Scientific Literacy and the Twenty-First Century

  • Glen Aikenhead


This chapter offers a glimpse into Canada’s future (25 years from now) by extrapolating from key events that have occurred since World War II. Prominent in this analysis and projection is an “attentive public,” who assumes social responsibilities related to science and technology. The 21st century will demand citizens who have the savvy to explore, understand, and to some degree control, their own fate in a society increasingly shaped by science and technology. Citizens with these abilities are science literate. In this chapter, scientific literacy is: (1) described in terms of a savvy citizenry; (2) explored with respect to its status as an education goal; and (3) defined within a case study of curriculum change in the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada.


Science Education Scientific Literacy Science Teacher Attentive Public Education Goal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1980). Science in social issues: Implications for teaching. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.Google Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G. S. (1985). Collective decision making in the social context of science. Science Education, 69, 453–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aikenhead, G. S. (in press). Scientific/technological literacy, critical reasoning, classroom practice. In L. Phiilips & S. Norris (Eds.), Exploring the breadth and depth of literacy.Google Scholar
  4. Broudy, H. S. (1969). Science and human values. The Science Teacher, 36, 23–28.Google Scholar
  5. Bubb, I. C., & Derion, J. C. (1978). Light water: How the nuclear dream dissolved. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett.Google Scholar
  7. D’Amore, L. J. (1981). An overview of SIA. In F. Tester & W. Mykes (Eds.), Social impact assessment: Theory, method and practice (pp. 366–373 ). Calgary: Detselig Enterprises.Google Scholar
  8. Dickson, D. (1984). The new politics of science. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  9. Fleming, R. W. (in press). Being literate in a technological society. In L. Phillips & S. Norris (Eds.), Exploring the breadth and depth of literacy.Google Scholar
  10. Gabel, L. L. (1976). The development of a model to determine perceptions of scientific literacy. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
  11. Gauld, C. (1982). The scientific attitude and science education: A critical reappraisal. Science Education, 66, 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gosling, D., & Musschenga, B. (Eds.). (1985). Science education and ethical values. Geneva: WCC Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Harms, N. C. (1981). Project synthesis: Summary and implications for teachers. In N. C. Harms & R. E. Yager (Eds.), What research says to the science teacher: Vol. 3 (pp. 113–127 ). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  14. Hart, E. P. (1987). Science for Saskatchewan schools: A review of research literature, analysis, and recommendations. Regina, Saskatchewan: Faculty of Education, SIDRU Research Report No. 7.Google Scholar
  15. Holton, G. (1978). The scientific imagination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hull, D. L. (1988). Science as a process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hurd, P. ( 1988, February). The emergence of a new synthesis for biology education. Paper presented at the 3rd National Science, Technology and Society Conference, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
  18. Krimsky, S. (1980). Public participation in the formation of science and technology policy. In D. Wolfle, A. W. Branscomb, & B. M. Casper (Eds.), Public policy decision making and scientific literacy: Information needs for science and technology (pp. 112–161). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation, Report No. NSF-80-21-A6.Google Scholar
  19. LaPorte, T. (1983). Provisional model of technology and social change. Unpublished manuscript, University of California at Berkeley, Political Science 188, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Lifton, R. J., & Falk, R. (1982). Indefensible weapons: The political and psychological case against nuclearism. Toronto: Canadian Broad-casting Corporation.Google Scholar
  21. Lovelock, J. E. (1979). Gaia: A new look at life on earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Munby, H. (1982). What is scientific thinking. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.Google Scholar
  23. Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1969). Teaching as a subversive activity. New York: Delacorte Press.Google Scholar
  24. Prewitt, K. (1983). Scientific illiteracy and democratic theory. Daedalus, 96, 49–64.Google Scholar
  25. Roberts, D. A. (1983). Scientific literacy: Towards balance in setting goals for school science programs. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.Google Scholar
  26. Saskatchewan Education. (1988, September). Science: Program overview and connections (K) 1–12 ( Draft edition). Regina: Provincial Department of Education.Google Scholar
  27. Savon, B. (1988). Science under siege: The myth of objectivity in scientific research. Toronto: CBC Enterprises.Google Scholar
  28. Scheffler, I. (1965). Conditions of knowledge. Chicago: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  29. Science Council of Canada. (1984). Science for every student. (Report No. 36 ). Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.Google Scholar
  30. Simpson, R. D., & Anderson, N. D. (1981). Science, students, and schools A guide for the middle and secondary school teacher. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Glen Aikenhead
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Curriculum Studies, College of EducationUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations