Science, Environment and Health Education: Towards a Reconceptualisation of Their Mutual Interdependences

  • Justin Dillon


This chapter looks at the argument for a reconceptualisation of the mutual interdependence which would result in a novel and empowering science/environment/health curriculum and an associated pedagogy. Whereas science education is widely regarded as a core subject in the curriculum, health and environmental education are more likely to be seen as cross-cutting themes if they appear anywhere. The general sense of dissatisfaction with the existing science curriculum in many countries provides an opportunity to consider a radical reform based on educational soundness and relevancy rather than political expediency.


  1. Aikenhead, G. (2011). Towards a cultural view of quality science teaching. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The professional knowledge base of science teaching (pp. 107–127). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., & Wilderman, C. C. (2009). Public participation in scientific research: Defining the field and assessing its potential for informal science education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report, Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).Google Scholar
  3. Cowell, D., & Watkins, R. (2007). Get out of the classroom to study climate change—the “Spring Bulbs for Schools” project. Primary Science Review, 97, 25–28.Google Scholar
  4. Department for Education (DfE). (2010). The importance of teaching: Schools white paper. London: DfE. Available at:
  5. Dillon, J. (2003). On learners and learning in environmental education: Missing theories, Ignored communities. Environmental Education Research, 9(2), 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dillon, J. (2009). On scientific literacy and curriculum reform. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(3), 201–213.Google Scholar
  7. Dillon, J., & Gill, P. (2001). Risk, environment and health: aspects of policy and practice. School Science Review, 83(303), 65–73.Google Scholar
  8. Dillon, J., & Scott, W. (2002). Perspectives on environmental education–related research in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1111–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ESRC Global Environmental Change Programme. (2000). Risky choices, soft disasters: Environmental decision making under uncertainty. Brighton: University of Sussex. Retrieved from,, on March 31, 2012.
  10. Fensham, P. J., & May, J. B. (1979). Servant not master—a new role for science in a core of environmental education. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 25, 15–24.Google Scholar
  11. Gayford, C. (2002). Controversial environmental issues: a case study for the professional development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1191–1200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glasgow Centre for Population Health (2010). Developing capacity for effective action to tackle health inequalities. Available at:
  13. Gordon, T. (2010). Cost of obesity could reach £3bn a year and hurt economic growth, heraldscotland (February 21, 2010). Available at:
  14. Gough, A. (2002). Mutualism: A different agenda for environmental and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1201–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grace, M. M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1157–1169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 703–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jenkins, E. W. (2003). Environmental education and the public understanding of science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1, 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jenkins, E., & Nelson, N. W. (2005). Important but not for me: students’ attitudes toward secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jensen, B. B. (1995). Teaching for and with democracy. In D. Colquhoun, K. Goltz, M. Sheehan, & B. Marshall (Eds.), The proceedings of the inaugural national health promoting schools conference. Geelong: Deakin University.Google Scholar
  20. Jensen, B. B., Schnack, K., & Simovska, V. (2002). Critical environmental and health education research issues and challenges. Copenhagen: Research Centre for Environmental and Health Education, University of Education.Google Scholar
  21. Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lucas, A. M. (1980). Science and environmental education: Pious hopes, self praise and disciplinary chauvinism. Studies in Science Education, 7, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maller, C. (2005). Hands–on contact with nature in primary schools as a catalyst for developing a sense of community and cultivating mental health and wellbeing. Eingana, 28, 16–21.Google Scholar
  24. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzales, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Smith, T. A., Chrostowski, S. J., Garden, R. A., & O’Connor, K. M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 international science report: Findings from IEA’s repeat of the third internationalmathematics and science study at the eighth grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College. National Institute for Educational Research: Tokyo.Google Scholar
  25. McEneaney, E. H. (2003). The worldwide cachet of scientific literacy. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. NASA. (2009). NASA announces climate change education funding opportunity. Press release 09–131. Available at:
  27. Nutbeam, D. (1998). Health promotion glossary. Health Promotion International, 13, 349–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nutbeam, D. (2000). Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies in the 21st century. Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London: Nuffield Foundation.Google Scholar
  30. Oulton, C., Day, V., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. (2004). Controversial issues—teachers’ attitudes and practices in the context of citizenship education. Oxford Review of Education, 30, 489–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Opening remarks. In C. Linder, L. Östman, & P.-O. Wickman, (Eds.), Promoting scientific literacy: Science education research in transaction. Proceedings of the Linnaeus Tercentenary Symposium (9–17). Uppsala: Uppsala University.Google Scholar
  32. Roth, W.-M., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2005). How do learners in different cultures relate to science and technology? Results and perspectives from the project ROSE. Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 6, 1–16.Google Scholar
  34. Tones, K. (2002). Health literacy: new wine in old bottles? Health Education Research, 17(3), 287–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tse, V. (2010). Swedish pupils slide in new global ranking. The Local (December 7, 2010). Available at:
  36. UNESCO (1978) Intergovernmental conference on environmental education: Tbilisi (USSR), 14–26 October 1977. Final report. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  37. Vosniadou, S. (2001). How children learn. Brussels: International Academy of Education.Google Scholar
  38. Wals, A. E. J., & Dillon, J. (forthcoming). Learning theories and their implications for environmental education research. In, R. B. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals, (Eds.), International Handbook of Research in Environmental Education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Walsh, S., & Tilford, S. (1998). Health education in initial teacher training at secondary phase in England and Wales: current provision and the impact of the 1992 government reforms. Health Education Journal, 57(4), 360–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Webster, K. (1996). The secondary years. In J. Huckle & S. Sterling (Eds.), Education for Sustainability (pp. 72–85). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.King’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations