Advertisement

Science for All: Historical Perspectives on Policy for Science Education Reform

  • George E. DeBoer
Chapter
Part of the Cultural Studies of Science Education book series (CSSE, volume 5)

Abstract

Tracing more than a hundred years of US policies aimed at extending equitable science education opportunities to all students, In this chapter, I describe the many factors that have shaped those policies and influenced their implementation and outcomes. Beginning with an early twentieth century focus on the practical and civic benefits of science education, especially as a tool for helping to assimilate large numbers of new immigrants, science education policy has been shaped by a changing set of imperatives such as the need for a highly trained scientific workforce during World War II and the Cold War and a push toward racial equality during the Civil Rights era. In this chapter, I distill some lessons from these and other key periods in US history when science education was in the foreground and describe the tensions between the educational ideals of a democratic society and the practical demands of economic growth and national security.

Keywords

Science Education Gifted Student Talented Student National Education Association Science Talent 
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.

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Angus, D., & Mirel, J. (1999). The failed promise of the American high school, 1890–1995. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  3. Boyer, E., & Levine, A. (1981). A quest for common learning: The aims of general education. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  4. Brandwein, P. (1955). The gifted student as future scientist. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  5. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954).Google Scholar
  6. Bush, G. (1990). Remarks on the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act, July 26, 1990. Charlottesville: Miller Center of Public Affairs, University of Virginia. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3424
  7. Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act of 1984. Pub. L. No. 98–524, § 20, 98 Stat 2435. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED256926.pdf
  8. Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, 20 U. S. C. § 2301 et seq. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname  =  105_cong_public_laws&docid  =  f:publ332.105Google Scholar
  9. Committee on Educational Policies, Division of Biology and Agriculture. (1958). Suggestions for a comprehensive program for improving the content of biology programs for elementary school to college. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council.Google Scholar
  10. Conant, J. (1945). General education in a free society: Report of the Harvard Committee. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Conant, J. (1959). The American high school: A first report to interested citizens. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89–10, 79 Stat 27. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED017539.pdf
  13. Gardner, J. (1961). Excellence: Can we be equal and excellent too? New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  14. Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. § 5801 et. seq. (1994). Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/GOALS2000/TheAct/index.html
  15. Hurd, P. (1961). Biological education in American secondary schools 1890–1960: Biological sciences curriculum study bulletin no. 1. Washington, DC: American Institute of Biological Sciences.Google Scholar
  16. Hurd, P. (1970). New directions in teaching secondary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  17. Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994, Pub. L. No.103–382, 20 U.S.C. § 8001 et. seq. (1994). Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://ed.gov/legislation/ESEA/toc.html
  18. Lynch, S. (2010). Equity and US science education policy from the GI Bill to NCLB: From opportunity denied to mandated outcomes. In G. DeBoer (Ed.), Research in science education: Vol. 5, The role of public policy in K-12 science education. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. MacLachlan, A. (2005). A longitudinal study of minority Ph.D.s from 1980–1990: Progress and outcomes in science and engineering at the University of California during graduate school and professional life (Final Report to the Spencer Foundation). Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://cshe.berkeley.edu/research/minorityphd/
  20. National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future (Report of the Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  21. National Center for Education Statistics. (1981). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  22. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.Google Scholar
  23. National Defense Education Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85–864, 1 U.S.C. § 101, 72 Stat. 1581 (1958).Google Scholar
  24. National Education Association. (1894). Report of the committee on secondary school studies. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  25. National Education Association. (1918). Cardinal principles of secondary education: A report of the commission on the reorganization of secondary education (US Bureau of Education Bulletin No. 35). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  26. National Organization for Women. (1966). Statement of purpose. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www.now.org/history/purpos66.html
  27. National Research Council. (2005). America’s lab report: A report of the committee on high school science laboratories: Role and vision. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  28. National Science Board Commission on Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology. (1983). Educating Americans for the 21 st century: A report to the American people and the National Science Board. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  29. National Science Foundation. (various dates). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
  30. National Vocational Education (Smith-Hughes) Act of 1917, 20 U.S.C. § 11 et seq. (1917).Google Scholar
  31. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq. (2002).Google Scholar
  32. Oakes, J. (1990a). Lost talent: The underparticipation of women, minorities, and disabled persons in science. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  33. Oakes, J. (1990b). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  34. Pfeiffer, D. (2002). Signing the Section 504 rules: More to the story. Ragged Edge Online, Issue 1. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www.ragged-edge-mag.com/0102/0102ft6.html
  35. President’s Scientific Research Board. (1947). Science and public policy (Vol. 4). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  36. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Belknap.Google Scholar
  37. Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act of 1980. Pub. L. 96–516, Sec. 32, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3010, 42 U.S.C. § 1885 et seq. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title42/42usc1885.html
  38. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. 20 U. S. C. §§ 1681–1688 et seq.Google Scholar
  39. US Department of Education. (1991). America 2000: An education strategy sourcebook. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  40. US Department of Education. (2008). No child left behind. High school graduation rate: Non-regulatory guidance, December 22, 2008. Retrieved December 6, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/hsgrguidance.pdf
  41. US Department of Education. (2010). A blueprint for reform: The reauthorization for the elementary and secondary education act. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  42. US Office of Education. (1953). Education for the talented in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Project 2061, American Association for the Advancement of ScienceWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations