Abstract
Schooling as much as any other social activity is determined by ideology. The introduction of the VictorianCurriculum & Standards Framework is a case in point. The alliance between the new Victorian State government and traditionalists has “reformed” the schooling of science. Evidence is presented that points to a return to a conception of scientific literacy in which the central mythology of value-free science is the guiding principle. Here is a vision for an “educated” Australia, which begs the question: Whose Australia?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aldous, J. C. P. (1903).An elementary course in physics. London: Macmillan.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989).Science for all Americans. Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993).Benchmarks for science literacy. Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Apple, M. W. (1979). The Production of knowledge and the production of deviance in schools In L. Barton & R. Meighan (Eds.),Schools, pupils and deviance, Driffiled: Nafferton Books.
Apple, M. W. (1992). Education reform and educational crisis.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, (8), 779–789.
Armstrong, H. E. (1903).The teaching of scientific method and other papers on education. London: Macmillan.
Australian Academy of Science. (1979).Chemistry for Australian secondary school students: A recommended course of study (Report Number 23). Canberra: Australian Academy of Science.
Australian Education Council. (1992).A national statement on science for Australian schoolsinterim. Canberra: Australian Education Council.
Australian Education Council. (1994).Science—A curriculum profile for Australian schools. Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.
Birch, C. (1976).Confronting the future. Harmondsworth, Penguin.
Bolotin, H. H. (1993). Dangers lurk in national curriculum,The Age, 14 July, 14.
Bolt, A. (1993). Science gone mad,Herald Sun, 10 June, 13.
Bruce, D. (1993). Non-labor states join to sink school strategy,The Age, 3 July, 3.
Bush, G. (1991).Public papers of the president of the United States (Book I). Washington DC: United States Government Printing Office.
Burton, B. (1995). Right wing think tanks go environmental,Chain Reaction, 73–74, May, 26–29.
Calder, N. (1970).Technopolis: Social control of the uses of science. London: Panther.
Crewther, R. J. (1993). A response to the national science profile from the Department of Physics & Mathematical Physics, University of Adelaide.Australian & New Zealand Physicits, 30 (4), 65–66.
Cross, R. T. (1994). Scientific literacy and democracy.Search, 25 (9), 283–286.
Cross, R. T. (in press). Ideology and science teaching: Teachers' discourse.International Journal of Science Education.
Cross, R. T. & Price, R. F. (1992).Teaching science for social responsibility. Sydney: St. Louis Press.
Cross R. T., & Price, R. F. (1993). The approaching storm. Ideology, power and control: The NSTA curriculum development in the USA.Research in Science Education, 23, 51–60.
Curtis, S. J., & Boultwood, M. E. A. (1960).An introductory history of English education since 1800. London: University Tutorial Press.
Department of Employment, Education and Training. (1989).Discipline review of teacher education in mathematics and science (Vol. 1). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Dewey, J. (1916, 1966 edition).Democracy and education. New York The Free Press.
Fensham, P. J. (1981). Heads, hearts and hands-Future alternatives for science education.The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 27 (1), 53–60.
Gibson, R. (1986).Critical theory and education. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Giroux, H. A. (1981).Ideology, culture & the process of schooling. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Heading, K. E. G., Provis, D. F., Scott, T. D., Smith, J. E., & Smith, R. T. (1966).Science for secondary schools (Vol. 1, 2 & 3). Adelaide: Rigby.
Hurd, P. DeH. (1992). First in the world by 2000: What does it mean?Education Week, Sept. 16.
Hurd, P. DeH. (1994). New minds for a new age: Prologue to modernizing the science curriculum.Science Education, 78 (1), 103–116.
Jenkins, E. (1979).From Armstrong to Nuffield. London: John Murray.
Jenkins, E. (1992). School science education: Towards a reconstruction.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24, (3), 229–246.
Jenkins, E. (1994). Public understanding of science and science education for action.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26, (6), 601–611.
Jones, B. (1982).Sleepers, wake! Technology & the future of work. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Layton, D. (1973).Science for the people. The origins of the school science curriculum in England, London” Allen and Unwin.
Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S., & Davey, A. (1993).Inarticulate science? Perspectives on the public understanding of science and some implications for science education. Nafferton: Studies in Education
Marsh, C. J. (1994).Producing a national curriculum: Plans and paranoia. St. Leonards, NSW: Allen and Unwin.
Messel, H. (1964).Science for high school students (Vol. 1 & 2). Sydney: Government Printer.
Moon, B. (Ed.), (1990).New curriculum-National curriculum. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Moran, J. (1983).Scientists in the political and public arena: Australian Association of Scientific Workers, 1939–1949. Master of Philosophy thesis, Griffith University, Queensland.
Muller, D. (1993a). Uproar over new plan for science,The Age, 27 May, 1.
Muller, D. (1993b). State rights scuttle national education,The Age, 3 July, 4.
National Board of Employment, Education and Training. (1994).Science and technology education: Foundation for the future. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Peters, R. S. (1966).Ethics and education. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Rae, I. (1995). The velocity of curriculum change: Speed plus direction.Lab Talk, 39 (2), 16–23.
Ramsey, J. (1993). The science education reform movement: Implication for social responsibility.Science Education, 77 (2), 235–258.
Schwab, J. J. (1963).Biology teachers' handbook. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Spring, G. (1993). National statements,Education News, (Victoria), 22 July.
Taft, B. (1987). The new right in practice. In K. Goghill (Ed.),The new right's Australian fantasy (pp. 27–45), Ringwood: Penguin.
Union of Concerned Scientists (1992).World scientists' warning to humanity. Cambridge, MA: Union of Concernced Scientists.
Verma, S. (Ed.) (1994).Curriculum & standards framework: Draft for consultation, Carlton, Victoria: Board of Studies.
Verma, S. (Ed.), (1995a),Curriculum and standards framework: Science. Carlton, Victoria: Board of Studies.
Verma, S. (Ed.). (1995b).Curriculum and standards framework: Technology. Carlton, Victoria: Board of Studies.
Wexler, P. (1982). Structure, text and subject: A critical sociology of school knowledge. In M. W. Apple (Ed.),Culture and economic reproduction in education: Essays on class ideology and the state. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Yager, R. E. (1992). Science-technology-society as reform. In R. E. Yager (Ed.),The status of science—technology—society reforms around the world (pp. 2–8). No place given: ICASE Yearbook.
Ziman, J. (1968).Public knowledge: The social dimension of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ziman, J. (1980).Teaching and learning about science and society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Additional information
La Trobe University
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cross, R. Conceptions of scientific literacy: Reactionaries in ascendency in the state of Victoria. Research in Science Education 25, 151–162 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356449
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356449