Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Regional Queensland parents’ views of science education: some unexpected perceptions

  • Published:
The Australian Educational Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Low post-compulsory science enrolments for secondary students have been a growing concern across the Western world. Research has examined factors relating to science curricula and students’ attitudes about science, but parental views of science education remain largely unexplored in Australia. Because parents have a strong role in shaping their children’s subject selection and career choices, in this pilot study we sought to explore parental attitudes about science education. Results from focus interviews and a survey of 132 Indigenous and non-Indigenous parents demonstrated, for the first time, that regional parents believe the study of society and the environment (SOSE) is a better preparation than science for their children’s understanding of socio-scientific issues. Most parents were unclear as to the nature of scientific literacy, believing science as it is currently taught in primary schools, not to be relevant to their children’s needs. Structural equation modelling using the survey data confirmed prior researchers’ claims and extended ideas about the likely interplay of parental attitudes and beliefs influencing their support of science study for their children. The results highlight an urgent need to explore such parental views across Australia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This key learning area includes geography, history, society and culture, sociology and futures.

  2. Indigenous parents are referred to as (I); non-Indigenous parents (NI); non-Indigenous science trained parents (NIS).

  3. HECS/HEL refers to the student debt accumulated if they choose to pay their university fees after, rather than before completing their degree.

References

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2005). The Health and Welfare of Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, Cat: 4704.0. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service.

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2006). Schools Australia, Cat. No. 4221.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service.

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2007a). Australian social trends, Cat: 4102.0. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service.

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2007b). Year Book Australia, Cat: 4102.0. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service.

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alloway, N., Dalley, L., Patterson, A., Walker, K., & Lenoy, M. (2004). School students making education and career decisions: Aspirations, attitudes and influences. Canberra: DEST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, M. (2008). Contextualisation caged? E Australia, Autumn, 13–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjusting model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 815–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blunch, N. J. (2008). Introduction to structural equation modelling using SPSS and AMOS. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breakwell, G. M., & Beardsell, S. (1992). Gender, parental and peer influences upon science attitudes and activities. Public Understanding of Science, 1, 183–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modelling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, L. (2008). Socio-cultural influences on science education: Innovation for contemporary times. Science Education, 92(1), 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. (2001). Parents’ attitudes and expectations regarding science education: comparisons among American, Chinese-American and Chinese families. Adolescence, 36(142), 305–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Boer, G. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekkers, J., & De Laeter, J. (2001). Enrolment trends in school science education in Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 487–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A literature review. Report Number 433. Department of Education and Skills. Nottingham: DfES Publications.

  • DEST (Department of Education, Science and Training). (2006). Family school partnerships project: A qualitative and quantitative study. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • DEST (Department of Education, Science and Training). (2007). Parents’ Attitudes to Schooling. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • DETA (Department of Education and Training). (2007). Studies of Society & Environment (SOSE) Essential Learnings by the end of Year 9. http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/downloads/assessment/qcar_el_sose_yr9.pdf.

  • DETA (Department of Education and Training). (2008). Education Queensland: scoping and sequence essentials Years 1–9. http://www.granvillss.eq.edu.au/Linked%20Documents/scope-sequence.pdf.

  • Dietrich, J., & Kracke, B. (2009). Career-specific parental behaviours in adolescents’ development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(1), 109–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2005). Reforming science in the school curriculum: A critical analysis. Oxford Review of Education, 31(2), 293–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen, G., Smit, F., & Sleegers, P. (2005). Parental involvement and educational achievement. British Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 509–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A reconsideration. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2002). Time to change: Drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(1), 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2004). Increasing the relevance of science and technology education for all students in the 21st century. Science Education International, 15(1), 7–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferry, T. R., Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (2000). The role of family context in a social cognitive model for career-related choice behaviour: A math and science perspective. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 57, 348–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, J. L., & Silverman, T. (1989). Women’s selection of careers in engineering: do traditional–nontraditional differences still exist? Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 34, 266–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. (2008). Tracking the reasons many girls avoid science and math: Science Daily. Accessed September 8, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080905153807.htm.

  • Fouad, N., Hackett, G., Haag, S., Kantamneni, N., & Fitzpatrick, M. E. (2007, August). Career choice barriers: Environmental influences on women’s career choices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association Convention, San Francisco, CA.

  • Fowler, S. R., Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socio-scientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullarton, S. & Ainley, J. (2000). Subject choice by students in year 12 in Australian secondary schools. LSAY Research Report No. 15. Melbourne: ACER.

  • Green, C. L., Walker, J. M. T., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (2007). Parents’ motivations for involvement in children’s education: An empirical test of a theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 532–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackling, M. W., & Prain, V. (2005). Primary connections: Stage 2 Trial Research Report. Canberra: Department of Education Science and Training. Accessed November 30, 2008, from http://www.science.org.au/primaryconnections/pcreport1.htm.

  • Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counselling psychology. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 52(2), 224–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, A., & Goodall, J. (2008). Do parents know they matter? Engaging all parents in learning. Educational Research, 50(3), 277–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2002). Some thoughts on scientific literacy: Motives, meanings and curriculum implementations. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, N., & Harvey, D. (2005). Do parents make a difference to children’s academic achievement? Differences between parents of higher and lower achieving students. Educational Studies, 31(4), 431–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kadlec, A., Friedman, A., & Ott, A. (2007). Important but not for me: Parents and students in Kansas and Missouri talk abut math science and technology education. Public Agenda. Accessed January 14, 2008, from http://www.publicagenda.org/.

  • Keeves, J. P. (1972). Educational environment and student achievement. Hawthorn: Australian Council of Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socio-scientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(10), 71–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, T., Cooksey, R., Panizzon, D, Parnell, A., & Pegg, J. (2006). Science, ICT and Mathematics education in rural and regional Australia: The SiMERR national survey. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training. Accessed November 15, 2008, from http://simerr.une.edu.au/national_survey/index.html.

  • Ma, Y. (2009). Family socioeconomic status, parental involvement, and college major choices—Gender, race/ethnic, and nativity patterns. Sociological Perspectives, 52(2), 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. N. (2009). A shared challenge improving literacy, numeracy and science learning in Queensland primary schools. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNair, R., & Durell Johnson, H. (2009). Perceived school and home characteristics as predictors of school importance and academic performance in a diverse adolescent sample. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 63–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. The Report of a Seminar Series Funded by the Nuffield Foundation. London: King’s College London, School of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuenschwander, M. P., Vida, M., Garrett, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). Parents’ expectations and students’ achievement in two western nations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 594–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2006). The PISA 2006 assessment framework: Science, reading and mathematics. Paris: OECD. Accessed November 30, 2008, from http://oberon.sourceoecd.org/vl=245443/cl=13/nw=1/rpsv/~6670/v2006n11/s1/p1l.

  • Ogawa, M. (2001). Reform Japanese style: Voyage into an unknown and chaotic future. Science Education, 85, 586–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. F., & Collins, S. (2000). Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum. London: King’s College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxfam. (2009). Hang Together or Separately? How global co-operation is key to a fair and adequate climate deal at Copenhagen. 128 Oxfam Briefing Paper. Copenhagen: Oxfam International. http://www.oxfam.de/download/hang_together.pdf.

  • Queensland Department of Education. (2003). Science state: Smart state 2003–2006: Spotlight on science. Brisbane: Education Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (1992). Introduction: cases of ‘What is a case. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, J. M. (1998). Mission impossible? Can anything be done about attitudes to science? International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratelle, C. F., Larose, S., Guay, F., & Senecal, C. (2005). Perceptions of parental involvement and support as predictors of college students’ persistence in a science curriculum. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2), 286–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROSE Project. (2005). Accessed December 10, 2007, from http://www.ils.uio.no/english/rose/.

  • Scantlebury, K., Boone, W., Butler Kahle, J., & Fraser, B. J. (2001). Design, validation, and use of an evaluation instrument for monitoring systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 646–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2004). ROSE: The relevance of science education: sowing the seeds of ROSE. Oslo: Oslo Department of Teacher Education and School Development, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, B. S. P. (1975). Science literacy and the public understanding of science. In S. B. Day (Ed.), Communication of scientific information (pp. 44–52). New York: S. Karger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2005). The importance of involving high-school chemistry teachers in the process of defining the operational meaning of ‘chemical literacy’. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 323–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of the major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J. (1999). Meta-scientific criticisms, curricular innovation and the propagation of scientific culture. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai, R. H., Qi Liu, C., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenenbaum, H. T., & Leaper, C. (2003). Parent–child conversations about science: The socialization of gender inequities? Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S. (2006). Science achievement in Australia: Evidence from national and international surveys. Paper presented at ACER Research conference 2006 ‘Boosting Science Learning—What will it take?’ 13–15 August 2006, Canberra. http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/RC2006_Thomson.pdf.

  • Thomson, S., & De Bortoli, L. (2008). PISA in brief from Australia’s perspective: Highlights from the full Australian report: Exploring scientific literacy: How Australia measures up. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER).

  • Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Camberwell: ACER Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Cripps Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the primary–secondary school transition. Canberra: Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/1BC12ECD-81ED-43DE-B0F6-958F8A6F44E2/23337/FinalJune140708pdfversion.pdf.

  • Weishaar, M., Green, B., & Craighead, L. (1981). Primary influencers of initial vocational choices for college women. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 18, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodrow, D. (1996). Cultural inclinations towards studying mathematics and sciences. New Community, 22(1), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, D. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1997). Factors affecting student career choice in science: An Australian study of rural and urban schools. Research in Science Education, 27(2), 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Cairns Institute, School of Education, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, 4811, Australia

    Helen J. Boon

Authors
  1. Helen J. Boon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen J. Boon.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview schedule of questions

  1. 1.

    How do you feel about your child’s move to secondary school next year?

  2. 2.

    Is your child a boy or girl?

  3. 3.

    Tell me which subjects you think are the most important for your child’s education?

  4. 4.

    Tell me how important or relevant do you think the study of maths will be for your child.

  5. 5.

    Tell me how important or relevant do you think the study of science will be for your child.

  6. 6.

    Which subjects will be most important for your child’s future job options?

  7. 7.

    If you had to help your child with homework, which subjects would you feel most confident about helping your child with? Which the least confident about?

  8. 8.

    Which school subjects do you think will be most useful in helping your child understand socio-scientific issues?

  9. 9.

    Tell me what you think about the various science strands (biology, physics and chemistry, marine science)? Which is the most relevant or important for your child’s future do you think?

  10. 10.

    What would you like to know about studying science and the careers it can lead to that might help you encourage your child to put in extra effort with science at school?

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boon, H.J. Regional Queensland parents’ views of science education: some unexpected perceptions. Aust. Educ. Res. 39, 17–43 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0045-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0045-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation