Search

Written in response to criticism of our work by Fouad Abd-El-Khalick, this position paper reaffirms and reinforces our position about the need to broaden and enrich the scope of nature of science (NOS) oriented curricula by exposing students to the voices of practising scientists. While Abd-El-Khalick's motivation for promoting the so-called consensus view of NOS is rooted in issues of assessment (or ‘benchmarking', as he calls it), we argue that the major reason for teaching about NOS is its contribution to what Shen calls civic and cultural scientific literacy. We are critical of the consensus view for its philosophical naivety, failure to reflect contemporary scientific practice and potential for confusing students, and we re-state our view that it is important to expose students to a diversity of practice among the sub-disciplines of science. We argue that richer NOS understanding and a more authentic view of scientific practice can be achieved through direct and indirect contact with scientists at the cutting edge of research and development, which we characterise as learning about scientists, learning from scientists and learning with scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The apartheid policies in South Africa had a marked influence on the accessibility and quality of school science experienced by the different race groups. African learners in particular were seriously disadvantaged in this regard. The issues of equity and redress were foremost in transformation of the education system, and the accompanying curriculum reform. This paper reports on equity in terms of equality of outputs and equality of inputs in South African school science, with a particular focus on the implementation of practical science investigations. This was a qualitative case study of two teachers on their implementation of science investigations at two schools, one a township school, previously designated for black children, and the other a former Model C school, previously reserved for white children. My study was guided by the curriculum implementation framework by Rogan and Grayson in trying to understand the practice of these teachers at schools located in contextually diverse communities. The framework helped profile the implementation of science investigations and also enabled me to explore the factors which are able to support or hinder this implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The idea that chemical knowledge can be represented in three main ways: macro, submicro, and symbolic (chemistry triplet) has become paradigmatic in chemistry and science education. It has served both as the base of theoretical frameworks that guide research in chemical education and as a central idea in various curriculum projects. However, this triplet relationship has been the subject of different adaptations and reinterpretations that sometimes lead to confusion and misunderstanding, which complicates the analysis of the triplet's nature and scope. Thus, the central goal of this paper is to describe some of the existing views of the triplet relationship in chemistry and science education and critically analyse their underlying assumptions. We also propose a general structure of our chemistry knowledge intended to better situate the chemistry triplet in relationship with the different types, scales, dimensions, and approaches that seem to characterise such knowledge. Our proposed model may be useful in the analysis, evaluation, and reflection of educational research results and teaching practices centred on the triplet relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]