Module 2

Article 1

Science Curriculum Reform in the United States by Rodger w. Bybee

In this article, Bybee begins by listing some of the major differences between the reforms of the 1950s and 1960s, and those of the late 1980s and 1990s. Firstly,during the 1960s, reforms began at the secondary level of education, and were gradually implemented in middle and elementary schools. By contrast, in the 1990s, reforms began at the elementary school level, and then progressed to middle and high school. Secondly, in the 1980s and 90s, there were fewer curriculum projects at the national level, but rather, reform was initiated through state level frameworks and local development. The author feels this may have been a disadvantage, as without national funding, much of the needed staff development and adoption of new textbooks was not available, and so ultimately resulted in a lower level of reform. The final difference is the establishment of several frameworks which influenced curriculum reform at state and local levels. These include the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), which developed the report Science for all Americans in 1989, and also the Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy in 1993.

In the report Science for all Americans, many topics were included, some of which were not usually found in a school curriculum. An example of this is how science, mathematics, and technology are connected to one another, and to our society.

The scope, sequence and coordination of science education was studied by Bill Aldridge in 1989. This takes into account the sequence in which students learn. The scope and sequence of science education was compared with that of other countries. The result was an understanding that students need to learn first from concrete experiences, and then understand associated names and symbols. This would result in a deeper understanding of concepts, which would no longer require students to memorize facts in order to retain them.

Another issue related to reform was that of equity in science education. For several decades, science educators had discussed the need to enhance opportunities in science for minority groups who had been underrepresented in the field of science. The reforms of the 1990s called for all Americans to be included in the drive for scientific literacy.

The author discusses some of the issues in the reform of science education. For changes to occur, school personel had to change, and this involved changing the programs and practices which were currently in place. Some of the fundamental changes which were seen as necessary were the amount of information which students would be required to know. This would be replaced by a few key concepts, which needed to be understood in depth. Also, the rigid boundaries which had been set in place in the 1950s and 60s, between such disciplines as earth science, biology, chemistry and physics, needed to be blurred, so that an interdisciplinary approach could be adopted. The role of science in school curricula needed to be reviewed; all citizens needed to be able to understand science as an integral part of society, and to be able to use science as a means to dealing with social problems, such as pollution, resources and population growth.

The way in which science knowledge should be acquired by students was also under review. The focus in the science classroom should be on the active involvement in the process of inquiry, and by opportunities to apply knowledge to new and novel situations.

Assessment is an important part of curriculum and instruction, and so this needed to be addressed at all levels. Changes in assessment needed to reflect changes taking place in curriculum, from the elementary level to the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Reflection:

While the ultimate goal of the reforms of the 1980s and 90s was to make all citizens scientifically and technologically literate, this seems to have been largely unsuccessful. Today there is yet more call for reform in education, and new standards being put in place with the implememtation of the Common Core Standards. The president is calling for Americans to increase their educational standing in the international arena, which sounds very much like the argument put forth in 1983 by the National Commission on Excellence in Education; that our economic standing in the world is slipping because of low test scores and poor academic performance. On the positive side, I do afgree that science should be taught in an interdisciplinary way, and that teachers should be given greater autonomy within their districts and classrooms. I also agree that science should not be seen as an elitist subject, but as something that all people have the ability to understand. Lastly, I agree that students interests and developmental levels should be considered when designing science curricula.
Reference:
Bybee, Rodger, W. (1995). Science Curriculum Reform in the United States. Redesigning the Science Curriculum. Retrieved from:
E:\SCIENCE Curriculum Reform in the United States  KSU SUMMER 2013.mht