Science Teaching: Scientific Literacy in a School Perspective

Authors

  • Jörgen Dimenäs Dalarna University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53555/nnel.v4i4.580

Keywords:

science education, content, technology,, society,, literacy, language

Abstract

The article highlights the professional teachers' understanding of what they see as the most important contents in science education. The aim of the study is based on conversations with professional teachers and how they understand what are the most central contents in science education. It is related to scientific language and importance for society. Their understandings are related to the importance of science in the society and to the language's importance to students' learning opportunities. The result of the study's interviews are analyzed on the basis of Basil Bernstein's concept of the horizontal and vertical discourse, which demonstrates the opportunities for pupils to approach a scientific content based on a contextual understanding. How science is taught is an important question in the aspect of students coming from different socioeconomic conditions and with different conceptions of the outside world and the science school discourse. In the present study the professional teachers'  in particular stresses the importance of a holistic understanding of the content in science, the methodical aspects in science education and the consequences of science and technology development. To be science literate in a teaching context means that the students will get the capacity to use scientific knowledge, to identify questions and to draw evidence based conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the natural world and the changes made to it through human activity. 

References

Anderberg, E. (2009). Språkanvändningens funktion vid kunskapsbildning. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 14 (4), 291-310.
Andresen, R. & Dimenäs, J. (2006). Why do we have schools? I J. Dimenäs, R. Andresen, M. Cruickschank, J. Ojala & A. Ratzki. Our Children – How can they suceed in school? Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Alvegård, C. (2009). Samspel mellan uttryck, innebörd och uppfattning av fysikaliska fenomen i dialoger med gymnasielever. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 14 (4), 311-329.
Appleton, K. (2006). Science Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Elementary School Teachers. In K. Appleton (red.), Elementary Science Teacher Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc., Publishers.
Bernstein, B. (1996/2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique (2nd ed.). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Danielsson, A., Andersson, K., Gullberg, A. & Hussénius, A. (2018). Naturvetenskap för yngre barn – kunskapsinnehåll i lärarstudenters beskrivningar av sin framtida undervisning. Högre utbildning 8, (1), 1-13.
Davidsson, B. (2007). Fokuserade gruppintervjuer. I J. Dimenäs (red.) Lära till lärare – Att utveckla läraryrket – vetenskapligt förhållningssätt och vetenskaplig metodik. Stockholm: Liber.
Englund, T. (2010). Att studera lärande. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 15 (1), 77-79.
Esaisson, P., Gilljam, M., Oscarsson, H. & Wängnerud, L. (2004). Upplaga 2:3. Metodpraktikan. Konsten att studera samhälle, individ och marknad. Stockholm. Norstedts Juridik AB.
Greenfield, T.A. (1997). Gender- and grade- level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education 81 (3), 259-276.
Harris, R. & Ratcliffe, M. (2005) Socio-scientific issues and the quality of exploratory talk - what can be learned from schools involved in a 'collapsed day' project? The Curriculum Journal, 16 (4), 439-453.
Helldén, G. (2002). En longitudinell studie av lärande om ekologiska processer. I H. Strömdahl (red.). Kommunicera naturvetenskap i skolan – några forskningsresultat. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Jidesjö, A., Oscarsson, M., Karlsson, K-G. & Strömdahl, H. (2009). Science for all or science for some: What Swedish students want to learn about in secondary science and technology and their opinions on science lessons. NorDiNa 5 (2), 213-229.
Klafki, Wolfgang (2004): Skoleteori, skoleforskning og skoleudvikling i politisk-samfundmaessig kontekst. Köpenhamn: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Knain, E. (2005). Skrivning i naturfag: mellom tekst og natur. NorDiNa (1) 70-80.
Knain, E. & Prestvik, O. (2006). Scientific literacy nedfelt i geofagene. NorDiNa (3), 17-27.
Koutroulis,A. G. et al. Papadimitriou,L. V.. Grillakis,M. G.. Tsanis,I. K.. Wyser,Klaus. Betts,R. A. (2018). Freshwater vulnerability under high end climate change. A pan-European assessment. I Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 613, 271-286.
Kärna, P. (2009). Holistic Physics Education in Upper Secondary Level Based on the optional Course of Physics. (Report Series in Physics HU-P-D157) Helsinki: Helsinki University Print.
Lewis, J. & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of Socio-scientific Issues. The Role of Science Education. International Journal of Science Education 28 (11), 1267-1287.
Liberg, C., af Geijerstam, Å. & Folkeryd, J. W. (2007). A Lingustic Perspective on Scientific Literacy. I C. Linder, L. Östman och P.O. Wickman (red.) Promoting Scientific Literacy: Science Education Research in Transaction. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.
Lindemann-Matthies, P., Constantinou, C., Junge, X., Köhler, K., Mayer,J., Nagel, U., Raper, G., Schüle, D. & Kadji-Beltran, C. (2009). The integration of biodiversity education in the initital education of primary school teachers: four comparative case studies from Europe. Environmental Education Research 15 (1), 17-37.
Millar, R. (2006). Twenty first century science: Insight from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education 28 (13), 1499-1521.
Nilsson, P. (2008). Learning to Teach and Teaching to Learn. Primary science student teachers’ complex journey from learners to teachers. Studies in Science and Technology Education No 19. Linköpings universitet/Högskolan i Halmstad.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in Its Fundamental Sense is Central to Scientific Literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240.
Novak, J.D. (2005). Results and Implications of a 12-year Longitudinal Study of Science Concept Learning. Research in Science Education 35, 23-40.
Osborne, J., Simons, S. & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education 25 (9)., 1049-1079.
OECD-PISA (2003). The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework: Mathematics, Reading, Science and Problem Solving Knowledge and Skills. Paris: OECD Publications.
OECD-PISA (2009). PISA 2009 Assessment Framework: Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris: OECD Publications.
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Opening Remarks. I C. Linder, L. Östman och P.O. Wickman (red.) Promoting Scientific Literacy: Science Education Research in Transaction. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.
Rutherford, F.J. (1990). Science for All Americans. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schreiner, C. & Sjöberg, S. (2005). Et meningsfullt naturfag for dagens ungdom? NorDinNa (2), 18-35.
Siraj-Blatchford, J. & MacLeod-Brudenell, I. (1999). Supporting Science, Design and Technology in the Early Years. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Sjöberg, S. (2000). Naturvetenskap som allmänbildning – en kritisk ämnesdidaktik. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Skolverket, (2016). PISA 2015. 15-åringars kunskaper i naturvetenskap, läsförståelse och matematik. Stockholm: Skolverket.
Skolverket, (2016). TIMSS 2015. Svenska grundskoleelevers kunskaper i matematik och naturvetenskap i ett internationellt perspektiv. Stockholm: Skolverket
Skolverket, (2016). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011. Reviderad 2016. Stockholm: Skolverket.
Snow, C. E., Griffin, P & Burns, M. S. (Red.) (2005). Knowledge to support the Teaching of Reading. San Fransisco. CA: Jossey –Bass.
Svensson, L. (2009). Användningen av språk vid konstituering och uttryckande av uppfattningar av kunskapsobjekt. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 14 (4), 261-276.
Säljö, R. & Wyndhamn, J. (2002). Naturvetenskap som arena för kommunikation. I H. Strömdahl (red.). Kommunicera naturvetenskap i skolan – några forskningsresultat. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Varelas, M., Pappas, C.C. & Rife, A. (2006). Exploring the role of Intertextuality in Concept Construction: Urban Second Graders Make Sense of Evaporation, Boiling, and Condensation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 43 (7), 637-666.
Åkerblom, A. (2009). Hur elever i grundskolan använder orden luft och dragningskraft för att uttrycka sin förståelse av fysikaliska fenomen. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 14 (4), 330-353.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-30

How to Cite

Dimenäs, J. . (2018). Science Teaching: Scientific Literacy in a School Perspective. Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Literature (ISSN 2208-2441), 4(4), 01-11. https://doi.org/10.53555/nnel.v4i4.580