Chapter 6 - Case Study
Case Study: STS as the Entire Science Program: Some Questions.
The Case
At a seminar to examine the future directions of the science curriculum, a high school chemistry teacher, who has been a proponent of environmental chemistry, makes a brief presentation regarding her views on STS and the curriculum. The focus of her presentation follows:
When heroes of mine, such as David Suzuki, point out that there is such a glut of scientific knowledge now available that we cannot expose students to all of it with any realistic expectation of retention, then it does seem to indicate that there must be a change in what we're doing. Many of my colleagues would argue that the content is not really being taught for content's sake alone, but used as a vehicle to develop a number of extremely important tools including process skills and, believe it or not, to actually develop discussion skills the students have, and to make them aware of the impact of science on our society. There seems to be a real concern that students are able to discuss the interface between science and society, and be able to look at societal problems in a scientific manner. While I think this is good and certainly should be a part of courses, to dedicate the entire program to it is, I feel, highly questionable. Where do students get the knowledge base to discuss these at anything other than an emotional or gut level if they don't have some content that they can fall back on? I also think when you get into an area such as the values aspect of science, that you're starting to place teachers, who have been trained in a completely different manner, in a position that's a little suspect.
The Problem
How would you react to this teacher? Is it highly questionable to base the science program on STS? Will students only react on an emotional or gut level without formal instruction in science content? And by the way, who is David Suzuki?
Case 2: Biased Teaching?
The Case
You are teaching chemistry to college bound students in a suburban community. Since this is your second year of teaching, you've decided to get students involved in some "environmental chemistry" activities. During the first semester you've decided to have students read high interest articles that you have copied (after securing permission, of course) from popular magazines such as Time, Newsweek, Natural History, and National Geographic. Your plan is to give the students one article every other week, followed by small and large group discussions. The first article you have selected is entitled: "Nuclear Energy: Its Time Has Passed." In order to conserve paper, each small team of four students gets one article, which they must share amongst themselves. The day after you distribute the article, you receive a phone call from one of your student's parents. He explains that he quite concerned that students are reading such a highly biased article on nuclear energy. He accuses you of indoctrinating the students with environmental sentimentality, and says that if you continue having students read these "outside" articles, he will complain to the school board.
The Problem
What do you do in this situation? Did you expect to get this kind of reaction for any of your students' parents? What information can you provide the parent that might remove his objection that your teaching is indoctrination? Who would you see before responding to the parent, and what would you say?
---
Excerpted from Douglas A. Roberts, "What Counts as Science Education?" in Development and Dilemmas in Science Education, Peter Fensham, ed. (London: The Falmer Press, 1988), p. 41.