The science curriculum; the decline of expertise and the rise of bureaucratise

The content for the school science curriculum has always been an interplay or contest between the interests of a number of stakeholders, who have an interest in establishing it at a new level of schooling or in changing its current form. For most of its history, the interplay was dominated by the interests of academic scientists, but in the 1980s the needs of both future scientists and future citizens began to be more evenly balanced as science educators promoted a wider sense of science. The contest changed again in the 1990s with a super-ordinate control being exerted by government bureaucrats at the expense of the subject experts. This change coincides with the rise in a number of countries of a market view of education, and of science education in particular, accompanied by demands for public accountability via simplistic auditing measures. This shift from expertise to bureaucratise and its consequences for the quality of science education is illustrated with five case studies of science curriculum reform in Australia.     

Scepticism and trust: two counterpoint essentials in science education for complex socio-scientific issues

In this response to Tom G. K. Bryce and Stephen P. Day’s (Cult Stud Sci Educ. doi:10.1007/s11422-013-9500-0, 2013) original article, I share with them their interest in the teaching of climate change in school science, but I widen it to include other contemporary complex socio-scientific issues that also need to be discussed. I use an alternative view of the relationship between science, technology and society, supported by evidence from both science and society, to suggest science-informed citizens as a more realistic outcome image of school science than the authors’ one of mini-scientists. The intellectual independence of students Bryce and Day assume, and intend for school science, is countered with an active intellectual dependence. It is only in relation to emerging and uncertain scientific contexts that students should be taught about scepticism, but they also need to learn when, and why to trust science as an antidote to the expressions of doubting it. Some suggestions for pedagogies that could lead to these new learnings are made. The very recent fifth report of the IPCC answers many of their concerns about climate change.     

VCE chemistry as a curriculum innovation

Conclusion The difficulty of sharing meaning of curriculum intentions between different groups is highlighted in this study. The acceptance of the novel features of the Chemistry Study Design is mixed. The longitudinal nature of the study helped to identify the difficulty teachers had in understanding the meaning of these novel features although the experiences of teaching units in the VCE chemistry course have enabled some teachers to shift in their construction of the meaning of the words and messages around them. Specializations: chemistry and science education, technology and industry links with sicence in schools. Specializations: science and technology curriculum, environmental education, educational disadvantage. Specializations: curriculum change, science career paths. Specializations: science education, computers in schools.     

Co‐operation between Cousins: Science and Mathematics Educators Look at what is Possible and what has Proved not Possible

The study reports an investigation into pupils’ understanding of biological and chemical terms, over the age range of 12‐18 years. The results indicate three main features: (1) knowledge is relatively short‐lived; (2) there is a lack of language precision; (3) little interaction exists between the various science subjects and between science and technology.

The educational implications of these findings are explored and appropriate recommendations are made.