CONTENT STANDARD A: As a result of activities in grades 9-12, all students should develop
For students to develop the abilities that characterize science as inquiry, they must actively participate in scientific investigations, and they must actually use the cognitive and manipulative skills associated with the formulation of scientific explanations. This standard describes the fundamental abilities and understandings of inquiry, as well as a larger framework for conducting scientific investigations of natural phenomena.
In grades 9-12, students should develop sophistication in their abilities and understanding of scientific inquiry. Students can understand that experiments are guided by concepts and are performed to test ideas. Some students still have trouble with variables and controlled experiments. Further, students often have trouble dealing with data that seem anomalous and in proposing explanations based on evidence and logic rather than on their prior beliefs about the natural world.
One challenge to teachers of science and to curriculum developers is making science investigations meaningful. Investigations should derive from questions and issues that have meaning for students. Scientific topics that have been highlighted by current events provide one source, whereas actual science- and technology-related problems provide another source of meaningful investigations. Finally, teachers of science should remember that some experiences begin with little meaning for students but develop meaning through active involvement, continued exposure, and growing skill and understanding.
A critical component of successful scientific inquiry in grades 9-12 includes having students reflect on the concepts that guide the inquiry. Also important is the prior establishment of an adequate knowledge base to support the investigation and help develop scientific explanations. The concepts of the world that students bring to school will shape the way they engage in science investigations, and serve as filters for their explanations of scientific phenomena. Left unexamined, the limited nature of students' beliefs will interfere with their ability to develop a deep understanding of science. Thus, in a full inquiry, instructional strategies such as small-group discussions, labeled drawings, writings, and concept mapping should be used by the teacher of science to gain information about students' current explanations. Those student explanations then become a baseline for instruction as teachers help students construct explanations aligned with scientific knowledge; teachers also help students evaluate their own explanations and those made by scientists.
Students also need to learn how to analyze evidence and data. The evidence they analyze may be from their investigations, other students' investigations, or databases. Data manipulation and analysis strategies need to be modeled by teachers of science and practiced by students. Determining the range of the data, the mean and mode values of the data, plotting the data, developing mathematical functions from the data, and looking for anomalous data are all examples of analyses students can perform. Teachers of science can ask questions, such as "What explanation did you expect to develop from the data?" "Were there any surprises in the data?" "How confident do you feel about the accuracy of the data?" Students should answer questions such as these during full and partial inquiries.
Public discussions of the explanations proposed by students is a form of peer review of investigations, and peer review is an important aspect of science. Talking with peers about science experiences helps students develop meaning and understanding. Their conversations clarify the concepts and processes of science, helping students make sense of the content of science. Teachers of science should engage students in conversations that focus on questions, such as "How do we know?" "How certain are you of those results?" "Is there a better way to do the investigation?" "If you had to explain this to someone who knew nothing about the project, how would you do it?" "Is there an alternative scientific explanation for the one we proposed?" "Should we do the investigation over?" "Do we need more evidence?" "What are our sources of experimental error?" "How do you account for an explanation that is different from ours?"
Questions like these make it possible for students to analyze data, develop a richer knowledge base, reason using science concepts, make connections between evidence and explanations, and recognize alternative explanations. Ideas should be examined and discussed in class so that other students can benefit from the feedback. Teachers of science can use the ideas of students in their class, ideas from other classes, and ideas from texts, databases, or other sources--but scientific ideas and methods should be discussed in the fashion just described.
Fundamental abilities and concepts that underlie this standard include
ABILITIES NECESSARY TO DO SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY
IDENTIFY QUESTIONS AND CONCEPTS THAT GUIDE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS. Students should formulate a testable hypothesis and demonstrate the logical connections between the scientific concepts guiding a hypothesis and the design of an experiment. They should demonstrate appropriate procedures, a knowledge base, and conceptual understanding of scientific investigations.
DESIGN AND CONDUCT SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS. Designing and conducting a scientific investigation requires introduction to the major concepts in the area being investigated, proper equipment, safety precautions, assistance with methodological problems, recommendations for use of technologies, clarification of ideas that guide the inquiry, and scientific knowledge obtained from sources other than the actual investigation. The investigation may also require student clarification of the question, method, controls, and variables; student organization and display of data; student revision of methods and explanations; and a public presentation of the results with a critical response from peers. Regardless of the scientific investigation performed, students must use evidence, apply logic, and construct an argument for their proposed explanations.
USE TECHNOLOGY AND MATHEMATICS TO IMPROVE INVESTIGATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS. A variety of technologies, such as hand tools, measuring instruments, and calculators, should be an integral component of scientific investigations. The use of computers for the collection, analysis, and display of data is also a part of this standard. Mathematics plays an essential role in all aspects of an inquiry. For example, measurement is used for posing questions, formulas are used for developing explanations, and charts and graphs are used for communicating results.
FORMULATE AND REVISE SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS AND MODELS USING LOGIC AND EVIDENCE. Student inquiries should culminate in formulating an explanation or model. Models should be physical, conceptual, and mathematical. In the process of answering the questions, the students should engage in discussions and arguments that result in the revision of their explanations. These discussions should be based on scientific knowledge, the use of logic, and evidence from their investigation.
RECOGNIZE AND ANALYZE ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS AND MODELS. This aspect of the standard emphasizes the critical abilities of analyzing an argument by reviewing current scientific understanding, weighing the evidence, and examining the logic so as to decide which explanations and models are best. In other words, although there may be several plausible explanations, they do not all have equal weight. Students should be able to use scientific criteria to find the preferred explanations.
COMMUNICATE AND DEFEND A SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT. Students in school science programs should develop the abilities associated with accurate and effective communication. These include writing and following procedures, expressing concepts, reviewing information, summarizing data, using language appropriately, developing diagrams and charts, explaining statistical analysis, speaking clearly and logically, constructing a reasoned argument, and responding appropriately to critical comments. [See Teaching Standard B in Chapter 3]
UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY
High-school students develop the ability to relate the macroscopic properties of substances that they study in grades K-8 to the microscopic structure of substances. This development in understanding requires students to move among three domains of thought--the macroscopic world of observable phenomena, the microscopic world of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles, and the symbolic and mathematical world of chemical formulas, equations, and symbols.
The relationship between properties of matter and its structure continues as a major component of study in 9-12 physical science. In the elementary grades, students studied the properties of matter and the classification of substances using easily observable properties. In the middle grades, they examined change of state, solutions, and simple chemical reactions, and developed enough knowledge and experience to define the properties of elements and compounds. When students observe and integrate a wide variety of evidence, such as seeing copper "dissolved" by an acid into a solution and then retrieved as pure copper when it is displaced by zinc, the idea that copper atoms are the same for any copper object begins to make sense. In each of these reactions, the knowledge that the mass of the substance does not change can be interpreted by assuming that the number of particles does not change during their rearrangement in the reaction. Studies of student understanding of molecules indicate that it will be difficult for them to comprehend the very small size and large number of particles involved. The connection between the particles and the chemical formulas that represent them is also often not clear.
It is logical for students to begin asking about the internal structure of atoms, and it will be difficult, but important, for them to know "how we know." Quality learning and the spirit and practice of scientific inquiry are lost when the evidence and argument for atomic structure are replaced by direct assertions by the teacher and text. Although many experiments are difficult to replicate in school, students can read some of the actual reports and examine the chain of evidence that led to the development of the current concept of the atom. The nature of the atom is far from totally understood; scientists continue to investigate atoms and have discovered even smaller constituents of which neutrons and protons are made.
Laboratory investigation of the properties of substances and their changes through a range of chemical interactions provide a basis for the high school graduate to understand a variety of reaction types and their applications, such as the capability to liberate elements from ore, create new drugs, manipulate the structure of genes, and synthesize polymers.
Understanding of the microstructure of matter can be supported by laboratory experiences with the macroscopic and microscopic world of forces, motion (including vibrations and waves), light, and electricity. These experiences expand upon the ones that the students had in the middle school and provide new ways of understanding the movement of muscles, the transport of materials across cell membranes, the behavior of atoms and molecules, communication technologies, and the movement of planets and galaxies. By this age, the concept of a force is better understood, but static forces in equilibrium and students' intuitive ideas about forces on projectiles and satellites still resist change through instruction for a large percentage of the students.
On the basis of their experiences with energy transfers in the middle grades, high-school students can investigate energy transfers quantitatively by measuring variables such as temperature change and kinetic energy. Laboratory investigations and descriptions of other experiments can help students understand the evidence that leads to the conclusion that energy is conserved. Although the operational distinction between temperature and heat can be fairly well understood after careful instruction, research with high-school students indicates that the idea that heat is the energy of random motion and vibrating molecules is difficult for students to understand.
Fundamental concepts and principles that underlie this standard include
STRUCTURE OF ATOMS
STRUCTURE AND PROPERTIES OF MATTER
CHEMICAL REACTIONS
MOTIONS AND FORCES
INTERACTIONS OF ENERGY AND MATTER
Students in grades K-8 should have developed a foundational understanding of life sciences. In grades 9-12, students' understanding of biology will expand by incorporating more abstract knowledge, such as the structure and function of DNA, and more comprehensive theories, such as evolution. Students' understandings should encompass scales that are both smaller, for example, molecules, and larger, for example, the biosphere.
Teachers of science will have to make choices about what to teach that will most productively develop student understanding of the life sciences. All too often, the criteria for selection are not clear, resulting in an overemphasis on information and an underemphasis on conceptual understanding. In describing the content for life sciences, the national standards focus on a small number of general principles that can serve as the basis for teachers and students to develop further understanding of biology.
Because molecular biology will continue into the twenty-first century as a major frontier of science, students should understand the chemical basis of life not only for its own sake, but because of the need to take informed positions on some of the practical and ethical implications of humankind's capacity to manipulate living organisms.
In general, students recognize the idea of species as a basis for classifying organisms, but few students will refer to the genetic basis of species. Students may exhibit a general understanding of classification. However, when presented with unique organisms, students sometimes appeal to "everyday" classifications, such as viewing jellyfish as fish because of the term "fish," and penguins as amphibians because they live on land and in water.
Although students may indicate that they know about cells, they may say that living systems are made of cells but not molecules, because students often associate molecules only with physical science.
See the example entitled "Fossils"
Students have difficulty with the fundamental concepts of evolution. For example, students often do not understand natural selection because they fail to make a conceptual connection between the occurrence of new variations in a population and the potential effect of those variations on the long-term survival of the species. One misconception that teachers may encounter involves students attributing new variations to an organism's need, environmental conditions, or use. With some help, students can understand that, in general, mutations occur randomly and are selected because they help some organisms survive and produce more offspring. Other misconceptions center on a lack of understanding of how a population changes as a result of differential reproduction (some individuals producing more offspring), as opposed to all individuals in a population changing. Many misconceptions about the process of natural selection can be changed through instruction.
Fundamental concepts and principles that underlie this standard include
THE CELL
During the high school years, students continue studying the earth system introduced in grades 5-8. At grades 9-12, students focus on matter, energy, crustal dynamics, cycles, geochemical processes, and the expanded time scales necessary to understand events in the earth system. Driven by sunlight and earth's internal heat, a variety of cycles connect and continually circulate energy and material through the components of the earth system. Together, these cycles establish the structure of the earth system and regulate earth's climate. In grades 9-12, students review the water cycle as a carrier of material, and deepen their understanding of this key cycle to see that it is also an important agent for energy transfer. Because it plays a central role in establishing and maintaining earth's climate and the production of many mineral and fossil fuel resources, the students' explorations are also directed toward the carbon cycle. Students use and extend their understanding of how the processes of radiation, convection, and conduction transfer energy through the earth system.
In studying the evolution of the earth system over geologic time, students develop a deeper understanding of the evidence, first introduced in grades 5-8, of earth's past and unravel the interconnected story of earth's dynamic crust, fluctuating climate, and evolving life forms. The students' studies develop the concept of the earth system existing in a state of dynamic equilibrium. They will discover that while certain properties of the earth system may fluctuate on short or long time scales, the earth system will generally stay within a certain narrow range for millions of years. This long-term stability can be understood through the working of planetary geochemical cycles and the feedback processes that help to maintain or modify those cycles.
As an example of this long-term stability, students find that the geologic record suggests that the global temperature has fluctuated within a relatively narrow range, one that has been narrow enough to enable life to survive and evolve for over three billion years. They come to understand that some of the small temperature fluctuations have produced what we perceive as dramatic effects in the earth system, such as the ice ages and the extinction of entire species. They explore the regulation of earth's global temperature by the water and carbon cycles. Using this background, students can examine environmental changes occurring today and make predictions about future temperature fluctuations in the earth system.
Looking outward into deep space and deep time, astronomers have shown that we live in a vast and ancient universe. Scientists assume that the laws of matter are the same in all parts of the universe and over billions of years. It is thus possible to understand the structure and evolution of the universe through laboratory experiments and current observations of events and phenomena in the universe.
Until this grade level, astronomy has been largely restricted to the behavior of objects in the solar system. In grades 9-12, the study of the universe becomes more abstract as students expand their ability to comprehend large distances, long time scales, and the nature of nuclear reactions. The age of the universe and its evolution into galaxies, stars, and planets--and eventually life on earth--fascinates and challenges students.
The challenge of helping students learn the content of this standard will be to present understandable evidence from sources that range over immense timescales--and from studies of the earth's interior to observations from outer space. Many students are capable of doing this kind of thinking, but as many as half will need concrete examples and considerable help in following the multistep logic necessary to develop the understandings described in this standard. Because direct experimentation is usually not possible for many concepts associated with earth and space science, it is important to maintain the spirit of inquiry by focusing the teaching on questions that can be answered by using observational data, the knowledge base of science, and processes of reasoning.
Fundamental concepts and principles that underlie this standard include
ENERGY IN THE EARTH SYSTEM
THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE EARTH SYSTEM
CONTENT STANDARD E: As a result of activities in grades 9-12, all students should develop
This standard has two equally important parts--developing students' abilities of technological design and developing students' understanding about science and technology. Although these are science education standards, the relationship between science and technology is so close that any presentation of science without developing an understanding of technology would portray an inaccurate picture of science.
In the course of solving any problem where students try to meet certain criteria within constraints, they will find that the ideas and methods of science that they know, or can learn, can be powerful aids. Students also find that they need to call on other sources of knowledge and skill, such as cost, risk, and benefit analysis, and aspects of critical thinking and creativity. Learning experiences associated with this standard should include examples of technological achievement in which science has played a part and examples where technological advances contributed directly to scientific progress.
Students can understand and use the design model outlined in this standard. Students respond positively to the concrete, practical, outcome orientation of design problems before they are able to engage in the abstract, theoretical nature of many scientific inquiries. In general, high school students do not distinguish between the roles of science and technology. Helping them do so is implied by this standard. This lack of distinction between science and technology is further confused by students' positive perceptions of science, as when they associate it with medical research and use the common phrase "scientific progress." However, their association of technology is often with environmental problems and another common phrase, "technological problems." With regard to the connection between science and technology, students as well as many adults and teachers of science indicate a belief that science influences technology. This belief is captured by the common and only partially accurate definition "technology is applied science." Few students understand that technology influences science. Unraveling these misconceptions of science and technology and developing accurate concepts of the role, place, limits, possibilities and relationships of science and technology is the challenge of this standard.
The choice of design tasks and related learning activities is an important and difficult part of addressing this standard. In choosing technological learning activities, teachers of science will have to bear in mind some important issues. For example, whether to involve students in a full or partial design problem; or whether to engage them in meeting a need through technology or in studying the technological work of others. Another issue is how to select a task that brings out the various ways in which science and technology interact, providing a basis for reflection on the nature of technology while learning the science concepts involved.
In grades 9-12, design tasks should explore a range of contexts including both those immediately familiar in the homes, school, and community of the students and those from wider regional, national, or global contexts. The tasks should promote different ways to tackle the problems so that different design solutions can be implemented by different students. Successful completion of design problems requires that the students meet criteria while addressing conflicting constraints. Where constructions are involved, these might draw on technical skills and understandings developed within the science program, technical and craft skills developed in other school work, or require developing new skills.
Over the high school years, the tasks should cover a range of needs, of materials, and of different aspects of science. For example, a suitable design problem could include assembling electronic components to control a sequence of operations or analyzing the features of different athletic shoes to see the criteria and constraints imposed by the sport, human anatomy, and materials. Some tasks should involve science ideas drawn from more than one field of science. These can be complex, for example, a machine that incorporates both mechanical and electrical control systems.
Although some experiences in science and technology will emphasize solving problems and meeting needs by focusing on products, experience also should include problems about system design, cost, risk, benefit, and very importantly, tradeoffs.
Because this study of technology occurs within science courses, the number of these activities must be limited. Details specified in this standard are criteria to ensure quality and balance in a small number of tasks and are not meant to require a large number of such activities. Many abilities and understandings of this standard can be developed as part of activities designed for other content standards.
Fundamental abilities and concepts that underlie this standard include
ABILITIES OF TECHNOLOGICAL DESIGN
IDENTIFY A PROBLEM OR DESIGN AN OPPORTUNITY. Students should be able to identify new problems or needs and to change and improve current technological designs. [See Content Standard A (grades 9-12)]
PROPOSE DESIGNS AND CHOOSE BETWEEN ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS. Students should demonstrate thoughtful planning for a piece of technology or technique. Students should be introduced to the roles of models and simulations in these processes.
IMPLEMENT A PROPOSED SOLUTION. A variety of skills can be needed in proposing a solution depending on the type of technology that is involved. The construction of artifacts can require the skills of cutting, shaping, treating, and joining common materials--such as wood, metal, plastics, and textiles. Solutions can also be implemented using computer software.
EVALUATE THE SOLUTION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. Students should test any solution against the needs and criteria it was designed to meet. At this stage, new criteria not originally considered may be reviewed.
COMMUNICATE THE PROBLEM, PROCESS, AND SOLUTION. Students should present their results to students, teachers, and others in a variety of ways, such as orally, in writing, and in other forms--including models, diagrams, and demonstrations. [See Teaching Standard B]
UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
The organizing principles for this standard do not identify specific personal and societal challenges, rather they form a set of conceptual organizers, fundamental understandings, and implied actions for most contemporary issues. The organizing principles apply to local as well as global phenomena and represent challenges that occur on scales that vary from quite short--for example, natural hazards--to very long--for example, the potential result of global changes.
By grades 9-12, many students have a fairly sound understanding of the overall functioning of some human systems, such as the digestive, respiratory, and circulatory systems. They might not have a clear understanding of others, such as the human nervous, endocrine, and immune systems. Therefore, students may have difficulty with specific mechanisms and processes related to health issues.
Most high school students have a concept of populations of organisms, but they have a poorly developed understanding of the relationships among populations within a community and connections between populations and other ideas such as competition for resources. Few students understand and apply the idea of interdependence when considering interactions among populations, environments, and resources. If, for example, students are asked about the size of populations and why some populations would be larger, they often simply describe rather than reason about interdependence or energy flow.
Students may exhibit a general idea of cycling matter in ecosystems, but they may center on short chains of the cyclical process and express the misconception that matter is created and destroyed at each step of the cycle rather than undergoing continuous transformation. Instruction using charts of the flow of matter through an ecosystem and emphasizing the reasoning involved with the entire process may enable students to develop more accurate conceptions.
See the example entitled "Photosynthesis"
Many high-school students hold the view that science should inform society about various issues and society should set policy about what research is important. In general, students have rather simple and naive ideas about the interactions between science and society. There is some research supporting the idea that S-T-S (science, technology, and society) curriculum helps improve student understanding of various aspects of science- and technology-related societal challenges.
Fundamental concepts and principles that underlie this standard include
PERSONAL AND COMMUNITY HEALTH
The National Science Education Standards use history to elaborate various aspects of scientific inquiry, the nature of science, and science in different historical and cultural perspectives. The standards on the history and nature of science are closely aligned with the nature of science and historical episodes described in the American Association for the Advancement of Science Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Teachers of science can incorporate other historical examples that may accommodate different interests, topics, disciplines, and cultures--as the intention of the standard is to develop an understanding of the human dimensions of science, the nature of scientific knowledge, and the enterprise of science in society--and not to develop a comprehensive understanding of history.
Little research has been reported on the use of history in teaching about the nature of science. But learning about the history of science might help students to improve their general understanding of science. Teachers should be sensitive to the students' lack of knowledge and perspective on time, duration, and succession when it comes to historical study. High school students may have difficulties understanding the views of historical figures. For example, students may think of historical figures as inferior because they did not understand what we do today. This "Whiggish perspective" seems to hold for some students with regard to scientists whose theories have been displaced.
Fundamental concepts and principles that underlie this standard include
SCIENCE AS A HUMAN ENDEAVOR
See the example entitled "An Analysis of a Scientific Inquiry"
Copernican revolution
Newtonian mechanics
Relativity
Geologic time scale
Plate tectonics
Atomic theory
Nuclear physics
Biological evolution
Germ theory
Industrial revolution
Molecular biology
Information and communication
Quantum theory
Galactic universe
Medical and health technology
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington DC.: AAAS.
Bechtel, W. 1988. Philosophy of Science: An Overview for Cognitive Science. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Bingman, R. 1969. Inquiry Objectives in the Teaching of Biology. Boulder, CO and Kansas City, MO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study and Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory.
Carey, S., R. Evans, M. Honda, E. Jay, and C. Unger. 1989. An experiment is when you try it and see if it works: A study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5): 514-529.
Chinn, C.A., and W.F. Brewer. 1993. The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63(1): 1-49.
Connelly, F.M., M.W. Wahlstrom, M. Finegold, and F. Elbaz. 1977. Enquiry Teaching in Science: A Handbook for Secondary School Teachers. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Driver, R. 1989. Students' conceptions and the learning of science: Introduction. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5): 481-490.
Duschl, R.A. 1990. Restructuring Science Education: The Importance of Theories and Their Development. New York: Teachers College Press.
Duschl, R.A., and R.J. Hamilton, eds. 1992. Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Glaser, R. 1984. Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39(2): 93-104.
Grosslight, L., C. Unger, E. Jay, and C.L. Smith. 1991. Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. [Special issue] Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9): 799-822.
Hewson, P.W., and N.R. Thorley. 1989. The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5): 541-553.
Hodson, D. 1992. Assessment of practical work: Some considerations in philosophy of science. Science & Education, 1(2): 115-134.
Hodson, D. 1985. Philosophy of science, science and science education. Studies in Science Education, 12: 25-57.
Kyle, W. C. Jr. 1980. The distinction between inquiry and scientific inquiry and why high school students should be cognizant of the distinction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(2): 123-130.
Longino, H.E. 1990. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mayer, W.V., ed. 1978. BSCS Biology Teachers' Handbook, third edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Metz, K.E. 1991. Development of explanation: Incremental and fundamental change in children's physics knowledge. [Special issue] Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9): 785-797.
NRC (National Research Council). 1988. Improving Indicators of the Quality of Science and Mathematics Education in Grades K-12. R.J. Murnane, and S.A. Raizen, eds. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NSRC (National Science Resources Center). 1996. Resources for Teaching Elementary School Science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Ohlsson, S. 1992. The cognitive skill of theory articulation: A neglected aspect of science education. Science & Education, 1(2): 181-192.
Roth, K.J. 1989. Science education: It's not enough to 'do' or 'relate.' The American Educator, 13(4): 16-22; 46-48.
Rutherford, F.J. 1964. The role of inquiry in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2: 80-84.
Schauble, L., L.E. Klopfer, and K. Raghavan. 1991. Students' transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation. [Special issue] Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9): 859-882.
Schwab, J.J. 1958. The teaching of science as inquiry. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 14: 374-379.
Schwab, J.J. 1964. The teaching of science as enquiry. In The Teaching of Science, J.J. Schwab and P.F. Brandwein, eds.: 3-103. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Welch, W.W., L.E. Klopfer, G.S. Aikenhead, and J.T. Robinson. 1981. The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65(1): 33-50.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
Driver, R., A. Squires, P. Rushworth, and V. Wood-Robinson. 1994. Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into Children's Ideas. London: Routledge.
Driver, R., E. Guesne, and A. Tiberghien, eds. 1985. Children's Ideas in Science. Philadelphia, PA.: Open University Press.
Fensham, P. J., R. F. Gunstone, and R. T. White, eds. 1994. The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Its Teaching and Learning. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.
Harlen, W. 1988. The Teaching of Science. London: Fulton.
NSTA (National Science Teachers Association). 1992. Scope, Sequence, Coordination. The Content Core: A Guide for Curriculum Designers. Washington, DC: NSTA.
Osborne, R.J., and P. Freyberg. 1985. Learning in Science: The Implications of 'Children's Science.' New Zealand: Heinemann.
AAPT (American Association of Physics Teachers). 1988. Course Content in High School Physics. High School Physics: Views from AAPT. College Park, MD: AAPT.
AAPT (American Association of Physics Teachers). 1986. Guidelines for High School Physics Programs. Washington, DC: AAPT.
ACS (American Chemical Society). 1996. FACETS Foundations and Challenges to Encourage Technology-based Science. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
ACS (American Chemical Society). 1993. ChemCom: Chemistry in the Community, second ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
BSCS (Biological Sciences Curriculum Study). 1993. Developing Biological Literacy: A Guide to Developing Secondary and Post-Secondary Biology Curricula. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.
Jacob, F. 1982. The Possible and the Actual. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Medawar, P.B., and J.S. Medawar. 1977. The Life Science: Current Ideas of Biology. New York: Harper and Row.
Moore, J.A. 1993. Science as a Way of Knowing: The Foundations of Modern Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Morowitz, H.J. 1979. Biological Generalizations and Equilibrium Organic Chemistry. In Energy Flow in Biology: Biological Organization as a Problem in Thermal Physics. Woodbridge, CT: Oxbow Press.
NRC (National Research Council). 1990. Fulfilling the Promise: Biology Education in Our Nation's Schools. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC (National Research Council). 1989. High-School Biology Today and Tomorrow. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
AGI (American Geological Institute). 1991. Earth Science Content Guidelines Grades K-12. Alexandria, VA: AGI.
AGI (American Geological Institute). 1991. Earth Science Education for the 21st Century: A Planning Guide. Alexandria, VA: AGI.
NRC (National Research Council). 1993. Solid-Earth Sciences and Society: A Critical Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Johnson, J. 1989. Technology: A Report of the Project 2061 Phase I Technology Panel. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Selby, C.C. 1993. Technology: From myths to realities. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(9): 684-689.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gore, A. 1992. Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Meadows, D.H., D.L. Meadows, and J. Randers. 1992. Beyond the Limits: Confronting Global Collapse, Envisioning a Sustainable Future. Post Mills, VT: Chelsea Green.
Miller, G.T. 1992. Living in the Environment: An Introduction to Environmental Science, 7th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Moore, J. 1985. Science as a Way of Knowing II: Human Ecology. Baltimore, MD: American Society of Zoologists.
NRC (National Research Council). 1993. Solid-Earth Sciences and Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Silver, C.S., and R.S. DeFries. 1990. One Earth, One Future: Our Changing Global Enviroment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
In addition to references for Science as Inquiry, the following references are suggested.
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bakker, G., and L. Clark. 1988. Explanation: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Cohen, I.B. 1985. Revolution in Science. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Hacking, I. 1983. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hoyingen-Huene, P. 1987. Context of discovery and context of justification. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 18(4): 501-515.
Klopfer, L. 1992. A historical perspective on the history and nature of science on school science programs. In Teaching About the History and Nature of Science and Technology: Background Papers, Biological Sciences Curriculum Study and Social Science Education Consortium: 105-129. Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
Machamer, P. 1992. Philosophy of science: An overview for educators. In Teaching About the History and Nature of Science and Technology: Background Papers, Biological Sciences Curriculum Study and Social Science Education Consortium: 9-17. Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
Malley, M. 1992. The Nature and History of Science. In Teaching About the History and Nature of Science and Technology: Background Papers, Biological Sciences Curriculum Study and Social Science Education Consortium: 67-79. Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
Moore, J.A. 1993. Science as a Way of Knowing: The Foundations of Modern Biology. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.
NRC (National Research Council). 1995. On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Russell, T.L. 1981. What history of science, how much, and why? Science Education 65 (1): 51-64.
