The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments

Ralf Marks; Marc Stuckey; Nadja Belova; Ingo Eilks

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

Full Text (PDF)

Ralf Marks ¹, Marc Stuckey ¹, Nadja Belova ¹, Ingo Eilks ¹ ^*

More Detail

¹ University of Bremen, GERMANY
^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

This paper reflects the theory and practice of societal-oriented science education in the past and present of German science teaching. Starting from a quite unique German justification for more thorough societal-oriented science education and some historical reflections a model for socio-scientific issues-based science teaching will be presented. The model was developed and operated in the last ten years in Germany along many cases of curriculum design and classroom-based research. Along selected cases it will be discussed how the curriculum design and action research triggered innovation process contributes to theory development in the field of socio-scientific issues-based science education.

Keywords

science education
STS
Socio-Scientific Issues
scientific literacy

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2014 - Volume 10 Issue 4, pp. 285-296

Publication date: 15 Dec 2014

Article Views: 1236

Article Downloads: 587

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Bauer, M. W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of science – discourse and comparative evidence. Science Technology Society, 14, 221-240
Behrendt, J., & Just, E. (1997). Alltagsorientierung [Everydaylife orientation]. Naturwissenschaften im Unterricht Chemie, 8 (37), 32-37.
Belova, N. & Eilks, I. (2014). Promoting societal-oriented communication and decision making skills by learning about advertising in science education. Centre for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 4, 31-49.
Bolte, C., Streller, S., Holbrook, J., Rannikmae, M., Hofstein, A., Mamlok-Naaman, A., & Rauch, F. (2012). Introduction into PROFILES - Professional ReflectionOriented Focus on Inquiry-based Learning and Education through Science. In C.
Bolte, J. Holbrook, & F. Rauch (eds.). Inquiry-based science education in Europe: First examples and reflections from the PROFILES project (pp. 31-42). Berlin: FU Berlin.
Burmeister, M., & Eilks, I. (2012). An example of learning about plastics and their evaluation as a contribution to Education for Sustainable Development in secondary school chemistry teaching. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 93-102.
Burmeister, M., Rauch, F., & Eilks, I. (2012). Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and secondary chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 59-68.
De Haan, G. (2006). The BLK ‘21’ programme in Germany: a ‘Gestaltungskompetenz’-based model for Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 12, 19 – 32.
De Jong, O. (2006). Making chemistry meaningful: Conditions for successful context-based teaching. Educacion Quimica, 17, 215-226.
Eilks, I. (2000). Promoting scientific and technological literacy: teaching biodiesel. Science Education International, 11 (1), 16-21.
Eilks, I. (2002). Teaching 'biodiesel': A sociocritical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry teaching, and students' first views on it. Chemistry Education Research Practice, 3, 67-75.
Eilks, I., Belova, N., Von Döhlen, M., Burmeister, M., & Stuckey, M. (2012). Kommunizieren und Bewerten lernen für den Alltag - Beispiel Energydrinks [Learning how to communicate and evaluate in everyday life – example energy drinks]. Der Mathematische und Naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht, 65, 480-486.
Eilks, I., & Feierabend, T. (2013). Developing the curriculum by Participatory Action Research – An interdisciplinary project on climate change. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (eds.), Educational design research: Introduction and illustrative cases (pp. 321-338). Enschede: SLO Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
Eilks, I. Marks, R., & Feierabend, T. (2008). Science education research to prepare future citizens - Chemistry learning in a socio-critical and problemoriented approach. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (eds.), Promoting successful science education - The worth of science education research (pp. 75-86). Aachen: Shaker.
Eilks, I., Nielsen, J. A., & Hofstein, A. (2014). Learning about the role of science in public debate as an essential component of scientific literacy. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien & P. Clément (eds.), Topics and trends in current science education (pp. 85-100). Dordrecht: Springer.
Eilks, I., & Ralle, B. (2002). Participatory Action Research in chemical education. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (eds.), Research in chemical education - what does this mean? (pp. 87-98). Aachen: Shaker.
Elmose, S., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Allgemeinbildung: Readiness for living in a risk society. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37, 11-34.
Ewers, M., Kremer, A., & Stäudel, L. (1990). Reform and counterreform in the teaching of natural sciences. Westerrn European Education. A Journal of Translations, 22 (2), 92-101.
Feierabend, T., & Eilks, I. (2010). Raising students’ perception of the relevance of science teaching and promoting communication and evaluation capabilities using authentic and controversial socio-scientific issues in the framework of climate change. Science Education International, 21, 176-196.
Feierabend, T., & Eilks, I. (2011). Teaching the societal dimension of chemistry using a socio-critical, problemoriented lesson plan based on bioethanol usage. Journal of Chemical Education 88, 1250-1256.
Fensham, P. J. (2004). Defining an identity. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fischer, H. E., Klemm, K., Leutner, D., Sumfleth, E., Tiemann, R., & Wirth, J. (2005). Framework for empirical research on science teaching and learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 309-349.
Fleck L (1935). Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache. Basel: Schwabe. English translation 1979, Genesis and development of a scientific fact. University of Chicago, Chicago.
Freise, G. (1994). Für einen politischen Unterricht von der Natur [Towards a political instrution about nature]. Marburg: Soznat.
Garner, N., de Lourdes Lischke, M., Siol, A., & Eilks, I. (2014). Learning about chemistry’s contributions to sustainable development in a non-formal laboratory context for secondary level students. In K. D. Thomas & H. E. Muga (eds.), Cases on pedagogical innovations for sustainable development (pp. 229-244). Hershey: IGI Global.
Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 957-976.
Gräber, W., & Lindner, M. (2008). The Impact of the PARSEL way to teach science in Germany on interest, scientific literacy, and German national standards. Science Education International, 19, 267-274.
Halford, J. C., Gillespie, J., Brown, V., Pontin, E. E., & Dovey, T. M. (2003). Effect of television advertisements for foods on food consumption in children. Appetite, 42(2), 221-225.
Hofstein, A., Eilks, I., & Bybee, R. (2011). Societal issues and their importance for contemporary science education: a pedagogical justification and the state of the art in Israel, Germany and the USA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1459-1483. H
olbrook, J. (2005). Making chemistry teaching relevant. Chemical Education International, 6 (1), http://old.iupac.org/publications/cei/vol6/06_Holbro ok.pdf.
Holbrook, J. (2008). Introduction to the special issue of science education international devoted to PARSEL. Science Education International, 19, 257-266.
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmäe, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1347-1362.
Jenkins, E. W., & Nelson, N. W. (2005). Important but not for me: students' attitudes towards secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23, 41-57.
Klafki, W. (2000a). The significance of classical theories of Bildung for a contemporary concept of Allgemeinbildung. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 85-108). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Klafki, W. (2000b). Didaktik Analysis as the core for preparation of instruction. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (eds.). Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139-160). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
KMK (2004). Bildungsstandards im Fach Biologie/Chemie/Physik für den Mittleren Bildungsabschluss [Educatkonal standards for the subjects biology/chemistry/physics for the junior secondary cycle]. München: Luchterhand.
Krageskov Eriksen, K. (2002) The Future of tertiary chemical education – A Bildung focus. HYLE – International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, 8, 35-48.
Marks, R., Bertram, S., & Eilks, I. (2008). Learning chemistry and beyond with a lesson plan on potato crisps, which follows a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry lessons – a case study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 267-276.
Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2009). Promoting scientific literacy using a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry teaching: concept, examples, experiences. International Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 4, 231-245.
Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2010). The development of a chemistry lesson plan on shower gels and musk fragrances following a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach – A project of Participatory Action Research. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11, 129-141.
Marks, R., Otten, J., & Eilks, I. (2010). Writing news spots about science – A way to promote scientific literacy. School Science Review, 92(339), 99-108.
McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2012). Encouraging and equipping students to engage critically with science in the news: what can we learn from the literature? Studies in Science Education, 48, 1-49.
Mogensen, F., & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16, 59-74.
Nentwig, P., Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., Ralle, B., & Demuth, R. (2007). Chemie im Kontext – A new approach to teaching chemistry; its principles and first evaluation data. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 1439-1444.
Newton, D. P. (1988). Relevance and science education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 20(2), 7-12.
Osborne, J. (2003). Attitude towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections. London: The Nuffield Foundation.
Ostermeier, C., & Prenzel, M. (2005). What can we learn from different forms of evaluation? Experiences from a quality-development program in science and mathematics instruction. In J. Benett, J. Holman, R. Millar & D. Waddington (eds.), Evaluation as a tool for improving science education (pp. 145-158). Münster: Waxmann.
Parchmann, I., Ralle, B., & Demuth, R. (2000): Chemie im Kontext [Chemistry in context]. Der Mathematische und Naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht, 53, 132-137.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88, 263-291.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research Science Teaching, 41, 513–536.
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Socio-scientific issues in the classroom. Heidelberg: Springer.
Schenk, B. (2007). Fachkultur und Bildung in den Fächern Chemie und Physik [Domain-specific culture and education in the subjects chemistry and physics]. In J. Lüders (ed.), Fachkulturforschung in der Schule (pp. 84-100). Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Schulz, R. M. (2009). Reforming science education: Part I. The search for a philosophy of science education. Science & Education, 9, 225-249.
Sjöström, J., (2013). Towards Bildung-oriented science education. Science & Education, 22, 1873-1890.
Stolz, M., Witteck, T., Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). "Doping" for chemistry education – The use of socio-scientific issues for learning about chemical analytics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technological Education, 9, 361-370.
Stuckey M., Hofstein A., Mamlok-Naaman R., & Eilks I. (2013). The meaning of ‘relevance’ in science education and its implications for the science curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 49, 1-34.
Stuckey, M., Lippel, M., & Eilks, I. (2012). Sweet chemistry: Learning about natural and artificial sweetening substances and advertising in chemistry lessons. Chemistry in Action, 2012 (Winter), 36-43.
Stuckey, M., & Eilks, I. (2014). Raising motivation in the chemistry classroom by learning about the studentrelevant issue of tattooing from a chemistry and societal perspective. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15, 156-167.
van Aalsvoort, J. (2004). Activity theory as a tool to address the problem of chemistry’s lack of relevance in secondary school chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1635-1651.
Villani, S. (2001). Impact of media on children and adolescents: A 10-Year review of the research. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 15, 392-401.
von Humboldt, W. (2000). Theorie der Bildung des Menschen [Theory of education of human beings]. In Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 57- 62). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Weninger, E. (2000). Didaktik as a theory of education. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 111- 126). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

How to cite this article

APA

Marks, R., Stuckey, M., Belova, N., & Eilks, I. (2014). The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(4), 285-296. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

Vancouver

Marks R, Stuckey M, Belova N, Eilks I. The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2014;10(4):285-96. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

AMA

Marks R, Stuckey M, Belova N, Eilks I. The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2014;10(4), 285-296. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

Chicago

Marks, Ralf, Marc Stuckey, Nadja Belova, and Ingo Eilks. "The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2014 10 no. 4 (2014): 285-296. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

Harvard

Marks, R., Stuckey, M., Belova, N., and Eilks, I. (2014). The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(4), pp. 285-296. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a

MLA

Marks, Ralf et al. "The Societal Dimension in German Science Education – From Tradition towards Selected Cases and Recent Developments". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 10, no. 4, 2014, pp. 285-296. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1083a