editorially /peaking Educational Reform: A Need for Leadership The problems of science education in our school systems have been enumerated by individuals, committees, and panels a t every educational level-college, secondary school, middle school, and elementary level. Two examples will suffice to illustrate the point. The need for a unified approach to science education starting a t middle school or earlier is recognized as an important component of curricular reform. In addition, numerous areas relating to teacher education-both pre-service and in-service-need attention. There have been, on occasion, reports of significant and effective contributions to primary school and secondary schoolprog~amsf+om scientistsa%liated withuniversities, industry, and government. Indeed, many of these reports have been published in the pages of this Journal. Unfortunately, these efforts have tended to remain local and isolated contributions, unguided by any overarching plan, unaccomoanied bv" anv " indeoendent assessment. unmoved by any means of dissemination, and, as a result, ephemeral a t best and unknown to most of those who should or might be interested. The process of reform in science education cries out for leadership from the community of practicing scientists. In the glory years of science, practicing scientists were among those in the forefront of science education. They provided the sense of what it means to "do" science, that is, that science is a process ofknowingand not the collection of facts and theories that result from that process. Somehow science education has slipped from teaching young people science to teaching - them about science: from being - an active process to being a passive one. Practicine scientists need to become eneazed with curricnlar reform a t the precollege level (indeed, in some cases, even a t the college level) as well as with the reform of teacher education-hoth pre-service and in-service. The developers of precollege science curricula need assistance in identifymg the important concepts of science that should be taught to all students; there are far too many facts and theories currently being taught as science during students' formative years if, indeed, any science is being taught a t all. Science teaching in the formative years should not be reduced to a language of foreign terms and facts to be memorized. Many states have already developed science
-
--
frameworks or curricular guides outlining the amount and type of science that should be taught a t every level, but states, districts, and especially schools must ensure that these requirements are actually instituted. This will require muchmore than token observanceof new regulations; the active participation of working scientists will he required. These mandated science frameworks or curricular guidelines are only skeletons that must be shaped and filled-out with the substance of science by those who know what it means to "do"science. Textbooks have to be revised or new ones written, real science-orientedlaboratory activities described, and new assessment rncthods fomdatcd. Thereismuch to hrdone that can onlvbedone hv "oracticine . scientists. Teacher education is another area that needs immediate attention in the system of science education. The -oreparation of teachers needs drastic reform. Effective science teaching requires being able to do science as well as to know science. New programs must ensure that science teachers not only understand science, hut that they also have the skills to relate science concepts to children of different ages. A curriculum that treats science as a process for knowing about the world can be effective only if the teachers have a solid understanding of that process themselves. Ideally, every teacher who has a responsibility for a high-school science class should have had the experience ofengaging in original researchunder the direction of a research scientist. ideally, this process should be part of the teacher's pre-service education, even if only for a semester or a summer. For practicing teachers who have missed that opportunity, inservice mechanisms must be devised. University and college science departments, which is to say the practicing scientists in these departments, bear a major responsibility in this regard. ~ ~ ~ r o p r iscience a t e courses for teachers are ~enerallvcons~icuous bvtheir absence. The needs of wouldbe science teachers currently receive little or no attention from University- or college-level faculty. It's time for scientists to step forward and begin to provide the leadership for the "science"part ofthe system of science education. They have, for the most part, been too silent and too content with letting others do their job, and it has been done poorly. Scientists need to recapture the high ground in science education. JJL
-
-
Volume 67
Number 12 December 1990
993
