John C. Whitmer Western Washington State College Bellinghom, Washington 98225
In the elementary schools emphasis should be placed on stimulating curiosity and discovery, the participatory "funand-games" aspect of science. The development of technical vocabulary should be replaced by concept development from a base of extensive experience and experimentation. The inborn curiosity of elementary students should be nurtured by providing an environment that encourages experimentation and investigation. Snowmass Conference ( 1 ) Report of Panel IV Several years ago I had the opportunity along with my regular teaching load in chemistry to teach courses in science for preservice elementary education students. Having had little experience with elementary schools since my own attendance over 25 years ago, I had a good hit of readine and rethinkine to do in . preparation. Mv ex. periences since my reintroduction to the elementary field have brought me in contact not only with the elementary educationk.udents in my classes, bbt also with local el;mentary school principals, teachers, and, perhaps most important in terms of my own understanding, elementary school children. With the increased emphasis in higher education in recent years on science instruction for "nonscience" students, it may be worth mentioning that the lamest - "=nun. of "nonscience" students in the educational system today are those children roughly five to eleven years of aee enrolled in elementaw schools. Perhaus a t no later t i m e in their lives will these students he a; receptive to learning and thus the oljportunities be better for developing attitudes toward ideas, ways of thinking, and subjects, including science. For these reasons, I believe that of all the levels in our educational system, elementary through graduate, the quality of instruction a t the elementary level may he the most i m ~ o r t a n t .Mv Dumose in this article is to review some v e j ~i~nificant'effortsin elementary school science. beginning in the early 1960's and continuing today, and to &courage-those who have the opportunity 6 assist these efforts.
-
The Funded Project Period
During the post-Sputnik period there was a strong movement, financed largely by the National Science Foundation, to develop science curricula which present science to young people in an intellectually honest, educationally sound, and interesting manner. The 1960's have been aptly termed "the funded project period" of science education. Although secondary school science programs
Elementary School Science Directions and opportunities
(PSSC, CHEMS, CBA, BSCS, etc.,) are perhaps better known to those in higher education, a number of elementary school science projects were funded in the early 1960's. Prior to this time elementary science curricula were the domain mainly of the science textbook puhlishers (and they are by no means extinct today). Although reading materials can have a place in the elementary science curriculum, a major goal of these funded projects, as reflected in the quote from the Snowmass conference above, was to minimize the reliance on text materials and to lace urimaw emuhasis on the student and his direct parkcipation. Most {f these projects are past the developmental stage and elementary science curricula which are seientificallv and educationallv sound as well as interesting to children now exist. All of the newer curricula involve the student extensivelv with materials and to a large . extent convert the elementary classroom into a laboratory. These curricula differ from textbook based curricula in several other significant ways. For the first time sufficient financial support was available for extensive trials and revisions of materials with children in actual elementary classrooms. Also in each project personnel with a variety of backgrounds were involved. Practicing scientists, science educators, educational psychologists, and elementary school teachers all had considerable input, but in most cases practicing scientists had major leadership roles. The deep involvement of college and university scientists in these projects has had significant effects on their own science courses particularly those intended for elementary education students. Six of these elementary science curriculum projects are given in the table with a brief description of their goals and grade level. Of these six, the Elementary Science Study (ESS), Science-A Process Approach (SAPA), and Elementary Science Curriculum Projects Elementary Science Curriculum Prolects con"eptua11y Oriented program in Elementary Science (COPES) New York University 61 Press Bldg. ~ s s h i n g t o "Square New York, N.Y. 10003 SchoolSciencePro'eet
$:&$TLary
College of Education of Education urbuna, 111. 61801 ~
~ sciencestudy ~ (ESS) ~ 66 C h a g l Street Newton, Mass.02160
Goalrr and Grade Levels To develop an undcrslanding of the nnturr of matter by emphasizing the major conceptual schemes of science.
(K-8) that renet fundamental eoneep1s in astronomy and to utilize an app'oach that encourages inveatization by the studenl.
TO develop
~
~
t
a
~
Minnesota Mathematics and Science Teaching Project (MINNEMAST) center for Currleulum Studies university of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minn. 65455
Presented in part at the 27th Annual Northwest Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Chemical Education Division, Corvallis, Oregon, June 1972. 'This colloquium (July 1970 at Snowmass-at-Aspen,Cola.) was sponsored by the Division of Chemical Education of the ACS and the Committee on Teaching Chemistry of IUPAC. The cited quote is from the Report of Panel IV, "Chemistry far Citizens," chaired by the late Richard L. Wolfgang ( J . CHEM. EDUC., 48, 24 (1970)). 168
/
Journal of Chemical Education
science^ P ~ (SAPA) American Association for the Advancement of Science 1515 ~ a - c h u s e t t s ~ v e .N.W. , washinelon, 11.c.~ 1 0 0 6 ~$~;$f~;"lum improvement 1,swronee Hall of science of ~ r x k e l e y ,calif. 84720
~
~
~
~
t h e Science Curriculum Improvement S t u d y (SCIS) a r e generally regarded as t h e "big three" a n d a r e representat i v e of t h e newer science curricula. These three curricul u m projects, although having m u c h in c o m m o n a n d all providing excellent science at t h e elementary level, also represent a diversity of viewpoints o n some aspects of elem e n t a r y school science. T h e Elementary S c i e n c e Study (ESS) The Elementary Science Study (ESS) began an a small scale in 1960 as one of the curriculum projects of the Education Development Center in Newton, Massachusetts. EDC, a private nanprofit organization incorporating the Institute for Educational Innovation and Educational Services Inc., began in 1958 as the parent orpanization of the Physical Science Study Committee (PSSC) high school physics course. The goal of ESS was to develop meaningful science materials centered around open-ended investigations for use hy children from kindergarten to ninth grade. Since its beginning more than 1W scientists and educators have heen involved in the conception and development of ESS materials. Development of the project is now complete, and the 56 ESS units now available extend over a wide range of subjects in the natural sciences and mathematics. Each unit comes with a teacher's guide and, usually, a kit of essential materials for a class. Careful attention was given to all materials used so that they resemble things which are normally accessible to children and not imposingly "scientific." Also available for some units are film loops, 8 mm films, student workbooks and problem cards far use by individuals or small groups. Some units simply offer teacher's guides with suggested activities which cgn be done with simple materials obtained locally. ESS is unique among the newer elementary science curricula in that no attempt has been made to identify specific science concepts or content which children should learn in the elementary grades. ESS claims there is no way of knowing whether the content deemed important now will be important in the first half of the twenty-first century, the period in which most of our present elementary school children will live most of their lives. Nor has ESS made any attempt to arrange their units into a single sequential curriculum for the elementary grades, although each unit has a suggested grade range usually over three or four grades. Each unit stands alone. Even within units a single specified sequence of activities is not imposed on the teacher. Thus ESS is not a curriculum as such; the units are building blocks from which an elementary school or school system can build its own curriculum. This flexibility allows relatively easy adoption or incorporation of ESS units into existing elementary school science programs. Another feature of the ESS units is their wide scope. Some involve traditional science topics. Electrical circuits and plant growth, common elementary science topics, are treated in units entitled "Batteries and Bulbs" and "Growing Seeds." Other units, however, are not as easily recognized from traditional curricula. In a unit on "Printine" children make a classroom mint-
from simple materials and brings many curriculum areas together, music, crafts, social studies, as well as science. A number of other ESS units also combine several areas of the total elementary curriculum-math and art are two more examples-with science. In this manner ESS feels that children are better able to relate science and scientific ways of thinking to their overall view of the world rather than as something apart. The development of a typical ESS unit progressed through several stages. A staff member had a potential idea for a unit, worked out an opening series of lessons, and taught the unit in a local elementary classroom. If the idea still seemed workable after an initial evaluation, a preliminary teacher's guide was written, prototypic materials were prepared, and local teachers tried out the unit. Feedback from ESS staff, teachers, and children usually led to revision of the teacher's guide, equipment, or even content and approach. Each unit was taught in 50-100 trial classes over several years before it was ready for final evaluation and production. A summary of the ESS philosophy and the tone of an ESS classroom is best described by a quote from one of their own puhlications (2)
ESS units will be mast effective in classrooms where inquiry is encouraged; where teachers are able and willing to listen more than to talk, to observe more than show, and to help their students to progress in their work without engineering its precise direction. Students will need their teachers to help them observe carefully, ask questions, design experiments, and assess the results of their work. To do those things without telling or directing too much requires a restraint that is born of self-confidence, as well as confidence in, and respect for, children. We have seen our materials reinforce these qualities in teachers. We have also learned that in the long run these qualities are more important t o the teaching of ESS units than is a substantive knowledge of science. Science-A
P r o c e s s Approach (SAPA)
In 1961 the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) sponsored a series of conferences to consider course content development projects in elementary and junior high school science. As a result of these conferenes, AAAS appointed a Commission on Science Education which, after consultation with a broad spectrum of scientists and educators, recommended the development of an experimental program for the elementary-school. This program, known as Science-A Process Approach (SAPA), was developed by over 100 scientists and educators during a five-year period beginning in 1963. Writing was done mainly during the summer with subsequent trial teaching and evaluation during the school year. The most significant characteristic of SAPA, as the name suggests, is its heavy emphasis on the processes of science. The goal is not the accumulation of specific knowledge about particular subjects such as biology, chemistry, or physics, hut for every child to acquire the basic knowledge of and competence in the use of process skills fundamental to all of science. In cbntrast to the relatively unstructured approach of the ESS program, SAPA is highly structured. The curriculum is divided into seven parts. Each part has 20-25 units which constitute the science program for a full year. The units are highly sequential, each building upon previous units from that year and previous years. Eaeh unit is based on one of the 13 processes of science identified by SAPA and listed below.
Basic Processes Observing Classifying Using numbers Measuring Usine.,soace-time relations Communicating Predicting Inferring
.
Integrated Processes Defining operationally Formulating hypotheses Interpreting data Controlling variables Exoerimentine
During the first four years children carry out activities based only on the basic processes. In the last three years the integrated processes are also included. Each process skill is the basis of many units in different contexts throughout the curriculum. For example, the process skill. Measuring, is the basis of 18 units in the total program. Eaeh Measuring unit in the curriculum involves measurement in different and increasingly complex situations. In the first year the Measuring unit involves comparing and ordering by length dowels of various lengths. In the fourth year one of the Measuring units involves calibrating a spring scale with objects of known weight and then measuring unknown forces in standard metric units, Newtons. Within each unit the approach and directions for the teacher are, in sharp contrast to ESS, very specific and follow a definite pattern. Specific objectives are listed at the beginning of each unit. The teacher introduces the unit, usually by presentine a demonstration, asking leading questions, and initiating discussion. The children are then guided in their work with actual materials provided in the accompanying kit. This is followed by a "Generalizing Experience" which encourages children to apply the skill they have just learned to different situations. To help the teacher evaluate the children's performance, each lesson is supplied with an "Appraisal Activity" for the class as a whole and, finally, a "Competency Measure" where each child performs 2"A Workins Guide to the Elementarv Science Studv." eompiled and pubkshed by the Elementary kelence study,*kewton. Mass., 1971, p. 3. =Berger, C. F., SCISNewsletter, No. 18.3 (Summer 1970). Volume 51. Number 3. March 1974
/
169
a number of specific tasks designed to measure how well the initially defined objectives of the lesson have been achieved. SAPA has been completed for several years now, although work is progressing on a second edition, the first part of which is scheduled for publication in 1974. Some characteristics of the new edition will be more choices of experiences for teachers to choose for their students and greater flexibility in sequencing. In summary, SAPA is a structured, carefully sequenced elementary science program based on the processes of science and is most appropriate when adopted as a total seven-year elementary science curriculum for a school or school district. Science Curriculum Improvement Study (SCIS)
The Science Curriculum Improvement Study (SCIS) was canceived and initiated by Robert Karplus, a professor of theoretical physics at the University of California at Berkeley, who became interested in elementary school science during the late 1950's. He was initially involved with several of the early elementary science curriculum projects and spend considerable time teaching science to elementary schaol children on a regular basis to increase his awareness of how young children think. SCIS was begun in 1962 and Karplus has been its director since that time. Now completed, SCIS is a six-year elementary science curriculum. Teacher's guides, student manuals and classroom equipment kits are . . available. The SCIS philosophy differs from ESS in that it is structured and the units are sequenced throughout the six-year program. It differs from SAPA in that no single approach, such as the processes of science, is so strongly emphasized and within and between units the teacher is given some freedom in choosing and ordering the activities. The main goal of the SClS curriculum is for children to have, concrete experiences in a context which builds a conceptual framework that will help them interpret and use information they will encounter throughout their lives. Thus, where SAPA is primarily process oriented, SCIS is primarily concept oriented, although both process and concept features can he identified in each program. This functional understanding of scientific concepts, termed "scientific literacy" by SCIS, is the principal goal of the program. The SCIS curriculum is composed of two separate but related sequences shown below, one in physical sciences and one in life science. These two sequences parallel each other throughout the six-year curriculum. Subject matter is hased on science concepts chosen far their wide applicability and potential usefulness. In each unit a variety of activities illustrate the concepts of the unit and build upon previous concepts. Physical Science Life Science Material Objects Organisms Interaction and Systems Life Cycles Subsystems and Variables Populations Relative Position and Motion Environments Energy Sources Communities Models: Electric and Ecosystems Magnetic Interactions As an example, the second year unit in the Life Science sequence is "Life Cycles." Here the "Organisms" unit of the first year is extended by studying the complete life cycles of selected plants and animals. Each child plants his own seeds, observes germination, and cares for his plant through maturity, flower production, and a new generation of seeds. similar &dies are carried out on fruit flies, frogs, and mealworms. As one generation produces another, children consider biotic potential, and the effects of reproduction and death on a population. These concrete experiences with living materials increase children's awareness of the differences between plants and animals, and living and nonliving things. Also during the second year the Physical Science unit, "Interaction and Systems," would be studied concurrently. The development of the SCIS units followed a pattern similar to other curriculum projects. After initial preparation of teaching plans, SCIS staff trial taught the units in local public schools. Revisions were followed by several years of classroom use by regular elementary teachers. After preliminary publication of teacher's guides, materials were used in several trial centers across the country. Then final editions were published. In summary the SCIS program is a six-year elementary science curriculum based on science concepts applied aver a broad spectrum in the physical and life sciences. Although the units are sequenced and related, the teacher is given some freedom in and between units. The primary goal is "scientific literacy": to im170
/
Journal of Chemical Education
prove the child's ability to interpret natural phenomena and to apply scientific thinking to many aspects of his experience. Overview
Although t h e curriculum projects described above have differences, their similarities a r e more significant, representing a n evolutionary rather t h a n revolutionar~developm e n t of elementary school science. During the 1970's a n d beyond, these programs a n d similar ones will have a strong impact on all science education. T h e most signific a n t common feature of these elementary science curricula is t h e emphasis on direct involvement of children with materials, not a s a supplement t o a reading-based curriculum, h u t a s t h e heart of t h e curriculum. Also common t o these projects is t h e decreased significance on concepts which depend strongly upon abstractions for a meaningful understanding. M u c h of t h e psychological foundation for these curricula is based o n the work of t h e Swiss psychologist J e a n Piaget and others which clearly indicates t h a t most children in t h e early elementary grades are generally incapable of dealing in a meaningful way with abstractions a n d t h a t the curriculum a t this level should he based on a n d he understandable from direct exnerienee. Even in t h e later elementary grades abstract concepts will have meaning for most children onlv if related t o concrete e a n SCIS materials at'hand. T h e f 0 1 l o w i n ~ " ~ u o tfrom Newsletter (31 concerning a n abstract concept from chemical science is pertinent. In one textbook series, for example, the concept of the molecule is introduced to second grade children . . . Tell a young child that he can smell something across the room because a tiny invisible particle floats through the air and into his nose and it will be as real to him as a knight on a white horse being able to climb the glass mountain to save the princess. Indeed, giving children even our best facts at an early age is on the level of giving them fairy tales. They'll believe you, they'll go along with you, but the facts they learn will have as much relationship to their understanding of reality as a fairy tale has to a true story.
I n a materials-centered elementary science classroom t h e teacher is not always the center of attention. Her attitude, her confidence with t h e curriculum, her ability t o ask questions (How can we find out?, What is your evidence?, etc.,) a s well as give answers, and her respect for children's work will be, as has always been true, the key t o a successful classroom. For this reason each of the curriculum projects has taken a n active interest in t h e training a n d retraining of elementary teachers who will use the programs. Workshops, summer institutes, source books a n d materials for teachers are available for each project to assist i n implementation. Also significant is t h e fact t h a t all t h e curriculum materials developed with federal supDort have uassed. or will in t h e verv near future. into t h e public domain and are available t o all in elementary science education. If meaningful science is t o become a part of every child's elementary school experience, continued effort in t h e years ahead m u s t he made. I would like t o conclude by encouraging scientists from all levels of t h e educational a n d scientific community t o assist in this effort. Look closely a t t h e units a n d teacher's guides of some of these recent curricula. If you have children of elementary school age visit their school a n d take a n active interest i n their science program. If your local elementary schools d o not have a science program, you might encourage t h e m t o make use of some of t h e more recent elementary science curricula or even assist t h e m i n t h e very difficult task of implementation. O r perhaps you could point out some of these elementary science curricula t o students i n your own college or university science classes who are interested in elementary education. There is much t o do.
- ..
Selected BibliooraDhv
R. E.. and valker. A. M.. "Progrsms for Improving science ,"*mction Elementary School. Part I. ESS."Scirncpand Children. 7. :I5 l.lan/Feb 19701.
in the
Rogers.
General
Science-A
Thier. H. D.. ''Teaching Elementary Schml Science-A Laboratory Approach," D. C. Heath&Co..Lexineton. Massachurettr. 1910. oftho c ~ ~ I ~ , - P ~~ oYd~a y~25. . c s23 uune 19721. piwet. ,J., ..~hysiealiYar~b Butrow. J. w.. Jr.. "Why the 'New' School Science Doesn't Sell." Science Chd ,9791 drsn . 10 20 i.laniweh ,~-.., ~.. .,. Chittenden. E. A,. "Piaget aod Elementary Science." Science and Children. 8, 9 IDec 1970).
Gagne, R. M.. "Elementary Scionce: A New Scheme of Inslruetion." Science. El, 49 119k61. ~ivermore.A. H.. "MAS omm mission on science ducat ion. ~ ~ o m e n t a science ry progiam."J. CHEM EDUC., 43. 270119661. "Science-A Process Aooraach-Purooros. Accomolishmentr. Eroectations.". .oreoared . and by t h h ~ ~ seienee ~ ~ ~i d ~u ~~a tAi i ~~A~ . ~A S M p u~h l i ~ cafion67-12. Sopt 1961.
~
~
Elementary Science Study (ESS) "The ESS Reader." edited and published by the Elementary Science Study. Xeutun. Msrsachusetts, 1970. Griflith. J., and Monism, P., "Reflections on a Decade of Grade~Schmi Science." Phvrics Today. 25. 29 (June 19721.
Process Approach (SAPA)
on
Science Curriculum Improvement Study (SCIS) Ksrplus, R., and Thior. H. D.. "A New Lwk at Elementary School Science." Rand McNally & Co.. Chicago, Illinoi~.1967. Karpiur. R., "Physics lor Hepinners," Phyhbcs Todau, 22. 36 (June 19721. Thompson. B. S.. and Voelker. A. M.. "Proprams lor Improving Science Instruction in the Elementary Schml. Part 11. SCIS."SclenreondChildren. 7.29 (May 1170).
Volume 51. Number 3, March 1974
/
171
~
~
~
~
