The State of School Science
In the 1950's, and extending into the 1960's, a numher of groups - . of scientists attempted to brine about maim improvements in the teaching of science a i d mathemitics in schools by initiating, under the sponsorship of the National Science Foundation, a variety of carefully prepared and tested materials for teaching science. These included the CHEM Study and ChemicalBond Approach materials as well as materials for biology, physics, and mathematics. Taken as a whole. these materials were useful for students from kindergarten through grade 12, although the chemistry materials were desienated for use in secondarv schools. Teachers were trained inUtheuse of the new teaching materials through National Science Foundation-sponsored institutes. In chemistry these institutes brought pre-college and college chemistry teachers together and provided a basis for meaningful dialogue; in retrospect, this was perhaps as important as the training function for which the institutes were designed. A substantial reduction in the numher of institutes for teachers in the 1970's was accompanied by a decline in usage of the new course materials. Recently the National Science Foundation commissioned several nationwide studies of the status of nre-colleee education and requested the National ~ e s e a r c < ~ o u n c i Coml< mission on Human Resources to review and comment on these studies. These studies consist of statistical surveys and literature reviews. A concentrated, in-depth analysis of eleven different school systems appears to have identified concerns which are reasonably representative of the problems occurring in many American schools. The Commission on Human Resources cited' varied evidence that declining enrollments, increasing financial strictures, the unsatisfactory performance of many pupils and graduates, pressure for gr;ater accountability, and disag;eement over educational -policy have affected the teaching of science and mathematics as well as every other aspect ofihe school's existence. After establishing the reality of a troubled American school system, the report offers the following (paraphrased) recommendations: ~
Establishment of a number of Science and Mathematics Teachine Resource Centers. each ta seive either a laree school cystrm ur a group of neighboring smaller qstems. I t is anticipntrd that Resource Crnters would provide ( a ) in-service training programs related toscienceand mathematiri teaching. (b) the construction, maintenance, repair, and distribution of materials required to teach new courses, and (c)expert advice to teachers concerning the use of new science and mathematics instructional materials and techniques and help with their individual teaching problems. 2) Increased suooort oraeram of institutes for teachers .. for the NSF . to increase their knnwledee "~of subiect matter and to imorove their skills in teaching future new courses, whether these are developed through puhlic or private funding. 3) Development of additional science and technology centers of the kind that now exist in a number of cities; cooperative ar1)
~
~
~
~~
-~.~~ ~
~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~
~~
~~~~
r
~
~
-
'"The State of School Science," National Research Council, Washington, D.C., June 1919.
rangemems hrtwrcn the%ermter* and nearby whuul ry,temd should he strengthened to BnCrQasethe extent t t r rvh~hthe centers provide planned supplementation of programs at the associated sehwls. The general value of such centers ta children and adults who wish to learn more about science should in increased. 4) Increased awareness of career opportunities for women and members of racial or ethnic minoritv. erouos " . and oreoaration . . for careers in scientific and technical occupations using the resources of professional scientists and engineers working through the local school system. 5) Opposition at the local level to the current overemphasis of scores on standardized achievement tests. Because the tests more generally used far these purposes tend to emphasize the more elementary and routine abilities necessary to meet "minimum competency" requirements, they reflect only some of the factors upon which schools and pupils should be judged. The report concludes with the suggestion "that scientists take the lead in evaluating these and other recommendations for the improvement of science education a t the pre-college level, and in developing the specific programs and activities necessary to implement the recommendations that seem most nromisine." ~learl; the data, in the eyes of the National Research Council evaluators, illustrate the relatively low state of interest in chemistry compared with other sciences. For example, in the twelve-year period ending in 1973 the total enrollment of pupils on grades 7-12 increased by 59%,yet enrollment in high school chemistw (and physics) courses did not keep pace with either total enrollment o r enrollment in other science courses. During this period chemistry (+38%) and physics (+45%) enrollments ran considerably behind sciences such as biology (+61%), physiology (+66%) and earth science (+630%). Happily, the percentage enrollment in advanced science courses (second-year biology, chemistry and physics) and specialized science courses such as physiology, anatomy, zoology, hotany, oceanography, and ecology has increased durine the last five vears. Unfortunatelv. however. such science electives seem t o be absorbing significant numbers of students who opt not to take chemistry andlor physics. Thus, we face the prospect of having "reached the millenium" where the importance of chemistry in understanding fundamental prohlems in other sciences, e.g., the biological sciences, is realized, but a smaller ~roportionof students-or their advisors-see the desirahilitj of understanding chemical principles. Although full implementation of the National Research Council's recommendations may not appear to he realistic in a eiven local environment. the need for ~rofessionalchemists and chemists interested in teaching to become involved is extraordinary. Many of the readers of the JOURNAL are associated with educational institutions which have the potential,to become active local Resource Centers in the sense suggested by the NRC recommendations. In the words of the authors of the report, we "will have to accept the responsibility for leading the whole effort, for it is not likely that anyone else JJL will."
-
Volume 57, Number 4, April 1980 / 237
