Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Discussions About the Three Aspects of Scientific Literacy: Focus on Integrative Understanding, Settlement in Curriculum, and Civic Education

과학적 소양에 대한 세 가지 논의 -통합적 이해, 교육과정에의 정착, 시민교육을 중심으로-

  • Received : 2016.04.11
  • Accepted : 2016.05.12
  • Published : 2016.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

There have been many discussions about scientific literacy (SL), which caused many science educators concern for many years. This paper focuses on three aspects about SL. First, there are various opinions, and components or types of SL. Second, it has been pointed out that the reconciliation between curriculum focusing on SL and curriculum focusing on scientific knowledge system is difficult. Third, the level of SL of citizens who learned science in schools is not so high. Related to these aspects, this paper suggests three recommendations. First, the paper suggests three dimensional model of SL and some examples of its application. Second, elementary and middle school focus on SL in their science curriculum and high school focuses on scientific knowledge system in the curriculum for preparing for future jobs. Third, we need to give efforts to lifelong science eduction for citizens' SL as well as school teachings for SL. In the conclusion section, it is described what aspects should be additionally considered for the discussions and recommendations about three aspects of SL.

많은 과학교육학자들이 주요 과학학습목표로 관심을 가져온 과학적 소양(SL: Scientific Literacy)에 대해서는 아직도 많은 논쟁거리가 있다. 본 논문에서는 그러한 다양한 논쟁들 중에서 3가지에 초점을 맞추어 논의하였다. 첫째, SL의 구성요소와 유형에 대한 관점이 다양하다는 점, 둘째, SL 중심의 교육과정과 과학개념체계 중심의 교육과정간의 조화가 어렵다는 점, 셋째, 학교에서 과학학습을 받은 성인의 SL이 특별히 높지 않다는 점. 이에 대해 본 논문에서는 3가지 제안을 제시하였다. 첫째, 3차원틀로 구성된 SL모형을 제안하고, 활용 사례를 제시하였다. 둘째, 초등 및 중학교 과정에서는 SL중심의 교육과정으로 구성하고, 고등학교에서는 미래 직업을 위한 준비과정으로서 과학개념체계 중심의 교육과정을 구성하는 방식으로 이원화된 교육과정을 운영한다. 셋째, 성인들의 SL을 위해서는 학교 안 교육뿐 아니라, 평생교육으로 연계될 필요가 있다. 결론에서는 SL에 대한 3가지 논의와 제안에 대해서 추가적으로 고려할 점들을 기술하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  2. Atkin, J. M., & Helms, J. (1993). Getting serious about priorities in science education. Studies in Science Education, 21, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560012
  3. Biesta, G. (2007). Why "What works" won't work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00241.x
  4. Blades, D. (1997). Procedures of Power and Curriculum Change: Foucault and the Quest for Possibilities in Science Education. New York: Peter Lang.
  5. Branscomb, A. W. (1981). Knowing how to know. Science, Technology, & Human, Values, 6(36), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224398100600302
  6. Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving Scientific Literacy: From Purposes to Practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  7. Chen, F., Shi, Y., & Xu, F. (2009). An analysis of the public scientific literacy study in China. Public Understanding of Science, 18(5), 607-616. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662508093089
  8. Choi, J., & Song, J. (1996). Students' preference for different contexts in learning science. Research in Science Education, 26(3), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356944
  9. Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Re-conceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20424
  10. Crowell, A., & Schunn, C. (2015, March 21). Unpacking the relationship between science education and applied scientific literacy. Research in Science Education. doi: 10.1007/s11165-015-9462-1
  11. De Corte, E. (2000). Marrying theory building and the improvement of school practice: a permanent challenge for instructional psychology. Learning and Instruction, 10, 249-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(99)00029-8
  12. DeBore, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-L
  13. Dillon, J. (2009). On scientific literacy and curriculum reform. International journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 201-213.
  14. Dohm, A., & Schniper, L. (2007). Employment outlook: 2006-16: Occupational employment projections to 2016. Monthly Labor Review, 130(11), 86-125. Retrieved July 10, 2015, from http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2007/11/art5full.pdf
  15. Driel,, J. H., & Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137-158. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2<137::AID-TEA1001>3.0.CO;2-U
  16. Elliot, P. (2006). Reviewing newspaper articles as a technique for enhancing the scientific literacy of students-teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1245-1265. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670560500438420
  17. Fensham, P. J. (1998). The politics of legitimating and marginalizing companion meanings: Three Australian case stories. In D. A. Roberts & L. Ostman (Eds.), Problems of Meaning in Science Curriculum (pp. 178-192). New York: Teachers College Press.
  18. Fensham, P. J. (2002). Time to change drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(1), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150209556494
  19. Fensham, P. J. (2008). Science Education Policy-making: Eleven Emerging Issues. Paris: UNESCO.
  20. Fives, H., Huebner, W., Birnbaum, A. S., & Nicolich, M. (2014). Developing a measure of scientific literacy for middle school students. Science Education, 98, 549-580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21115
  21. Gabel, L. L. (1976). The development of a model to determine perceptions of scientific literacy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
  22. Graber, W., Erdmann, T., & Schlieker, V. (2001). ParCIS: Partnership between Chemical Industry and Schools. Retrieved July, 10, 2015, from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED466362.pdf
  23. Hoban, G.F. (2005). The missing links in teacher education design: Developing a multi-linked conceptual framework. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  24. Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601007549
  25. Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275-288.
  26. Jim, R. (2001). Identifying science understanding for unctional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36, 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260108560166
  27. Jong, E.D., Armitage, F., Brown, M., Butler, P., & Hayes, J. (1994). Physics Two. Melbourne: Heinemann.
  28. Klein, P. D. (2006). The challenge of scientific literacy: From the viewpoint of second-generation cognitive science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 143-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336627
  29. Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimensions of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011
  30. Korthagen, F. A. J. (2007). The Gap Between Research and Practice Revisited. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(3), 303-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610701640235
  31. Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<71::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-C
  32. Law, N., Fensham, P. J., Li. S., & Bing, W. (2000). Public understanding of science as basic literacy. Melbourne Studies in Education, 41(2), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508480009556367
  33. Lee, M. (2014). Characteristics and trends in the classifications of scientific literacy definitions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(2), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.2.0055
  34. Liu, X. (2009). Beyond science literacy: Science and the public. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 301-311.
  35. Lockard, C. B., & Wolf, M. (2012). Occupational employment projections to 2020. Monthly Labor Review, 135(1), 84-108.
  36. Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing Science teachers' Pedagogical Content knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense publishers.
  37. Millar, R. (1996). Toward a science curriculum for public understanding. School Science Review, 77, 7-18.
  38. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future: A report with ten recommendations. Retrieved from July, 10, 2015, from http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/Beyond%202000.pdf
  39. Miller, J. D. (1983). The American People and Science Policy. NY: Pergamon Press.
  40. Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
  41. Murcia, K. (2009). Re-thinking the development of scientific literacy through a rope metaphor. Research in Science Education, 39, 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9081-1
  42. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224-240. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066
  43. National Science Teachers Association [NSTA] (1982). Science-Technology-Society: Science Education for the 1980s. Washington, DC: Author.
  44. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literate: A framework for PISA 2006. Retrieved July, 10 2015, from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/assessing-scientific-reading-and-mathematical-literacy_9789264026407-en
  45. Park, C, -I., Park, J., & Jung, H. (1998). A study of high school students' interests and concerns in physics. Journal of Science Education: Chonnam National University, 22, 1-10.
  46. Park, J., Liu, C., Huang, C., Shen, M., & Shin, M. -K. (2016). Introducing modern science and high technology in schools. In H. -S. Lin, J. K. Gilbert, & C, -J., Lien (Eds.), Science Education Research and Practice in East Asia: Trends and Perspectives (pp. 391-416). Taipei: Higher Education Publishing Co., Ltd.
  47. Ramirez, F. O., Luo, X., Schofer, E., & Meyer, J. W. (2006). Student achievement and national economic growth. American Journal of Education, 113, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1086/506492
  48. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman, (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  49. Roschelle, J., Bakia, M., Toyama, Y., & Patton, C. (2011). Eight issues for learning scientists about education and the economy. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(1), 3-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.528318
  50. Roth, W-M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis, Public Understanding of Science, 11, 33-56. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/302
  51. Shamos, M. H. (1996). The myth of scientific literacy. Liberal Education, 82(3), 44-49.
  52. Shen, B. S. P. (1975). Scientific literacy and the public understanding of science. In S. B. Day (Ed.), Communication of Scientific Information (pp. 44-52). Basel: Karger.
  53. Slavin, R. E. (2008). Perspective on evidence-based research in education: What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X027001005
  54. Turner, S. (2008). School science and its controversies; or, whatever happened to scientific literacy? Public Understanding of Science, 17, 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507075649
  55. Vick, M. (2006). "It's a Difficult Matter": Historical perspectives on the enduring problem of the practicum in teacher preparation, Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(2), 181-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660600720579
  56. Yore, L. D., Pimm, D., & Tuan, H. -L. (2007). The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 559-589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Cited by

  1. 과학 탐구와 과학 교수학습에서의 모델과 모델링에 대한 교사들의 인식 vol.37, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.1.0143
  2. 미래 사회 한국인의 과학소양에 대한 요구 분석 vol.37, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.3.441
  3. 초등예비교사의 과학 동기유발과 과학적 소양의 역량에 대한 인과구조 vol.36, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2017.36.3.208
  4. 과학 관련 사회적 쟁점(Socio-Scientific Issues, SSI)을 활용한 국내 프로그램 분석 vol.62, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2018.62.2.137
  5. 의사결정 유형 및 성격특성에 따른 예비생물교사들의 SSI(Socio-Scientific Issues) 토론 담화 차이 분석 vol.38, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.5.739
  6. 고등학교 지구과학 선택과목 재구조화 연구 vol.13, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.15523/jksese.2020.13.1.40
  7. 학문, 교과, 교과내용, 교과교육 간 관계에 대한 비판적 고찰 -과학교육을 중심으로- vol.40, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2020.40.6.671