1 / 24

Pigs, sheep and scientific futures: enthusing young people through science

Pigs, sheep and scientific futures: enthusing young people through science. Ralph Levinson Institute of Education University of London r.levinson@ioe.ac.uk. Motivating factors. Citizenship 21 st Century Science Nuffield A-level Biology

aradia
Download Presentation

Pigs, sheep and scientific futures: enthusing young people through science

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pigs, sheep and scientific futures: enthusing young people through science Ralph Levinson Institute of Education University of London r.levinson@ioe.ac.uk

  2. Motivating factors • Citizenship • 21st Century Science • Nuffield A-level Biology • Science Museum report (Reiss et al); King’s (Osborne and Collins) • Valuable Lessons • House of Commons S&T sub committee 2002 • Supports reflection on the Nature of Science (Zeidler et al) • Statutory requirement (National Curriculum) • It might just help young people to recognise that there’s a connection between science and values

  3. Pigs and xenotransplantation • Media • Market • Scientific acceptability • Risk/probability/danger • Rights and responsibilities • Consideration of interests • Precautionary principle • Empathy • Mythology

  4. Hot p®otatoes • First to third world attitudes • Power/politics • Trust • Regulation • Statistics • Complexity of scientific process • Notion of ‘natural’

  5. The naturalistic fallacy and its problems • It is widely recognised that ‘is’ statements in science cannot be turned into the ‘ought’ statements of moral discourse. For example, science can fairly accurately judge the consequences of bringing together a number of sub-critical masses of U-235 above a densely populated geographical area. It can say absolutely nothing, however, about whether such an action would be right or wrong. The answer to the latter question lies outside the domain of science but within the remit of a moral discourse. The domains of scientific and moral discourse are fundamentally different; they have different core concepts . . ., different procedural ground rules and different tests for truth. . . To apply science’s empirical test for truth within the moral domain would turn morality into pragmatism. (E. Hall, SSR (295) p.15.)

  6. The ‘impurity’ of science • From its Baconian inception, modern science has been about both knowledge and power, above all the power to control and dominate nature, including human nature. Nowhere perhaps has this Faustian pact been made so explicit as in the programme that has shaped molecular biology since its origins (Stephen Rose, Lifelines, Penguin.)

  7. Difference of opinion Reason Risk Evidence Dealing with a dilemma Imagination Feelings Ethics Uncertainty

  8. Why teaching contemporary issues in science might be particularly suitable for G&Ts • Encourages learners to be open to new ideas • Supports learning across subjects • Links to wider contexts • Involves learners in a range of settings • Reflect on process of their own learning • Models how experts handle complex tasks • Analysis using processes of arguments

  9. Teacher roles • Not to be directive (G&Ts tend to be good self-regulators) • Formulate procedures for discussion • Socratic questioning • Dealing with ‘the grey’ • Weighing judgements

  10. Research into teaching controversial issues in science • Argumentation (Osborne et al) • ‘Stories’ (Solomon) • Consensus projects (Kolstoe) • Drama (Odergaard) • Consequence maps/decision-making (Ratcliffe)

  11. Stimulating discussion • Newspaper headlines • Concept cartoons • Advertisements • Video clips (e.g. www.highwire.org.uk/awards/pages/index.html) • Photographs • Websites • Radio excerpts (plan in advance to tape) • Soaps (Holby City, The Archers) • Museum exhibits

  12. Promoting group discussion • Defined outcome • Focused topic • Personalised topic • Explicit procedures • Structure of and roles within group • Time limits • Conflict stimulus • Intervention • Experience of group work • Access resources

  13. Organising group discussion • Envoys • Rainbows • Snowballs

  14. Encouraging group discussion • Experiences of everyday life give rise to talk • Strong explicit interactional rules. Sequence of what is going to be done is brought into the discussion • Adult’s role is mainly procedural and to clarify what has been said. • Adult is not judgemental about a pupil’s contribution • Pauses to allow for reflection

  15. Problems with controversy • Early consensus • Knowledge • Expectations of teacher/leader • Anti-social views • Dogma • Sensitivities • Grey areas

  16. Strategies for discussion on ethics

  17. Useful websites • http://www.ase.org.uk/htm/teacher_zone/upd8/ • Cloning • Caffeine • Global warming • Biowarfare • Mobile phones • http://www.schoolscience.co.uk/content/index.asp • Nuclear waste • http://www.sycd.co.uk/can_we_should_we/startfil/home.htm • Immunisation • Energy resources

  18. Re-thinking science lessons • Science itself may be a study of nature, but science lessons should be the study of what people have said and thought about nature. (Clive Sutton, 1992, Words, Science and Learning, Open University Press, p.92)

More Related