Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

9
Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Transcript of Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Page 1: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education

(USA)

Page 2: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Controversial Topic (CT) Definition

“Issues that deeply divide a society, that generate conflicting explanations and solutions based on alternative value systems, are considered controversial” (Harwood & Hahn, 1990).

“Controversial issues are important policies or proposals on which conflicting views are held by large numbers of people in schools, community and nation” (The School District of Philadelphia, 1990)

Page 3: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Identified Earth System Controversial Topics

in Science Education (USA)

NESTA Survey of Earth and Space Science Teachers about Needs/Concerns

Controversial Topic

% Feeling Difficulty or Pressure from Parents, Students, Administrators, or Other Community Members

Evolution(see Buxton & Provenzo, pp. 14-15)

68%

Age of the Earth 47%

Climate Change 43%

Solar System Formation

22%

Planetary Formation 13%

There were 275 respondents to this survey (Johnson, 2011).

Page 4: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Teaching Strategies For Sensitive/CTs

“Most strategies for teaching students about values issues during the 1970s and 1980s followed the same basic rule: Present the students with the dilemma, give them rational processes for thinking through the dilemma, but do not try to impose your own values on them” (DoBoer, 1991, p. 181).

Page 5: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Teaching Strategies for Sensitive/CTs

Begin by teaching relevant science content, then discuss related policy or economic issues, and end by having students explore their own personal stances (Kirk, 2011).

Provide students with “solid background information, multiple perspectives, guidelines for discussing issues as a group, substantive discussion questions, and strong follow-up” (Cannard, 2005, p. 15).

Page 6: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Teaching Strategies for Sensitive/CTs

Focus on using the scientific practice of using evidence to support knowledge claims (Duschl, 1990; Kelly & Takao, 2002).

Have students analyze the scientific data themselves (McGinnis, Hestness & Riedinger, 2011; Kirk, 2011).

Page 7: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Sample Sensitive Topic: Global Climate Change

Next Generation Science Standards - First national science standards document to include the topic of global climate change

Example performance standard:Code Standard Clarification Statement and Assessment

Boundary MS-ESS3-5  

Ask questions to clarify evidence of the factors that have caused the rise in global temperatures over the past century.

Examples of factors include human activities (such as fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and agricultural activity) and natural processes (such as changes in incoming solar radiation or volcanic activity). Examples of evidence can include tables, graphs, and maps of global and regional temperatures, atmospheric levels of gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, and the rates of human activities. Emphasis is on the major role that human activities play in causing the rise in global temperatures.

Page 8: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

Global Warming’s “Six Americas”

Page 9: Sensitive/Controversial Topics in Science Education (USA)

This presentation was designed by the MADE CLEAR Learning Sciences Research Team at the University of Maryland, College Park (www.ClimateEdResearch.org)

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1043262. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.