Science and Technology Education in the STES Context in Primary Schools: What Should It Take?

Uri Zoller1
1Faculty of Natural Sciences, Haifa University—Oranim, Kiryat Tivon, 36006, Israel

Tóm tắt

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

AAAS (2010) Project 2061’s. Using Atlas of Science Literacy. http://www.project2061.org.atlas

Barak M, Ben-Chaim D, Zoller U (2007) Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: a case of critical thinking. Res Sci Edu 37:353–369

Ben-Chaim D, Barak M, Lubezky A, Zoller U (2008) College science students’ ability to resolve chemistry problems requiring higher-order-cognitive skills. J Res Sci Teach (Submitted)

Brady M (2008) Cover the material—or teach students to think? Teach Stud Think 65(5):64–67

Bunce DM (2009) Teaching is more than lecturing and learning is more than more than memorizing. J Chem Edu 86(6):674–680

Bybee R, McCrae B, Laurie R (2009) PISA 2006: an assessment of scientific literary. J Res Sci Edu 46(8):865–883

Chen D, Novick R (1996) MABAT: toward scientific and technological literacy: the national primary science curriculum in Israel. In: Mioduser D, Zilberstein I (eds) The 2nd Jerusalem international science and technology education conference (JISTEC ‘96)—book of abstracts. CET, CP-19, Jerusalem

Connonly P (2009) The challenges and prospects for educational effectiveness research. Effect Edu 1(1):1–12

Dori Y, Herskovitz O (1999) Question posing capability as an alternative evaluation method; analysis of environmental case study. J Res Sci Teach 36(4):411–430

Eshach H (2006) Science literacy in primary schools and pre-schools. Springer, Dordrecht

Fensham PJ (2009) Real world contexts in PISA science: implications for context-based science education. J Res Sci Teach 46(8):884–896

Gatt S (2000) Problem solving in primary science. Primary Sci Rev. 8–10 Jan/Feb

Gibbons M, Nowotny HJT (2001) The potential of transdisciplinarity. In: Thompson Klein J, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Häberli R, Bill A, Scholz RM, Welti M (eds) Transdisciplinarity: joint problem solving among science, technology, and society. An effective way for managing complexity. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 67–80

Glaze WH (2002) Drinking water treatment with ozone. Environ Sci Technol 36(23):438A–439A

Hodson D (2003) Time for action: science education for the alternative future. Int J Sci Edu 25:645–670

Hodson D (2004) Going beyond STS: towards a curriculum for sociopolitical action. Sci Edu Rev 3(1):2–7

Hoolbrook J, Ranikmae M (2009) The meaning of scientific literacy. Int J Environ Sci Edu 4(3):275–288

Johnstone AH (2001) Can problem solving be taught? Univ Chem Edu 5:69–73

Jones-Wilson TM (2005) Teaching problem-solving skills without sacrificing course content. J College Sci Teach 35(1):42–46

Levy Nahum T, Azaiza I, Ben-Chaim D, Herscovitz O, Zoller U (2010) Does STES-oriented science education promote 10th-grade students’ decision capability? Int J Sci Edu 32(10):1315–1336

Malamitsa K, Kasoutas M, Kokkotas P (2009) Developing Greek primary school students’ critical thinking through an approach of teaching science which incorporates aspects of history of science. Sci Educ 8(3–4):1–12

Mihelcic JR, Crittenden JC, Small MJ, Shonnard DR, Hokanson DR, Zhang Q, Chen H, Sorby SA, James VV, Sutherland JW, Schnoor JL (2003) Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. Environ Sci Technol 37:5314–5324

Millar R (2006) Twenty first century science: insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. Int J Sci Edu 28(13):1499–1521

NCATE (2010) Panel says Ed. Schools overlook development science. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/10/05/07develope.h30.html?tkn=SSKFEhn2HWN70yojMIFjyEuiq08s.Jh9pKZyo&cmp=clp-edweek

New York Times (2009) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/30educ.html?-=1&emc=eta1

NSTA International Task Force (2005) Developing a worldview for science education in North America and across the globe. Final report. pp 1–9

Orion R, Trend D (2009) Thinking and learning in the geosciences. Geosci Edu 57(4):222–223

PCAST (2009) Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education for Americans’ future. Executive report. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/16/president-obama-annonce-major

Smith KC, Nakhleh MB, Bretz SL (2010) An expanded framework of analyzing general chemistry exams. Chem Edu Res Pract 11:147–153

Tal RT, Dori YJ, Keiny S, Zoller U (2001) Assessing conceptual change of teachers involved in STES education and curriculum development: the STEMS project approach. Int J Sci Edu 23(3):247–262

Tomorrow 98 (1992) Report of the superior committee on science, mathematics and technology education in Israel–harari report. Ministry of Education (in Hebrew), Jerusalem

Wardle C (2004) Asking the right questions: developing children’s questioning skills and knowing how to answer!. Primary Sci Rev 83:11–13

Whitehurst GJ, Croft M (2009) Brown center of education policy. The Brookings Institution. http://www.brokings.edu/opinions/2009/1029_standards_whitehurts.aspx

Yager RE (1991) The constructivist learning model: towards real reform in science education. Sci Teach 58(6):52–57

Yager RE (1996) Science/technology/society as reform in science education. State University of New York Press, Albany

Zoabi M, Zoller U (2010) The relevance of science and technology teaching to primary school education. The “Design Process” case in Israel. J Sci Edu Technol (submitted)

Zoller U (1987) The fostering of question-asking capability—a meaningful aspect of problem-solving in chemistry. J Chem Edu 64(6):510–512

Zoller U (1990) The IEE—an STS approach. J College Sci Teach 19(5):289–291

Zoller U (1991) Teaching/learning styles, performance and students’ teaching evaluation in STES-focused science education. A quasi-quantitative probe of a case study. J Res Sci Teach 28(7):593–607

Zoller U (1992) Faculty teaching performance evaluation in higher science education: issues and implications (a ‘cross-cultural’ case study). Sci Edu 76(6):673–684

Zoller U (1993) Lecture and learning: are they compatible? Maybe for LOCS; unlikely for HOCS. J Chem Edu 70(3):195–197

Zoller U (1994) The examination where the student asks the questions. School Sci Math 94(7):347–349

Zoller U (1996) The development of students HOCS—the key to progress in STES education. Bull Sci Technol Soci 16(5–6):268–272

Zoller U (1998) Eshnav Le-Matas. University of Haifa, Oranim (in Hebrew)

Zoller U (1999) Scaling-up of higher order cognitive skill oriented college chemistry teaching: an action-oriented research. J Res Sci Teach 36(5):583–596

Zoller U (2000a) Teaching tomorrow’s college science courses—are we getting it right? J College Sci Teach 29(6):409–414

Zoller U (2000b) Environmental chemistry: the disciplinary/correction-transdisciplinary prevention paradigm shift. Environ Sci Pollut Res 7(2):63–65

Zoller U (2001) The challenge for environmental chemistry educators. Environ Sci Pollut Res 8(1):1–4

Zoller U (2004) From algorithmic LOCS teaching to HOCS learning paradigm shift: What does/should it take in practice-oriented research in STES education. In: Ralle B, Eilks I (eds) Proceedings of the 17th symposium on chemical education: quality in practice-oriented research in science education. Dortmund. pp 125–135

Zoller U, Ben-Chaim D (1997) Students’ self-assessment in HOCS science examina-tions; is there a problem? J Sci Educ Technol 7(2):135–147

Zoller U, Levy Nahum T (2011) From teaching to ‘know’-to learning to ‘think’ in science education. The LOCS- to-HOCS paradigm shift: ‘how to do it’? In: Fraser B, Tobin K, Mcrobbie CD (eds) Handbook of science education, 2nd edn. Springer (In Press)

Zoller U, Pushkin D (2007) Matching higher order cognitive skills (HOCS)-promoting goal with problem-based laboratory practice in a freshman organic chemistry course. Chem Edu Res Pract 8(2):153–171

Zoller U, Scholz RW (2004) The HOCS paradigm shift from disciplinary knowledge (LOCS) to interdisciplinary evaluative system thinking (HOCS): what should it take in science-technology-environment-society-oriented courses, curricula and assessment? Water Sci Technol 49(8):27–36

Zoller U, Nakhleh MB, Dori J, Lubezki A, Tessier B (1995) Success on algorithmic and LOCS versus conceptual chemistry exam questions. J Chem Edu 72(11):987–989

Zoller U, Dori Y, Lubezky A (2002) Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: performance and attitudes of college students. Int J Sci Edu 24(2):185–203