240 likes | 261 Views
This article explores motivating factors, ethical considerations, and teaching strategies for discussing controversial scientific issues with young people. It emphasizes the difference between scientific and moral discourse, and the importance of engaging students in critical thinking and decision-making processes. The text delves into the challenges and benefits of teaching contemporary science topics, highlighting the role of educators in promoting open dialogue and ethical reasoning in the classroom.
E N D
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 • 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
Pigs and xenotransplantation • Media • Market • Scientific acceptability • Risk/probability/danger • Rights and responsibilities • Consideration of interests • Precautionary principle • Empathy • Mythology
Hot p®otatoes • First to third world attitudes • Power/politics • Trust • Regulation • Statistics • Complexity of scientific process • Notion of ‘natural’
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.)
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.)
Difference of opinion Reason Risk Evidence Dealing with a dilemma Imagination Feelings Ethics Uncertainty
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
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
Research into teaching controversial issues in science • Argumentation (Osborne et al) • ‘Stories’ (Solomon) • Consensus projects (Kolstoe) • Drama (Odergaard) • Consequence maps/decision-making (Ratcliffe)
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
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
Organising group discussion • Envoys • Rainbows • Snowballs
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
Problems with controversy • Early consensus • Knowledge • Expectations of teacher/leader • Anti-social views • Dogma • Sensitivities • Grey areas
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
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)