| |
Cross, Roger (Ed.). (2003). A vision for science
education: Responding to the work of Peter Fensham. London:
RoutledgeFalmer Press
Pp. xxi + 218
$29.95 ISBN 0-415-28872-X
Reviewed by Amy E. Ryken
University of Puget Sound
December 28, 2003
Evoking a sense of awe about the natural world, a South
African student asks, “What enables a single moon to light
up the whole world?” (p. 21). International contributors of
this edited volume on science education reform might rephrase the
question as, What about Peter Fensham’s work inspires a
shared vision among diverse science educators?
The work of Peter Fensham, the noted Australian science
educator, has influenced educators throughout the world and
impacted science education research and reform efforts. A
vision for science education: Responding to the work of Peter
Fensham brings together science educators from around the
globe who are focused on extending and elaborating on the work of
Peter Fensham. Contributors represent an international
perspective, including: Australia, Canada, Germany, Indonesia,
The Netherlands, Philippines, South Africa, United Kingdom, and
the United States.
People interested in international science reforms that
feature democratic and collaborative approaches will find this
volume a useful resource for considering the values, reform
history, and philosophy that inform current reform efforts. The
volume has 15 chapters and is organized into eight sections,
including a biography of Peter Fensham, and addressing such
issues as science for all; science, technology, and society;
gender; theory and practice; politics; reform agendas; and the
impact of Peter Fensham’s vision.
Each chapter adds depth to the volume by contributing the
story of science reform efforts from a particular country,
cultural context and perspective. Key themes addressed throughout
the volume are the values that inform reform efforts, dilemmas of
envisioning and implementing reforms, importance of collaboration
for success, and the new roles required of teachers and
students.
The international reforms described are aimed at increasing
access to science education, or providing science for all, not
just future scientists. Respect for each learner, recognizing
learners’ prior experiences, the importance of
“student appropriate personal, societal, and technological
applications of science” (p. 117), and “science
teaching that respects, allows, and even promotes variations in
different science learners’ journeys” (p. 122) is
central to the reform efforts detailed in the volume. Reform
efforts are described within the cultural, social, and political
contexts with an emphasis on the many actors (e.g., students,
scientists, governments, companies, science educators,
educational researchers) that shape the reform debates. The
complex two-way interaction between society and science replaces
the notion of science as truth, thus science is framed as
“not a fixed body of knowledge but an evolving attempt by
humans to create a coherent description of the physical
universe” (p. 174).
The values at the core of Fensham’s reform efforts raise
many dilemmas, and as one contributor writes, the
“challenge of creating ‘Science for All’ will
be an ongoing struggle” (p. 100). Perhaps the most
important dilemma examined in the volume is the complexity of
student beliefs and experiences. How can a uniform curriculum and
assessment system address the “wide range of beliefs,
traditions, socio-economic conditions, physical environments, and
lifestyles” (p. 21) of individual students? Other dilemmas
considered include: How can a science program prepare both
informed citizens and scientists? Should students believe
(affective focus) or understand (cognitive focus) what is taught?
Is the goal of scientific literacy economic, moral, cultural, or
democratic? The volume does not answer these questions, but
instead provides multiple perspectives on the dilemmas involved
when organizing science education around learner needs and goals,
rather than around the structure of the discipline.
The volume evokes a strong commitment to collaborative and
partnership reform efforts. The African worldview, “I am
through others; because we are, therefore I am” (p. 22)
captures the collaborative spirit of Fensham’s work and the
nature of this edited volume. Teachers and students are
positioned as active agents critical to the success of science
education reforms. Reformers describe the importance of
collaboration between teachers and students, teachers and
academic scientists, developed and developing economies and among
science educators. As a result, one gets a sense of
Fensham’s profound influence on the volume’s
contributors, and also the influence that the contributors have
had on Fensham’s work and thinking.
This work will appeal to people interested in value systems
that inform science education reform efforts and how reform
efforts, focused on democratic and collaborative approaches, play
out within different international contexts. It provides multiple
perspectives on the complexity of science education reform,
rather than specific implementation suggestions. The variety of
perspectives illustrate how values and international and local
contexts intersect to shape reform efforts. It serves as a
tribute to Peter Fensham’s vision for science education
that addresses the needs and interests of diverse groups of
students, and situates science as one of many lenses for
exploring and explaining the world.
About the Reviewer
Amy E. Ryken is an Assistant Professor in the School of
Education at the University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Washington.
Her research interests include science education, career
academies, and teacher development.
| |