National concerns about the quality and effectiveness of science
teaching have resulted in several major efforts directed at restructuring
the nation's curriculum, including Project 2061 of
the American association
for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, 1989) and the Scope, Sequence and
Coordination projects of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA,
1992). A third effort is the Earth Systems Education program centered at
The Ohio State University and the University of Northern Colorado (Mayer,
editor, 1992). Its philosophy and approach to science content is consistent
with the better-known projects but differs in significant respects, especially
in its focus on planet Earth. (ERIC/CSMEE... Digest...EDO-SE-93-2...March
1993...By: Victor J. Mayer)
Understanding
Planet Earth
-
Over the past two decades there have been tremendous advances in the understanding
of planet Earth,in part through the use of satellites in data gathering
and supercomputers for data processing. As a result, Earth scientists are
reinterpreting the relationships among the various science sub-disciplines
and their mode of inquiry. These changes are documented in the "Bretherton
Report," developed by a committee of scientists representing various governmental
agencies with Earth science research mandates (Earth Systems Science Committee,
1986). These advances also prompted the organization of a conference of
geoscientists and educators in April, 1988, to consider their implications
for science curriculum renewal. The 40 scientists and educators including
many scientists from the agencies responsible for the Bretherton Report,
developed a preliminary framework of four goals and ten concepts about
planet Earth that they felt every citizen should understand (Mayer and
Armstrong, 1991). Through subsequent discussions with teachers and Earth
science educators at regional and national meetings of the NSTA, a renewed
concern emerged for a more adequate treatment of planet Earth in the nation's
science curriculum.
Infusion through Teacher
Enhancement
-
In the Spring of 1990 the Teacher Enhancement Program of the National Science
Foundation awarded a grant to The Ohio State University for the preparation
of leadership teams in Earth Systems Education - PLESE, the Program for
Leadership in Earth Systems Education. The program was designed to infuse
more content regarding the modern understanding of planet Earth into the
nation's K-12 science curricula.
-
In preparation for PLESE, a planning committee composed of ten teachers,
curriculum specialists, and geoscientists met in Columbus, Ohio, in May,
1990, to develop a conceptual framework to guide the program. Preliminary
work included the analysis of the Project 2061 report for content related
to Earth systems. The committee used this analysis combined with the results
of the 1988 conference to develop a framework consisting of seven understandings.
This Framework for Earth Systems Education provided a basis for the PLESE
teams to construct resource guides and to select teaching materials for
use in infusing Earth systems concepts into the science curriculum in their
areas (Mayer, 1991). The program has worked with over 180 teachers in three
member teams including an upper elementary teacher, a middle school teacher
and a high school teacher during three-week long summer programs. These
teams have conducted Earth System awareness workshops in their states,
communities, and at national NSTA conferences. During the summer of 1993,
selected participants prepared resource guides for use at each of the three
grade levels.
-
The PLESE Planning Committee intentionally arranged the understandings
of the Earth Systems Education Framework into a sequence (Mayer, 1991).
The first understanding emphasizes the aesthetic values of planet Earth
as interpreted in art, music and literature. By focusing on students' feelings
towards the Earth systems, the way in which they and others experience
and interpret them, students are drawn into a systematic study of their
planet. An aesthetic appreciation of the planet leads the student naturally
into a concern for the proper stewardship of its resources: the second
understanding of the framework (Mayer, 1990). A developing concern for
conserving the economic and aesthetic resources of our planet leads naturally
into a desire to understand how the various subsystems function and how
we study those subsystems: the substance of the next four understandings.
In learning how the subsystems function, students must master basic physics,
chemistry, and biology concepts. The last understanding deals with careers
and avocations in science, bringing the focus once again back to the immediate
concerns and interests of the students (Fortner, editor, 1991).
Earth
Systems Education and Science Curriculum Restructuring
-
Teachers using the Framework to develop their resource guides saw its application
for the development of integrated science curricula, an objective of both
Project 2061 and NSTA's SS&C effort. What could be more natural than
developing K-12 science curricula using the subject of all science investigations
- planet Earth - as the unifying theme? Any physical, chemical or biological
process that citizens must understand to be scientifically literate can
be taught in the context of its Earth subsystems. That is the thought that
has guided a number of teachers and curriculum specialists in considering
the implications of Earth Systems Education for the nation's science curriculum
reform efforts (Mayer, et al, 1992).
-
The Earth Systems Education effort also seeks to implement a more holistic
philosophy of the nature of science into what has been criticized as a
reductionist curriculum. Stephen Gould, occupant of the Agassi Chair of
Paleontology at Harvard University, has characterized the nature of science
as it is presented in today's schools in the United States:
-
Most children first meet science in their formal education by learning
about a powerful mode of reasoning called "the scientific method." Beyond
a few platitudes about objectivity and willingness to change one's mind,
students learn a restricted stereotype about observation, simplification
to tease apart controlling variables, crucial experiment and prediction
with repetition as a test. These classic "billiard ball" modes of simple
physical systems grant no uniqueness to time and object - indeed, they
remove any special character as a confusing variable - lest repeatability
under common conditions be compromised. Thus, when students later confront
history, where complex events occur but once in detailed glory, they can
only conclude that such a subject must be less than science. And when they
approach taxonomic diversity, or phylogenetic history, or biogeography
- where experiment and repetition have limited application to systems in
total - they can only conclude that something beneath science, something
merely "descriptive," lies before them (Gould, 1986).
-
The commonly held image of science that is reinforced in our classrooms
is that of controlled laboratory experiments conducted by a balding man
wearing a white lab coat. Basic to the Earth Systems Education approach
is to give a more comprehensive understanding of the nature of science
and its intellectual processes including the historical descriptive approaches
commonly used by the earth and biological sciences (Mayer, et al, 1992).
-
Earth Systems Education efforts also take a constructivist approach to
learning both in workshops conducted by the staff and in the curriculum
restructuring efforts. Most learning goes on in small collaborative groups
working on real issues and problems dealing with the Earth System. Another
basic tenet is that curriculum restructuring must be a "grass-roots" effort.
Teachers are the curriculum developers. Other individuals, be they university
professors, professional association staff, state or local level administrators,
serve a facilitating function. The curriculum itself must be developed
and therefore owned by the teachers who teach it (Mayer, et al, 1992).
Earth Systems Education
Projects
-
Several projects are underway to test aspects of Earth Systems Education.
The oldest and furthest along is the implementation of an integrated Biological
and Earth Systems (BESS) science sequence into
the high schools in the Worthington (OH) School District (Fortner, et al,
1992). It is a required sequence replacing both Earth science at the 9th
grade and Biology at 10th. The sequence is organized around basic Earth
systems issues such as resource supply, global climate change, and deforestation.
The program incorporates collaborative learning and problem-solving techniques
as major instructional strategies. Current technology is also used, including
on-line and CD-ROM databases for accessing current scientific data for
use in course laboratory instruction. Ten additional Ohio and New York
school systems are now studying the BESS program for its implications for
their curriculum restructuring efforts.
-
Other efforts at elementary, middle, and high school levels are now underway
in school districts in New York, Colorado, Ohio, Oregon, and Illinois.
Conclusion
-
The time appears to be ripe for the first total restructuring of the science
curriculum since the current high school course sequence was established
in the late 1800s. The dramatic changes that have taken place in science,
in the understanding of how science is learned, in the evolving demands
of technology, and in the pressures they place on our environment require
this restructuring. Earth Systems Education offers an effective strategy.
As a first step, it infuses planet Earth concepts into all levels of the
K-12 science curriculum. In the long run, it provides an organizing theme
for a K-12 integrated science curriculum that could effectively serve the
objectives of scientific literacy and at the same time provide a basis
for the recruitment of talent into science and technology careers.
|
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for
all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.
Earth System Science Committee. (1988). Earth system science. Washington,
DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Fortner, R. W., (Ed.). (1991). Earth systems education [Special issue].
Science Activities, 28(1).
Fortner, R.W. (1992). Down to earth biology: A planetary perspective
for biology curriculum. The American Biology Teacher, 54(2), 76-79.
Fortner, R. W., et al. (1992). Biology and Earth systems science. The
Science Teacher, 59(9), 32-37.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. NY: Penguin Books.
Gould, S.J. (1986). Evolution an the triumph of homology, or why history
matters. American Scientist, 74, 60-69.
Mayer, V.J. (1988). Earth systems education: A new perspective on planet
Earth and the science curriculum. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
Mayer, V.J. (1989). Earth appreciation. The Science Teacher, 56(3),
22-25.
Mayer, V.J. (1990). Teaching from a global point of view. The Science
Teacher, 57(1), 26-30.
Mayer, V.J. (1991). Earth-system science: A planetary perspective. The
Science Teacher, 57(1), 31-36.
Mayer, V.J. (1991). Framework for Earth systems education. Science Activities,
28(1), 8-9.
Mayer, V.J. (Ed.). (1992). Earth systems education: Origins and opportunities.
Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
Mayer, V.J., & Armstrong, R. E. (1990). What every 17-year old should
know about planet Earth: The report of a conference of educators and geoscientists.
Science Education, 74(2) 155-165.
Mayer, V.J., et al. (1992). The role of planet Earth in the new science
curriculum. Journal of Geological Education, 40(1), 66-73.
The National Science Teachers Association. (1992). Scope, sequence,
and coordination of secondary school science: The content core. Washington,
DC: Author.
|
Earth
System Education