SECOND CHANCE SCHOOLS IN GREECE: SCIENCE TEACHERS VIEWS AND PRACTICES ON DESIGNING SCIENTIFIC LITERACY CURRICULA 1

Transcription

1 SECOND CHANCE SCHOOLS IN GREECE: SCIENCE TEACHERS VIEWS AND PRACTICES ON DESIGNING SCIENTIFIC LITERACY CURRICULA 1 Spyros Kollas and Krystallia Halkia National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Faculty of Primary Education, Athens, Greece. Abstract: Second Chance Schools (SCSs) were established as an effort to reintegrate into society adults who, due to the fact that they have not completed their compulsory education, have not conquered the necessary qualifications and skills to adapt to contemporary personal, vocational and social requirements (IDEKE, 2003). Scientific literacy is regarded as a significant aim for the education of these people in Second Chance Schools. Science teachers who work in SCSs face the challenge of developing science curricula according to the needs of their students. The present study aims to investigate the science teachers views on the significance of scientific literacy for the population they refer to. The study also focuses on the way science teachers develop a curriculum to achieve the goal of reintegrating their students in society through scientific literacy. For this purpose, eleven semi-structured interviews of science teachers (designers of science curricula) were conducted. The analysis shows that most science teachers consider scientific literacy as an introduction to the content of science in order students to be able to continue their studies in formal upper secondary school. Also, science teachers quite often recognize their students need to explain the situations they encounter daily through science, and for this reason they design context-based curricula. These contexts do not incorporate at all socioscientific issues related with their students lives, even though some science teachers argue about the importance of developing the social awareness of their students. Keywords: Adult education, Scientific literacy, Curriculum design INTRODUCTION: THE CONTEXT OF SECOND CHANCE SCHOOLS Second Chance Schools in Greece were founded in 1997 and are financially supported by the European Commission. It s an experimental program that strives to face the social exclusion of dropout adults who have not completed their compulsory education. They were founded in an attempt to cover the gap between those who know and those who do not know according to the findings of a report of the European Commission. It was in the mid 90s when European Commission in the 1 This research has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program "Education and Lifelong Learning" of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) - Research Funding Program: Heracleitus II. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund.

2 White Paper on Education and Training report acknowledged the risk of a rift in a contemporary scientific and technological society: It is a rift between those that can interpret; those who can only use; and those who are pushed out of mainstream society and rely upon social support: in other words, between those who know and those who do not know. In this regard, European Commission argues about the importance of adequate scientific awareness not simply in the mathematical sense to ensure that democracy can function properly. Democracy functions by majority decision on major issues and for this reason it is critical for individuals to learn how to make informed choices both as individuals and as members of a community. (European Commission, 1995) In Greece, most of the students in SCSs come from socially vulnerable populations (unemployed, economic immigrants, prisoners, minorities - especially Romany people (Gypsies) and Greek Muslims, elders etc.). The SCSs main purpose is to help the aforementioned social groups to start participating in the cultural, political and economic life in society, but also to enable them to change their status in the society. The way to fulfill this objective is by promoting curricula designed with an emphasis on each subject s literacies. In SCSs, literacies consist of not only the ability to write, to read and make arithmetic calculations. More than that, literacies constitute the competences to act in life-situations: to solve problems, to work in groups, to use interpersonal skills, to express disposition to learning etc. (IDEKE, 2003). The duration of study in SCSs is two years and learners that graduate acquire a certificate equivalent to lower secondary school. The curriculum includes Greek and English language training, mathematics, science, environmental awareness, sociology, job orientation, ICT skills and arts. The learners also participate in various projects and workshops of 3 to 6 months duration relative to issues, like environmental awareness, applied science, local culture, heritage, etc. As mentioned before, the target group consists mainly though not exclusively of school dropouts. Thus, it is important that the second chance at learning differ essentially from the first one in formal education. Drop-out adults, according to IDEKE reports (2003), would like to avoid returning to a learning environment in which they have failed till now, unless the main features of the education on offer were significantly different from those of the formal school system. For this reason, the content of the curriculum of each subject is flexible, in order to meet the individual needs and interests of students and to serve the goal of active and meaningful learning. Due to the different characteristics of SCSs target groups (different cultural contexts, personal, vocational and social needs and different interests), teachers in each school have to design and develop curricula concerning their subject. This study focuses on science teachers views on what scientific literacy signifies in the context of SCSs and on how to develop a curriculum aiming at reintegrating the students in society through scientific literacy. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND The term scientific literacy most probably appeared for the first time in Paul Hurd used it to express the need of public support for science in the USA in order to

3 respond vigorously to the Soviet launch of Sputnik (Laugksch, 2000). Since then, scientific literacy is considered an essential part of general education and culture all over the world (Popli, 1999), and nowadays the term scientific literacy stands for what the general public ought to know about science (Durant, 1993). This definition seems to be vague, since: a) different meanings and interpretations could be given to the term, because there are several views of what the public ought to know about science (who decides what the public ought to know?) and b) there are different implications based on who the public is (Laugksch, 2000). However, DeBoer (2000) argues against seeking a narrow or precise definition of scientific literacy. According to him, scientific literacy should be conceptualized broadly enough for local school districts and individual classroom teachers to pursue the goals that are most suitable for their particular situations along with the content and methodologies that are most appropriate for them and their students. This argument is consistent with the way SCSs function, but presupposes the teachers ability to recognize the special educational needs of their students, when transforming the scientific knowledge into content knowledge. To support teachers in rethinking the conventional school culture of science education, and design innovative curricula that meet the needs of the learners and also the 21 st century society needs for informed citizens, science communities use terms like scientific literacy as educational slogans (Aikenhead, 2002). Roberts reviewed a large number of curricula aiming to develop students scientific literacy to investigate the way this aim is conceptualized. He identified two different perspectives on the notion of scientific literacy (Roberts, 2007): a) Vision I gives meaning to scientific literacy by looking at the products and processes of science itself. This approach envisions literacy within science. and b) Vision II derives its meaning from the character of situations with a scientific component, situations that students are likely to encounter as citizens. This vision can be called literacy about science-related situations. According to Bulte (2007), the distinction between those two perspectives can be interpreted in terms of the need for a transition in curriculum designing focus, from Science Literacy to Scientific Literacy. 21st Century Science is a characteristic curriculum exemplar that attempts to make this transition. It aims not only to provide the first stages of training in science, but also aims to stress science for effective citizenship (Roberts, 2007). It recognizes that citizens are consumers of scientific knowledge rather than producers of it and argues that in most cases the students will encounter scientific knowledge implicitly embedded in artifacts and processes in their lives (Millar, 2006). Though, Millar s perception for scientific knowledge implies strongly a Roberts Vision II point of view for scientific literacy, 21 st Century Science focuses on skills, competences and knowledge from the perspective of what society demands for the future citizens, ignoring the unique micro-characteristics and needs of a specific population (Roberts, 2007). This is a macro view for scientific literacy (Laugksch, 2000). On the contrary, Layton (1986) argues about the need of a micro view. According to him, the context or situation of a socioscientific issue has a strong influence on the knowledge people bring to bear. It is the real-ness of a situation and the relation with students experiences that makes knowledge meaningful. For this reason, Layton

4 develops a curriculum for adults, named Science for Specific Social Purposes (SSSP), which brings into focus the vocational life of the students (Layton, 1986). Under the same terms, Roth and Lee (2004) - who worked with marginalized people - highlight the importance of context-based learning and they design a program based on activity theory. According to them, the means for learning, but also the main issue of learning is the collective activity of the students to develop skills and to acquire scientific knowledge for participation in community life. Activities take place in real contexts that derive from students experiences and range from personal matters, livelihood and leisure, to activism or organized protest (Roth & Lee, 2004). Table 1 Different Approaches to Scientific Literacy Curriculum Designing Vision of Scientific Literacy Roberts Vision I Science literacy Roberts Vision II IIa Literacy about science-related situations (Macro view) IIb Literacy about science-related situations that derive from students everyday lives in a local community (Micro View) Curriculum exemplar Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS) Twenty First Century Science (Millar) Science for Specific Social Purposes (Layton) Scientific Literacy as a Collective Praxis (Roth & Lee) Curriculum content Emphasizing in science itself e.g. Concepts, laws, developing scientific skills Using media articles or general interest daily life situations to create learning contexts that a citizen may encounter in his/hers life. e.g. Keeping healthy, Air quality, Earth in Universe Addressing the science needed to cope with daily life situations. e.g. Vocational life Addressing science as and for participation in community life. e.g. Personal matters, livelihood, activism Table 1 summarizes the aforementioned different perceptions of curriculum designing. Considering the target groups of Second Chance Schools and the aim of reintegrating this population in the society, a desired would approach the views of Layton about the importance of context based curriculum designing. Thus, science teachers should create learning science contexts that would relate their students personal, vocational or social life. Furthermore, this curriculum should incorporate socioscientific issues raised from the students lives, as Roth and Lee s framework suggests.

5 THE STUDY This study aims to trace SCSs science teachers views on what scientific literacy signify in the context of SCSs and on how to develop a curriculum aiming at reintegrating the students in society through scientific literacy. For this purpose eleven semi-structured interviews of science teachers (designers of science curriculum) were conducted. The participants were from several parts of Greece; they had varying academic backgrounds and different teaching experiences in adult and formal secondary education (Figure 1). Figure 1. The Characteristics of the Sample The content analysis of the interviews was based on the Grounded theory, a method of generating a theory inductively from a corpus of data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Through this method, each educator s profile was correlated with the kind of curriculum he/she designs. To create the educators profile three factors were taken into consideration: (a) their academic background, (b) their teaching experience and (c) their ability to understand the special characteristics of their students. The latter - (c)- was measured by taking into account how many of the parameters mentioned in (c) (Table 2) are described in the interview of each science teacher, as factors helping him/her to set goals and to design a curriculum.

6 Table 2 Educators Profile (a) Academic background (b) Teaching experiences (c) Ability to understand the special characteristics of their students: Studies in Physics, Chemistry, Geology or Biology. Having or not having done postgraduate studies, in fields relevant to adult education or curriculum designing. Educators with previous experience in adult education or inexperienced educators who work only for a few hours every week in SCSs (part time job). (c1) Interests (c2) Cultural Contexts (c3) Personal Needs (c4) Vocational Needs (c5) Social Needs e.g. Astronomical issues (solar system, Universe etc.) e.g. Romany people s reasoning tend to be based on pseudo-scientific explanations (fate affect our lives) e.g. Need to understand health issues e.g. Need to learn new things concerning their occupations/jobs (new fertilizers for agricultural work) e.g. Need to understand and participate in the social discourse about socioscientific issues related to their lives (make decisions on the establishment or not of landfills in their municipality, make decisions about genetically modified foods) THE RESULTS The results show that three major categories of curricula can be identified (Table 3). Each one reflects a different perception of what scientific literacy means in the contexts of the SCSs, according to the science teachers (and designers of the corresponding curricula): 1) A curriculum oriented towards the content of science. The science teachers who adopted this view consider that the knowledge of science concepts and principles (e.g. Newton Laws), the development of scientific skills (e.g. to make hypotheses about a phenomenon), as well as science being taught through history of science, should be the target of a science curriculum. These teachers are categorized as implying the aforementioned Vision I point of view. 2) A curriculum providing the knowledge and developing the kind of thinking that are necessary to deal with science-related daily life situations and problems (e.g. health issues, fertilizers for agricultural work). 3) A curriculum aiming at developing the learner s ability to make choices related with socioscientific issues (e.g. pros and cons of using nuclear energy).

7 Categories 2 and 3 indicate what Roberts describes as Vision II. Yet, in SCSs, due to the population they refer to, it is very crucial for an educator to incorporate socioscientific issues in his/her curriculum. Doing so, it will be considered in this study as consisting a different category of curriculum designing (see below Table 3). Table 3 The Kinds of Curricula Science Teachers Design to Achieve Their Students Expected Scientific Literacy Kind of Curriculum 1. Curriculum oriented towards the content of science 2. Curriculum aiming at providing familiarity with science-related daily life situations 3. Curriculum aiming at supporting decision making in socioscientific issues Science Teachers Profile Science teachers who are inexperienced in adult education. It s their own teaching experience in formal education and their academic background that guide them at their choices, when designing a curriculum, and not the culture of their students. Science teachers who are either inexperienced with high sensitivity in understanding their students characteristics or experienced educators. They are affected by the context of their students lives, especially from their professional lives. Experienced science teachers with high level of understanding their students living conditions. Only a few teachers try to include socioscientific issues in their curriculum. Objectives of the Curriculum Students should acquire basic skills of science and should be familiar with concepts that they will meet in upper secondary school. To get a degree which will help them to overcome their social and economic exclusion from the society. Students should be able to explain physical phenomena that affect their lives and interpret daily life through science. Also they should understand information related with science that appear in media and have the confidence to participate in relevant conversations. Students should be able to make decisions as active citizens about science and technology related social issues. Curriculum oriented towards the content of science In the first category of curriculum designing, all science teachers are inexperienced in adult education. Their choice to develop a content-based curriculum is explained by them as an effort to provide students with the scientific knowledge and skills required to continue their studies in upper secondary school. Students should acquire basic skills of science and should be familiar with concepts that they will meet in upper secondary school.

8 This is because the teachers of this category identify the needs of their students and the aim of their social inclusion with the degree of the upper secondary school, even though the most of them when they were asked don t even know how many of their students will actually continue their studies in the formal education. Their benchmark to choose the most appropriate content for that aim is that of the content of the curriculum of the formal lower secondary school. Influenced by the field of their studies, they emphasize in Physics and Chemistry, teaching e.g. measurement units, mechanics, structure of matter, periodic table, chemical reactions and related exercises. Furthermore, few science teachers among them declare that through the science content they teach, they try to raise the scientific awareness of their students, while some others stress aspects of nature of science. The goal of scientific awareness is reflected in the following statement: To be introduced to the scientific method and scientific thinking. The development of their students scientific awareness is served by applying the sequence of observation, hypothesis, experiment and conclusion. Science teachers with relevant studies stress the goal related to the nature of science. Their learning goal is: To gain an appreciation about the way scientific knowledge has evolved into what we believe today or how we have achieved technological achievements or To understand the operation of the natural world. To serve that goal they present the unity of the natural world from the macrocosm to the microcosm and provide examples of historical moments that changed the way we interpret the natural world. To conclude, the teachers of this category, when designing scientific literacy curricula, do not take into account the culture of their students, especially when these curricula are addressed to Romani people, immigrants or prisoners. In their interviews they admit that it s their own teaching experiences from formal education and their academic background that guide them to design curricula that focus in concepts and methods of science. Those few educators trying to stress aspects of the nature of science and to develop their students scientific awareness express views that reveal a very positivistic view of scientific method, scientific thinking and the way scientific enterprise evolves. Curriculum aiming at providing familiarity with science-related daily life situations Science teachers of this category are experienced teachers in adult education or inexperienced ones who have high sensitivity and understanding of their students characteristics (mainly their interests and their personal and vocational needs). They stand that: Acquiring familiarity with science-related daily life situations, will give students the confidence they need in their personal life to start participating in relevant conversations. The most experienced teachers of this category try to develop a meaningful learning context for their students by using media articles mainly. The articles they choose are relevant either to general interest science topics (e.g. the human body, earthquakes,

9 radiation etc.), or to topics relevant to their students personal and vocational life (e.g. health issues and fertilizers for agricultural work). This approach of science curriculum designing implies strongly Vision II, but still ignores the part of promoting active citizenship, an aspect of scientific literacy that Roberts highlights in his definition of Vision II. The less experienced ones believe that the interpretation of daily life phenomena is too complex. Therefore addressing such phenomena presupposes the need to teach the corresponding content of science (concepts and principles). However, in their attempt to address the necessary knowledge background, many of them eventually end up teaching science that is out of the context of their students lives, interests and values. Consequently, this kind of learning context for daily life situations is less meaningful for their students and resembles the teaching practices of the teachers of the first category. Curriculum aiming at supporting decision making in socioscientific issues Teachers with previous experience in SCSs and with a high level of understanding of their students living conditions argue about the importance of supporting decision making in socioscientific issues. According to them: Being scientificly literate means being able to make decisions as an active citizen about science and technology related social issues and this is very crucial for the lives of these students. Whilst those teachers set such goals, according to the way they describe the structure of their curricula, they integrate socioscientific issues only at the last topic of their curriculum (nuclear energy - arguments for and against, and technology - pros and cons. This result reveals that even if science teachers are experienced and try to understand what should be a desirable goal for the target group they address, they don t know how to serve that goal through the content they choose. CONCLUSIONS This study aimed at investigating the SCSs science teachers views: a) on how they understand the aim of promoting their students scientific literacy to face social exclusion, and b) whether they take into account their students personal, cultural and social needs when designing a curriculum. The results showed three major categories of curriculum designing. However, the three categories presented here should not be considered as distinct. They only show in which aspects of scientific literacy the SCSs teachers have focused and where they intended to give emphasis through the curricula designed. However, in practice there is not just one aspect of curriculum emphasis in each curriculum. For instance, a science teacher may intend to design a curriculum to promote active citizenship, but the structure of his/her curriculum also gives emphasis to providing knowledge to the learner for understanding and controlling his/her environment in order to cope in everyday life situations. Thus, the categorization of these curricula should be seen as parts of a spectrum of SCSs science teachers curriculum emphasis, rather than three distinct categories.

10 This Figure 2a shows in two parallels a comparison of the practices of SCSs science teachers when designing their curricula with the kind of curricula identified in bibliography. Figure 2a. Spectrum of Science Teachers Curricula: Emphasis in Different Aspects of Scientific Literacy Each science teacher s curriculum classification in the spectrum seems to be related with his/her teaching experience in adult education. As mentioned before, the less experienced science teachers (who are a large proportion of the general population of science teachers in SCSs) focus on teaching the content of science. For them, the lower secondary education science curriculum acts as an exemplar, and furthermore they are very much affected by the field of their studies when they choose the content they will teach. These teachers tend to forget the characteristics of the target group they are addressing (Figure 2b). Figure 2b. Curriculum Oriented Towards the Content of Science When science teachers attempt to make a transition from Vision I to Vision II curricula they tend to emphasize teaching scientific phenomena related to students interests. In this case, their main concern is promoting skills for participating in discourses regarding issues raised frequently in the media. These curricula seem to resemble with the Millar s curriculum, however they don t engage at all the socioscientific aspects that Millar highlights (Figure 2c). The less experienced science teachers of this category, when they develop the corresponding teaching content to introduce daily life phenomena, quite often still seem to be limited and drift from the scientific knowledge embedded in the

11 phenomena. That is why some curricula of the second category have characteristics of Vision I curricula and in practice could be identified in the area of Figure 2b. Figure 2c. Curricula Aiming at Providing Familiarity with Science-related Daily Life Situations (Macro View) As the experience of the teachers becomes greater in adult education, it is clear that the science teachers acknowledge their students needs and thus they design curricula focused on applied scientific knowledge that will be useful for their students future life. However, in their attempt to identify the micro-characteristics of their learners, they seem to perceive and utilize more easily the characteristics of the vocational and personal lives of the learners. These curricula have similarities with Layton s curriculum exemplar (Figure 2d). Figure 2d. Curricula Aiming at Providing Familiarity with Science-related Daily Life Situations (Micro View) Very few among them focus on the social needs of their students. These science teachers are the most experienced ones (5-7 years of experience in SCSs). They argue about the importance of decision-making in socioscientific issues but, as we have already mentioned, in focus they slightly focus in related topics (only at the last topic of their curricula). Moreover, the learning contexts they create for socioscientific issues fail to approach science issues from the perspective of the individual (students perspective/micro view) and rather approach them from the perspective of the society (society s needs for future citizens/macro view). This way of addressing

12 socioscientific issues reminds us more of Millar s curriculum exemplar than Roth and Lee s. However, if SCS educators could design curricula according to Roth and Lee s exemplar, it would be very important for the kind of student population they are addressing (Figure 2e). Figure 2e. Curriculum Aiming at Supporting Decision Making in Socioscientific Issues (Macro View) To conclude, from the results presented here it seems that teaching experience in SCSs helps science teachers to make significant progress in giving curriculum emphasis to aspects of their students daily lives. They minimize the extent to which they are affected from their own academic background and teaching experiences in formal education and they shift their interest to the recognition of aspects of their students lives (Figure 2f). Figure 2f. What Influences Science Teachers Practices in Scientific Literacy Curriculum Designing Therefore, it is clear that the institution of SCSs should support those teachers by training them to design curricula for scientific literacy according to the sociocultural characteristics of their students. Through this process, the less experienced science teachers will be able to be introduced more easily into the priorities of the institution and the more experienced will be able to develop their skills in curriculum designing. In this way, teachers will be able to develop meaningful learning contexts (for their students lives) and therefore provide their students with better opportunities for reintegration into society.

13 REFERENCES Aikenhead, G. (2002). Renegotiating the culture of school science: Scientific literacy for an informed public. Conference paper in Lisbon's School of Science Conference. Portugal: Lisboa. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from Bulte, A. (2007). How to connect concepts of science and technology when designing context-based science education. e Proceedings of the Linnaeus Tercentenary Symposium: Promoting Scientific Literacy: Science Education Research in Transaction (pp ). Sweden: Uppsala University, Uppsala. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from De Boer, D. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), Durant, J., Evans, G., & Thomas, G. (1993). Public understanding of science in Britain: The role of medicine in the popular representation of science. Public Understanding of Science, 1(2), European Commission. (1995). White Paper on Education and Training - Teaching and Learning - Towards the Learning Society. Luxembourg: European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from IDEKE. (2003). School Guidelines for Second Chance Schools. Athens: IDEKE Publications. Laugksch, R. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), Layton, D., Davey, A., & Jenkins, E. (1986). Science for specific social purposes (SSSP): Perspectives on adult scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 13(1), Millar, R. (2006). Twenty first century science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), Popli, R. (1999). Scientific literacy for all citizens: Different concepts and contents. Public Understanding of Science, 8(2), Roberts, D.A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, (pp ). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Inc. Roth, W-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage Publications Inc.