Reforming science in the school curriculum: A critical analysis

Oxford Review of Education

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 293-309

  Donnelly, James ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 20444374159     PISSN: 03054985     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03054980500117934     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. 21st Century Science Project Team (2003) 21st Century Science - a new flexible model for GCSE science, School Science Review, 85(310), 27-34.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Benchmarks for science literacy (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
3. Appelbaum, P. & Clark, S. (2001) Science! Fun? A critical analysis of design/content/evaluation, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(5), 588-600.
4. Council for Science and Technology (1998) School science: fit for the future? (London, CST).
5. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (1997) Common framework of science learning outcomes K to 12 (Toronto, Council of Ministers of Education).
6. DeBoer, G. (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), 582-601.
7. Department of Education and Science (1985) Science 5-16: a statement of policy (London, HMSO).
8. Department of Education, Republic of South Africa (2002) Revised National Curriculum statement for grades R-9 (schools) (Pretoria, Department of Education).
9. DfES (2005) 14-19 Education and skills (London, HMSO).
10. Donnelly, J. (2001) Instrumentality, hermeneutics and the place of science in the school curriculum, in: F. Bevilacqua, E. Giannetto & M. R. Matthews (Eds), Science education and culture: the contribution of history and philosophy of science (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers) 1-19.
11. Donnelly, J. (2004) Humanizing science education. Science Education, 88(5), 762-784.
12. Gaon, S. & Norris, S.P. (2001) The undecidable grounds of scientific expertise: science education and the limits of educational independence, Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(2), 187-201.
13. Goodrum, D., Hackling, M. & Rennie, L. (2000) The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools: a research report (Canberra, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs).
14. Goodson, I.F. (1998) The making of curriculum: collected essays (London, Falmer).
15. Hirst, P.H. (1974) Liberal education and the nature of knowledge, in: Knowledge and the Curriculum (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul) 30-53.
16. HM Treasury, DTI & DfES (2004) Science and innovation framework 2004-14 (London, HMSO).
17. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (2002) Third report 2002, science education from 14 to 19 (Vol. HC 508-1).
18. House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (1999-2000) Third report. Science and society (HL 38).
19. Huberman, M. (1992) Teacher development and instructional mastery, in: A. Hargreaves & M. G. Fullan (Eds) Understanding teacher development (London, Cassell) 122-142.
20. Jasanoff, S. (2003) Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science, Minerva, 41(3), 223244.
21. Laugksch, R.C. (2000) Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview, Science Education, 84, 71-94.
22. Layton, D., Jenkins, E.W., Mcgill, S. & Davey, A. (1993) Inarticulate science? Perspectives on the public understanding of science (Driffield, Studies in Education).
23. Levinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001) Valuable lessons: engaging with the social context of science in schools (London, Wellcome Trust).
24. Matthews, B. (2002) Why is emotional literacy important to science teachers? School Science Review, 84(306), 97-103.
25. Mcmurray, R., Weighall, A., Cheater, F., Mukherjee, S., Schweiger, M., Sinclair, S. et al. (2004) Empowering parental decision making in relation to second dose MMR vaccine: user perspectives on the effectiveness and continuity of multi-agency information provision. Accessed 5 January 2004, from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/healthcare/.
26. Millar, R. & Osborne, J. (Eds) (1998) Beyond 2000: science education for the future (London, King's College).
27. Murray, I. & Reiss, M. (2003) Student review of the science curriculum (London, Planet Science/Institute of Education/Science Museum).
28. National Research Council (1996) National science education standards (Washington, DC, National Academy Press).
29. National Research Council (2000) Inquiry and the national science education standards (Washington, DC, National Academy Press).
30. Nowotny, H., Scott, P. & Gibbons, M. (2001) Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty (Cambridge, Polity).
31. Osborne, J. & Collins, S. (2000) Pupils' and parents' views of science in the school curriculum (London, King's College).
32. Roberts, G. (2002) SET for success. The supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills (London, HM Treasury).
33. Roberts, R. & Gott, R. (2004) Assessment of Sc1: alternatives to coursework, School Science Review, 85(313), 103-108.
34. Royal Society (2003) Urgent action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Accessed 17 December, from http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/ releasedetails.cfm?file=495.txt.
35. Royal Society (2004) Students should not turn their backs on science before 19, says Lord May. Press release. Accessed 27 October, from http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news/.