Social activism in elementary science education: A science, technology, and society approach to teach global warming

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 315-339

  Lester, Benjamin T ^a   Ma, Li ^a   Lee, Okhee ^a   Lambert, Julie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 30744455791     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690500240100     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1994). What is STS science teaching? In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives in reform (pp. 47–59). New York: Teachers College Press.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. American Geophysical Union. (2003, December). Human impacts on climate. Retrieved January 2, 2004, from www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/climate_change_poistion.html
5. Andersson, B., & Wallin, A. (2000). Students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and the problem of ozone layer depletion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1096–1111.
6. Apple, M. (2000). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. New York: Routledge.
7. Apple, M. W. (1979). Ideology and curriculum. Boston, MA: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
8. Bouillion, L. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school–community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878–898.
9. Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1993). The “greenhouse effect”: Children’s perceptions of causes, consequences and cures. International Journal of Science Education, 15(5), 531–552.
10. Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1998). High school students’ perceptions of how major global environmental effects might cause skin cancer. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29(2), 31–36.
11. Bybee, R. (1991). Science–technology–society in science curriculum: The policy–practice gap. Theory Into Practice, 30(4), 294–302.
12. Bybee, R. (1993). Reforming science education: Social perspectives and personal reflections. New York: Teachers College Press.
13. Cross, R. T., & Price, R. F. (1999). The social responsibility of science and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 775–785.
14. Francis, C., Boyes, E., Qualter, A., & Stanisstreet, M. (1993). Ideas of elementary students about reducing the “greenhouse effect”. Science Education, 77(4), 375–392.
15. Fusco, D. (2001). Creating relevant science through urban planning and gardening. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 860–877.
16. Giroux, H. A. (2002). Democracy, freedom, and justice after September 11th: Rethinking the role of educators and the politics of schooling. Retrieved September 18, 2003, from www.tcrecord.org
17. Hurd, P. D. (1997). Inventing science education for the new millennium. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407–416.
19. Koulaidis, V., & Christidou, V. (1998). Models of students’ thinking concerning the greenhouse effect and teaching implications. Science Education, 83(5), 559–576.
20. Mason, L., & Santi, M. (1998). Discussing the greenhouse effect: Children’s collaborative discourse reasoning and conceptual change. Environmental Education Research, 4(1), 67–86.
21. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. National Science Teachers Association. (1993). Science/technology/society: A new effort for providing appropriate science for all. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), The science, technology, society movement (pp. 3–5). Washington, DC: NSTA Special Publications.
23. Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
24. Pedretti, E. (1999). Decision making and STS education: Exploring scientific knowledge and social responsibility in schools and science centres through an issue-based approach. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 174–181.
25. Rahm, J. (2002). Emergent learning opportunities in an inner-city youth gardening programme. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 164–184.
26. Rosenthal, D. B. (1990). Warming up to STS: Activities to encourage environmental awareness. The Science Teacher, 57(6), 28–32.
27. Rye, J. A., Rubba P. A., & Wiesenmayer, R. L. (1997). An investigation of middle school students’ alternative conceptions of global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 527–551.
28. Scrase, R. (1997). Global warming: Let’s act on the facts. The Times Educational Supplement, 4246, 25.
29. Waks, L. J. (1992). The responsibility spiral: A curriculum framework for STS education. Theory Into Practice, 31(1), 13–19.
30. Yager, R. E., & Roy, R. (1993). STS: Most pervasive and most radical of reform approaches to “science” education. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), The science, technology, society movement (pp. 7–13). Washington, DC: NSTA Special Publications.