Teaching Science

  • John P. Keeves
  • I Gusti Ngurah Darmawan
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 21)

The teaching of science in schools in most countries changed markedly during the last four decades of the twentieth century. The first 60 years of that century gave rise to many remarkable advances in science, not only with respect to basic scientific principles, but also in the applications of science to technology for military purposes and the growth and development of living organisms. This led to major changes in an understanding of scientific processes, the rejection of positivism and greater recognition of the contribution of science to economic and technological development. Consequently, in the late 1950s it was widely recognized that the teaching of science in schools must also change. The major changes that occurred were: (a) the teaching of biology in schools with an ecological focus to replace the teaching of botany, zoology and physiology largely to girls, (b) the teaching of science related to the earth, the solar system, the universe and the environment, (c) the teaching of an integrated science during the early years of secondary schooling, rather than the teaching of only physics and chemistry as the basic sciences, (d) the teaching of elementary science during the primary school years, replacing the study of nature, and (e) a greater emphasis on inquiry and investigation in the learning of science. Unfortunately, the applications of science both in everyday life, in technology and in conservation of the environment were often overlooked in the new courses that were introduced. However, after 20 years of intense activity world-wide, the movement for change in the teaching of science lost momentum in many countries of the Western world. This was at a time when the developing countries were searching for leadership and for advances in the teaching of science to support their economic and technological development that involved the uses and applications of scientific knowledge and the processes involved in scientific inquiry.

At the beginning of the twenty-first century the teaching of science can be said to be in a state of crisis. This situation has arisen from a growing shortage of science teachers in the physical sciences and mathematics, that has resulted both from the retirement of teachers who were educated during the peak years of reform in science teaching and who were attracted to the teaching profession, as well as from the higher financial rewards that were available in the fields of technology and commerce which had become oriented to science-based development. Furthermore, today the teaching and learning of science is too often seen as a field that involves only what takes place in a classroom and is thus divorced from a world that is changing rapidly as a consequence of continuing growth and development in the fields of science and technology. The authors adopt the view that it is both incomplete and inadequate to consider the learning of science as involving only those practices associated with the teaching of science in classrooms and laboratories. The media, the internet, peer group activities, investigation centres, field displays and museums all have a central role in the teaching and learning of science by children and by adults throughout their lives, because the fields of science are advancing at a rapid rate. The learning of science in schools is critical for all that follows outside the classroom and at later stages of life and that is related to scientific and technological development.


Science Teaching Cognitive Development Science Curriculum Compulsory Schooling Secondary School Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aikin, W. M. (1942). Adventures in American education: Vol. 1. Story of the eight year study. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, H. E. (1903). The teaching of scientific method. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, D. P., & Jones, D. P. (1993). Creating gender equality: Cross-national gender stratification and mathematical performance. Sociology of Education, 66, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. In Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
  6. Bloom, B. S., Hastings, T. J., & Madaus, G. F. (1971). Handbook of formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  7. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Bortoft, H. (1996). The wholeness of nature. New York: Lindisfarne Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boyd, W. (1952). The history of western education. London: Adam and Charles Black.Google Scholar
  10. Bredderman, T. (1983). Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 499–518.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, A. L., Campeone, J. C., Metz, K. E., & Ash, D. B. (1997). The development of science learning abilities in children. In K. Härnqvist & A. Burgen (Eds.), Growing up with Science. London: Kingsley.Google Scholar
  12. Bybee, R. W., & De Boer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357–387). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Comber, L. C., & Keeves, J. P. (1973). Science education in nineteen countries: An empirical study. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Conant, J. B. (1947). On understanding science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Connell, W. F. (1980). The history of education in the twentieth century world. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Curtis, S. J., & Boultwood, M. E. A. (1964). A short history of educational ideas. London: University Tutorial Press.Google Scholar
  18. Design-Based Research Collection. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Epstein, H. T. (1978). Growth spurts during brain development: Implications for educational theory and practice. In J. S. Chall & A. F. Masky (Eds.), Education and the brain. NSSE 27th Yearbook, Part 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Flavell, J. H. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, NJ.: Van Nostrand.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gagne, R. M. (1963). The learning requirements for enquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1, 144–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gagne, R. M. (1965). Psychological issues in Science a Process Approach. In The psychological basis of science — A process approach (AAAS Miscellaneous Publications, pp. 63–68). Washington, DC: Commission on Science Education, American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  23. Gibbons, J. A. (2004). On reflection. Studies in Comparative and International Education No. 11. Adelaide, Australia: Shannon Research Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gustafsson, J. E. (1988). Hierarchical models in the structure of cognitive abilities. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 4). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Gustafsson, J. E. (1994). Models of Intelligence. In T. Husén, T. N. Postlethwaite, B. R. Clark, & G. Neave (Eds.), Education: The complete encyclopedia (CD-ROM). Oxford: Pergamon (Elsevier).Google Scholar
  26. Habermas, J. (1992). Post metaphysical thinking. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hanushek, E. A., & Kimko, D. D. (2000). Schooling, labor-force quality and the growth of nations. American Economic Review, 90(3), 1184–2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hanushek, E. A., & Wössman, L. (2007). Education quality and economic growth. Washington, DC: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hunt, J. M. (1961). Intelligence and experience. New York: Ronald.Google Scholar
  30. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The early growth of logic in the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  32. Jenkins, E. W. (1985). History of science education. In T. Husén & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (pp. 4453–4456). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  33. Karplus, R. D. (1969). Introductory physics: A model approach. New York: Benjamin.Google Scholar
  34. Karplus, R. D., & Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  35. Keeves, J. P., Njora, H., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2003). Monitoring the impact of globalization on education and human development. In J. P. Keeves & R. Watanabe (Eds.), International handbook of educational research in the Asia-Pacific region (pp. 1331–1346). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  36. Klopfer, L. E. (1971). Evaluation of learning in science. In B. S Bloom, J. T. Hastings, & G. F. Madaus (Eds.), Handbook of formative and summative evaluation of student learning (pp. 559–642). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  37. Klopfer, L. E., & Cooley, W. W. (1963). Test of understanding science. Chicago: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
  38. Klopfer, L. E., & Cooley, W. W. (1964). The history of science cases. Chicago: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
  39. Kuhn, T. S. (1957). The Copernican revolution. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  40. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lawley, D. N. (1943). On problems connected with item selection and test construction. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 61, 273–287.Google Scholar
  42. Lokan, J., Hollingsworth, H., & Hackling, M. (2006). Teaching science in Australia. Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  43. Masters, G. N., & Keeves, J. P. (1999). Advances in educational research and assessment. Oxford: Per-gamon.Google Scholar
  44. Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism in science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  45. Munroe, W. S., DeVoss, J. C., & Kelly, F. J. (1924). Educational tests and measurements. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  46. Netz, R., & Noel, W. (2007). The Archimedes codex. London: Weidenfield and Nicolson.Google Scholar
  47. Pascal-Leone, J. (1976). A view of cognition from a formalistic perspective. In K. F. Rugel & J. A. Meacham (Eds.), The developing individual in a changing world (Vol. 1, pp. 89–110). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  48. Phillips, D. C. (2000). Constructivism in education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  49. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  50. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1976). The child's conception of space. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  51. PISA (Programme for International Scientific Assessment). (2003). Scientific literacy. Paris: OECD (CERI).Google Scholar
  52. Quine, W. V., & Ullian, J. S. (1978). The web of belief. London: Random House.Google Scholar
  53. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute of Educational Research.Google Scholar
  54. Rosier, M. J., & Keeves, J. P. (Eds.). (1991). The IEA study of science I: Science education and curricula in twenty-three countries. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  55. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Rutherford, F. J., Holton, G., & Watson, F. G. (1970). The project physics course: Text. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  57. Shayer, M., & Adey, P. (1981). Towards a science of science teaching. Oxford: Heinemann Educational.Google Scholar
  58. Shayer, M., & Adey, P. (2002). Learning intelligence: Cognitive acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 Years. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60s on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 127–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Snow, C. P. (1964). The two cultures. A second look. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Spearritt, D. (Ed.). (1982). The improvement of measurement in education and psychology. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  63. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  64. Thorndike, R. L. (1982). Applied psychometrics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  65. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  66. Tyler, R. W. (1994). Evaluation: A Tylerian perspective. In T. Husén, T. N. Postlethwaite, B. R. Clark, & G. Neave (Eds.), Education: The complete encyclopedia (CD-ROM). Oxford: Pergamon (Elsevier).Google Scholar
  67. Van Praagh, G. (Ed.). (1973). H. E. Armstrong and science education. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  68. Vosniadou, S. (1997). On the development of the understanding of abstract ideas. In K. Härnqvist & A. Burgen (Eds.), Growing up with science (pp. 41–58). London: Kingsley.Google Scholar
  69. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Westaway, F. W. (1929). Science teaching. London: Blackie.Google Scholar
  71. Willis, S., & Kissane, B. (1995). Outcome-based education: A review of the literature. Perth, Australia: Education Department of Western Australia.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • John P. Keeves
    • 1
  • I Gusti Ngurah Darmawan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations