Abstract
Internationally, an accepted aim of science education is to enable all students to develop a deeper understanding of the world around them, and to use their understanding of science to contribute to public debate and make informed and balanced decisions about scientific issues that impact their lives (see for example, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2000; Millar & Osborne, 1998). In Australia, significant emphasis has been placed on the importance of scientific literacy in science education (Rennie, Goodrum, & Hackling, 2001; Tytler, 2007). All Australian State and Territory curriculum documents state that science education should aim to develop students’ scientific understandings, problem solving, and critical thinking skills related to science topics of importance in society. A high level of scientific literacy can help young people to question the claims of the scientific community and other stakeholders, weigh up evidence about science issues, and use critical thinking skills and their understanding of science to make informed and balanced decisions. More recently, the newly formed Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has released guidelines for a national curriculum in science. The guidelines state that the Australian science curriculum must prepare students ‘who, as citizens in a global world need to make personal decisions on the basis of a scientific view of the world’ (National Curriculum Board, 2009, p. 4).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2000). Designs for science literacy. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). 2006 census tables [Data set]. Retrieved from Australian Bureau of Statistics website http://www.abs.gov.au
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2010). My School. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from http://www.myschool.edu.au
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cooper, J. E. (1991). Telling our own stories: The reading and writing of journals or diaries. In C. Witherell & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 96–112). New York: Teachers College Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating qualitative and quantitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Dawson, V. M. (1996). A constructivist approach to teaching transplantation technology in science. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42(4), 15–20.
Dawson, V. M. (2010). Outcomes of bioethics education in secondary school science: Two Australian case studies. In A. Jones, A. McKim, & M. Reiss (Eds.), Ethics in the classroom (pp. 69–86). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Dawson, V. M., & Taylor, P. C. (1998). Establishing open and critical discourses in the science classroom: Reflecting on initial difficulties. Research in Science Education, 28(3), 259–278.
De Crespigny, L. J. & Savulesca, J. (2004). Abortion: Time to clarify Australia’s confusing laws. The Medical Journal of Australia. Retrieved March 18, 2010, from http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/181_04_160804/dec10242_fm.html
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.) (2000). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.
Dixon, R. (2005). The Catholic community in Australia. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from http://www.catholicaustralia.com.au/page.php?pg=austchurch-history
Dori, Y. J., Tal, R., & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies-Can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? Science Education, 87, 767–793.
Erikson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
Grace, M. (2009). Developing high quality decision-making discussions about biological conservation in a normal classroom setting. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1464–1489.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Holly, M. (1992). Keeping a personal – Professional journal. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: School of Education, King’s College.
Moreton, C. M. (2007). World’s first test-tube baby Louise Brown has a child of her own. Retrieved March 9, 2010, from http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/worlds-first-testtube-baby-louise-brown-has-a-child-of-her-own-432080.html
National Curriculum Board. (2009). Shape of the Australian Curriculum: Science. Carlton: National Curriculum Board.
National Health and Medical Research Council. (2007). Ethical guidelines on the use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Pedretti, E. (1999). Decision making and STS education: Exploring scientific knowledge and social responsibility in schools and science centers through an issues-based approach. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 174–181.
Picoult, J. (2004). My sister’s keeper. Crows Nest, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Potts, A. (2009). Public and private schooling in Australia: Historical and contemporary considerations. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.history.ac.uk/resources/e-seminars/potts-paper
Rennie, L., Goodrum, D., & Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in Australian schools: Results of a national study. Research in Science Education, 31, 455–498.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138.
Stake, R. E. (2000). Qualitative case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Camberwell, Vic: Australian Council for Educational Research Press. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.acer.edu.au
Venville, G., & Dawson, V. (2010). The impact of an argumentation intervention on grade 10 students’ conceptual understanding of genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952–977.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dawson, V.M. (2011). A Case Study of the Impact of Introducing Socio-scientific Issues into a Reproduction Unit in a Catholic Girls’ School. In: Sadler, T. (eds) Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 39. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1158-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1159-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)