Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching Environmental Issues in Science Classroom: Status, Opportunities, and Strategies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Science Education Research and Practices in Taiwan

  • 1689 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter highlights the importance of using environmental issues as a resource and a context for science education. A review of literature regarding socio-scientific issuesand science–technology–society–environment (STSE) education demonstrates a rationale for involving environmental issues in science education. It has been suggested that such instruction will effectively improve student decision-making and problem-solving abilities as well as civic participation. I intend to express the status of science and environmental education in Taiwan, and tensions between these two disciplines, by analyzing relevant studies in this regard. Strength and obstacles of incorporating environmental issues into science curricula are discussed. In the final part of this chapter, I present my recent research on teaching approaches that aim to engage students in learning environmental issues. Further studies on teachers’ perspectives on environmental issues and their practical considerations in teaching such topics are recommended.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrew, J., & Robottom, I. (2001). Science and ethics: Some issues for education. Science education, 85(6), 769–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashley, M. (2000). Science: An unreliable friend to environmental education?. Environmental Education Research, 6(3), 269–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardwell, L. V. (1991). Problem-framing: A perspective on environmental problem-solving. Environmental Management, 15(5), 603–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. E., & Pedretti, E. (2006). Contrasting orientations: STSE for social reconstruction or social reproduction?. School Science and Mathematics, 106(5), 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-zvi-Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2009). A design based research of an earth systems based environmental curriculum. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(1), 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, K., & Scott, W. (1998). Deconstructing action competence: Developing a case for a more scientifically-attentive environmental education. Public Understanding of Science, 7(3), 225–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (2008). Scientific literacy, environmental issues, and PISA 2006: The 2008 Paul F-Brandwein lecture. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 566–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camino, E., & Calcagno, C. (1995). An interactive methodology for ‘empowering’ students to deal with controversial environmental problems. Environmental Education Research, 1(1), 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S. N., & Chiu, M. H. (2008). Lakatos’ scientific research programmes as a framework for analysing informal argumentation about socio‐scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1753–1773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, L.-T., & Liu, S.Y. (2011, April). Promoting systems thinking through an environment course. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Orlando, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, M. K., & Laubichler, M. D. (2003). Natural enemies–Metaphor or misconception?. Science, 301(5629), 52–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colucci-Gray, L., Camino, E., & Barbiero, G. (2006). From scientific literacy to sustainability literacy: An ecological framework for education. Science Education, 90(2), 227–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fien, J. (2000). ‘Education for the environment: A critique’—An analysis. Environmental Education Research, 6(2), 179–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier, B., Guilbert, L., & Pelletier, M. L. (1997). Soft systems methodology and problem framing: Development of an environmental problem solving model respecting a new emergent reflexive paradigm. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 2, 163–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, A. (2002). Mutualism: A different agenda for environmental and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1201–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, A. G., & Robottom, I. (1993). Towards a socially critical environmental education: Water quality studies in a coastal school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(4), 301–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace, M. M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1157–1169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. (2002). Environment in the science curriculum: The politics of change in the Pan-Canadian science curriculum development process. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1239–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. (2003). Teachers’ thinking in environmental education: Consciousness and responsibility. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P., & Nolan, K. (1999). A critical analysis of research in environmental education. Studies in Science Education, 34(1), 1–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, S. J. (2003). The effects of an undergraduate environmental education course on environmental action and associated environmental literacy variables. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 11(1), 97–119. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, S. J., & Gou, S.-M. (2009). Effects of an undergraduate environmental course incorporating issue analysis, life stories, and wilderness education: A focus on affective objectives. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 135–156. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, J.-F., & Chen, Y.-K. (2011). The design and enactment of an emerging technology inquiry-based curriculum in senior high school: A case study. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 19(1), 1–23. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Hungerford, H. R. (1998). The myths of environmental education—Revisited. In H. R. Hungerford, W. J. Bluhm, T. L. Volk, & J. M. Ramsey (Eds). Essential readings in environmental education. Champaign: Stipes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3(2), 163–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.-P., & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortland, K. (1996). An STS case study about students’ decision making on the waste issue. Science Education, 80(6), 673–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L.-C., & Liu, S.-Y. (2006). Elementary teachers’ decision making on controversial environmental issues. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 4(1), 1–32. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, R. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of the role of evidence in teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 247–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S.-S. (2006). Interpretative research on the roles of the science teacher in instruction of a controversial issue in science and technology: A case study. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 14(3), 237–255. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S.-S. (2012). Fostering the sixth grade students’ moral thinking through the instruction of controversial issues in science classroom. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 435–459. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S.-S., & Chin, C.-C. (2012). The comparison of the novice and experienced teachers’ knowledge construction about socioscientific instruction before and after actual implementation. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(1), 41–68. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S.-S., & Huang, P.-H. (2009). Students’ constructing argumentation about a socioscientific issue: The differences between sixth graders with different levels of academic achievement. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 111–133. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M.-R., & Wang, S.-H. (2006). An experimental teaching study of conservation curricula of the Fubow wetland on the influences for 3rd to 6th graders’ cognitions, attitudes of wetland conservation. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 4(1), 103–146. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T.-J., Lin, S.-S., & Chen, Y.-C. (2010). University students’ knowledge and argumentation skills concerning a socio-scientific issue. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 18(3), 229–252. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S.-Y., Lee, L. C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). Scientific epistemological view and decision-making on socioscientific issues. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 15(3), 335–356. [English Abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. Y., Lin, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3), 497–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.) (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: Nuffield Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, D. (1991). What is education for? Trumpeter, 8(3), 99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedretti, E. (2003). Teaching science, technology, society and environment (STSE) education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 219–239). Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Posch, P. (1993). Research issues in environmental education. Studies in Science Education, 21, 21–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven, G. (2006). Methodological reflexivity: Towards evolving methodological frameworks through critical and reflexive deliberations. Environmental Education Research, 12(3–4), 559–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickinson, M. (2006). Researching and understanding environmental learning: Hopes for the next 10 years. Environmental Education Research, 12, 445–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauvé, L. (2005). Currents in environmental education: Mapping a complex and evolving pedagogical field. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, 11–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, J. C. (2006). Environment and education: A view of a changing scene. Environmental Education Research, 12(3), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, Y.-C., & Lin, S.-S. (2012). Improving sixth graders’ argumentation skills through scaffolding instruction in socio-scientific contexts. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 343–366. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, C.-L., & Liu, S.-Y. (2008). Elementary teachers’ views about “alien species” and their environmental values. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 5(2), 1–32. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO-UNEP (1978). The Tbilisi declaration. Connect, 3(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rensburg, E.-J. (1994). Social transformation in response to the environmental crisis: The role of education and research. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. P., Bauknecht, D., & Kemp, R. (Eds.). (2006). Reflexive governance for sustainable development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A. E. J. (2010). Between knowing what is right and knowing that is it wrong to tell others what is right: On relativism, uncertainty and democracy in environmental and sustainability education. Environmental Education Research, 16, 143–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M.-L., & Liu, S.-Y. (2009). Implementation of the farm animal welfare curriculum to high school students in an animal protection club: A case study. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 6(1), 85–117. [English abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A. E. J., & van der Leij, T. (1997). Alternatives to national standards for environmental education: Process-based quality assessment. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 2, 7–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellington, J. J. (Ed.) (1986). Controversial issues in the curriculum. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). High school students’ informal reasoning regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 371–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F. Y. (2004). Exploring high school students’ use of theory and evidence in an everyday context: The role of scientific thinking in environmental science decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1345–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F. Y. (2005). Student views concerning evidence and the expert in reasoning a socio‐scientific issue and personal epistemology. Educational Studies, 31(1), 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F.-Y., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). Senior high school students’ preference and reasoning modes about nuclear energy use. International Journal of Science Education, 25(2), 221–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Netherlands: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 219–239). Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: Conscience, character, and care. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 201–216). Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Shiang-Yao Liu

Authors
  1. Shiang-Yao Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shiang-Yao Liu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Science Education, Taipei, Taiwan

    Mei-Hung Chiu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Liu, SY. (2016). Teaching Environmental Issues in Science Classroom: Status, Opportunities, and Strategies. In: Chiu, MH. (eds) Science Education Research and Practices in Taiwan. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-472-6_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-472-6_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-287-471-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-287-472-6

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation