QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

MODERN DEVELOPMENTS IN SCIENCE EDUCATION

Saouma BouJaoude
Science and Math Education Center, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

Keywords: Teaching methods, concept maps, analogies, summaries, answering

questions, inquiry, conceptual change, environmental issues, ICT, teacher education,
teaching, learning, students’ conceptions, learning, classroom contexts, learner
characteristics, goals and policy, curriculum, evaluation, assessment, textbooks, cultural
issues, social issues, gender issue, history, philosophy, epistemology, nature of science,
educational technology, informal learning.

Contents

1. Introduction

S
TE S
2. Approaches to Teaching Science

R
AP LS
3. Research in Science Education 2008-2011
4. Results and Discussion of Literature Review
5. Summaries of Findings of Research Categories
C EO
6. Conclusions
Acknowledgements
Bibliography

Summary
E –
H

Research has determined that science education is presently in crisis worldwide. There
PL O

is evidence that science education at all educational levels is not preparing students to
live and work in the science and technology rich environment of the twenty-first
M SC

century. Moreover, interest in and attitude toward science is declining in many

developed countries. These failings are blamed on the unacceptable quality of teaching.
Against this backdrop of alarming news, what are the teaching approaches that are
SA NE

recommended to improve the quality of science education and what does research say
about the status of science education worldwide. Consequently, the purpose of this
chapter is to summarize the major trends in promising approaches to teach science,
review the research in science education published between 2008 and 2011 in two
U

prominent science education journals, namely Journal of Research in Science Teaching

and International Journal of Science Education, and provide conclusions regarding the
improvement of science.

1. Introduction

In a 2006 commentary on the status of science education in the United States, the Nobel
prize winner Carl Wieman and his colleague Katherine Perkins (Wieman & Perkins,
2006) asserted that “there is considerable evidence that science classes from elementary
school through to university are generally failing to provide most students with a
thorough understanding of science that will allow them to live and work successfully in
the twenty-first century. Sadly, these classes are also frequently suppressing whatever
interest students may have in the subject” (p. 290). Similarly, a European Commission’s
report entitled “Science Education Now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe”

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

(2007) affirmed that many studies have identified an alarming decline in European
young people’s interest in science and blamed this decline on the way science is taught
in schools. Concurrently, research has shown that citizens of developing countries lack
the necessary knowledge and skills in science and technology to function in the modern
world (Ogawa 1998). What makes the above findings worrying is that they have
emerged at a time when education, political, economic, and community leaders
worldwide have agreed that science and technology are the catalysts for change in
modern society and when science is needed by all citizens to make informed decisions
regarding science-related scientific issues such as global warming and the green house
effect.
Against this backdrop of alarming news, what are the teaching approaches that are
recommended to improve the quality of science education and what does research say
about the status of science education worldwide. Consequently, the purpose of this
chapter is to summarize the major trends in promising approaches to teach science,

S
TE S
review the research in science education published between 2008 and 2011 in two
prominent science education journals, namely Journal of Research in Science Teaching

R
AP LS
and International Journal of Science Education, and provide conclusions regarding
factors that will lead to the improvement of science learning.
C EO
2. Approaches to Teaching Science

Advances in developmental psychology and cognitive science research have

revolutionized the way educators think about teaching and learning science. Presently,
science educators realize that students’ brains are not empty vessels waiting to be filled
E –
H

with knowledge transmitted by the teacher. Rather, they believe that most people learn
best through personal experience and by relating new information to what they already
PL O

know. They also understand that learners need to construct their own scientific
M SC

knowledge by actively taking control of their learning. Specially, learners have to be

able to identify and analyze problems, explore and test solutions in a variety of in-
school and out-of school situations, conduct their own investigations, analyze and
communicate their findings, and reflect on their learning in their attempts to rethink
SA NE

their explanations and retry experiments and re-evaluate problem solutions.

Furthermore, students need to acquire the scientific and technological knowledge and
develop the skills that will permit them to be productive and creative members of
U

society and to develop attitudes that will help them to use their knowledge and skills
responsibly when taking every day and professional decisions. They must develop skills
that are particularly important for effective functioning in the ever-changing world of
work in which the traditional bases of economic competition continue to change
(Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2011). This requires that students develop a strong
conceptual base and essential problem solving and critical thinking skills that they can
apply in a variety of situations; knowledge and skills that should be the focal points of
teaching and learning science in the classrooms of the twenty first century (Resnick,
1999).
To be effective and efficient citizens of the scientific and technological world in which
we presently live and in order not to be alienated, overwhelmed, and demoralized by the
changing world, it is not sufficient for students to remember information in the same
way it was presented in class; that is to learn by rote. Instead, they need to be able to use
what they have learned in novel situations to answer new questions, solve new

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

problems, relate what they have learned to everyday life, and facilitate learning new
subject matter; that is, to learn meaningfully (Mayer, 2002). Rote learning is described
as learning new information through the use of memorization. It suggests the absence of
connections between new and previously learned information. Because new information
is not connected to existing concepts in the learner’s mind, it is easily forgotten
(Anderson & Ausubel, 1966). In contrast, meaningful learning, described by Ausubel
(1968) as the establishment of non-arbitrary relations among concepts in the learner’s
mind, is the fundamental process that underlies the acquisition of useful information and
the construction of new knowledge (Novak, 1990). BouJaoude (1992) argued that
students who are able to establish connections among concepts and other forms of
knowledge are more likely to understand and remember what they learn. Also, they
might be able to address misunderstandings and to solve problems through the use of
the relations they construct between new knowledge and relevant existing concepts.
There are a variety of ways by which students can accomplish meaningful learning. In

S
TE S
the following the author describes a number of strategies that can be used for
meaningful learning including concept mapping, analogies, summaries and answering

R
AP LS
questions, inquiry strategies, and conceptual change strategies, strategies to address
environmental issues, and using ICT in teaching and learning.
C EO
2.1. Concept Maps

One of the teaching/learning strategies that have been shown to enhance learners’
science achievement and meaningful understanding is concept mapping. Concept
mapping has been used in science education in a variety of ways. Concept maps, for
E –
H

example, can play a significant role in curriculum development, learning, and teaching
in many disciplines (Novak, 1998). They are useful in science curriculum planning for
PL O

separating significant from trivial content (Starr & Krajcik, 1990). Furthermore, concept
M SC

maps have been used as assessment tools because they measure dimensions different
from those revealed by traditionally used assessment instruments (Markham, Mintzes,
& Jones, 1994). Finally, concept maps have been used in instruction in a variety of
contexts. Each context reflects an alternative theory of knowledge acquisition. On the
SA NE

one hand, the rationalist theory of learning suggests that subject matter has an inherent
structure that should be conveyed to learners. In this context, a concept map should be
evaluated by relating it to an ideal map, teacher-constructed map, or an expert concept
U

map. Alternatively, the constructivist theory of learning underscores the uniqueness of

each individual’s concept map representation with respect to organization of concepts
and their construction (Beyerebach & Smith, 1990) leading to a different approach to
assessing these maps and a more student-centered instructional approach which allows
students to actively construct their own knowledge with teacher guidance. Still, both
theories concur that meaningful learning occurs when concepts are organized in an
individual’s cognitive structure.

2.2. Analogies, Summaries and Answering Questions

Generative learning is another approach to involve students in meaningful learning.

When using generative learning strategies students are expected to actively generate the
links between the new information and prior knowledge. A generative learning strategy
is any strategy that involves students actively and meaningfully in the learning process.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

Three generative learning strategies are instructional analogies, summarization, and

asking questions. Instructional analogies are instances where a less familiar domain is
made understandable by referring to similarity relations with a more meaningful
domain. They provide a bridge between what is known and what is less known (Dagher,
1995). Analogies help in achieving conceptual change and problem solving,
constructing explanations, and building arguments (Gentner, & Holyoak, 1997), and in
concept learning (Cosgrove, 1995). Summaries are brief statement representing the
condensation of information representing the basic and central ideas of a discourse
(Friend, 2002). Students’ generation of summarizing sentences increases the generative
processing in memory. The summary writer must ensure that the summary is true to the
original meaning and decide what to include, what to eliminate, and how to reorganize
information. Finally, educators think that engaging students in answering thought-
provoking questions or in generating them will help them gain the knowledge and skills
necessary for managing their own learning (Chin, Brown, & Bruce, 2002; Chin & Chia,
2004)

S
TE S
R
2.3. Inquiry Strategies

AP LS
Science has a unique nature and specific teaching strategies might be needed to help
students to understand the content, methods, and nature of science. Contemporary
C EO
conceptions of the nature of science suggest that scientific knowledge is empirically
based, tentative, and value laden. Moreover, scientific knowledge is inferential, creative,
and socially and culturally embedded. The fact that science is by nature empirical,
tentative, value laden and socially embedded necessitates emphasizing meaningful
E –

learning, because, when students learn science by rote they develop unrealistic and
H

unacceptable notions of the nature of science as a collection of disconnected facts.

PL O

There are different strategies by which teachers can provide the context within which
students can learn science meaningfully while concurrently understanding the nature of
M SC

science. According to the Wisconsin State Department of Public Instruction (2003)

these strategies include: Establishing context, seeking to establish personal relevance,
making emotional connections, relating learning to the real world, establishing patterns,
SA NE

thinking of the big picture, allowing for processing time, and promoting in-depth
interdisciplinary inquiry.
Science educators have developed many student-centered strategies to enhance
U

meaningful learning and help students understand the nature of science. One of the
characteristics of these strategies is that they are both hands-on and minds-on, a
characteristic that allows students to manipulate objects and experience events while at
the same time engaging their minds in thing about science and reflecting on their
experiences. Two of these strategies, general inquiry and problem-based learning are
described in the following.
Inquiry is a teaching strategy that aims to teach students about conducting investigations
and using and assessing evidence in order to answer questions or solve problems.
Scientific inquiry, specifically, refers to the varied ways by which students emulate
scientists by studying the natural world and proposing explanations based on the
evidence derived from their work. Inquiry also refers to the activities of students in
which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas as well as an
understanding of how scientists study the natural world. Inquiry teaching aims to
develop students’ higher order and critical thinking skills and in-depth and meaningful

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

understanding of content. Inquiry appears as a major component of standards and

curricula around the world (e.g. National Research Council [NRC], 1996; National
Audit Office [NAO], 2006) and has been advocated as the teaching strategy of choice
by the European Commission (2007).
When teaching by inquiry, teachers assume the role of a facilitator of the inquiry
process; they plan the different aspects of the lessons and guide students in the
investigations. Moreover, they insure that students plan and implement their
investigations carefully; taking their time to identify multiple sources of data and to
think through alternative sources of evidence and alternative solutions. Finally, teachers
encourage students to reflect on the various aspects of the investigation to consolidate
gains and use what they have learned in novel situations. According to Ayoubi and
BouJaoude (2005) good science teaching has been linked to teaching by inquiry because
this teaching strategy involves a) putting emphasis on both process and content, thus
allowing students to develop profound understandings of science content as well as how

S
TE S
scientists work; b) relating content to students’ experiences and prior knowledge; c)
encouraging students to be curious about the world around them, d) providing

R
AP LS
opportunities for integration across different content areas; e) developing students’
communicating skills through sharing of thoughts and collaborative work; and f)
preparing students to be citizen who take informed decisions about science related
C EO
issues.
The extent of teacher guidance during inquiry depends on the learners’ cognitive level
and the level of sophistication in conducting investigations. Herron (1971) developed a
scale that provides teachers with guidelines for using and assessing inquiry in the
E –

classroom (Figure 1). Level 0 is usually used with students who are new to inquiry.
H

Thus they are given the problem, the procedure to follow as well as the solution or
PL O

expected answer. Level 1 is used with students who are a little more advanced, thus they
get the problems and procedure and are required to reach the solution themselves. In
M SC

level 2, the students are only given the problem and are required to develop the
procedure and reach the solution. In level 3, students come up with their own problem,
develop their own procedure, and reach their own solution. This is open inquiry that
SA NE

may be very useful if students are working on a Science Fair project.

Level Problem Procedure Solution

U

0 X X X

1 X X

2 X

Note: An "x" indicates that students are provided with the information or steps necessary to
complete the designated component.

Figure 1. Herron scale: evaluating the level of inquiry

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

While inquiry in science was the focus of the science education standards in the 20th
century, the reformulation of these standards in the 21st century emphasizes the inter-
relationships of science, technology, engineering and math in what is now known as
STEM education which focuses on scientific inquiry and engineering design (National
Research Council [NRC], 2011a). For example, the document entitled “A Framework
for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas” suggests
that in the United States all students should have “some appreciation of the beauty and
wonder of science; possess sufficient knowledge of science and engineering to engage
in public discussions on related issues; are careful consumers of scientific and
technological information related to their everyday lives; are able to continue to learn
about science outside school; and have the skills to enter careers of their choice,
including (but not limited to) careers in science, engineering, and technology.” (NRC,
2011a, p. ES 1).
A variety of specific teaching strategies have been advocated to involve students in

S
TE S
inquiry leaning. These include problem-based learning, Predict, Observe Explain
(POE), the learning cycle, and the 5-E learning cycle. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is

R
AP LS
a form of experiential learning that involves students in posing real-world problems,
preferably from the students’ environment, and using resources, under the guidance of
the teacher, to resolve the problems while at the same time developing content
C EO
knowledge and problem solving skills associated with the problem. The POE’s three
steps allow students to predict what might happen if an event were to take place,
observe what actually happens, then amend their explanations if what they had
predicted contradicts what they observed or add to their original explanations to account
E –

for the observations. The learning cycle involves three steps and requires students to
H

explore, explain, then apply, while the 5-E model – which is an extension of the
PL O

learning cycle – involves engaging students in an activity, allowing them to explore the
problem identified in the activity, explain the results of their exploration, extend their
M SC

knowledge, and finally evaluate their work.

2.4. Conceptual Change Strategies

SA NE

As indicated above science educators realize that students’ brains are not empty vessels
waiting to be filled with knowledge transmitted by the teacher. Rather students come to
the classroom with preconceived notions and understandings that they have developed
U

from their experiences. These preconceived notions are sometimes at variance with
accepted scientific knowledge and are called alternative conceptions (or
misconceptions). The existence of misconceptions has been documented in hundreds of
research studies worldwide. The existence of alternative conceptions necessitates the
use of conceptual change strategies that address them directly because they have been
resistant to change by ordinary teaching methods.
One of the first models of conceptual change was developed by Posner, Strike, Hewson,
& Gertzog (1982). This model posits that there are four conditions for conceptual
change to succeed: there should be dissatisfaction with existing concepts and new
concepts should be intelligible, plausible and fruitful. This model was however
criticized because it is overly rational and because it neglects motivational factors such
as students’ goals, values, self efficacy beliefs, and control beliefs (Treagust & Duit,
2008). Others have criticized this model because of its lack of emphasis on context as a
mediator of conceptual change (Treagust & Duit, 2008). Another popular model of

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

conceptual change was developed by Driver and Scanlon (1989). This model includes
five steps: 1) Orientation, during which students are introduced to the task, 2) elicitation
of students’ ideas, 3) restructuring of ideas during which students are involved in a
variety of activities to restructure their ideas, including the exposure to cognitive
conflict among other activities, 4) application of the new ideas in new situations, and 5)
review change of ideas by comparing the initial ideas to the new ones.
It is worth noting that cognitive conflict (or the use of discrepant events) has played an
important role in conceptual change models with research. However, the use of
cognitive conflict has also been criticized because it does not always lead to successful
and permanent conceptual change (Treagust & Duit, 2008). In conclusion, Treagust and
Duit (2008) assert that multi-dimensional conceptual change perspectives that consider
both cognitive and affective outcomes of learning as conceptual change seem to be
more effective than ones that do not consider these factors even though there have not
been meta-analytical studies that confirm this conclusion.

S
TE S
2.5. Strategies to Address Environmental Issues

R
AP LS
Students living in the 21st century will eventually have to participate in decision-making
regarding science-related issues that are environmental or controversial socio-scientific
C EO
in nature. Preparation for such participation can be accomplished by adopting a science-
technology-society-environment approach (STSE).

The aims of including STSE issues in the teaching of science are helping students to
E –

learn and understand science content and at the same time make informed decisions
H

about scientifically-based environmental issues. STSE can be incorporated in the

PL O

science curriculum by using a variety of strategies that include the study of products and
systems, issues awareness, moral development, issues investigation and action learning.
M SC

While action learning is the ultimate aim of using STSE approaches, students need to
develop the skills to investigate issues in preparation for decision making and action
learning.
SA NE

These skills include identifying and clarifying the basic question to be answered,
gathering data about the issue under study, evaluating the data, proposing tentative
U

solutions, and determining the acceptability of the solution in the context where it is
being considered.
Two strategies that can be used to investigate issues are the Futures Wheel (BouJaoude,
2000) and the Issues Analysis Technique. The futures wheel is a teaching technique that
encourages students to think creatively in exploring the implications of a particular issue
or event.

There are no right answers when completing a futures wheel and no decision-making
occurs. Rather, it is used to analyze issues in preparation for decision-making. When
developing a Futures Wheel students look at an event, experience or decision and ask
"What might happen if...?" and construct a graphic representation of the direct and
indirect effects of the issue or event that is being analyzed. Similarly, the issues analysis

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

technique involves students in analyzing issues by identifying the Problem, the issue,
the players who have a role in the issue, the positions of the players concerning the
issue, the beliefs held by the players, and the values on which the beliefs are based.
Based on this analysis, various strategies to resolve the issue are identified.
-
-
-

TO ACCESS ALL THE 41 PAGES OF THIS CHAPTER,

Visit: http://www.eolss.net/Eolss-sampleAllChapter.aspx

Bibliography

S
TE S
Abel, S.K. & Lederman, N.G. (2007). Handbook of research in science education. New Jersey: Erlbaum.

R
AP LS
[A comprehensive critical review of science education research].
Anderson, R., & Ausubel, D. (1966). Readings in the psychology of cognition. New York: Holt. Rinehart
& Winston. [A seminal document on the on the merging field of cognitive psychology and its relationship
C EO
to reading].
Ayoubi, Z., & BouJaoude, S. (2005). Inquiry in science teaching. Beirut, Lebanon: Lebanese Association
for Educational Studies (in Arabic). [A primer for teachers on inquiry in science. Includes a variety of
inquiry activities].
E –

Beyerebach, B. & Smith, J. (1990). Using a computerized concept mapping program to assess preservice
H

teachers’ thinking about effective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 961-971.
[Investigates the effect of using computerized concept maps to assess preservice teachers concepts of
PL O

teaching].
M SC

BouJaoude, S. (1992). The relationship between students’ learning strategies and the change in their
misunderstandings during a high school chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29,
687-699. [This paper investigates the ability of students to address their own misunderstandings in
chemistry].
SA NE

BouJaoude, S. (2000). What might happen if . . .?: Students use the futures wheel to analyze science-
related social issues. The Science Teacher, 67 (4), pp. 45-47. [Describes the use of one type of graphic
organizer, the futures wheel, in teaching socio-scientific issues].
U

BouJaoude, S., & Jurdak, M. (2010). Integrating physics and math through microcomputer based
laboratories (MBL): Effects on discourse type, quality, and mathematization. International Journal of
Science and Mathematics E duc a tion. 8 (6), 1119-1047. [This is a mixed-methods research study that
attempts to investigate the effect of using micro-computer based technologies in teaching and learning].
Chin, C. & Chia, L (2004). Problem-based learning: Using students' questions to drive knowledge
construction, Science Education, 88, 707-727. [This paper addresses issues related to problem-based
learning as one student-centered teaching strategy].
Chin, C., Brown, D. &Bruce, B. (2002).Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in
science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 521-49. [Investigates the use of questions as
generative tools in learning]
Dagher, Z. (1995). Analysis of analogies used by science teachers. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32, 259-270. [The author of this paper attempts to understand the role analogies play in natural
classroom settings].

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

Driver, R. & Scanlon, E. (1989). Conceptual change in science: A research programme. Journal of
computer assisted learning, 5, 25-36. [Explains the nature of conceptual change in science and its
importance as a vehicle for knowledge production].
European Commission (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe.
Retrieved from http : / / ec . europa. eu /r esearch / science- s ociety / document_ l ibrary / pdf_06 / report-
rocard - on- s cienc e -education_ en . pdf [A comprehensive treatment of the role of new findings from
current educational research in improving the quality of science learning and teaching].
Friend, R. (2002, April). Summing it up. Science Teacher, 69, 40-43. [Introduces a method of preparing
complete laboratory reports].
Gentner, D. & Holyoak, K. (1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy. American Psychologist, 52, 32-
34. [Examines how people use analogies to solve preexisting problems].
Herron, M.D. (1971). The nature of scientific inquiry. School Review, 79 (2), 171 – 212. [This paper
characterizes the different types of inquiry starting from guided to open inquiry].
Jenkins, E.W. (2000). Research in science education: Time for a health check? Studies in Science
Education, 35, 1-26. [The paper reviews the state of science education as a field of research and offers a

S
TE S
personal commentary on the range, quality, purpose and usefulness of this research]

R
Lee, M.H., Wu, Y.T. & Tsai, C.C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A

AP LS
content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15),
1999-2020. [Based on an earlier article -- Tsai, C.-C., & Wen, L.M.C. (2005).-- this paper analyzes
science education research using a framework developed for the purposes of the study].
C EO
Markham, K. M., Mintzes, J. J., & Jones, M. G. (1994). The concept map as a research and evaluation
tool: Further evidence of validity. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 31(1), 91-101. [This paper
provides evidence for the validity of concept maps as research and assessment tools and suggests that it
should lead to deeper level understanding and more meaningful learning].
E –

Mayer, R. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into practice, 41, 226-232. [Characterizes
H

rote and meaningful learning and examines how teaching and assessing can be broadened beyond an
exclusive focus on the cognitive process of remembering].
PL O

NAO. (2006). Improving school performance: A guide for school governors. Retrieved August 11, 2007,
M SC

from http://www.governornet.co.uk/linkAttachments/ACFFBDF.pdf [A document that provides practical

recommendations for improving the quality of teaching and learning].
Novak, J. (1990). Concept maps and Vee diagrams: two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful
learning. Instructional science, 19, 29-52. [This paper describes concept mapping and Vee diagramming,
SA NE

and reports on research utilizing these tools from grades one through university].
Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in
schools and corporations. New Jersey: Erlbaum. [This book provides a comprehensive theoretical and
practical treatment of concept maps as tool to facilitate meaningful learning].
U

NRC (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [This
book includes the national science education standards of the USA].
NRC (2011a). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core
ideas. Retrieved from http : / / www . nap . edu / catalog . php ? record _ id=13165. [This document
presents the most recent theoretical framework and elements of the National Science Education Standards
of the USA].
NRC (2011b). Learning science through computer games and simulations. Retrieved from http : / / www
. nap . edu / catalog . php ? record_i d = 13078. [This document reviews research on learning science
through interaction with digital simulations and games and discusses the potential of digital games and
simulations to contribute to learning science in and out of schools].
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2011). Framework for 21st Century Learning. Retrieved from http: / /
w w w .p 2 1. org / overview / skills- f ra mework. [The documents on this website elucidate the
characteristics of a success 21st century education for all students].

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of scientific
conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227. [This paper
presents the first attempt at developing a theory of conceptual change in science. It also illustrates the
model by using a research study conducted by the authors].
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from http : / / w w w. marcprensky .
com / writing / Prensky % 20- % 20 Digita l% 20Natives, % 20Digita l% 20Immigrants % 2 0-%20 Part1
. p df. [This article typifies the nature of students who were born and are living in the digital age and
differentiates them from those born earlier and discusses the educational implications of this situation].
Resnick, L. (1999, June 16). Making America smarter: A century's assumptions about innate ability give
way to a belief in the power of effort. Education Week, 18, 38-40. [This article explains the nine
principles of teaching in the 21st century based on research in cognitive psychology and education].
Songer, N.B. (2007). Digital resources versus cognitive tools: A discussion of learning science with
technology. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 471-491).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [This chapter reviews research on the effectiveness of computer use in schools,
provides reasons for the lack of success of this use, and proposes a new system of looking and technology
and its use in the classroom].

S
TE S
Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (1990). Concept mapping as a heuristic for science curriculum development:

R
towards improvement in process and product. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 987-1000.

AP LS
[This paper investigates concept mapping as a tool for curriculum development in science].
Shulman, L. S. 1987. Knowledge and teaching foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education
Review, 57, 1-22. [This paper investigates the nature of knowledge needed for teaching and introduces the
C EO
concept of pedagogical content knowledge].
Treagust, D. & Duit, R. (2008). Conceptual change: A discussion of theoretical, methodological and
practical challenges for science education. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 3, 297-328. [This paper
presents a comprehensive and critical review of the theories of conceptual change and presents ways by
E –

which conceptual change research can be used to transform teaching and learning].
H

Tsai, C.-C., & Wen, L.M.C. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: A
PL O

content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3–
14. [This paper analyzes science education research using a framework developed for the purposes of the
M SC

study].
White, B. (1998). Computer micro-worlds and scientific inquiry: An alternative approach to science
education. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (eds.), International handbook of science education, (pp. 295-
315). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer. [This paper investigates the problems of top-down and bottom
SA NE

up approaches to inquiry and suggests a new middle-out approach].

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (2003). Planning a connected curriculum. Milwaukee, WI:
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 479268). [This
is a practical guide for curriculum development].
U

Wittrock, M. (1990). Generative process of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24, 345- 376.
[Explains the role of the generative learning model in explaining the nature of understanding].

Biographical Sketch

Saouma BouJaoude graduated from the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA in 1988 with a
doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction with emphasis on science education. From 1988 to 1993 he was
assistant professor of science education at the Department of Science Teaching, Syracuse University,
Syracuse, New York, USA. In 1993 he joined the American University of Beirut (AUB). He served as
Director of the Science and Math Education Center (SMEC) (1994-2003), Chair of the Department of
Education (2003-2003-2009), and is presently director of SMEC and the Center of Teaching and
Learning. Dr. BouJaoude has published numerous research articles in international journals such as the
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Science Education, International Journal of Science Education,
Journal of Science Teacher Education, the Science Teacher, and School Science Review, among others.
In addition, he has written chapters in edited books in English and Arabic and has been an active

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)

QUALITY OF HUMAN RESOURCES: EDUCATION – Modern Developments in Science Education – Saouma BouJaoude

presenter at local, regional and international education and science education conferences. Dr. BouJaoude
is member of several international science education research associations and has served as the
International Coordinator and a member of the Executive Board of National Association for Research in
Science Teaching. Presently he serves on the editorial boards a number of science education journals and
is a reviewer for others. In 2009 he was appointed as a member of the Executive Committee of Supreme
Education Council of the State Qatar.

S
TE S
R
AP LS
C EO
E –
H
PL O
M SC
SA NE
U

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)