January/February 2018 – Vol. 31 No. 2

Defining Scientific Literacy for Informal Science Education

Posted: Wednesday, December 14th, 2016

by Martin Smith, Steven Worker, Andrea Ambrose, Lynn Schmitt-McQuitty, Kelley Brian, Emily Schoenfelder

Introduction

Scientific literacy is an important educational and societal goal (e.g., AAAS, 1990). Scientific literacy targets socially responsible and competent citizenry in that individuals should be able to participate in and contribute to a society (Hurd, 1998). While there is agreement that advancing scientific literacy among K-12 youth is important, measuring the construct has been problematic since there is no consensus about the meaning or the component parts of what it means to be scientifically literate (DeBoer, 2000). Although “a veritable deluge of definitions” (Roberts, 2007, p. 729) have been developed, historically, most definitions of scientific literacy have focused on generalized knowledge related to major science disciplines, principally content and processes germane to scientists (Roberts, 2007). These “within science” definitions represent a Vision I perspective of scientific literacy (Roberts, 2007). In contrast, a Vision II perspective focuses on situations positioned from the viewpoint of the citizen and concentrates on science-related issues or circumstances individuals may encounter in their lives.

Despite a lack of agreement as to a common meaning of scientific literacy, defining the construct or describing its component parts is critical for science program development (Roberts, 2007). The absence of a definition or an agreed-upon understanding makes it challenging to develop and compare programs, evaluate pedagogical strategies, and perform outcome evaluation. However, because science learning is a function of context, attempting to reach consensus on a universal definition is imprudent (Roberts, 2007). Therefore, any definition of scientific literacy “…should be conceptualized broadly enough…to pursue the goals that are most suitable for [a given] situation” (DeBoer, 2000, p. 582).

In informal science education programs – also referred to as out-of-school time or non-formal – science learning is contextualized and individualized (Falk, Storksdieck, & Dierking, 2007). Persons within a community develop “an understanding of a specific area of science because of his or her unique, personal set of needs and desires to know about this area of science” (p. 458). This is where individuals self-select activities that meet their needs and interests and where they experience excitement in learning about phenomena in the natural world. Informal science programs are guided by varying societal priorities and issues, ranging from local concerns in community-based programs to matters of significance at the state or national level among larger organizations (e.g., 4-H, Boys and Girls Clubs). Understanding this makes it clear that a Vision II perspective provides informal programs a platform to help define scientific literacy. A Vision II perspective allows the component parts that comprise scientific literacy to be specified broadly enough that they address diverse societal issues, yet provide opportunities to develop science programming that is culturally relevant and specific to individual programmatic needs.

Anchor Points of Scientific Literacy for Informal Science Education

We developed a definition of scientific literacy for the context of California 4-H Youth Development that is also relevant for other informal science education programs. Through a systematic, analytical literature review (Steward, 2004), four anchor points were identified as the component parts to define scientific literacy (See Figure 1). The anchor points include science content, scientific reasoning skills, interest and attitude, and contribution through applied participation. Framed conceptually and metaphorically, these anchor points provide guideposts for curriculum and program development, teaching, and evaluation, and are flexible enough for adaptation to local needs and situations.

Figure 1. Anchor Points of Scientific Literacy for Informal Science Education

Figure 1. Anchor Points of Scientific Literacy for Informal Science Education

Contribution to the teaching and learning of science in informal contexts

Defining scientific literacy is critical for program development and evaluation. Emphasizing a Vision II approach (Roberts, 2007) provides opportunities for the systematic advancement of organizational efforts using an asset-based approach to understanding science. This strategy emphasizes relevant science knowledge that individuals learn for different reasons, including interest, need, and curiosity. The anchor points help frame the development and adaptation of curriculum materials; shape the content and design of educator professional development; and utilize consistent outcome goals for program evaluation.

Curriculum: Curriculum development and adaption can be driven by content associated with issues and situations important to clientele and geographic regions (anchor point I), while all curriculum materials, regardless of science content area, can attend to anchor points II (scientific reasoning skills), III (interest and attitudes), and IV (contribution through applied participation).

Professional Development: Secondly, utilizing a Vision II approach to defining scientific literacy provides the opportunity to design educator professional development opportunities that incorporate specific features considered critical to advancing the knowledge and skills of science educators: emphasis on subject matter knowledge (e.g., Penuel et al., 2007), and linking professional development opportunities to broader organizational goals (e.g., Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003).

Learning Assessment: Finally, the four anchor points provide a framework for consistent, measurable learning goals that can be used for evaluation. Summative evaluation can target the four anchor points through the use of appropriate evaluation methods. Specifically, the assessment of content understanding (anchor point I) and contributions made by learners through applied participation (anchor point IV) can be designed around the specific environmental, social, and economic issues. The assessment of scientific reasoning skills (anchor point II) and interest and attitudes (anchor point III) can be measured in all content areas and will provide the opportunity for comparisons across programs.

Conclusion

The definition of scientific literacy using four anchors is adaptable for use by other informal science programs, including local and national community-based organizations. Each program addresses particular needs relative to the youth populations they serve, thus the “focus-on-situations” approach could be modified and positioned around relevant situational issues. Specifically, anchor points I (Science Content) and IV (Contribution through Applied Participation) provide for adaptability within different contexts. Individual programs could identify relevant content and associated service learning projects that provide youth opportunities for applied participation. In comparison, anchor points II (Scientific Reasoning Skills) and III (Interest and Attitudes) are broad constructs that could remain consistent across diverse subject matter areas within different contexts.

Read the full paper at California Agriculture at http://ucanr.edu/anchorpoint/ or view the poster at http://4h.ucanr.edu/files/201952.pdf.

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science: For all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

DeBoer, G. (2000).  Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform.  Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582- 601.

Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16, 455-469.

Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407–416.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Corwin Press.

Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007, December). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921-958.. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729-780).

Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729-780).

Steward, B. (2004). Writing a literature review. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67(11), 495-500.

Martin Smith (mhsmith@ucdavis.edu) is a Specialist in Cooperative Extension, and Steven Worker (smworker@ucanr.edu) is a 4-H Youth Development Advisor.

Andrea Ambrose is a Director of Development Services, and Lynn Schmitt-McQuitty is the 4-H Youth Development Advisor and County Director.

Kelley Brian is the Youth, Families and Communities Advisor, and Emily Schoenfelder is the 4-H Youth Development Advisor.

All are a part of the University of California, Agricultural and Natural Resources, 4-H Youth Development Program. In addition, Steven, Martin, and Lynn are members of CSTA.

Written by Guest Contributor

From time to time CSTA receives contributions from guest contributors. The opinions and views expressed by these contributors are not necessarily those of CSTA. By publishing these articles CSTA does not make any endorsements or statements of support of the author or their contribution, either explicit or implicit. All links to outside sources are subject to CSTA’s Disclaimer Policy: http://www.classroomscience.org/disclaimer.

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

Accelerating into NGSS – A Statewide Rollout Series Now Accepting Registrations

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

Are you feeling behind on the implementation of NGSS? Then Accelerating into NGSS – the Statewide Rollout event – is right for you!

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
If you have not experienced Phases 1-4 of the Statewide Rollout, or are feeling behind with the implementation of NGSS, the Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout will provide you with the greatest hits from Phases 1-4!

OVERVIEW
Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout is a two-day training geared toward grade K-12 academic coaches, administrators, curriculum leads, and teacher leaders. Check-in for the two-day rollout begins at 7:30 a.m., followed by a continental breakfast. Sessions run from 8:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Day One and from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Day Two.

Cost of training is $250 per attendee. Fee includes all materials, continental breakfast, and lunch on both days. It is recommended that districts send teams of four to six, which include at least one administrator. Payment can be made by check or credit card. If paying by check, registration is NOT complete until payment has been received. All payments must be received prior to the Rollout location date you are attending. Paying by credit card secures your seat at time of registration. No purchase orders accepted. No participant cancellation refunds.

For questions or more information, please contact Amy Kennedy at akennedy@sjcoe.net or (209) 468-9027.

REGISTER

http://bit.ly/ACCELERATINGINTONGSS

DATES & LOCATIONS
MARCH 28-29, 2018
Host: San Mateo County Office of Education
Location: San Mateo County Office of Education, Redwood City

APRIL 10-11, 2018
Host: Orange County Office of Education
Location: Brandman University, Irvine

MAY 1-2, 2018
Host: Tulare County Office of Education
Location: Tulare County Office of Education, Visalia

MAY 3-4, 2018
Host: San Bernardino Superintendent of Schools
Location: West End Educational Service Center, Rancho Cucamonga

MAY 7-8, 2018
Host: Sacramento County Office of Education
Location: Sacramento County Office of Education Conference Center and David P. Meaney Education Center, Mather

JUNE 14-15, 2018
Host: Imperial County Office of Education
Location: Imperial Valley College, Imperial

Presented by the California Department of Education, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association/County Offices of Education, K-12 Alliance @WestEd, California Science Project, and the California Science Teachers Association.

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

The Teaching and Learning Collaborative, Reflections from an Administrator

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

by Kelly Patchen

My name is Mrs. Kelly Patchen, and I am proud to be an elementary assistant principal working in the Tracy Unified School District (TUSD) at Louis Bohn and McKinley Elementary Schools. Each of the schools I support are Title I K-5 schools with about 450 students, a diverse student population, a high percentage of English Language Learners, and students living in poverty. We’re also lucky to be part of the CA NGSS K-8 Early Implementation Initiative with the K-12 Alliance. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by NGSS Early Implementer

NGSS Early Implementer

In 2015 CSTA began to publish a series of articles written by teachers participating in the California NGSS k-8 Early Implementation Initiative. This article was written by an educator(s) participating in the initiative. CSTA thanks them for their contributions and for sharing their experience with the science teaching community.

2018 CSTA Conference Call for Proposals

Posted: Wednesday, January 17th, 2018

CSTA is pleased to announce that we are now accepting proposals for 90-minute workshops and three- and six-hour short courses for the 2018 California Science Education Conference. Workshops and short courses make up the bulk of the content and professional learning opportunities available at the conference. In recognition of their contribution, members who present a workshop or short course receive 50% off of their registration fees. Click for more information regarding proposals, or submit one today by following the links below.

Short Course Proposal

Workshop Proposal Learn More…

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

CSTA’s New Administrator Facebook Group Page

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Holly Steele

The California Science Teachers Association’s mission is to promote high-quality science education, and one of the best practice’s we use to fulfill that mission is through the use of our Facebook group pages. CSTA hosts several closed and moderated Facebook group pages for specific grade levels, (Elementary, Middle, and High School), pages for district coaches and science education faculty, and the official CSTA Facebook page. These pages serve as an online resource for teachers and coaches to exchange teaching methods, materials, staying update on science events in California and asking questions. CSTA is happy to announce the creation of a 6th group page called, California Administrators Supporting Science. Learn More…

Written by Guest Contributor

From time to time CSTA receives contributions from guest contributors. The opinions and views expressed by these contributors are not necessarily those of CSTA. By publishing these articles CSTA does not make any endorsements or statements of support of the author or their contribution, either explicit or implicit. All links to outside sources are subject to CSTA’s Disclaimer Policy: http://www.classroomscience.org/disclaimer.

Find Your Reason to Engage

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Jill Grace

I was recently reflecting on events in the news and remembered that several years ago, National Public Radio had a story about a man named Stéphane Hessel, a World War II French resistance fighter, Nazi concentration camp survivor, and contributor to the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The story focused on a book he had published, Time for Outrage (2010).

In it, Hessel makes the argument that the worst attitude is indifference:

“Who is in charge; who are the decision makers? It’s not always easy to discern. We’re not dealing with a small elite anymore, whose actions we can clearly identify. We are dealing with a vast, interdependent world that is interconnected in unprecedented ways. But there are unbearable things all around us. You have to look for them; search carefully. Open your eyes and you will see. This is what I tell young people: If you spend a little time searching, you will find your reasons to engage. The worst attitude is indifference. ‘There’s nothing I can do; I get by’ – adopting this mindset will deprive you of one of the fundamental qualities of being human: outrage.  Our capacity for protest is indispensable, as is our freedom to engage.”

His words make me take pause when I think of the status of science in the United States. A general “mistrust” of science is increasingly pervasive, as outlined in a New Yorker article from the summer of 2016. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Jill Grace

Jill Grace

Jill Grace is a Regional Director for the K-12 Alliance and is President of CSTA.