The spatial turn: geographical approaches in the history of science

Over the past decade or so a number of historians of science and historical geographers, alert to the situated nature of scientific knowledge production and reception and to the migratory patterns of science on the move, have called for more explicit treatment of the geographies of past scientific knowledge. Closely linked to work in the sociology of scientific knowledge and science studies and connected with a heightened interest in spatiality evident across the humanities and social sciences this ‹spatial turn’ has informed a wide-ranging body of work on the history of science. This discussion essay revisits some of the theoretical props supporting this turn to space and provides a number of worked examples from the history of the life sciences that demonstrate the different ways in which the spaces of science have been comprehended.

Maria Edgeworth: Nineteenth century Irish female pioneer of science education.

Maria Edgeworth was a nineteenth century novelist, primarily remembered for her adult and children's novels. Yet her book, Letters for literary ladies discussed the importance of science education for girls and in conjunction with her father, Richard Edgeworth, she wrote several treatises on education. Their book Practical education advocates an inquiry approach to teaching science and also using scientific practices, such as observation and data collection, to examine and plan children's education. They emphasised the importance and the role of experimentation, observation and critical thinking in the development of children's knowledge, skills and attitudes towards learning. However, the history of science education has to date ignored this seminal work and Maria's contributions to women's science education.

Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge skills and attitudes framework

A recognised aim of science education is to promote critical engagement with science in the media. Evidence would suggest that this is challenging for both teachers and pupils and that at science education does not yet adequately prepare young people for this task. Furthermore, in the absence of clear guidance as to what this means and how this may be achieved it is difficult for teachers to develop approaches and resources that address the matter and that systematically promote such critical engagement within their teaching programmes. Twenty-six individuals with recognised expertise or interest in science in the media, drawn from a range of disciplines and areas of practice, constituted a specialist panel in this study. The question this research sought to answer was ‘what are the elements of knowledge, skill and attitude which underpin critical reading of science based news reports’? During in-depth individual interviews the panel were asked to explore what they considered to be essential elements of knowledge, skills and attitude which people need to enable them to respond critically to news reports with a science component. Analysis of the data revealed fourteen fundamental elements which together contribute to an individual’s capacity to engage critically with science-based news. These are classified in five categories ‘knowledge of science’, ‘knowledge of writing and language’, ‘knowledge about news, newspapers and journalism’, ‘skills’ and ‘attitudes’. Illustrative profiles of each category along with indicators of critical engagement are presented. The implications for curriculum planning and pedagogy are considered.

Children making sense of science

Abstract This study explored the effects that the incorporation of nature of science (NoS) activities in the primary science classroom had on children’s perceptions and understanding of science. We compared children’s ideas in four classes by inviting them to talk, draw and write about what science meant to them: two of the classes were taught by ‘NoS’ teachers who had completed an elective nature of science (NoS) course in the final year of their Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degree. The ‘non-NoS’ teachers who did not attend this course taught the other two classes. All four teachers had graduated from the same initial teacher education institution with similar teaching grades and all had carried out the same science methods course during their B.Ed programme. We found that children taught by the teachers who had been NoS-trained developed more elaborate notions of nature of science, as might be expected. More importantly, their reflections on science and their science lessons evidenced a more in-depth and sophisticated articulation of the scientific process in terms of scientists “trying their best” and “sometimes getting it wrong” as well as “getting different answers”. Unlike children from non-NoS classes, those who had engaged in and reflected on NoS activities talked about their own science lessons in the sense of ‘doing science’. These children also expressed more positive attitudes about their science lessons than those from non-NoS classes. We therefore suggest that there is added value in including NoS activities in the primary science curriculum in that they seem to help children make sense of science and the scientific process, which could lead to improved attitudes towards school science. We argue that as opposed to considering the relevance of school science only in terms of children’s experience, relevance should include relevance to the world of science, and NoS activities can help children to link school science to science itself.