JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 20, NO 7, PP. 711-712 (1983)

COMMENTS AND CRITICISM

SUPPOSE A WORLD WITHOUT SCIENCE EDUCATORS

JAMES H. WANDERSEE Dr. Martin Luther College, New Urn, Minnesota 56073

A recent triad of articles in JRST (Yager, 1983; Watson, 1983; Westmeyer, 1983) sought to analyze science education as a discipline. Indeed, the need to establish that our discipline is legitimate, distinctive, and useful to society has been a perennial problem.

Yager’s biological analogy comparing science education to a vital membrane between science and society is a dynamic operational definition worthy of serious consideration. If, as Thomas Mann once wrote, “A great truth is a truth whose opposite is also a great truth,” let us suppose that Yager’s membrane (and therefore, science educators) did not exist.

Who would logically analyze the structure of knowledge in science and restructure it for pedagogical use? Or would we just send students to the library to struggle with the primary science sources such as journal articles, conference papers, and monographs?

Who would teach students how to learn science, how to “crack the code” of scientific lan- guage? If, as Novak (1979) asserts, “we can use these language labels to teach the child new concept meanings. . . ,” then language is a critical factor in learning science.

Who would design learning materials that could pass the test of being both meaningful to the student and educationally excellent? Scientists are often too far removed from the miscon- ceptions and obstructions confronting the novice science student. Merely mastering scientific knowledge does not guarantee mastery of the process of educating (Gowin, 1981).

Who would present science content in a variety of ways-lectures, laboratory activities, fieldwork-in order to help the student make new connections between what he/she knows and what is to be learned?

Who would help the student integrate thinking, feeling, and acting in science classes? Who would keep the goal of a selfeducating science student at the fore?

Who would investigate how students can best learn science and suggest ways of improving science instruction based on actual research?

Obviously, scientists and society need science educators as much as science educators need them. Lewis Thomas (1974) observes that “. . . it takes a membrane to make sense out of dis- order in biology.” The membrane analogy of science education is appropriate. Imagining a world without science educators is all it takes to emphasize the contributions and potential for service our discipline offers.

References

Gowin, D. B. Educating. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981. Novak, J. D. Applying psychology and philosophy to the improvement of laboratory teach-

ing. American BioZogy Teacher, 1979,41,466-467.

@ 1983 by the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/83/070711-02$01.20

712 COMMENTS AND CRITICISM

Thomas L. The fives of a cell. New York: Viking, 1974. Yager, R. E. Editorial: defining science education as a discipline. Journal of Research in

Watson, F. G . Science education: a discipline? Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

Westmeyer, P. The nature of disciplines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1983,

Science Teaching, 1983,20,261-262.

1983,20,263-264.

20,265-210.

Manuscript accepted April 25, 1983