2. Professor Mary Ratcliffe Associate Director, National Science Learning Centre University of York, UK m.ratcliffe@slcs.ac.uk The place of socio-scientific issues in citizenship education

3. Key questions What are socio-scientific issues? Why is consideration of socio-scientific issues an important part of citizenship education? Where should they sit in the curriculum? What are the implications for professional development?

4. Socio-scientific issues Basis in science with a potentially large impact on society (e.g. global warming, genetic engineering)

5. Nature of socio-scientific issues Have a basis in science, often at frontiers of knowledge; Involve forming opinions; media-reported; May have incomplete evidence base; Can address local, national & global dimensions; Involve values and ethical reasoning May require understanding of probability and risk Ratcliffe, M. & Grace M. (2003) Science education for citizenship. Maidenhead: Open University Press

6. Citizenship Education in UK Crick Report Citizenship seen as encompassing ‘ social and moral responsibility, community involvement and political literacy’ Citizenship education now embedded in school curriculum – strong focus in humanities – far less so in science around socio-scientific issues A paradox Davies, I (2004) Science and citizenship education International Journal of Science Education 26, 14, 1751-64

7. Expectations of formal education Able to make informed decisions about issues with a scientific base? Can contribute to democratic processes from an informed perspective? Able to deal with controversy – using evidence and value judgements?

8. Some possible conceptual bases Decision-making theories normative; descriptive - emphasis on rationality, evidence (e.g. Baron & Brown, 1991) Argumentation Claims supported by warrants, rebuttals (e.g. Erduran et al, 2004) Value based reasoning Moral development, Ethical reasoning – Goals, rights, responsibilities, values clarification (e.g. Layton, 1986) Epistemological model of controversy Reasonable disagreement (role of evidence); communicative virtues (tolerance, openness); modes of thought (narrative, logico- scientific) (Levinson, 2006)

9. Cross-curricular research project Cross-curricular day on Genetic Engineering 15 year old pupils Science and Humanities teachers working together – planning within a framework Framework: Stimulus (external speaker); sessions on science of genetics, social aspects & ethics; synthesis session – Can we? Should we? Harris, R. & Ratcliffe, M. (2005) Socio-scientific issues and the quality of exploratory talk - what can be learned from schools involved in a 'collapsed day' project? The Curriculum Journal, 16 (4), 439-453.

10. 10

11. 11 You will be able to have the perfect baby You can give your baby what you never had e.g. communication skills You can stop them having genetic diseases like Cystic Fibrosis You can decide what they look like and act like You make them have perfect health e.g. hearing and eyesight

12. 12 It would be interfering with nature Some things can go wrong e.g. deformities Conflict between two partners, different ideas Engineered babies could become more brittle because something went wrong BABY

14. 14 Many people believe that cloning humans is wrong, and that scientists are just playing god. They believe that no one should have the power to build a “Designer Baby.”

15. 15 On the other hand, some people believe that scientists should be allowed to do anything in their power to eradicate genetic diseases such as Cancer and Cystic Fibrosis. I am a doctor

16. 16 Genetic diseases and disabilities could be eradicated. Babies could be engineered to have more desirable characteristics. Benefits to services who could save millions on cures for diseases. Experiments with sheep have shown that deformities are common, and even more successful clones have had many problems. Religious issues such as the right to create life are thrown into context as scientists continue to play god.

17. Outcomes of cross-curricular day Positive for pupils: The study of one interesting issue in depth. A novel stimulus raising questions External speakers, providing novelty and expertise Pupils share views, with a structure supporting critical discussion. Focus on ethics of real problems An activity centred around the construction of a tangible product, allowing all pupils to synthesise their views actively and creatively. Pupils working in teams as a feature to reinforce active learning and critical discussion

18. 18 Issues for teachers In most schools, science teachers led the science session and humanities / RE teachers led the ethical discussion Cross-curricular planning prior to the day, but sharing different teaching approaches was limited It was rare to see well-supported discussions with reflections on the process. Humanities teachers were not necessarily better at generating high level discussion

19. Implications for teachers’ professional development Abilities to deal with: Concepts of science and of scientific evidence – the nature of science Values and ethical reasoning Supporting pupils’ discussions Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004) Teaching students ‘ideas about science’: five dimensions of effective practice Science Education 88, 5, 655-682

20. 1 of 9 The National Network of Science Learning Centres North West Manchester Metropolitan University West Midlands Keele University South West @Bristol North East University of Durham National Centre University of York Yorkshire and Humber Sheffield Hallam University East Midlands University of Leicester East of England University of Hertfordshire London Institute of Education South East University of Southampton

21. National Science Learning Centre Supporting professional development across the UK

22. Professional development is designed: using what is known about the most effective professional development; to demonstrate and share effective classroom and management practice; with content from the forefront of teaching and scientific developments; with expert practitioners leading the programmes.

24. Measuring Impact Guskey(2000) 1.Participants’ reactions - their initial views of the professional development experience 2.Participants’ learning - their perceptions of what knowledge and skills they have learnt 3.Organisation support and change - involvement of colleagues in change 4.Use of new knowledge and skills - in classroom and management practice 5.Pupil learning outcomes - in gauging effects on pupils. Evidence shows that there is impact at each of these levels.

25. Recording progress Participants use an impact toolkit to record: 1 - their initial expectations of the professional development; 2 - their action plan from collaborative sessions – what they will do to improve practice; 3 - the impact of the professional development – a reflective record of the outcomes of their action plan. This record is validated by their line manager. 464 records analysed

26. Date 00.00.00 Running header of the presentation

27. Date 00.00.00 Running header of the presentation

28. Date 00.00.00 Running header of the presentation

29. Date 00.00.00 Running header of the presentation

30. Future evaluation 1.Exploration of any impact of teachers’ enhanced skills/knowledge, post CPD, on pupils’ learning of specific scientific concepts 2. Examination of the short- and medium-term actions of teachers resulting from participation in specific SLC programmes – case studies. 3. Longitudinal study of views of professional development – participants on summer schools and comparative cohort

31. References Baron, J. & Brown, R.V. (1991) Teaching Decision-making to adolescents. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004) TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern in studying science discourse Science Education 88(6), 915-933 Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, Ca., Corwin Press Layton, D (1986) Revaluing science education, in P. Tomlinson & M Quinton (eds) Values Across the Curriculum. London: Falmer Press Levinson, R (2006) Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socio-scientific issues International Journal of Science Education 28 (10) 1201-1224

32. Contact details m.ratcliffe@slcs.ac.uk www.slcs.ac.uk