Teacher Professional Development Necessary for Science Education Reforms

“I believe that too often we present science as a static body of knowledge; science is fundamentally a mode of inquiry for exploring the universe.” -- Rep. Vern Ehlers

At a September 24 House Science Committee hearing on science and math education, Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Vern Ehlers (R-MI.) Ehlers, the only PhD physicist serving in Congress, was asked earlier this year by Sensenbrenner and House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) to lead a study into forging a new long-term congressional science and technology policy, incorporating education.

The panel of witnesses, all educators, repeatedly emphasized the importance of the professional development of teachers to any attempts at science education reform. They also discussed the value of inquiry-based learning, and how the science community could contribute to improving science education. Bruce Alberts, President of the National Academy of Sciences, described the Academy’s project to develop National Science Education Standards. These voluntary standards, drafted with input from educators and scientists around the country, were released in 1996 (see FYI #4 , 1996.) Ultimately, he declared, “standards-based reforms will take hold only when the nation’s teachers...are effectively enacting the ideas” embodied in the standards.

“Teachers are the key to any changes in education,” agreed Gerald Wheeler, Director of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA.) He cited three items that NSTA members had identified as barriers to reform: lack of time for teachers to plan effective use of the standards; isolation from the plans and ideas of other teachers; and lack of resources and professional development opportunities that would help them implement the standards. Gail Burrill, President of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, noted that a recent study showed that many math teachers had not heard of the national mathematics standards, and others who thought they were familiar with the standards were not implementing them properly.

Science Committee Ranking Minority Member George Brown (D-CA) asked how a single set of standards could apply to students of varying abilities. Alberts stressed that the standards were intended to be minimal, and address what every student should know. He added that, in his experience, hands-on learning gave an opportunity for success to students who probably would not do well in a lecture-oriented class. If inquiry was done properly, Wheeler said, “something magical happens,” causing many biases and equity concerns to disappear.

Ehlers asked about efforts to involve local scientists in education reform. Alberts said NAS had a project to encourage scientists to be available as resources for teachers, and to speak to classes. Wheeler said his experiences with scientists in the classroom had proven less successful than he would have wished; he and Burrill both suggested that scientists could volunteer to answer questions and provide information to students and teachers via telecommunications.

Ehlers, himself a science educator for 22 years, plans additional hearings on various aspects of science policy.