DOCONENT RESUME ED 106 105 SE 018 837 AUTHOR Ring, Donald G. TITLE Science Curriculum Format. INSTITUTION Pount Prospect Township High School District 214, Ill. PUB DATE Jan. 75 NOTE 166p.; Not available in hard copy due to quality of print on colored pages -- AVAILABLE FROMERIC/SNEAC, The Ohio State University, 400 Lincoln Tower, Columbus, Ohio 43210 (on loan) EDRS PRICE BF-SO.76 HC Not Available from EDRS. PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Conceptual Schemes; Curriculun Enrichnent; *Curriculum Guides; *Interdisciplinary Approach; Models; *Science Curriculum; Science Edication; Secondary Education; *Secondary School Science ABSTRACT This document presents.a curriculum base for a particular school system comprised of eight high schools. Its purpose is to provide a conceptual base which encourages flexibility and diversity. The format is based on the conceptual schemes identified in the NSTA publication, Theory Into Action. Included in the publication is the philosophy of the science curriculum for this school district as well as a detailed description of the minimun required experiences in science to be fulfilled by students wishing to graduate from schools within the prescribed. district. Conceptual schemes are presented in the content of biological sciences, physical science, earth and space science, chemistry, and physics. (Author/11M , t, . te , i' " ' a()Wye& -goo i tutclawl-ao-sw $ Ira'00guat,.wzo,a. t z,.w ww Giv2w.4ww.oizx SI-Orl:g!Ilw.ig-.0,2-Mi° zwotlwrwcz 4 , w E0-42g2zig 242 12gt428G2 2: ,fintek. o 80:tot.,:i 2 wsow, tutufZ22z,_wo .0.4..W k, I ..' C . -4$ k -or; ow- 40 7 "0:,447', ' f kt 50190103 4 e If o SS' ,="- TABLE OF-CONTENTS PAGE I. Introduction 2 II. Philosophy of Science Curriculum in District 214 III. Minimum Rbquired Experiences in Science for Students Graduating from District 214 IV. Conceptual Schemes 11 a) Level I - NSTA 12 b) Level II - Conceptual Schemes in the contexts of the following: 1) Biological. Science 12 2) Physical Science 13 3) Earth and Space Science 13 4) Chemistry 14 5) Physics 15 c) Level III - Course Concepts forthe following: 1) Biology,Exploratory 17 2) Biology,General 19 3) Biology,Advanced (Botany, Zoology, Human Physiology,etc.) 25 4) PhysicalStience, Exploratory 43 S) PhysicalScience, General 46 6) PhysicalScience, Chelistry and Physics 49 7) PhysicalScience, Earth 52 8) PhysicalScience, Space 56 9) PhysicalScience, Ocean -59 10) Chemistry 61 11) Physics 66 AO Level IV - Course Concepts for the following: 1) Biology, Exploratory 2) Biology, General (3 sets) 3) Physical Science, Exploratory 4) Physical Science, General. 5) Phyiical Science, Chemistry and Physics 6) Chemistry-(2 sets) 7) Physics V. Appendix 1) NSTA Conceptual Schemes 2) NSTA Process Schemes 3) Report of 1972 Conference of Science Chairmen 4) Original Workshop Participants 5) Evaluation Instrument 3 -2- INTRODUCTION TO THE 2ND EDITION OF THE SCIENCE CURRICULUM! FORMAT In-September 1972,1972, the science teachers in District 214 were given acopy of the "Science Curriculum Format."The purpose of that documentwas to provide each .teacher with a set of conceptual, processes and meanings of sciencestatements which would help him to identify the learning experiencesa student should have While taking a science course in District 214. A second purpose was to provide some back-'- ground to help students and teachers to understand the interdisciplinarynature of science and its role in describing reality. The third purpose of the effort was to provide a curriculum model which would be useful in coordinating the scienceprogram among the eight high schools in the District. Of primary interest in this regard was the ability of the model to generate and evaluate new courses and to communicate the changes-to all of the buildings. The "Curriculum Format=' was not intended to provide a description of a single district science curriculum,Its fourth purpose was therefore to provide a curriculum basis which would encourage flexibility-be- tween schools by identifying a common conceptual, activity and philosOphical base rather than course titles and topics. Since the first Format was distributedmany revisions have been written which clarify original statements and describe changes made since its. inception. If the Format is to remain valid and useful, it must be able to change with thenew insights we have gained. This 2nd edition is written to identify those changes to respond to the weaknesses apparent in the 1st document. The primary differences in the District 214 science curriculum since 1972have been to develop more course alternatives for students and to place greater emphasis on "phenomenological" or "reality" science. These changes have resulted in new courses such as exploratory earth science, horticulture and the separation of botany and zoology into smaller courses. The increased emphasis on health education in bi- 'ology is a further example of the change towardmore realistic science. Another significant change in this edition of the Format has been the identification of the "Basic.Minimum Experiences Required of All Students" (section IV). Rather than stating our requirements in terms of 2 years of courses in biological and physical sciencewe have identified the basic experiences which should be required of all students.The effect has been to allow the students more alternatives such a earth scienceor space science as electives in fulfilling the 2 year science requirement. Finally, many of the statements in the 1st edition have been revised to specify the expected learning outcomes_ rather than the activity the student will dothe achieve that outcome. With the exception of the statements on required experiences the form of the Science Curriculum Format has hot changed from its original basic model.The separa- tions into the areas of subject matter concepts,process skills and meanings or social relevance remain. The concepts are still heirarchically organized into the 4 levels of specificity. This revision includes examples of level 4 or student objectives for each of the areas. An extensive evaluatiol of the Format is now being conducted. A copy of the evaluation instrument is included in the appendix. A primary interest of this evaluation will be to determine the relevance of the Format to teachers.Although this is not the only reason for writing the Format, the results 'should be very useful in developing new changes. -3- It is important to remind the reader that this document is not. intended to bea description of the instructional techniques we use in the classroom. Although hopefully the Format will encourage individualized instruction, it does not describe the relationship which should be established between student and teacher. Neither are new teaching techniques such as audio-tutorial instruction, use of resource rooms or behavior modifications identified. PrObably the most significant changes which are occuring in science classrooms in District 214 are instructional rather than curricular. The omission of these changes in this document does not mean that they are not important or exciting. Many individuals have contributed to the preparation of the original version and this revision of the Science Format. Since most of the work Itad done at workshops, the names of contributors are generally listed with the section produced. The science chairmen have had primary input and review of the document. Mr. Sam pacific°, Administrative Intern from VILaiversity of Wisconsin, made a large contribution in writing as well as coordinating the efforts of other contributors. We would also like to express appreciation to the various administrators in District 214 who provided .finds for and otherwise encouraged this project. Donald G. RingPh.D District Coordinator of Mathematics and Science December, 1974 DGR:sn 5 -4- II. PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE CURRICULUM IN DISTRICT 214 Any curriculum has meaning only as it is related to students. If students are not able to relate what they learn in the classroom to their environment the essence of science teaching is lost. If students are not able to challenge themselves to broaden their thinking about reality, human existence and the prupose to life,.science teaching has not been effective in relating the reasons for asking questions aboutour environ- ment. If a science curriculum cannot encourage students to live with our environment with dignity it has failed to become more than a description and collection ofcourses. Criteria for'.Developing a Format In searching for a curriculum model it was of primary importance that it be meaningful to the classroom. This meant that it would have to be accurate and up to date. If would have to present reality in a form which would reduce the distinction between nature and classroom instruction in science. The model would have to be able to reduce the arbitary distinctions we have established between the branches of science. It would have to encourage the integration of science courses by followingan interdis- ciplinary approach. Its content would have to be accurate and be able to communicate the reality It represented in the classroom. A second set of criteria for a curriculum model is that'it should reflect the processes Which occur in investigating nature. The science curriculum must be able to increase the ability of students to ask questions, to anticipate changes and to manipulate their evnironment. It is necessary that.a curriculum model demonstrates that science proceeds by experimental and laboratory investigation. A science curriculum must have purposeful activity to it. The third concern that a science curriculum format must accommodate is that it must be able to communicate the meaning of science to students. The question, of why one should study science must be given a valid and acceptable answer. The area of meaning is not clearly understood and should become more clear as science edu- cators report their thinking to the i?rofession. It is presently apparent that within the context of meaning exists elements of technology, application, values, and priorities.