The research questions

The origin of the research questions (RQ) that drive this case study comes from my own interest and developing knowledge and understanding of the NoS and the involvement of politicians in determining the curriculum in schools during my time as a science teacher in the mid-1980s. As a child studying science in school, taking an interest in science outside school and as a science undergraduate, the NoS was not a concept I was taught explicitly, knew about or understood. My experience at all levels had been of science as a body of knowledge (facts) to be ‘learned’. In addition, there were skills to be learned e.g. manipulation of laboratory equipment/chemicals and how to design an experiment. TSM was, for me as a student of sciences, simply how to do an experiment and how the results of experiments should be written in a laboratory journal.

As a teacher of sciences in state schools, the NoS did not consciously feature in my lesson planning or curriculum construction. Terminology such as inductive, deductive, abductive reasoning or logic were not fully understood by me, even though I used logical thinking to explain how evidence in science leads to knowledge and understanding of concepts. Having very briefly taught the old O level and CSE syllabuses, which were not government controlled, I was part of the generation of teachers who experienced the new political involvement with the curriculum as the full national curriculum was enacted

in the late 1980s. How this influenced schools and teachers and how it created organisational issues also prompted this research.

One controversial issue in science has been a constant interest of mine for over 30 years, creationism and evolution. Having studied the life and work of Charles Darwin (1809- 1882) and Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913), the originators of the theory of evolution by natural selection, I developed an expertise and interest in the history and development of their theory over time. Studying why creationists do not accept evolution, why creationism and intelligent design creationism is not science, I became aware of the role of the history and philosophy of science, the NoS and TSM in making determinations about what science ‘is’ and how science is ‘done’. Creationists try to use the NoS and TSM to argue against evolution as science, in a bid to characterise it as a religious belief system. This led to my increasing desire to understand how the NoS could contribute to a better understanding of science at all levels, especially in school science. A good understanding of the NoS enables people to see why creationism is not science. It is fundamental to being scientifically literate.

This background led to an interest in the NoS and TSM in the science curriculum. As a practicing science teacher during the period being reported in the case study, I had to grapple with the NoS as a new part of the science curriculum. Over the intervening 25 years I variously taught about the SNC or developed teaching material for the SNC. Having accumulated a wealth of knowledge and understanding about the SNC, this led ultimately to developing ideas and questions that could be researched. For this case study, I wanted to examine the various influences that affect a state mandated curriculum and how the NoS was incorporated, and subsequently evolved/developed, through various revisions of the SNC. It was clear in the late 1980s and early 1990s that politicians were leading the reforms in schools at various levels, from the structure of schools, to the removal of powers from Local Authorities and to some extent the content of the various curriculum documents. This level of political influence was unprecedented in English education. Reflecting on this raised important questions that I felt needed answering.

The initial process of deciding on suitable research questions was to generate ideas about the topic of the NoS in the curriculum, having viewed and considered a range of research papers (see Chapter 3). From this, I refined and unpacked the ideas generated to formulate researchable questions. Using Cohen et al’s (2013, p.111) approach it enabled me to move from ‘a general set of purposes to a range of specific, concrete

issues and areas to be addressed in the research, and, for each, to frame these in terms of one or more research questions’.

The Main questions for this research consider the development and evolution of the NoS within the SNC

RQ 1 What was the origin of the SNC and how did it develop over time?

RQ 2 What were the political, educational and organisational influences on its origin and development?

Supporting these key questions are other more specific questions that inform the subject of the research and drive the case study.

RQ 3 How has the NoS been incorporated into the science National Curriculum? RQ 4 How is the NoS articulated in the science National Curriculum and does this vision of the NoS promote coherence across the sciences?

RQ 5 How has the evolution and development of the science National Curriculum affected the NoS and its incorporation into science education?

RQ 6 How does the incorporation (or lack) of the NoS affect how different scientific disciplines are viewed by science teachers?

The rationale for asking these research questions is to gain a better understanding of the curriculum through time. Although the questions as stated are mainly ‘how’ questions, key aspects of these questions include an understanding of the ‘Who?’; ‘When?’; ‘Where?’; What; ‘Why?’ questions, for example, who created the curriculum? Why was a NC needed? Ultimately, the answers to these questions, generated from the case study, will lead to a better understanding of what influences and tensions there were on the science curriculum and how these affected the coherence of that curriculum.