In 2010 national tests in biology, physics and chemistry were introduced in the Swedish comprehensive school, year 9 (15-16 years). The tests are to be used in order to create better conditions for a more equal and fair assessment of students. This initiative rests on the assumption that all teachers will approach the test and the actual science content in a uniform way and mark the tests in the same manner. However, results from earlier research show that there are different ways to approach science teaching in general. There are patterns in teachers’ preferences in educational situations concerning for example views on what knowledge is important, the purposes and benefits of learning science and how teaching should be connected to community and/or students’ everyday lives. When these choices are made systematically over time they are developed into what is named in this article as selective traditions in science teaching. The methodology is inspired by earlier research in the area of environmental and sustainability education. A well-developed analytical tool is applied on responses from semi-structured interviews with twenty-nine science teachers.  

In the national science tests there are many questions focusing ‘canonical’ science knowledge for example facts and figures about pH and electricity, but also matters starting in contexts connected to societal development with consequences for example environmental and sustainability issues are introduced. These matters deals with questions like for example problems with acid rain, different challenges for energy production and a better use of natural resources when recycling waste (Lundqvist, Lidar, & Almqvist, 2013).

Some of the questions in are thus well connected to socio-scientific issues. SSI can be regarded as real world issues that are socially significant and rooted in science (Zeidler, Walker, Ackett, & Simmons, 2002) and well-connected to sustainability issues (Summers, Childs, & Corney, 2005). The tendency to incorporate more socio-scientific issues in science curricula is common world- wide (Levinson, 2010; Prain, 2012), but this shift is not undisputed. There are ‘gatekeepers’ in the science education community who are significantly troubled by this and fear that the amount of core science content will decrease (Tytler, 2012). SSI are though entering science education more generally (Robottom, 2012).

 Purpose

An initial web-based inquiry to 1003 (response from 42%) teachers gave some patterns in science teachers approaches to science teaching, but a follow-up study was necessary to be conducted. The purpose of this study is to discern patterns in science teachers’ responses observed in the initial inquiry and show that they are a type of collective institutionalized habits.

The research question is:

What selective traditions are visible in science teachers’ descriptions of their teaching when discussing the introduction of national test encompassing socio-scientific issues?

These traditions can be apprehended as concealed possible obstacles towards a fairer grading and they need to be made increasingly visible. These habits, customs and material institutions make up a substantial part of a teacher’s knowledge. Of course, we cannot simply find a ‘cause for our actions, remove it, and then replace it with another cause’ so that our experience and acting in the world will change in a predictable manner (Wickman, 2012). To reach fairer marking in an easy way seems not be practically possible, but by enhancing the knowledge of selective teaching traditions the discussions about the possibilities of a introduction of national tests in relation to grading perhaps will be conducted in a more informed way.

Dewey, J. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct: an Introduction to Social Psychology. New York: Holt. Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and Education. New York: Touchstone, Simon and Schuster. Levinson, R. (2010). Science Education and democratic participation: an uneasy congruence. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 69-119. Lundqvist, E., Lidar, M., & Almqvist, J. (2013). What content is assessed in the Swedish national tests in biology, chemistry and physics? . Paper presented at the ESERA, Nicosia, Cyprus. Prain, V. (2012). Acting on Sustainability. Research in Science Education, 42, 149-154. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Robottom, I. (2012). Socio-scientific Issues in Education: Innovative Practices and Contending Epistemologies. Research in Science Education, 42, 95-107. Summers, M., Childs, A., & Corney, G. (2005). Education for sustainable development in initial teacher training: Issues for interdisciplinary collaboration. Environmental Education Research, 11(5), 623-647. Sund, P. (2008). Discerning the extras in ESD teaching: A democratic issue. In J. Öhman (Ed.), Values and Democracy in Education for Sustainable Development - Contributions from Swedish Research (pp. 57-74). Stockholm: Liber. Sund, P., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011). Socialization Content in Schools and Education for Sustainable Development - I. A study of Teachers’ Selective Traditions. Environmental Education Research, 17(5), 599-624. Tytler, R. (2012). Socio-Scientific Issues, Sustainability and Science Education. Research in Science Education, 42, 155-163. Wickman, P.-O. (2012). How can conceptual schemes change teaching? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 127-136. Zeidler, D., Walker, K., Ackett, W., & Simmons, M. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.