Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Relevancy of Science Education to Public Engagement with Science

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Current Research in Biology Education

Part of the book series: Contributions from Biology Education Research ((CBER))

Abstract

For the past few decades science education aimed to prepare non-scientists to make sense of science in their daily lives, to be critical consumers of science information, and to make informed decisions about scientific issues (Roberts & Bybee, 2014). This goal of inclusive science education for non-scientists is termed “science literacy” (Hurd, 1958). “Science education for all” can be justified if it offers value for all rather than just for the minority who will become scientists (Osborne & Dillon, 2008). What is this value?

“The wise man’s eyes are in his head, But the fool walks in darkness. Yet I myself perceived, That the same event happens to them all”

Ecclesiastes 2:14

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In accordance with the scope of science education, ‘Science’ refers here to STEM: Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Science includes a body of knowledge (content and theories), a way of knowing the world (processes and dispositions), as well as aspects of human endeavour (relevant institutions and people).

  2. 2.

    Vision I of science literacy offers a solid comprehensive foundation of literacy within science (Roberts, 2007).

  3. 3.

    I adhere to a quote attributed to the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, who was asked why a brilliant scientist like himself would nail a horseshow above his door for good luck. He replied “I understand it brings you luck, whether you believe in it or not”.

  4. 4.

    The dependence of one’s knowledge on factors outside one’s cognitive agency, e.g. one does not possess direct evidence that the Earth circles the sun, but believes so nonetheless.

References

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., Joyce, N., Sheikh, S., & Cote, N. G. (2011). Knowledge and the prediction of behavior: The role of information accuracy in the theory of planned behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.568834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asakly, D., Orr, D., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2016). Characteristics of an authentic scientific discourse in social networks: The case of drinking water fluoridation. Paper presented at the Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST) conference, Istanbul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baram-Tsabari, A., & Osborne, J. (2015). Bridging science education and science communication research (Editorial). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 135–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baram-Tsabari, A., & Schejter, A. (2019). The double-edged sword of new media in supporting public engagement with science. In Y. Kali, A. Schejter, & A. Baram-Tsabari (Eds.), Learning in a networked society (Computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) book series). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baram-Tsabari, A., Bronshtein, J., Rozenblum, Y., Barel-Ben David, Y., & Swirski, H. (2021). Sports fans’ science knowledge is relevant to their stance on COVID-19 guidelines, but only if they don’t care who wins. Paper presented at the Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST) 2020+1 Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Retrieved from Washington, DC http://www7.nationablacademies.org/bose/Learning%20Science%20in%20Informal%20Environment.html

  • Betten, A. W., Broerse, J. E. W., & Kupper, F. (2017). Dynamics of problem setting and framing in citizen discussions on synthetic biology. Public Understanding of Science, 0963662517712207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517712207

  • Bonney, R., Phillips, T. B., Ballard, H. L., & Enck, J. W. (2016). Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Chapter 3: Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 61–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme, R., & Goldman, S. R. (2014). The public’s bounded understanding of science. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 59–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme, R., Kienhues, D., & Porsch, T. (2010). Who knows what and who can we believe? Epistemological beliefs are beliefs about knowledge (mostly) to be attained from others. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 163–193). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromme, R., Scharrer, L., Stadtler, M., Hömberg, J., & Torspecken, R. (2015). Is it believable when it’s scientific? How scientific discourse style influences laypeople’s resolution of conflicts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(1), 36–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broniatowski, D. A., Jamison, A. M., Qi, S., AlKulaib, L., Chen, T., Benton, A., Quinn, S. C., & Dredze, M. (2018). Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate. American Journal of Public Health, 108(10), 1378–1384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brossard, D. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Suppl 3), 14096–14101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2013). Science, new media, and the public. Science, 339(6115), 40–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrion, M. L. (2017). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728024

  • Christensen, C., & Fensham, P. J. (2012). Risk, uncertainty and complexity in science education. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 751–769). Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalyot, K., Sharon, A. J., Orr, D., Ben-David, Y. B., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2019). Public engagement with science in everyday life: Perceptions of Wi-Fi radiation risks in schools. Research in Science Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09894-w

  • Dawson, E. (2017). Social justice and out-of-school science learning: Exploring equity in science television, science clubs and maker spaces. Science Education, 101(4), 539–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, C., & Fischhoff, B. (2017a). Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(36), 9587–9592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, C., & Fischhoff, B. (2017b). Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 201704882.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1995). The construction of lay expertise: AIDS activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials. Science, Technology & Human Values, 20(4), 408–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399502000402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), science and technology. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ee9bacdf-fdad-46eb-8cd8-32879e310191/language-en

  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2012). Lifelong science learning for adults: The role of free-choice experiences. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1063–1079). Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J. H., Dierking, L. D., Swanger, L. P., Staus, N., Back, M., Barriault, C., Catalao, C., Chambers, C., Chew, L.-L., Dahl, S. A., Falla, S., Gorecki, B., Lau, T. C., Lloyd, A., Martin, J., Santer, J., Singer, S., Solli, A., Trepanier, G., … Verheyden, P. (2016). Correlating science center use with adult science literacy: An international, cross-institutional study. Science Education, 100(5), 849–876. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, N. (2011). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education, 95, 168–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, N. (2014). Making sense of autism: Progressive engagement with science among parents of young, recently diagnosed autistic children. Public Understanding of Science, 23(5), 592–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, N. W. (2015). Education, communication, and science in the public sphere. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 145–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, N. W., & Meshoulam, D. (2014). Science for what public? Addressing equity in American science museums and science centers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(3), 368–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, N., Allen, S., & Jenkins, E. (2013). Outside the pipeline: Reimagining science education for nonscientists. Science, 340(6130), 314–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2015). Connoisseurs of science: A next goal for science education? In The future in learning science: What’s in it for the learner? (pp. 35–59). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golumbic, Y. N., Fishbain, B., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2020). Science literacy in action: Understanding scientific data presented in a citizen science platform by non-expert adults. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 10(3), 232–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic dependence. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazelkorn, E., Charly, R., Yves, B., Constantinos, C., Ligia, D., Michel, G., & Welzel-Breuer, M. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. In Report to the European Commission of the expert group on science education. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Sharon, A., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2021). Public understanding of the mathematical aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic and its relation to school mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108, 201–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hine, C. (2012). Headlice eradication as everyday engagement with science: An analysis of online parenting discussions. Public Understanding of Science, 23(5), 574–591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, J. B. (2016). Lifelong learning and technology. Pew Research Center, 22. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2016/03/22/lifelong-learning-and-technology/

  • Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16(1), 13–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L. L., Braman, D., & Mandel, G. (2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change, 2(10), 732–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, F. G., & Fuhrer, U. (2003). Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Applied Psychology, 52(4), 598–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Tonning, A. S. V., & Ulvik, M. (2006). Science students’ critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90(4), 632–655. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lammers, J., Crusius, J., & Gast, A. (2020). Correcting misperceptions of exponential coronavirus growth increases support for social distancing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(28), 16264–16266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laslo, E., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2021). Expressions of science literacy in online public discussions of animal experimentation. International Journal of Science Education: Part B. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2020.1871103

  • Laslo, E., Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2011). A growth medium for the message: Online science journalism affordances for exploring public discourse of science and ethics. Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism, 12(7), 847–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S., & Davey, A. (1993). Inarticulate science? Perspectives on the public understanding of science and some implications for science education. Studies in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewenstein, B. V. (2016). Can we understand citizen science? Journal of Science Communication, 15(1), E1.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2010). Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge, skills and attitudes framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(6), 727–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. In Fostering critical reflection in adulthood (Vol. 1, p. 20).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Most, T., Ingber, S., & Heled-Ariam, E. (2012). Social competence, sense of loneliness, and speech intelligibility of young children with hearing loss in individual inclusion and group inclusion. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(2), 259–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2020). Science and technology: Public attitudes, knowledge, and interest. In Science and engineering indicators 2020. U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. P. (1995). Learning to live with scientific expertise: Toward a theory of intellectual communalism for guiding science teaching. Science Education, 79(2), 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730790206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 947–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northern, J. L., & Downs, M. P. (2002). Hearing in children. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development [OECD]. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy. OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, D., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2018). Science and politics in the polio vaccination debate on Facebook: A mixed-methods approach to public engagement in a science-based dialogue. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1500

  • Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. Nuffield Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1988). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 22–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, H. P., Dunwoody, S., Allgaier, J., Lo, Y. Y., & Brossard, D. (2014). Public communication of science 2.0. EMBO Reports, e201438979. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201438979

  • Pritchard, D. (2015). Epistemic dependence. Philosophical Perspectives, 29(1), 305–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpe.12067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 1, pp. 120–144). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., & Kinslow, A. T. (2017). Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio-Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 274–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, J. L., & Horibe, S. (2016). What do we mean by science education for civic engagement? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36, 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A., Sodian, B., Koerber, S., & Wong, J. (2014). Developing children’s early competencies to engage with science. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.917589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharrer, L., Rupieper, Y., Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2016). When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516680311

  • Schejter, A. M., & Tirosh, N. (2016). Media policy and theories of justice. In A justice-based approach for new media policy (pp. 51–59). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharon, A., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2020a). Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life? Science Education, 104, 873–894. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharon, A. J., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2020b). The experts’ perspective of “ask-an-expert”: An interview-based study of online nutrition and vaccination outreach. Public Understanding of Science, 29(3), 252–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shauli, S., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2019). The usefulness of science knowledge for parents of hearing-impaired children. Public Understanding of Science, 28(1), 19–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, N. A. (2015). Examining the nexus of science communication and science education: A content analysis of genetics news articles. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(3), 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumenttaion in socio-scientific Context. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 187–199). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., & Dibner, K. A. (Eds.). (2016). Science literacy: Concepts, contexts, and consequences. The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taragin-Zeller, L., Rozenblum, Y., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2020). Public engagement with science among religious minorities: Lessons from COVID-19. Science Communication, 42(5), 643–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfensberger, W. P. (1977). A multi-component advocacy/protection schema.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). Misunderstood misunderstanding: Social identities and public uptake of science. In A. Irwin & B. Wynne (Eds.), Misunderstanding science?: The public reconstruction of science and technology (pp. 19–46). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zillien, N., Haake, G., Fröhlich, G., Bense, T., & Souren, D. (2011). Internet use of fertility patients: A systemic review of the literature. Journal für Reproduktionsmedizin und Endokrinologie-Journal of Reproductive Medicine and Endocrinology, 8(4), 281–287.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

    Ayelet Baram-Tsabari

Authors
  1. Ayelet Baram-Tsabari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ayelet Baram-Tsabari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Konstantinos Korfiatis

  2. School of Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    Marcus Grace

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Baram-Tsabari, A. (2022). The Relevancy of Science Education to Public Engagement with Science. In: Korfiatis, K., Grace, M. (eds) Current Research in Biology Education. Contributions from Biology Education Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89480-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89480-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-89479-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-89480-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation