ABSTRACT
There is contention over the shape and formation of science curriculum and, ultimately, over what will count as scientific knowledge, skill, capacity and world view. The Cold War set the policy context for an ongoing focus on science education across Western nations. Sputnik-era US and UK educational policy offered a broad premise for the purpose of school science: in a risky geopolitical environment, high levels of advanced scientific expertise were central to the national interest and necessary for the maintenance of
military/industrial and technological power. Half a century on, in the context of global economic and environmental crisis, as a justification for digital, industrial and biomedical innovation, the rationale for the production of scientific capital is central to curriculum settlements and educational policy in Europe, Asia and the Americas. The Australian federal government’s 2008 commitment to a National Science Curriculum has revived debate over what will count as scientific knowledge and literacy in schools. In early 2009 the national newspaper, The Australian, an influential player in educational policy, criticized the National Curriculum Board’s (2008) argument for a “thematic” approach to science education. “In all disciplines, there is no substitute for teaching the basics” (Curriculum Values, The Australian, March 17, 2009, p. 11) , its editorial column read, restating its consistent argument for basic skills, facts and knowledge and a universal focus on canonical disciplinary and literary content (Luke, 2009). The framing paper commissioned by the National Curriculum Board (2008) attempts to strike a balance between the production of high levels of scientific expertise and the production of a broad scientific literacy for everyday life and civic participation:
The main objective of school science education is to develop young people’s science capabilities. It is imperative that Australia’s future citizens have scientific knowledge and understanding that enable them to make personal and societal decisions on the basis of evidence and
reason. . . . [P]eople who are scientifically capable can make informed decisions about the products they buy, the food they eat, the environment in which they live or the lifestyle they adopt.
