ABSTRACT
In Vision I, normative issues are treated as something irrational that should be avoided. According to this vision the focus of education should be on facts and laws of science. However, on closer inspection there is room for two different and seemingly contradictory positions in this vision. On the one hand we can find one position that perceives “is” and “ought to” as a dichotomy. Here, expressions like “ought to” are considered to be subjective, irrational-that is, noncognitiveand therefore unsuitable as educational content. According to this position, by learning the scientific method, students will acquire the necessary skills to take an objective stance in controversial issues (Waring, 1979, p. 41). On the other hand, the second position is characterized by a belief that it is possible to “objectify” values through true knowledge. The normative dimension is approached as an outcome that only becomes rational if it is grounded in true knowledge. The common feature of these two positions within Vision I is that they are based on the idea of a clear division between values and scientific knowledge. Consequently, according to this vision the normative is something that science education should not be concerned about. Instead it is the role of science education to offer something that can substitute for the subjective in people’s reasoning as citizens and consumers. Vision II represents a totally opposite view, however, which is that the normative is seen as something natural, unavoidable, and nonreducible in human lives. Therefore, normative aspects must be dealt with in science education in order to make the student a competent citizen and consumer. At first glance it may seem as though this difference between Vision I and II is mainly a question of different philosophical views on facts and values. However, in this chapter we want to show that it is not just a matter of philosophy, but also a question of where and how to look in educational practices. We argue that the pragmatic empirical research we are going to present shows values and norms are integral parts of learning, as well as preconditions for learning. We will show that aesthetical, practical epistemological and ethical values, and social contracts make learning possible. Following our illustrations of classroom conversations, we summarize where and how teachers and researchers can acquire more knowledge about what makes learning possible. In the discussion we connect to the closely related problem of socialization content in science education. Here we argue that the learning of science is accompanied by the learning of values and companion meanings (Östman, 1994, 1996, 2007; Roberts & Östman, 1998). We also link up with the discussion about the need to make companion meanings explicit and to make learning from science the major focus of science education.
