Conflicting Agendas: Critical Thinking versus Science Education in the International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge Course

Abstract

The article investigates the Theory of Knowledge course of the International Baccalaureate Organization. After a short overview of the aims and objectives of the course, the assessment criteria and a popular textbook are investigated. Shortcomings concerning the treatment of the natural sciences are highlighted and the problem is generalised to courses or curricula that aim to reconcile agendas focusing on critical thinking and philosophical analysis on the one hand and traditional science subject-agendas on the other. The article argues that these problems also surface in the actual teaching practice and their implications for the curricula need to be taken more seriously. Three possible alternatives to overcome these problems are outlined. The first is based on novel work in history and philosophy of science, the second on general theories of argumentation, and the third on systematic exploration of student interests and stakes.

Developing Greek Primary School Students’ Critical Thinking through an Approach of Teaching Science which Incorporates Aspects of History of Science

“…1 According to Zemplèn (2007) the seemingly conflicting agenda between critical thinking and science education can be bridged through specific teaching approaches arguing that these approaches should include the incorporation of aspects of History and Philosophy of Science. Nevertheless, he remarks that History and Philosophy of Science isn't a unified field today and Philosophy of Science is extremely hard to teach even in High Schools.…”

“…Using the above mentioned as general guidelines we have designed and implemented a teaching project which explicitly tackles issues in the broader context of HOS, together with aspects of the Nature of Science and Socioscientific Issues (Lederman 1992;McComas et al 1998;Zemplèn 2007) in a pronouncedly non-authoritarian and studentcentred approach. During the implementation of the project, opportunities were provided for the students to directly address values connected to science (its history and its nature) and to engage them in a critical examination of knowledge (importance, complexity and human implications).…”

Putting Sociology First—Reconsidering the Role of the Social in ‘Nature of Science’ Education

“…In fact, it is hard to find high school textbooks with radically different structures. A comprehensive analysis of Nicholas Alchin's work (Alchin 2003a, b) is given in Zemplén (2007a), and more books could be listed and analysed in detail-ad nauseam.…”

“…The scientific method, if introduced in this framework, seems simple on the surface, but in fact implies views that are not at all easy to grasp for high school students. 18 Examples include referees' comments, and a response to the earlier article (Zemplén 2007a) by Nicholas Alchin, stressing that the historical development of NOS ideas should be used to determine the sequence of the views taught (See http://www.springerlink.metapress.com/content/311231425022664n/?p=87c7d0cd9e934a 60a151abe9481dd199&pi=0, Alchin, Nicholas, Zemple´n on Theory of Knowledge, Science and Education, online first). 19 While there have been some improvements due to innovative educational methods, like Nott and Wellington (1998), probably many of the disconcerting findings (e.g.…”

“…In toto, there is no agreement on who should teach what and for what aims. 31 As I have argued in Zemplén (2007a), for the specific IBO course in Theory of Knowledge (still a course much ahead of many other attempts) curricular development is aimed more at refining the system of grading, operationalising assessment, and not on evaluating what the course actually does-the curriculum gets ''black-boxed'', and little effort is made to investigate what it is that students actually achieve by attending the course. 32 In the area of critical thinking (in a number of respects connected to understanding and appreciating NOS issues and science education-see e.g.…”