It would be difficult to support any claim that problem solving is not an important goal in the teaching of science. Scientists by their very nature are problem solvers.

Rather, we contest the viewpoint that problem solving is the most important goal in the teaching of science. Science is a multi-faceted discipline. There are many ways to “do” science.” There are many ways to learn science.

“there simply is no fixed set of steps that scientists always follow, no one path that leads them unerringly to scientific knowledge” ( Rutherford & Ahlgren, 1990, The Nature of Science)

If this axiom is accepted throughout the scientific community, it should be embraced by science education. The viewpoint that problem solving is the most important goal in teaching science seems to contradict this statement

“ Learning to view the world scientifically means…

(North Carolina State Dept., 2003, Understanding the nature of science ) to seek explanations to ask questions about nature make observations discuss findings with others organize information collect and measure things

Experiences for school students in their guided study of science should include experiences which promote process skills, such as measuring, observing, classifying and predicting. These skills are critical for the development of a worthwhile and fruitful understating by students of scientific concepts and propositions. These experiences are also critical for achieving expertise in the meaningful use of scientific procedures, for problem solving and for to applying scientific understanding ones own life. (Ango, 2002, p.12)

Sooner or later, the validity of scientific claims is settled by referring to observations of phenomena. Hence, scientists concentrate on getting accurate data. (Rutherford and Ahlgren, 1990, Nature of Science).

Such evidence is obtained by observations and measurements taken in situations that range from natural settings (such as a forest) to completely contrived ones (such as the laboratory). (Rutherford and Ahlgren, 1990, Nature of Science).

The preceding arguments underscore the importance of a strong foundation of scientific knowledge in order to pursue higher levels of learning

Scientists need to be communicators of knowledge. communication is a critical aspect of scientific investigation without it, scientific investigation would be pointless (Ango, 2002, p.17)

developing meaningful explanation could be considered the core enterprise of both scientific endeavor as well as personal learning in science” (Heywood, 2002, p.234).

“because of the social nature of science, the dissemination of scientific information is crucial to its progress” (Rutherford and Ahlgren, 1990, Nature of Science).

What sort of science education should we have and what should its goals be? What do I teach in my science lesson today and how should I teach it? (Longbottom and Butler, 1999, p.486) Important Questions to Consider…

specialist secondary science teachers would probably describe their main task as helping students to learn new ideas and explanations regarding natural phenomena (Bryce & MacMillan, 2005, p.739)

children should… 1. 1.understand that scientists are successful in developing understanding the world even though they do not have a fail-safe method, but that science is fallible 2. 2.acknowledge scientific knowledge as the best we have, and therefore accept that it is rational to trust in expert knowledge (thus limiting skepticism to a justified level) 3. 3.adopt many of the critical and creative attributes of scientists (giving students the skills to take seek and evaluate evidence and to take part in reasoned debate) (Longbottom and Butler, 1999, pp )

a most compelling statement: because science education is likely to be in competition with manifold unscientific and antiscientific forces in both formal and informal education, the onus is on science educators to teach in a manner that captures the imagination and reveals both the fascination of the known and the challenge of the unknown (Longbottom, & Butler, 1999, p.473)

From the NSTA an important characteristic—and shortcoming—of Generation 2 (scientific inquiry) materials is that they do not explicitly provide instruction that will help students learn about scientific inquiry itself (Teaching Science in the 21st Century, 2006)

an implicit and incorrect assumption exists that doing inquiry results in learning about inquiry (Teaching Science in the 21st Century, 2006)

If doing inquiry does not necessarily result in learning about inquiry… then it seems reasonable to consider that… doing problem solving may not result in learning about problem solving

-Not the most important goal in science education. -Does not fully address the range of required process skills, the common knowledge base, and the communication that must go on in science -It is one of many important goals in science education, but it cannot address all of the aspects of the nature of science. Problem solving: