Research on the nature of science and science education enjoys a longhistory, with its origins in Ernst Mach's work in the late nineteenthcentury and John Dewey's at the beginning of the twentieth century.As early as 1909 the Central Association for Science and MathematicsTeachers published an article – ‘A Consideration of the Principles thatShould Determine the Courses in Biology in Secondary Schools’ – inSchool Science and Mathematics that reflected foundational concernsabout science and how school curricula should be informed by them. Sincethen (...) a large body of literature has developed related to the teaching andlearning about nature of science – see, for example, the Lederman and Meichtry reviews cited below. As well there has been intensephilosophical, historical and philosophical debate about the nature of scienceitself, culminating in the much-publicised ‘Science Wars’ of recent time. Thereferences listed here primarily focus on the empirical research related to thenature of science as an educational goal; along with a few influential philosophicalworks by such authors as Kuhn, Popper, Laudan, Lakatos, and others. Whilenot exhaustive, the list should prove useful to educators, and scholars in otherfields, interested in the nature of science and how its understanding can berealised as a goal of science instruction. The authors welcome correspondenceregarding omissions from the list, and on-going additions that can be made to it. (shrink)

In this study we explored how the science department shaped the relationship between a science department head, Mr Greg, and a teacher, Ms Horton, as they grappled with their expectations of, and responsibilities for, teaching and leadership in the daily life in the department. We found that, from their life histories and their positions in the department, Mr Greg and Ms Horton have developed different values and visions that shape the ways they construct their work, particularly in relation to the (...) place of subject matter, goals for students, teamwork, roles and responsibilities and accountability. Although both shared a commitment to their students and to their subject, Mr Greg saw his contribution in subject organizational terms and Ms Horton saw hers in personal student terms. Orderliness and stability were important to the department head whereas Ms Horton valued spontaneity and innovation. Collaboration was Mr Greg's method of achieving the business of the department; working alone allowed Ms Horton the freedom and flexibility she needed. Accountability for Mr Greg was framed in organizational terms; Ms Horton was more concerned with the learning that took place in her classroom. Our case study looks at the range and intensity of the forces shaping the work of teachers and the way they organize themselves at work. We argue that, if we wish to continue to improve teaching and learning, particularly in secondary schools, we need to know a great deal more about the forces that operate in subject departments. (shrink)