Carleton Robert H., Williams Harry H. Modern - Life Science

Chicago, Philadelphia, New York: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1942. — 650 p.; ill.Recent years have witnessed accelerated efforts by fore- thinkers in education, by policy-making committees, by progressive teachers, and by textbook writers to broaden the scope of science instruction so as to make it more functional - and to do so for the sake of the general education of all students, regardless of whether they go to college. As far back as 1932, Professor Charles J. Pieper urged a reorganization of the secondary-school science program around "desirable specific adjustments in relation to the aspects of the environment which are most significant in everyday life." A systematic effort in this direction seems logically to involve at least three major steps: setting up objectives and redefining them in terms of desirable changes in pupil behavior; selecting materials of instruction and planning activities designed to effect these changes; devising new instruments of evaluation to determine the effectiveness of these materials and activities. This emphasis upon the statement of objectives in terms of individual growth and development through more and more adequate adjustment to the world about him, rather than in terms of knowledge or subject matter in a more limited sense, has led to a more realistic consideration of such objectives as improving the ability to recognize and define problems, to formulate and test hypotheses, to observe adequately and objectively, to interpret data, to apply facts and principles to new situations, and to develop the specific scientific attitudes essential to clear and unbiased thinking. These, in turn, have significance as objectives only as they contribute to the creation of a total individual whose experiences in science make him more effective in his personal living and socioeconomic relationships by developing understandings that are real to him and concern major aspects of his environment.