If Not NABT, Then Who?

Abstract

The general high school biology course is about 80 years old. Emerging as a replacement for botany, human physiology, and zoology, and at first strongly reflecting this tripartite origin, is has become nearly encyclopedic in scope as each decade added more knowledge. Originally taken by only a few percent of high school students, many of whom did not go on to college, it has become the one science course taken by most high school graduates. Despite an appearance of stability, the content, organization, and emphasis of high school biology has changed through the years in response to diverse social forces. Paul DeHart Hurd noted in the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study Bulletin No. 1 (1961) that during the period 1910-1920, emphasis was placed on human welfare, including, .... vocations, health, sanitation, avocations, appreciations and understanding the environment. With the twenties standardized tests became popular, leading to pressure for a standard biology course with emphasis on the principles of biology. The Great Depression decade focused on meeting student needs, with health, consumer education, and social welfare emerging as organizing ideas for biology curricula. Learning theory became a factor in curriculum development. The years surrounding World War II radically changed our perception of power and potential for growth, while in biology education conflict arose between efforts to prepare students for careers in science while providing a useful biology course for the majority of students. Hurd describes the decade from 1950 to 1960 as one of confusion and crisis in biology education. Conflicting pressures came from the needs of national defense, industry, and higher education, while society at large produced a booming teenage population, belief in college education, and fascination with the coming space age. The three biology curricula of BSCS along with laboratory blocks and supporting materials, were in trial use by the end of this decade; they emphasized new knowl edge, research methods, and application of learning theory. The BSCS materials came to dominate biology education in the sixties, leading' to revisions of traditional texts, incorporating the ideas pioneered with National Science Foundation support. Hurd's survey of biology education ended with the sixties, but those reading the present volume in the eighties will have their own impression of the intervening decade. Development of an environmental ethic, concern for individual worth, and recognition that there are absolute limits to human population growth contrasted sharply with an underlying fear that we had somehow lost control. Science support was eroded by the retreat to basics, while new biological knowledge flooded the news. Schools became the focus of conflict between factions who wanted to implement their vision of society. Biology teachers, often demoralized, frequently called their own retreat to a version of basic biology, based on lecture, recitation, and textbooks adjusted to lower reading levels and expectations. Which brings us to 1981 and the eighties. What forces are affecting biology education? What are appropriate responses for professional teachers? What biological knowledge should be captured by the 175odd hours allotted to the average high school biology course? The authors contributing to this volume deal with these questions and their answers are of concern to all biology teachers. NABT is proud to place New Directions in Biology Teaching next to Social Implications of Biological Education, edited by Arnold Grobman and published in 1970. Faith Hickman and Jane Kahle have done an outstanding job of editing a book which may well catalyze develop-