Do facts stifle science education?

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that science is considered to be an undisputed list of "facts". Rigid and stuck.

This is not correct, the ideas behind science evolve and change and jump forward. So does teaching science "facts" stop children understanding what science is? At primary school does it stifle the enjoyment of students in their science lessons?

Do children need to learn to explore and experiment to give them more of a basis for learning science? I like my lessons to be about having a go and making observations. Even if the child can't form the explanation, they can at least experience the discovery first hand.

Part of the reason for becoming a science teacher was so I could allow the students to see the experiment first, rather than use experiments as a way to check the theory we have just been told. Rushing through the syllabus at the expense of exploration and discovery does a disservice to science in my opinion.

But I still teach plenty students who will just ask "tell me", or "will you write that on the board".

I believe that we don't teach science so that people leave education knowing Newton's second Law, I believe that science education is about shaping the curiosity of the next generation and science education should not be about indisputable facts that must be remembered.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:South West, UK