In our lead story, a defence of reforms to New Zealand science curriculum from one of those involved in its rewriting. She maintains students need to learn how to "critically evaluate" science knowledge alongside "other forms of knowledge" so they can "make informed decisions" and
"act on issues that matter".
Sounds admirable, no?
The question is, at what point in a student's school journey should they do this?
Over the years, I've watched as school curricula come to resemble the curricula of first or second year university subjects, focusing on higher order skills rather than foundations of knowledge (I do realise these are not entirely distinct).
As a maths teacher for some years in my youth, I observed that what kids actually like is ... getting the right answer! Once they can do that, their confidence grows and they can start to learn the higher order analysis and synthesis skills. So unlike the author in our lead story, I think "learning the basics" is absolutely necessary before students can develop "systems thinking and agency", which is - and should be
- the domain of higher education. It's a matter of paying attention to what works, rather than the latest educational research fad.
