Perceptions of STS Topics Among Uruguayan College Students: Implications for Secondary School Curricular Reform

Abstract

The purpose of this descriptive and exploratory study was to measure the perceptions regarding a variety of science, technology, and society (STS) topics among a sample of Uruguay underclassmen college students. These perceptions were compared with the viewpoints of a group of professional scientists. It was found that, for some STS topics, such as the role of humans in global climate change, the perceptions of Uruguay underclassmen and scientists were statistically identical. For topics, such as the problem of human overpopulation, both groups find themselves on the same side of the issue but with a statistically significant gap between them. Uruguay underclassmen and professional scientists have opposite views on STS topics such as the use of animals for scientific research. A sizable proportion of Uruguay underclassmen were not familiar with several STS topics, such as the scientific work of the International Space Station. Implications for formal and informal STEM education efforts are discussed.

Keywords

STS socioscientific issues Uruguay public understanding of science science education

Introduction

Many years ago, the scientific education community reached a consensus regarding traditional, textbook-driven, direct instruction as a less effective approach for maximizing student learning (National Research Council, 1996, 2012). An enormous variety of evidence-based science teaching methods have been described and supported, from those that emphasize modeling (Dukerich, 2015; Jackson, Dukerich, & Hestenes, 2008), inquiry (Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, & Briggs, 2012; National Research Council, 2000), and projects (De los Santos, Montes, Sánchez-Coronilla, & Navas, 2014; Han, Capraro, & Capraro, 2015) to those that focus on technology integration (MacKinnon & Williams, 2006; Tinker, Horwitz, & Bannasch, 2007), interactive engagement (Hake, 1998), and cultural relevance (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 2014). A well-researched approach is to introduce and analyze science topics in the context to of its relationship with technology and society (Croissant, Restivo, & Bauchspies, 2005; Fischer, 2006; Hackett, Amsterdamska, & Lynch, 2007; Yager, Choi, Yager, & Akcay, 2009). This approach, referred to as STS (science, technology, and society), emphasizes the importance of citizens making informed science and technology decisions, the motivating context of STS for learning, and the role of science and technology as central to people’s well-being and success (National Science Teachers Association, 2010).

The Organization of Ibero-American States has been a leader in researching about STS and synthesizing government and academia studies originated in many countries in Latin America (Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos, 2016). Similarly, organizations such as the Pew Research Center (2015) and the European Commission’s (2014) Eurobarometer have published surveys about the public’s perception of STS issues in the United States and Europe, respectively. In Uruguay, the country of interest for this study, a survey about the public’s perception of science, technology, and innovation was completed in 2015 (Bernheim & Vaz, 2015). In contrast to the present study, Bernheim and Vaz’s (2015) study was broader, aimed at the general public, did not ask for levels of knowledge about specific scientific topics, and focused more on how science, technology, and innovation affected everyday life, the economy, and public policy.

Interestingly, research on the science perception of students, who recently completed secondary school and are attending college, is lacking in the literature. This group is of particular interest because it can help pinpoint to what extent the national high school (bachillerato) science curricula in Uruguay, normalized and prescribed at the national level by the Consejo de Educación Secundaria or CES (Council for Secondary Education), part of the Administración Nacional de Educación Pública or ANEP (National Administration for Public Education), is being successful in promoting high levels of scientific literacy (CES, 2006; Inspección de Física, 2006).

The purpose of this descriptive and exploratory study was to measure the knowledge and perception of science topics among a sample of Uruguayan “bachillerato” graduates that are completing underclassmen college courses (UCS), and to compare them with a knowledgeable “control group,” a representative sample of 3,748 professional scientists (PS) from the United States. Although a group of scientists from other countries could have been selected, the researchers settled on this “control group” because of the publication of a recent report from the Pew Research Center that included enough statistical details to establish robust comparisons. A secondary goal of the study was to analyze UCS responses by gender, age, and geographic variables, and to document additional perceptions about the status of science, research, and science education in Uruguay.

The research questions that guided this study were as follows: (a) For what science topics are the perception of UCS and PS statistically identical or similar? (b) For what science topics do UCS and PS disagree in their perceptions? (c) What science topics are less familiar to UCS? (d) How do UCS perceive national science, science education, and research efforts? (e) What factors, such as gender, age, and location where participants completed their middle and high school, are related to UCS’ perception of science topics?

Methodology

With an enrollment of about 7,300 students, Catholic University of Uruguay (CUU) is the largest private university in the country. In order to collect data from UCS, students enrolled in first year courses, in all seven CUU faculties were identified for the study. After the research proposal and survey were reviewed and approved by the CUU Human Subjects Committee, the researchers coordinated their visit to 29 classrooms, selected using convenience sampling (classrooms where professors agreed to let the researchers recruit students for the study). UCS received the consent form, the survey, and an answer sheet.

A total of 662 UCS completed the survey. Of those, students 25 years old or older were removed from the analysis because they were taught using a prior “bachillerato” curriculum. The revised sample size was 564 UCS, almost evenly divided by gender (49.4% male students and 50.6% female students). With 35.6%, 17.9%, and 17.2%, respectively, the faculties of Business Sciences, Human Sciences, and Engineering and Technology were the most represented.

The remaining students came from the faculties of Nursing and Health Technologies (10.6%), Psychology (8.3%), Law (6.4%), and Odontology (3.5%). About 60% of the UCS completed all their middle and high school in the capital, Montevideo, and about 27% completed all their middle and high school outside of the capital. Similarly, about 60% of the UCS recently completed high school (18 or 19 years old), while the rest of the students were 20 to 24 years old.

The research survey given to the UCS was modified from the same Pew Research Center (2015) survey that 3,748 scientists answered. Survey questions were translated into Spanish, piloted with two Spanish-speaking CUU faculty members and experts in education, and revised based on their suggestions. The final version of the research survey had 9 items about STEM in Uruguay, 4 items related to STEM education in Uruguay, 5 demographic questions, and 13 items specifically targeted toward science issues.

Descriptive statistics were calculated for all the survey items. Due to the nature of the survey, inferential nonparametric statistics were used for most comparisons. Chi-square statistics were calculated to compare the proportion of participants and scientists who agreed or disagreed with the questions. “Do not know” answers were not included in the chi-square analysis but were reported elsewhere. The number of males versus females reporting “I don’t know” were compared across all the STS-related items, and those data were analyzed with a student’s t test. Item responses by gender (male vs. female) and age (ages 18-19 vs. ages 20-24) were compared using a Mann–Whitney U test. Item responses about where UCS completed their middle and high school (6 years completed at the capital city vs. 6 years completed in other cities/towns vs. a combination of both) were compared using a Kruskal–Wallis test (reported as a chi-square statistic). For all inferential statistics, the researchers established a significance level of p ≤ .05. Do keep in mind that the study required the use of a large number of statistical tests. Each test adds to the overall “family” Type I error risk. However, the main purpose of this study was descriptive and exploratory, it was not a confirmatory study with hypotheses testing.

Results and Discussion

Uruguay Science, Research, and Science Education

Overall, 85% of UCS think that science makes life easier for people, compared with students who think there is no net effect (4.9%), that science makes life more difficult for people (4.7%), or that do not know enough about the subject (5.4%). The effect of science has been much more positive for health services (69%) than for food (42%) or the environment (23%). The most negative effect of science is seen in the environment (27%). The percentage of UCS who reported not knowing about the effect of science on food, health services, or the environment in Uruguay ranged from about 10% to 20%.

When UCS were asked to compare Uruguay’s scientific achievements with those of other industrialized countries, they perceived that their country lagged behind other nations. About 5% of the students perceived Uruguay’ scientific achievements as the best (0.2%) or above average (4.8%). About 37% and 55% of UCS thought their country ranked average or below average, respectively. About 4% of the students indicating not knowing how Uruguay would compare with other nations in this criterion.

UCS have a better perception of government resource investments in engineering and technology than those for basic scientific research. About 56% of students stated that engineering and technology investments are worthwhile and will produce long-term positive results, compared with only 39% for a similar question but concerning basic scientific research. Also, UCS split almost evenly in terms of the relative importance of government (39%) and private (37%) resource investments for scientific progress. About one in four students did not know about this topic.

UCS perceived mathematics education K-12 to be relatively better, compared with science and technology education K-12. Their overall assessment of K-12 STEM education in Uruguay is average to below average, when asked to compare with other industrialized nations. Considering that Uruguay ranked 55th out of 65 participating countries in the 2012 PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) tests and that these results have been in many national news outlets, the participants’ perception is hardly surprising (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2012).

Comparison Between UCS and PS

Of the 13 science topics selected, the responses could be classified into three categories: total agreement (response percentage gaps were not statistically significant, p > .05); partial agreement (UCS and PS were on the same “side” of the issue, but response percentage gaps were statistically significant, p < .05); and total disagreement (UCS and PS were on opposite “sides” of the issue).

UCS and PS reported total agreement in only three science topics: the anthropogenic nature of global warming, that some plants should be genetically modified to produce biofuels that can replace fossil fuels, and that offshore oil platforms are not a good idea. UCS and PS reported partial agreement in favor of biological evolution through natural selection, compulsory pediatric vaccination, overpopulation as a problem that will stretch national resources thin, and that investments in the International Space Station are worthwhile; and against the use of fracking to extract fossil fuels and risking astronauts’ lives for space exploration. There was total disagreement between UCS and PS in topics such as the use of animals in scientific research, building nuclear power plants to create electricity, and the safety of genetically modified foods and of crops that were planted in fields where pesticides were used. Table 1 summarizes the results for this section.

Table 1.

Perception Comparison of Science Topics Between UCS and PS.

Survey statements	Participants		Scientists		Test, chi-square statistic	p
Survey statements	n	%	n	%	Test, chi-square statistic	p
I think that humans and other living things have evolved due to natural processes such as natural selection.	379	69.3	3,373	90	3 × 2, 52.496	<.0001
I think that humans and other living things have evolved due to the guidance of a supreme being.	78	14.3	300	10
I think that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.	23	4.2	75	2
I do not know if humans and over living things have evolved due to natural processes, the guidance of a creator, or if they have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.	67	12.2	0	0	n/a
I think that most scientists agree that humans have evolved over time.	440	79.3	3,673	98	2 × 2, 10.226	<.0014
I think that most scientists do not agree that humans have evolved over time.	20	3.6	75	2	2 × 2, 10.226	<.0014
I do not know whether most scientists agree or disagree about humans having evolved over time.	95	17.1	0	0	n/a
The earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity such as burning fossil fuels.	472	84.4	3,261	87	3 × 2, 1.799	.407
The earth is getting warmer mostly because of natural patterns in the earth’s environment.	43	7.7	337	9
There is no solid evidence that the earth is getting warmer.	21	3.8	112	3
I do not know whether the earth is getting warmer because of natural patterns or human activity, or if there is no evidence that the earth is getting warmer.	23	4.1	37	1	n/a
I think that most scientists agree that the earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.	428	77.1	3,261	87	2 × 2, 19.95	<.0001
I think that most scientists do not agree that the earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.	26	4.7	487	13	2 × 2, 19.95	<.0001
I do not know whether most scientists agree or disagree that the earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.	101	18.2	0	0	n/a
I favor the use of animals in scientific research.	129	23.2	3,336	89	2 × 2, 1095	<.0001
I oppose the use of animals in scientific research.	346	62.3	337	9	2 × 2, 1095	<.0001
I do not know whether animals should be used in scientific research or not.	80	14.4	75	2	n/a
I favor building more nuclear power plants to generate electricity.	85	18.3	2,436	65	2 × 2, 353.5	<.0001
I oppose building more nuclear power plants to generate electricity.	346	62.3	1,237	33	2 × 2, 353.5	<.0001
I do not know whether more nuclear power plants should be built or not to generate electricity.	124	22.3	75	2	n/a
I favor the increased use of fracking, a drilling method that uses high-pressure water and chemicals to extract oil and natural gas from rock formations.	68	12.3	1,162	31	2 × 2, 8.051	.005
I oppose the increased use of fracking . . . to extract oil and natural gas from underground rock formations.	217	39.4	2,474	66	2 × 2, 8.051	.005
I do not know whether fracking should be used or not to extract oil and natural gas from underground rock formations.	266	48.3	112	3	n/a
I favor the increased use of genetically engineered plants to create a liquid fuel replacement for gasoline.	338	61.0	2,923	78	2 × 2, 0.802	.37
I oppose the increased use of genetically engineered plants to create a liquid fuel replacement for gasoline.	81	14.6	787	21	2 × 2, 0.802	.37
I do not know whether genetically engineered plants should be used or not to create a liquid fuel replacement for gasoline.	135	24.4	75	2	n/a
I favor allowing more offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic Ocean, near the coast.	138	24.6	1,199	32	2 × 2, 0.175	.68
I oppose allowing more offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic Ocean, near the coast.	298	53.1	2,474	66	2 × 2, 0.175	.68
I do not know whether it should be allowed or not to drill offshore in the Atlantic Ocean, near the coast.	125	22.3	75	2	n/a
Thinking about childhood diseases, such as measles, mumps, rubella and polio, I think that all children should be required to be vaccinated.	413	73.8	3,223	86	2 × 2, 24.57	<.0001
Thinking about childhood diseases . . . I think that parents should be able to decide NOT to vaccinate their children.	111	19.8	487	13	2 × 2, 24.57
I do not know whether or not all children should be required to be vaccinated.	36	6.4	37	1	n/a
The growing population will be a major problem because there won’t be enough food and resources to go around.	236	42.0	3,073	82	2 × 2, 195.5	<.0001
The growing world population will not be a major problem because we will find a way to stretch our natural resources.	198	35.2	637	17	2 × 2, 195.5
I do not know whether a growing population will be a major problem or not.	128	22.8	37	1	n/s
I think the International Space Station has been a good resource investment.	221	39.8	2,549	68	2 × 2, 10.34	.001
I think the International Space Station has not been a good resource investment.	63	11.4	1,162	31	2 × 2, 10.34	.001
I do not know whether or not the International Space Station has been a good resource investment.	271	48.8	75	2	n/a
The cost of sending human astronauts to space is considerably greater than the cost of using robotic machines for space exploration. I think that it is essential to include the use of human astronauts in space.	166	29.4	1,762	47	2 × 2, 6.815	.009
The cost of sending human astronauts to space is considerably greater than the cost of using robotic machines for space exploration. I think that it is not essential to include the use of human astronauts in space.	242	42.9	1,949	52	2 × 2, 6.815	.009
I do not know whether to include or not the use of human astronauts in space.	147	26.1	37	1	n/a
I think it is generally safe to eat foods grown with pesticides.	62	11.1	2,549	68	2 × 2, 523.7	<.0001
I think it is generally unsafe to eat foods grown with pesticides.	392	70.3	1,162	31	2 × 2, 523.7	<.0001
I do not know whether it is generally safe or not to eat foods grown with pesticides.	104	18.6	37	1	n/a
I think it is generally safe to eat genetically modified foods.	98	17.6	3,298	88	2 × 2, 1106	<.0001
I think it is generally unsafe to eat genetically modified foods.	321	57.7	412	11	2 × 2, 1106	<.0001
I do not know whether it is generally safe or not to eat genetically modified foods.	137	24.6	37	1	n/a

Note. UCS = students completing underclassmen college courses; PS = professional scientists.

The survey also included 10 additional science topics of interest to the researchers. These topics were not part of the PS survey. Table 2 summarizes them.

Table 2.

UCS Perceptions of Other Science Topics.

Survey statements	UCS responses
Survey statements	n	%
I favor allowing more people access to experimental drugs before clinical trials have shown the drugs to be safe and effective for that disease or condition.	191	34.3
I oppose allowing more people access to experimental drugs before clinical trials have shown the drugs to be safe and effective for that disease or condition.	253	45.4
I do not know whether or not more people should have access to experimental drugs before clinical trials have shown the drugs to be safe and effective for that disease or condition.	113	20.3
I think it is an appropriate use of medical advances to use biological engineering to create artificial organs for humans needing a transplant operation.	502	90.0
I think using biological engineering to create artificial organs for humans needing a transplant operation takes medical advances too far.	21	3.8
I do not know whether or not it is an appropriate use of medical advances to use biological engineering to create artificial organs for humans needing a transplant operation.	34	6.1
I think that most scientists agree that the universe was created in a single, violent event, often called “the Big Bang.”	317	56.6
I think that most scientists do not agree that the universe was created in a single, violent event, often called “the Big Bang.”	120	21.4
I do not know whether most scientists agree or disagree that the universe was created in a single, violent event, often called “the Big Bang.”	123	22.0
I think that it is an appropriate use of medical advances to change a baby’s genetic characteristics to make the baby more intelligent.	71	12.9
I think that changing a baby’s genetic characteristics to make the baby more intelligent takes medical advances too far.	427	77.4
I do not know whether or not it is an appropriate use of medical advances to change a baby’s genetic characteristics to make the baby more intelligent.	54	9.8
I think that it is an appropriate use of medical advances to change a baby’s genetic characteristics to reduce the risk of serious diseases.	354	63.9
I think that changing a baby’s genetic characteristics to reduce the risk of serious diseases takes medical advances too far.	130	23.5
I do not know whether or not it is an appropriate use of medical advances to change a baby’s genetic characteristics to reduce the risk of serious diseases.	72	13.0
I think that most scientists have a clear understanding of the health effects of genetically modified crops.	225	40.8
I think that most scientists do not have a clear understanding of the health effects of genetically modified crops.	109	19.7
I do not know whether or not scientists have a clear understanding of the health effects of genetically modified crops.	218	39.5
Scientists can change the genes in some food crops to make them grow faster or bigger and be more resistant to bugs, weeds, and disease. When I am food shopping, I always look to see if the plant/vegetable products are genetically modified.	39	7.0
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I sometimes look to see if the plant/vegetable products are genetically modified.	126	22.7
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I rarely look to see if the plant/vegetable products are genetically modified.	103	18.6
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I never look to see if the plant/vegetable products are genetically modified.	243	43.9
I do not know if the plant/vegetable products are genetically modified.	43	7.8
Scientists can change the genes in some farm animals to make them grow faster or bigger and be more resistant to disease. When I am food shopping, I always look to see if the meat products are genetically modified.	43	7.8
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I sometimes look to see if the meat products are genetically modified.	64	11.6
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I rarely look to see if the meat products are genetically modified.	110	20.0
Scientists can change . . . When I am food shopping, I never look to see if the meat products are genetically modified.	286	51.9
I do not know if the meat products are genetically modified.	48	8.7

UCS: Differences by Gender

The Mann–Whitney U test results uncovered that male UCS had a significantly better perception of Uruguay technology (U = 32305.5, p = .01) and engineering K-12 education (U = 30549, p = .002) compared with female UCS. There were no gender differences in the students’ views of science and mathematics K-12 education. Male UCS keep track of science news significantly more often than female students (U = 33087.5, p = .036).

Responses were significantly different by gender in topics such as whether PS are in agreement about whether humans have evolved over time (U = 34122.5, p = .044) and have caused global warming (U = 33156, p = .023), whether genetically modified plants should be used to create biofuels (U = 30655.5, p < .0001), whether overpopulation is a problem that will strain our food resources (U = 31345, p = .002), whether the International Space Station has been a good investment (U = 25514.5, p < .0001), and whether it is not essential to send astronauts for space exploration (U = 30057, p < .0001). For these science topics, male UCS were significantly closer to the scientists’ view.

In addition, responses were significantly different by gender in topics such as whether global warming is caused by anthropogenic causes, such as the burning of fossil fuels (U = 33479.5, p = .012), whether fracking should be used for the extraction of oil and natural gas (U = 31182, p = .002), and whether oil extraction platforms should be placed offshore near the coast (U = 24545.5, p < .0001). For these science topics, female UCS were closer to PS.

Even though both male and female UCS share opposite views on whether animals should be used in experimental research (U = 33215.5, p = .032) and whether more nuclear power plants should be built (U = 32417, p = .016), female students are significantly more opposed than male students.

Across all science topics, an average of 18% of male UCS and 21% of female UCS responded, “I do not know”; an unpaired t test showed that the difference was not significant (t = 0.985, degrees of freedom = 44, p = .3298). Topics that were less familiar to female students were related to the International Space Station, fracking, the safety of genetically modified foods, and human space exploration. For male students, the topics with the highest percentage of “I do not know” responses were related to fracking, the International Space Station, the safety of genetically modified foods, and the safety of crops that were planted in fields where pesticides were used.

UCS: Differences by High School Location and Age

UCS who completed all of their high school outside Montevideo have a significantly more positive view of the long-term effects of engineering and technology investments that the government is making (χ² = 6.378, p = .041), and are significantly more confident of the scientists’ understanding of the health effects of genetically modified foods (χ² = 6.021, p = .049), compared with students who completed all or some of their high school in Montevideo. UCS who completed some of their high school in Montevideo have a significantly more negative view of the effects science had on the quality of health care (χ² = 6.451, p = .040) and were significantly less convinced that human activities are causing global warming (χ² = 5.99, p = .050), compared with students who completed all of their high school in Montevideo or all of their high school in the interior.

For statistical purposes, UCS were divided into two main groups: relatively young (ages 17-19) and relatively old (ages 20-24) students. Relatively older UCS have a significantly more positive view of the long-term effects of basic science investments that the government is making (U = 32473, p = .046) and keep updated about science news significantly more often than relatively young students (U = 32020, p = .011). Also, relatively older UCS have a significantly more positive view of the effects science had on the quality of the environment compared with relatively young students (U = 31187, p = .006).

Conclusion

Overall, this study shows important “good news” regarding UCS perception of science topics, research and STEM education in Uruguay, as well as areas that definitely need to be improved at the national level. The study uncovered that many UCS tend to have an optimistic attitude toward science, and that they recognize its importance and everyday relevance. This information can be used to identify actions that, over time, maintain and strengthen this perception among high school students and the general public. Also, there was a good alignment between UCS and PS in many science topics, which can be seen as a partial victory for some of the national school science education policy priorities, especially those sponsored by ANEP, CES, and the Ministerio de Educación y Cultura or MEC (Ministry of Education and Culture).

On the other hand, the fact that in about 30% of the science topics the perceptions of UCS and PS were not aligned should be an eye-opener for Uruguay’s formal and informal science education efforts. For these science topics, there is a gap between the high school curricular goals, their implementation, and the ultimate goal of producing scientifically and technologically literate citizens that are ready to make personal and social decisions based on sound science. This is consistent with criticism from some scholars, who argue that the latest curriculum reform (completed in 2006) focused on coverage of a number of disconnected science topics, taught mainly in the old “positivistic” style, and with limited time for the analysis of the topics’ social and technological affects (Coll-Cárdenas, 2009). For members of the CES, including the Inspectors (whose main task is to assess teacher quality across Uruguay), the findings of this study will be extremely useful in updating national curricula and teacher assessments, and strengthening it with STS approaches.

The findings and conclusions of this study must be examined in the context of its limitations. First, the use of a 20-minute, paper-and-pencil survey limited the type of questions that could be asked. Second, the fact that a convenience sample of college students in one private university in Montevideo was selected, makes it difficult to extrapolate the findings to other populations of interest. This study is, however, an important baseline that can be expanded with future mixed-methods or qualitative studies targeting other populations of interest.

Scientific literacy is not only the responsibility of formal education. Despite many efforts from MEC and partner organizations, the development and improvement of additional communication channels that can contribute to informal science education seems an urgent matter. Only through enhanced mass media and community engagement can citizens become fully informed of the most recent national and international scientific and technological advances and their implications for all Uruguayans. Efforts tailored to women should be strongly encouraged if the findings of the study are to be followed.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge use of the services and facilities of the Catholic University of Uruguay and Morehead State University.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported in part by the Fulbright Scholars Program, U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, and Fulbright Uruguay.

Author Biographies

Wilson J. González-Espada is an associate professor of Physics and Science Education, Morehead State University. His research interests include physics education, science communication, school science, and socioscientific issues.

Rosina Pérez Aguirre is an associate professor of New Didactics in Education, Catholic University of Uruguay. Her research interests mainly include K-12 education and school science.

Marcos Sarasola is the dean of the Faculty of Human Sciences and chair of the Department of Education, Catholic University of Uruguay. His research interests include evaluation, school improvement and leadership, organizational culture, higher education curriculum, and competency-driven group work.

References

Bernheim

Vaz

(2015). III Encuesta de percepción pública sobre ciencia, tecnología e innovación en Uruguay, 2014 [III Survey of public perception about science, technology and innovation in Uruguay, 2014]. Retrieved from http://www.anii.org.uy/upcms/files/listado-documentos/documentos/an-lisis-de-resultados-eppcti-2014.pdf

Coll-Cárdenas

M. D.

(2009). Francisco Berra y la educación positivista en el Uruguay, 1874-1882 [Francisco Berra and positivist education in Uruguay, 1874-1882]. Anuario del Instituto de Historia Argentina, 9, 43-58.

Consejo de Educación Secundaria. (2006). Reformulación 2006: Programas Bachillerato [2006 High School Program reformulation]. Retrieved from https://www.ces.edu.uy/ces/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=680:reformulacion-2006-programas-bachillerato&catid=2:uncategorised

Croissant

Restivo

Bauchspies

W. K.

(2005). Science, technology and society: A sociological approach. New York, NY: Wiley.

De los Santos

D. M.

Montes

Sánchez-Coronilla

Navas

. (2014). Sol-gel application for consolidating stone: An example of project-based learning in a physical chemistry lab. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 1481-1485.

Dukerich

(2015). Applying modeling instruction to high school chemistry to improve students’ conceptual understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 92, 1315-1319.

European Commission. (2014). Special Eurobarometer 419: Public perceptions of science, research and innovation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion//archives/ebs/ebs_419_en.pdf.

Fischer

M. M. J.

(2006). Science, technology and society. Theory, Culture & Society, 23, 172-174. doi:10.1177/026327640602300228

Furtak

E. M.

Seidel

Iverson

Briggs

D. C.

(2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching. Review of Educational Research, 82, 300-329.

10.

Gay

(2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

11.

Hackett

E. J.

Amsterdamska

Lynch

M. E.

(2007). Handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

12.

Hake

(1998). Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.

13.

Han

Capraro

(2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors in achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 1089-1113.

14.

Inspección de Física. (2006). Programas de bachillerato [High School Physics Programs]. Retrieved from http://aulasvirtuales2.ces.edu.uy/mod/resource/view.php?id=13184.

15.

Jackson

Dukerich

Hestenes

(2008). Modeling instruction: An effective model for science education. Science Educator, 17, 10-17.

16.

Ladson-Billings

(2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0. Harvard Education Review, 84, 74-84.

17.

MacKinnon

G. R.

Williams

(2006). An enhanced studio physics model: Which technologies are productive? Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25, 29-40.

18.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

19.

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

20.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

21.

National Science Teachers Association. (2010). Position statement: Teaching science and technology in the context of societal and personal issues. Retrieved from http://getrealscience.org/erich/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/03/PositionStatement_TeachingScienceAndTechnology.pdf.

22.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2012). Uruguay-PISA: 2012 results overview. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/uruguay-pisa.htm.

23.

Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos. (2016). El estado de la ciencia: Principales indicadores de ciencia y tecnología Iberoamericanos e Interamericanos [The state of science: Principal Iberoamerican and Interamerican science and technology indicators]. Retrieved from http://www.oei.es/historico/divulgacioncientifica/?El-Estado-de-la-Ciencia-2016.

24.

Pew Research Center. (2015). Public and scientists’ views on science and society. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society

25.

Tinker

Horwitz

Bannasch

(2007). Teacher uses of highly mobile technologies: Probes and podcasts. Educational Technology, 47, 16-21.

26.

Yager

R. E.

Choi

Yager

S. O.

Akcay

(2009). A comparison of student learning in STS vs those in directed inquiry classes. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 13, 186-208.