The Really Useful Elementary Science Book

reviewed by Jeffrey J. Rozelle & Mary Bearkland — April 06, 2012

Title: The Really Useful Elementary Science Book

Author(s): Jeffrey W. Bloom

Publisher: Routledge, New York

ISBN: 0415958199, Pages: 224, Year: 2010

Search for book at Amazon.com

Historically, science as a subject has received scant attention in elementary schools, particularly in comparison with literacy or mathematics (e.g., Schoeneberger & Russell, 1986; Tilgner, 1990; Victor, 1962). With contemporary reforms in the United States like No Child Left Behind, elementary school science received an additional blow because the standardized testing central to the reform initially included only literacy and math; schools and teachers (quite reasonably given the pressure) responded by shifting additional instructional time away from subjects like science and social studies and toward those subjects that would determine their success (Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; Marx & Harris, 2006). Even with the later inclusion of science as part of the testing program at limited grades, little evidence exists that science has garnered much increased attention. In addition to these factors, however, elementary teachers’ content knowledge for science has generally been found to be weak (Davis, Petish, & Smithey, 2006), which is likely an additional contributing factor to science’s low status in younger grades. Struggles with content knowledge are not surprising given that elementary teachers must be prepared as generalists, capable of teaching all subject matters; given how important literacy and mathematics are at early grades, preparation in those areas is generally more complete than in science. Even completing introductory-level sequences for each science subject (biology, chemistry, physics, and earth science) is generally far beyond the requirements for preservice elementary science teachers in an undergraduate program. In the end, elementary teachers might be asked to teach about rocks and minerals, the water cycle, food webs, forces and motion, states of matter, and the solar system—drawn from different disciplines of science—without the necessary content preparation to do it. It is into this challenge that Jeffrey W. Bloom steps with his book The Really Useful Elementary Science Book, which seeks to serve as a one-stop science content resource for preservice and practicing elementary teachers.

The Really Useful Elementary Science Book sets out to be a resource for current and future K–8 teachers by providing background science knowledge for teaching elementary and middle school science. It is not meant to be a “how-to” manual and does not give suggestions for activities or recommendations for science instruction; rather, Bloom directly attempts to address the difficulty described earlier—that many K–8 educators come to the profession with limited experience and background knowledge pertaining to the science topics they are expected to teach. As such, the book has been organized around each of four disciplinary themes: life sciences, ecological sciences, physical sciences, and earth sciences. In each section, the specific National Science Education Content Standards (NSES) being addressed are clearly stated at the outset, and information within the section is organized by key ideas (National Research Council, 1996). For example, in the Earth and Space section, “objects in the sky” is one of the K–4 content standards addressed, and “Earth, Moon and Solar System” is one of the key ideas that Bloom addresses within this standard. The author has also embedded, within the major themes, information regarding “History and Nature of Science” and “Science in Personal and Social Perspectives,” both of which are important in the NSES. Additional resources and references for teachers to extend their study of a subject are helpfully provided at the end of each chapter, though most are in the form of websites that may over time become unavailable.

The organization of the book around traditional science themes, along with a corresponding list of the NSES, is one of the strengths of this book. It allows for easy access to a specific topic and keeps that topic in the context of the broader idea while also providing assurance to the reader that the information presented is aligned with the standards. Another of the book’s strengths is the use of clear language without avoidance of scientific terminology. Bloom does a reasonable job with this difficult task of writing for an audience that likely does not have a strong science background without oversimplifying the material. Bloom is sure to include the important vocabulary in his explanations, while avoiding scientific jargon that would make the text challenging or uninteresting to read.

In giving Ecology and the Environment a separate section rather than spreading it out among the other topics—in contrast to the NSES—a more fully developed treatment of these topics is possible. As a result, this section provides the depth necessary for understanding and teaching the topics presented. Particularly good descriptions and comparisons are presented for the key idea of “sequences and cycles-life, energy, and materials” with extensive and helpful diagrams for the nitrogen, carbon, sulfur, phosphorous, and water cycles for clearer visualization of the processes involved in each. In the Physical Sciences section, the author does a particularly commendable job in accurately describing the properties of sound waves, noting how these waves are often erroneously depicted like those found in the ocean. An accompanying figure accurately portraying sound waves as the compression of air particles is helpful in supporting the description in the text.

Despite these strengths of the book, it suffers from a fundamental weakness that it does not overcome, one that perhaps can’t be overcome given its mission. In just 214 pages, it attempts to describe all science content that an elementary teacher might possibly encounter. To be useful, these descriptions can’t simply be summaries like those found in elementary science textbooks; instead, Bloom aims for developing readers’ conceptual understanding of the topics, a task that requires some space to develop an idea. Given these demands for both efficiency and conceptual depth, Bloom had to make some difficult decisions about which topics received an in-depth treatment and which received more cursory summaries. As a result, the book feels uneven in its treatment of topics. As described, Bloom devoted a whole chapter to ecological science; as a result, he had the space to develop ideas about nutrient cycles in ways that might enable the building of content understanding for teachers unfamiliar with those topics. On the other hand, in subjects like “life processes and levels of organization” or “layers of the atmosphere,” the descriptions are briefer, more burdened with vocabulary, and unlikely to engage or develop understanding in readers who weren’t already knowledgeable about the topic. The logic regarding which topics receive a more in-depth treatment and which do not isn’t explicitly addressed and invites questioning. The result of these undoubtedly tough decisions is that for some content areas, the book seems much less useful than others. This critique of the book mirrors, of course, the oft-made criticism of U.S. curriculum (in science and elsewhere) that emphasizes “a mile-wide and inch-deep” coverage of content (Schmidt, Houang, & Cogan, 2002). Bloom’s challenge of writing a short book that addresses all of science in accessible ways to elementary teachers was made perhaps impossible by the mile-wide swath of content that elementary teachers are expected to teach.

References

Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651.

Griffith, G., & Scharmann, L. (2008). Initial impacts of No Child Left Behind on elementary science education. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(3), 35–48.

Marx, R. W., & Harris, C. J. (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks. Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 467–477.

National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Schmidt, W. H., Houang, R., & Cogan, L. (2002). A coherent curriculum: The case of mathematics. American Educator, 26(2), 10–26, 47–48.

Schoeneberger, M., & Russell, T. (1986). Elementary science as a little added frill: A report of two case studies. Science Education, 70(5), 519–538.

Tilgner, P. J. (1990). Avoiding science in the elementary school. Science Education, 74(4), 421–431.

Victor, E. (1962). Why are our elementary school teachers reluctant to teach science? Science Education, 46(2), 185–192.