INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION

Fletcher G. Watson, Section Editor

An Americans Observations on Science Education in the Federal Republic of Germany

HOWARD MUNSON Winona State College, Winona, Minnesota

Statements made in this article are based upon observations which were repeated several times, or upon expressions heard several times from members of the teaching and school administration professions.

I observed the practices and consulted with teachers and publishers associated with the development of new science curriculums in Germany. This was the first visit directly related to teacher education. I had the opportunity to tour teacher education institutions in Berlin, Gottingen, Saarbriicken, Freiburg, and Bremen. I visited schools in Berlin, Gottingen, Piittlingen, Dillingen, and Freiburg. An association for textbook publishers which housed a textbook library was visited in Frankfurt. Representatives of Cultural Ministries were interviewed in Bonn, Berlin, and Saarbrucken.

A brief description of the educational system in the Federal Republic of Germany may serve to modify some observations and place others in proper perspective. Basically the structure for education still begins with a four year school, the Grundschule. Beyond the Grundschule or foundation school, children are sent to one of three types of schools depending upon their ability. About 50% attend the Hauptschule-a five year school which emphasizes the 3 Rs, one foreign language, and some practical skills. Its graduates go on to vocational schools until age 18.

About 25% of the students go on to the Realschule-a seven year school emphasizing two foreign languages, math, sciences, and German. Its graduates typically become secretaries, administrative assistants, nurses, practical engineers, salesmen, et c.

About 25% enter the Gymnasium-a nine year school which is the route to university training. These students must be regarded as the cream of the crop and are usually not only gifted students but are often professionally oriented.

263

Science Education, 60(2): 263-268 (1976) 0 1976 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

264 MUNSON

A new and experimental type of school is currently attracting attention. In some 40 localities, Gesamtschulen (comprehensive schools) have replaced the three types of secondary schools. Gesamtschulen enroll students of all three ability levels and offer basic as well as prevocational and academic preparation. They are a subject upon which vol- umes could be written but at this point it is sufficient that the reader is aware of their existence.

Teachers for the Grundschule and Hauptschule are educated in Padagogische Hochschule (P.H.) which are comparable to our teachers colleges.

Teachers for the Gymnasium are university trained and are subject-matter specialists. Teachers for the Realschule may attend the P.H. and study two academic subjects or they may pursue a less rigorous course at the university and supplement that with some train- ing at the P.H. Teachers in the Gesamtschule have either P.H. or university backgrounds.

The Federal Republic of Germany is divided into 11 governmental units or Lands (States). In each Land, an elected official appoints a Minister of Culture who in turn has ultimate responsibility for and authority over the schools, including the P.H.3 and the universities. Curriculum development, textbook approval, budgeting, and school organi- zation are all functions of this very important and influential office. National goals and directions are developed at meetings of the several cultural ministers with the Minister of Culture in Bonn. This structure is mentioned here to empahsize the fact that decisions whether to develop new curriculums, adopt, and/or adapt curriculums from other nations or to maintain the status quo rests in each State with one man and in the nation these decisions rest with one man in consultation with his subordinates, all of whom are poli- tical appointees and are not answerable to the general public except through their political party.

Against this background let me point out that my observations and conclusions are based upon visits, conferences, observations, and/or consultations with 28 college or university professors or administrators, 12 school teachers, nine persons representing supervision, administration, or curriculum development at the state level, national level, or private foundation, and three persons who represented the school book publishing trade. I soon learned that when I wanted to locate someone representing the sciences I had to specify natural science (Naturwissenschaften) because the word science (Wissenschaften) in Germany includes the social sciences. For the purposes of t h s article, sciences include mathematics, since some of my visits were specifically mathematics oriented.

Some Observations

There is widespread acquaintance with and interest in new curriculum projects in the United States and Great Britain. Even among professors who didnt speak English, I found evidence that they were reading the English and American journals. In short, they were very well informed. One particularly active professor at Gottingen had a sizeable collection of microfiche he had obtained from E.R.I.C. for his personal library. Subscrip- tions to American journals were common both on a private basis and in institutional libraries. Similarly, samples of American and English texts were in evidence everywhere I went.

Individual faculty have not had a great deal of opportunity to observe schools in the U. S . or Britain and therefore have only vicarious knowledge of new programs. Through

SCIENCE EDUCATION IN GERMANY 265

sample books they may know about the content of units but they have generally not had the opportunity to see the materials kits that accompany a large number of our curricula and, of course, they have not seen the curricula implemented. Some publishers have sent representatives abroad to observe, but I have the impression that it is not a widespread practice because of the costs involved.

Science curriculum change in the Federal Republic of Germany seems to suffer most from a lack of a single, concentrated, driving force. Some university and school personnel appear interested but they lack the material means and the direction. Natural sciences were not as fortunate as was mathematics in which case the Cultural Ministers uniformly endorsed the move to new math prior to 1970. A similar multilateral move seems necessary in order to insure the financial support for curriculum change and implementa- tion in the natural sciences. Until that occurs, changes in approaches to science teaching as well as the content will likely come about slowly.

The present state of science teaching seems to be one of change from chalk and talk to active student participation. Student participation, however, appears to be included not so much to teach the methods of scientific inquiry (process) as to reinforce and sup- port the learning of science facts and principles. Typical of related comments was the statement, One learns more completely and remembers longer by doing the experi- ment. My impression is that even if new curricula from the U. S . or Great Britain were to be adopted, they would be adapted more to emphasize product than process.

The above impression is borne out also in the fact that few of the science educators I encountered were willing to discuss hands-on activity as a means of achieving science literacy. Though the term is known from the literature, it does not appear to enjoy wide acceptance as a goal of science teaching-at least not with the same meaning-that is usually attached in the United States.

The relationship of science to technology appears even closer in Germacy than here at home. Examination of science texts, especially at upper grade levels, shows consider- able concern for the application of scientific principles. This should not be surprising for Germany is, of course, highly technology oriented. The lack of curriculum development was, in fact, explained in terms of postwar funds being allocated primarily for technolog- ical and industrial development. I t is not surprising then that technology undergirds much of science teaching.

The application of scientific methods to social and political problems is not a great concern of those teachers in higher education with whom I talked. There is a great deal of political interest and activity among the P.H. and university students in Germany (much more in some localities than in others) and several professors spoke of student insistence that classes-even natural science classes-be a forum for exchange of political and social ideas. It was said with some concern that students expect professors to be interested and involved. Yet few among the professors with whom I spoke indicated that they saw relevance of social-political problems to their fields of specialization and to the methods of science generally. Perhaps many have tried to show relevance and have failed as did one man. He said, in essence, that students want immediate action, immediate answers, and immediate resolution of problems. They are too impatient to follow the logical order of hypotheses, data collection, evaluation, and conclusions. They are im- patient with science. I must confess that this observation troubles me and makes me a bit anxious about that nations political future.

266 MUNSON

For Americans from institutions like my own, the curriculum at the Padagogiche Hochschulen for future teachers of science was surprising. Students preparing to teach any of the science disciplines will take two courses which we would label Methods. One course is referred to as Didactics (for example, didactics in chemistry) and the second is called Techniques. Didactics will normally deal with the theory and philosophy of teaching (chemistry, for example) and will likely also examine typical school curricula. Techniques classes emphasize the methods used to communicate ideas, prepare and give demonstrations, prepare and supervise laboratory experiences, etc. We would likely regard 40 class meetings as too much time to spend on the theory of teaching one discipline. We would also be suspicious of a lot of overlap when we consider that the two courses are often taught by different instructors.

Relative to curriculum, educational technology enjoys considerable use. I saw in use well-developed video taping facilities and computer assisted instruction. Video taping facilities permitting a student teacher to work with a full class of students (30) were seen at two of the P.H.s I visited. Computer assisted instruction was observed in aiding students to analyze English sentence structure and also in teaching students to use taxon- omic keys on botanical specimens, a very interesting application.

Free and open communication between members of a department, whether at a Gymnasium or at a P.H., seems not to be a universal characteristic of German teachers. I asked a Gymnasium teacher if they dont get together, exchange ideas, and discuss common problems. The answer shocked me, but I found it to be common wherever I went-except at the experimental Gesamtschulen. The answer was that good teachers dont have problems. Discussion of problems or problem students seem to be regarded as a sign of weakness. Similarly, a teachers ideas are considered his/her private property and to share them is to give any ones secrets. I could not determine how widespread this attitude is, but I did encounter it.

I noted the exception apparent in the Gesamtschulen. Faculties for Gesamtschulen were specially recruited and group planning and sharing of ideas was a feature known by teachers before they joined the staff. I should add that some departments at several P.H.s appeared to enjoy considerable exchange and sharing of ideas but many did not. We would no doubt find a similar situation in our own colleges. Along this line, there is virtually no mechanism in West Germany that mandates or in any way even makes desir- able continuing education. As is true in many European countries, once a teacher is certified, that certificate is for life and no further education, updating, or new stimulation via course work at P.H. or university is required or encouraged. This fact, plus the appar- ent lack of willingness among teachers to exchange ideas, creates a situation in which a teacher is responsible for his/her own professional enrichment through reading and pri- vate study. One might be tempted to conclude that a relationship exists between this situation and the slow pace of science curriculum revision. Such a conclusion would be pure speculation-but worth pursuing, perhaps. Perhaps, also, a relationship between the present curriculum activity in the Gesamtschule and faculty group planning could be hypothesized.

Sciences in grades one through four are apparently well integrated. Textbook con- tents show a reasonable balance between life sciences and physical sciences, with lesser attention given to earth science. In Gesamtschulen a serious attempt is being made to integrate or fuse the separate science fields in grades five through seven and sometimes

SCIENCE EDUCATION IN GERMANY 267

beyond. Conversely, in schools organized along the Hauptschule-Realschule-Gymnasium lines, each science field is taught separately. Thus a child of 11 or 12 in the fifth school year will attend chemistry class several times a week, a physics class several times a week, and a biology class several times a week. Lest one jump to the conclusion that fifth graders are studying content that our American high school students study, let me hasten to point out that the content for fifth graders, and other grade levels as well, is quite similar to the content in American elementary science text series. It is simply separated into its several content areas.

Among science professors I found a general agreement that a fusing of the sciences through higher grade levels may be a desirable goal. All with whom I raised the question- except one very adamant group of biologists-agreed that many of the concepts and ideas taught at the elementary level do not neatly fall in one science field or another but over- lap or integrate the sciences. Again, some curriculum changes might occur if a greater degree of interchange and communication were to take place.

Two topics of current interest in U. S. schools, environmental education and sex education, are both dealt with in the science curriculums in Germany. Concepts in con- servation, pollution control, and environmental action can be found in science texts for every grade and also in social studies textbooks. Publishers with whom I talked do not anticipate any need for separate texts or other types of print material dealing with the topic and basically believe that the subject will be handled as a part of science for some time to come.

Sex education presents a somewhat different picture. Some biology texts for adoles- cent age groups contain extensive and explicit sex information. Other texts treat the subject lightly. One publisher has two versions of his biology texts available, one with a relatively complete treatment of sex and one without. He explained that in order to have a book acceptable both in the conservative and liberal sections of the nation, he had to prepare two versions of the same text. Another publisher of biology texts omitted from the general text references to human sexual information and placed that material in a supplement that may or may not be purchased with the main text.

As stated earlier, these observations were based upon very limited visits to selected sites. I might point out that I found no evidence that German science educators, even those regarded as leaders in their field, had attempted any observations similar to mine, either in scope or in kind. As a result, I feel justified in commenting on some needs that are apparent as I reflect back upon my experience. I might add that these will perhaps be quite typically American reactions and may not be appropriate when the total German culture is considered. I offer them nevertheless.

Needs in Germany

First, there appears to be a need for some unifying force, agency, or group which will promote the development of new science curricula for Germany or which will pro- mote the adoption, adaptation, and implementation of curricula developed elsewhere. I am aware of the curriculum efforts of Institute for Padagogic Naturwissenschaften (I.P.N.) at Kiel and of isolated efforts to implement programs similar to S.C.I.S. and S.A.P.A. However, what is missing is support and encouragement at the national level. An equivalent of our National Science Foundation could be very effective.

268 MUNSON

Along with the need cited above, there seems to me to be a need to unify the sci- ences, at least the physical sciences, in the first few years of the Hauptschule, Realschule, and Gymnasium. Artificial lines that separate physics from chemistry and chemistry from biology cloud the real significance of many concepts that are not truly of one field or another. I believe that science could be made more interesting and appealing to German students if common natural phenomena were studied for their full significance and mean- ing rather than to isolate out those factors that are (or seem) discretely physics or chem- istry. I saw a fine lesson on expansion of metals caused by heat energy. I was informed that these same children in chemistry had learned some basic ideas about the structure of atoms and molecules. Should not the two ideas have been related, as they presumably would be in a unified science approach?

One professor suggested that the separation of the sciences in the secondary schools is permitted and perhaps encouraged in order to maintain the separation of the disciplines at the P.H. and university level and in order to accommodate specialization among professors. The similarity of that situation to what prevails in the U. S. is too apparent.

I sensed a great need for dialogue in three dimensions. First, there is a need for dialogue among teachers at the secondary school level (Hauptschule, Realschule, and Gymnasium) who, as Ive reported, tend to hide their problems and secret their thoughts relative to teaching strategies and curriculum. Second, there is a need for dialogue among professors at the P.H. and universities. I found (as Im certain is true in the U. S. too) a lack of both inter- and intradepartmental sharing. Certainly the situation differed at each institution. However, generally speaking, more discussion of the current scene seems to be in order. Third, there is a need for discussion between elementary teachers, secondary teachers, and professors from higher education. Something akin to our National Science Teachers Association would make a great contribution to a professional interchange of ideas, goals, and assessments.

Another need relates to the study of curricula extant in other countries. Ive com- mented that I found professors and some teachers well informed about developments abroad. I believe that a mechanism is needed which would make it possible for German teachers and professors to visit schools and colleges in England and the U. S. and observe first-hand students and teachers involved in the new science programs. A beginning is being made under the sponsorship of the Fulbright Commission. I tend to believe, how- ever, that additional means of support and greater numbers of persons should be in- volved in order to influence the status of science education in Germany.

This research was supported by a Fulbright-Hays grant under the Pilot Project for Educational Experts.

References

1. Littmann, U., An Introduction to the Confusion of German Education, Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, Dokumentation and Information, Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 1972.

2 . Geimer, R., and H. Geimer, Science in the Federal Republic of Germany- Organization and Promotion, Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, Dokumenta- tion and Information, Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 197 1.

Received February 3,1975