¹ Department of Education and Science and the Welsh Office, Science in the National Curriculum, London: HMSO, 1989.Google Scholar

² National Curriculum Council, Science. Non-Statutory Guidance, Bradford, 1989, p. A4Google Scholar; National Curriculum op. cit. (1), p. 36.Google Scholar

³ See National Curriculum op. cit. (1), pp. 36–7.Google Scholar The text is reproduced in full on pp. 63–4 below, by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

⁴ Rutherford, F. J., Holton, G. and Watson, F. G., Project Physics Text, New York, 1970Google Scholar; For a discussion of EXACT see Bijker, W., ‘Some philosophical and ethical principles underlying the science series “EXACT”’. Unpublished paper for the Workshop on Science Education and Ethics, Amsterdam, 1983.Google Scholar

⁵ Science Education and the History of Physics/Enseignement Scientifique et Histoire de la Physique. 21–25 November 1988Google Scholar, Paris, France, Paris: Centre Scientifique d'Orsay; Centre de Recherche en Histoire des Sciences et des Techniques. No editor named. See especially the papers by Ott, and Vedin, , Broman, , Broman, and Ott, , and Knudsen, , pp. 215–44.Google Scholar

⁶ Shortland, M. and Warwick, A. (eds.), Teaching the History of Science, Oxford, 1989.Google Scholar

⁷ Shortland, and Warwick, , op. cit. (6), pp. 17–53.Google Scholar For Jenkins, see pp. 22–3.Google Scholar

⁸ British Association for the Advancement of Science, Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, London, 1918, p. 160.Google Scholar

⁹ Solomon, J., Nott, M. et al. , Exploring The Nature of Science, London, forthcoming.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See, for example, Boyd, J. and Whitelaw, W., Understanding Science, 2 vols., London, 1989–1990Google Scholar, vol. 1. For criticisms of these ‘read about’ sections see Ellis, P., ‘New Materials for a Historical Dimension to Physics Teaching’, in Diamond, P. (ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth Multinational Conference on Science Education and the History of Physics. Cambridge, England, 28–3008 1990, Institute of Physics: LondonGoogle Scholar, forthcoming.

¹¹ Conant, J. B. (ed.), Harvard Case Histories in Experimental Science, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass., 1964.Google Scholar

¹² Rutherford, F., Holton, G. and Watson, F. G., Project Physics Text, New York, 1970.Google Scholar For evaluation see Brush, Stephen, ‘History of Science and Science Education’Google Scholar in Shortland, and Warwick, , op. cit. (6), pp. 56–63.Google Scholar

¹³ Solomon, J., The Search for Simple Substances, ASE: Kettering, 1989, pp. 16–23.Google Scholar Solomon has explained privately that she avoids the more historical label of ‘alchemist’ because of its irrational connotations. This raises the question of how far simplification or falsification can be permitted in pursuit of other aims before the purpose of a history of science is lost. The same problem occurs in the context of, not multicultural but anti-sexist aims. Suggestions for anti-racist and anti-sexist history are made in Shortland, and Warwick, , op. cit. (6)Google Scholar, by Rattansi and Brush respectively. A list of women prominent in the history of physics, prepared by B. Parker et al., is available from the Institute of Physics, Belgrave Square, London. One might suggest that, if we agree modern science was the creation of rich, white, male Europeans, then the redress is limited. Discussion is even more necessary of the reasons why marginal groups were (and continue to be) excluded. Tokenist accounts of women, who were not of course allowed to add to mainstream developments, are necessary for role model creation but they risk the inference that women have generally made only minor contributions.

¹⁴ Quotation from Solomon in Shortland, and Warwick, , op. cit. (6), p. 43.Google Scholar See Kingsley, N., Louis Pasteur, Kettering, 1989Google Scholar, for a pupil resource presenting the weaker interpretation.

¹⁵ For a statement of this purpose see Solomon, J. et al. , Teaching about the Nature of Science, ASE: no place given, 1989, p. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Ibid.

¹⁷ Shapin, S., ‘History of science and its sociological reconstructions’, History of Science (1982), 22, pp. 157–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarSolomon, J., What is Science?, in Hunt, A. (ed.), SATIS 16–19, ASE: Hatfield, 1989.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Honey, J. (ed.), Investigating the Nature of Science, Harlow, 1990Google Scholar, Unit K.

¹⁹ See below, pp. 71–2.

²⁰ Solomon, J., How Can We Be Sure?, Oxford, 1983.Google Scholar

²¹ National Curriculum Council, op. cit. (2), p. A5Google Scholar, Section 4.3.

²² See Collins, H. M. and Shapin, S., ‘Experiment, science teaching and the new history and sociology of science’, in Bevilacqua, F. and Kennedy, P. J. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on using History of Physics in Innovatory Physics Education. 5–909 1983. Pavia, Italy.Google Scholar A revised version appears in Shortland, and Warwick, , op. cit. (6), pp. 67–79.Google Scholar

²³ Op. cit. (15).

²⁴ See p. 64 above.

²⁵ National Curriculum Council, op. cit. (2), p. F1.Google Scholar Emphasis supplied.

²⁶ Op. cit. (15), pp. 3, 7.

²⁷ Ibid., pp. 7, 10.

²⁸ Op. cit. (20).

²⁹ SirLee, Desmond CBE, Lindsay, Donald et al. , Science and Social Development, in Science in Society series, 12 vols., London, 1981, Book KGoogle Scholar; see Lee, , ‘Science, technology and society in the ancient world’Google Scholar. Other articles are not so reliable, and indeed conflict with Lee's historicist approach.

³⁰ Ellis, P., ‘Education Forum. The newsletter and forum for the Education Section of the British Society for the History of Science’ (1990), II, p. 1.Google Scholar

³¹ Solomon, J., The Big Squeeze, Kettering, 1989.Google ScholarMiddleton, W. E. Knowles, The History of the Barometer, Baltimore, 1964Google Scholar, Part I.

³² Solomon, , op. cit. (31), p. 29.Google Scholar One should not object simply to the language, which is in part an attempt to convey respectable Kuhnian views on paradigm maintenance in secondary school terms.

³³ Pascal, B., Oeuvres Complètes, 3 vols., Bruges, 1970–, vol. 2, pp. 549, 717.Google Scholar For an extended historical review, see Pumfrey, S., ‘Squeezing the history into physics teaching: Pascal and air pressure’Google Scholar, in Diamond, P. (ed.), op. cit. (10).Google Scholar

³⁴ Kingsley, N., Louis Pasteur, Kettering, 1989, p. 19.Google Scholar For Pasteur's admission see Conant, J. (ed.), Harvard Case Histories in Experimental Science, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass., 1964, vol. 2, pp. 519–20.Google Scholar

³⁵ This distinction bears no relation to the Popperian one between the contexts of discovery and justification, which concerns the thought processes of the scientist. Rather, it focuses on the social contexts of presentation (how scientific work was made persuasive for an audience) versus acceptance (the grounds on which the work in fact became persuasive).

³⁶ For the Visiting Historians of Science Scheme, contact Dr S. Pumfrey, Department of History, University of Lancaster, Lancaster LA1 4YG.