New Zealand’s draft science curriculum, released last month, promises to advance “knowledge-rich” learning.

But the term remains only loosely defined and the curriculum fails to appreciate the importance of teaching students critical thinking in science.

Research and practice over the past several decades have revealed that a truly knowledge-rich science curriculum encompasses multiple dimensions. These include content knowledge (facts and concepts), procedural knowledge (how to practice science) and epistemic knowledge (understanding the nature of scientific knowledge).

Epistemic knowledge and procedural knowledge are necessary to enable critical thinking, informed decision making and functional scientific literacy. While New Zealand’s draft curriculum is strong on factual content, this comes at the expense of other significant knowledge domains.

Current research on scientific literacy demonstrates that deep knowledge includes awareness of ethical and relational dimensions of science, which are absent in the current draft.

We argue this omission risks failing students and society by not teaching critical thinking – a necessary skill to address the world’s major challenges such as climate change, pandemics and misinformation.

The draft curriculum also offers no insights into how decisions are made about what counts as “core knowledge” and which ideas are prioritised or left out. This obscures whose perspectives shape what counts as essential knowledge.

As reflected in the recent feedback compiled by teacher professional associations, including Earth and Space Science Educators of New Zealand and the

© The Conversation