It would appear that as many more voices join in the advocacy for STS-constructivist Reform in science teaching/learning, more discordant notes are emitted. The purpose of the paper therefore, was to spotlight some of these discordant notes emitted in the course of the on-going reform advocacy. Specifically, three of such discordant notes bordering on focus, status, and initiation of the reform are identified. After a critical examination of the seemingly conflicting views on these issues, and drawing from relevant underlying theoretical constructs, more rational, realistic and sustainable viewpoints are synthesized. Introduction Polarization of views or dissension is not an uncommon feature of academic or intellectual debates. Indeed, knowledge growth has benefited immensely from such polarizations or dissensions, which sometimes manifest in competing schools of thought. The on-going STS-Constructivist dialogue ought not to be an exception. It is not to be expected that all will speak with a uniformity of voice on issues pertaining to the reform. Even among its protagonists or proponents, it will be a rare expectation, talk-less among its antagonists or opponents. In a situation such as this, while the antagonists of the reform try to launch attacks at the propositions of the protagonists, the later will strive to debunk such criticisms or attacks. This process ignites a network of intellectual crossfire which will illuminate and brighten the whole terrain of the debate, particularly, the dark corners. This is positive and beneficial to scholarship.