CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
A Critique of Science Education as Sociopolitical Action from the Perspective of Liberal Education
Tác giả
Hadzigeorgiou Y.
Năm xuất bản
2015
Source title
Science and Education
Số trích dẫn
15
DOI
10.1007/s11191-014-9728-4
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
This paper outlines the rationale underpinning the conception of science education as sociopolitical action, and then presents a critique of such a conception from the perspective of liberal education. More specifically, the paper discusses the importance of the conception of science education as sociopolitical action (e.g., it can provide students with opportunities to link school and society, it can offer them opportunities for more meaningful experiences, and it can also empower them as citizens) and then raises questions about the content of school science, about the place and value of scientific inquiry, and about the opportunities students have for self-directed inquiry. The central idea behind the critique is that a conception of science education as sociopolitical action downplays the importance of knowledge for its own sake and totally neglects the personal/aesthetic dimension of science. © 2014, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
Từ khóa
Critique; Liberal education; Science education as socio-political action; Scientific inquiry; Value of content knowledge
Tài liệu tham khảo
Science for all Americans. Scientific literacy, (1990); Adler M., The paideia proposal, (1980); Aikenhead G., Review of research on humanistic perspectives in science curricula. Paper presented at the 2nd ESERA conference. Noordwijkehoot, Netherland, August, pp. 19-23, (2003); Arlin P., Wisdom: The art of problem finding, Wisdom: Its nature, origin, and development, (1990); Arons A., Achieving wider scientific literacy, Deadalus, 112, pp. 91-122, (1983); Beckett K., R. S. Peters and the concept of education, Educational Theory, 61, pp. 239-255, (2011); Brickhouse N., Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, pp. 282-295, (2001); Brickhouse N., Science for all? Science for girls? Which girls?, A vision for science education, pp. 93-101, (2003); Calabrese-Barton A., Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, representation, and identity, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, pp. 379-394, (1998); Calabrese-Barton A., Osborne M., Urban girls’ participation in formal science settings: Playing with identities and borders, Curriculum & Teaching, 16, pp. 17-38, (2001); Calabrese-Barton A., Osborne M., Reconstructing the harsh world: Science with/for sociopolitical action, Science as/for sociopolitical action, pp. 167-184, (2002); Costa V., When science is “another world”: Relationships between the worlds of family, friends, school and science, Science Education, 79, pp. 313-333, (1995); Counts G., Dare schools build a new social order?, New York: John Day Company, (1932); Cuypers S., R.S. Peters’ ‘The justification of education’ revisited, Ethics & Education, 7, pp. 3-17, (2012); Cuypers S., Martin C., Reading R. S. Peters today: Analysis, ethics and the aims of education, (2011); DeBoer G., A history of ideas in science education, (1991); Dewey J., The way of confusion, John Dewey: The later works, 1925–1953, (1931); Dewey J., Art as experience, (1934); Dewey J., Experience and education, (1938); Dewey J., Childs J., The social-economic situation and education, The educational frontier, pp. 32-72, (1933); Donelly J., Humanizing science education, Science Education, 88, pp. 762-784, (2004); Duschl R., Abandoning the scientistic tradition of science education, Science Education, 72, pp. 51-62, (1988); Egan K., The educated mind. How cognitive tools shape our understanding, (1997); Eisner E., The educational imagination: On design and evaluation of school programs, (1985); Feinstein N., Salvaging science literacy, Science Education, 95, pp. 168-185, (2011); Feynman R., The value of science, Science and ideas, pp. 3-12, (1964); Gallas K., Sometimes I can be anything: Power, gender and identity in a primary classroom, (1997); Gallagher S., Hermeneutics and education, (1992); Girod M., Ran C., Schepige A., Appreciating the beauty of science ideas: Teaching for aesthetic understanding, Science Education, 87, pp. 574-587, (2003); Giroux H., Border crossings. Cultural workers and the politics of education, (1992); Gross P., Levitt N., Lewis M., The flight from science and reason, New York: New York Academy of Sciences, (1996); Habermas J., Knowledge and human interests, (1971); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Relationships, meaning, and the science curriculum, Curriculum & Teaching, 12, pp. 83-90, (1997); Hadzigeorgiou Y., On problem situations and science learning, School Science Review, 81, pp. 43-48, (1999); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Some thoughts on the notion of purposeful learning, Educational Forum, 65, pp. 316-326, (2001); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Romantic understanding and science education, Teaching Education, 16, pp. 23-32, (2005); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Science, personal relevance, and social responsibility: Integrating the liberal and humanistic traditions of science education, Educational Practice & Theory, 27, pp. 82-93, (2005); Hadzigeorgiou Y., On humanistic science education, ERIC DOCUMENT, (2005); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Exploring the possibilities for developing romantic understanding through storytelling. Paper presented at the 1st conference on storytelling and science teaching. Deutsches Museum, Munich, Germany, July, 2006, pp. 3-7, (2006); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Fostering a sense of wonder in the science classroom, Research in Science Education, 42, pp. 985-1005, (2011); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Klassen S., Froese-Klassen C., Encouraging a romantic understanding of science: The effect of the Nikola Tesla story, Science & Education. Published online, (2012); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Konsolas M., Global problems and the curriculum: Toward a humanistic and constructivist science education, Curriculum & Teaching, 16, pp. 29-39, (2001); Hadzigeorgiou Y., Stivaktakis S., Encouraging involvement with school science, Journal of Curriculum & Pedagogy, 5, pp. 138-162, (2008); Hamm C.M., Philosophical issues in education: An introduction, (1989); Helms J., Science and/in the community: Context and goals in practical work, International Journal of Science Education, 20, pp. 643-653, (1998); Hirst P., Liberal education and the nature of knowledge, Education and the development of Reason, pp. 391-414, (1972); Hirst P., Knowledge and the curriculum, London, (1974); Hirst P., Education, knowledge, and practices, Philosophy of education—Major themes in the analytic tradition, pp. 384-395, (1998); Hodson D., Seeking directions for change: The personalization and politicization of science education, Curriculum Studies, 2, pp. 71-99, (1994); Hodson D., Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action, Science Education, 83, pp. 775-796, (1999); Hodson D., Time for action. Science education for an alternative future, International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 645-670, (2003); Holton G., Science education and the sense of self, The flight from science and reason, pp. 551-560, (1996); Hove P., The face of wonder, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, pp. 437-462, (1996); Howe A., A lost dimension in elementary science education, Science Education, 55, pp. 143-146, (1971); Jardine D., Clifford P., Friesen S., Back to the basics of teaching and learning, (2003); Jenkins E., The “nature of science” as a curriculum component, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, pp. 137-150, (1996); Jenkins E., Towards a functional understanding of science, Science today. Problem or crisis?, (1997); Jenkins E., School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science, International Journal of Science Education, 21, pp. 703-710, (1999); Jenkins E., Linking school science education with action, Science as/for sociopolitical action, pp. 17-34, (2002); Jenkins E., Nelson N., Important but not for me: Students’ attitudes toward secondary school science in England, Research in Science and Technological Education, 23, pp. 41-57, (2005); Kelly A., Education and democracy, (1995); Kyle W., The importance of investing in human resources. Editorial, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, pp. 1-4, (1996); Martin J., Needed: A new paradigm for liberal education, Philosophy of education, Vol. 1: Philosophy and education, pp. 267-283, (1998); Matthews M., Science teaching: The role of history and Philosophy of science, East Sussex: Psychology Press, (1994); Matthews M., Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science, (2015); Maxwell N., From knowledge to wisdom, (1984); Maxwell N., What kind of inquiry can best help us create a good world?, Science, Technology and Human Values, 17, pp. 205-227, (1992); McAllister J., Beauty and revolution in science, (1996); Millar R., Osborne J., Beyond 2000: Science education for the future, (1998); Moulakis A., Beyond utility. Liberal education in a technological age, (1994); Norris S., Intellectual independence for nonscientists and other content-transcendent goals of science education, Science Education, 81, pp. 239-257, (1997); Oakeshott M., The voice of liberal learning, (1989); Oakeshott M., Rationalism in politics and other essays, (1991); Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: The PISA 2000 Assessment of Reading, Mathematical, and Scientific Literacy, (2000); Olson J., Lang M., Science and technology and the didactics of citizenship, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36, pp. 543-553, (2004); Opdal P.M., Curiosity, wonder and education seen as perspective development, Studies in Philosophy and Education, 20, pp. 331-344, (2001); Osborne J., Collins S., Ratcliffe M., Millar R., Duschl R., What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, pp. 692-720, (2003); Peters R., Ethics and education, (1966); Peters R., What is an educational process?, The concept of education, pp. 1-23, (1967); Peters R.S., Authority, responsibility and education, (1973); Peters R.S., Aims of education—A conceptual enquiry, The philosophy of education, pp. 1-35, (1973); Peters R.S., Education and the education of teachers, (1977); Peters R., Democratic values and educational aims, Philosophy of education, pp. 339-357, (1988); Peters R.S., The justification of education, Philosophy of education, Vol. 1: Philosophy and education, pp. 207-230, (1998); Phenix P., Promoting personal development through learning, Teachers College Record, 84, pp. 301-317, (1982); Pugh K., Newton’s laws beyond the classroom walls, Science Education, 88, pp. 182-196, (2004); Pugh K.J., Transformative experience: An integrative construct in the spirit of Deweyan pragmatism, Educational Psychologist, 46, pp. 107-121, (2011); Pugh K., Girod M., Science, art, and experience: Constructing a science pedagogy from Dewey’s aesthetics, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, pp. 9-27, (2007); Pugh K.J., Linnenbrink-Garcia L., Koskey K.L.K., Stewart V.C., Manzey C., Motivation, learning, and transformative experience: A study of deep engagement in science, Science Education, 94, pp. 1-28, (2010); Pugh K.J., Linnenbrink-Garcia L., Koskey K.L.K., Stewart V.C., Manzey C., Teaching for transformative experiences and conceptual change: A case study and evaluation of a high school biology teacher’s experience, Cognition and Instruction, 28, pp. 273-316, (2010); Root-Bernstein R., The sciences and arts share a common creative aesthetic, The elusive synthesis. Aesthetics and science, pp. 49-82, (1996); Root-Bernstein R., Aesthetic cognition, International Studies in Philosophy of Science, 16, pp. 61-77, (2002); Rorty R., Solidarity or objectivity?, Post-analytic philosophy, pp. 3-19, (1985); Roth W.-M., Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of collective praxis, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, pp. 9-23, (2003); Roth W.-M., Desautels J., Science education as/for sociopolitical action: Charting the landscape, Science as/for sociopolitical action, pp. 1-16, (2002); Roth W.-M., Desautels J., Science education as/for sociopolitical action, (2002); Roth M., Jornet A., Toward a theory of experience, Science Education, (2013); Roth W.-M., Lee S., Breaking the spell: Science education for a free society, Science as/for sociopolitical action, pp. 67-98, (2002); Roth W.-M., Lee S., Science education as/for participation in the community, Science Education, 88, pp. 263-291, (2004); Rury J., Education and social change, (2002); Sadler T., Zeidler D., Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, pp. 112-138, (2005); Schank R., Making minds less well educated than our own, (2004); Scheffler I., The concept of the educated person, Work, education, and leadership, pp. 81-100, (1996); Schulz R., Reforming science education: Part 1: The search for a philosophy of science education, Science & Education, 18, pp. 225-249, (2009); Sfard A., Prusak A., Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity, Educational Researcher, 34, pp. 14-22, (2005); Shamos M., The myth of scientific literacy, (1995); Solomon J., Conflict between mainstream science and STS in science education, STS education: International perspectives, pp. 3-10, (1994); Solomon J., The UK and the movement for science, technology, and society (STS) education, A vision for science education, pp. 76-90, (2003); Stanley W., Curriculum for utopia, (1992); Stevenson L., Byerly H., The many faces of science. An introduction to scientists, values, and society, (2000); Tauber A., From Descartes’ dream to Husserl’s nightmare, The elusive synthesis: Aesthetics and science, pp. 289-312, (1996); Taylor J., Poetic knowledge. The recovery of education, (1998); Thiessen E.J., R.S. Peters on liberal education—A reconstruction, Interchange, 20, pp. 1-8, (1989); International forum on scientific and technological literacy for all, Final report, (1993); Report of the world conference on science: Framework for action, Science sector, (2000); Wenger E., Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity, (1998); Witz K., Science with values and values for science, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, pp. 597-612, (1996); Wong D., Pugh K., Learning science: A Deweyan perspective, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, pp. 317-336, (2001); Woolgar S., Science: The very idea, (1993); Zeidler D., Nichols B., Socioscientific isuues: Theory and practice, Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21, pp. 49-58, (2009); Zeidler D., Sadler T., Simmons M., Howes E., Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education, Science Education, 89, pp. 357-377, (2005)
Nơi xuất bản
Kluwer Academic Publishers
Hình thức xuất bản
Article
Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus