Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 309–325 | Cite as

Framing equity through a closer examination of critical science agency

  • Kathleen SchenkelEmail author
  • Angela Calabrese Barton
  • Edna Tan
  • Christina Restrepo Nazar
  • Marcos D. González D. Flores
Original Paper

Abstract

Science for all has been touted as the primary path to equity in science education in the USA. We argue that without attention to the power imbalances that both create and sustain dominant views of science education; such an approach is not equity-oriented but rather science colonizing. In this manuscript, we draw upon critical views of justice to argue that a more equity-oriented approach to science education focuses on critical science agency (CSA)—using science knowledge and other forms of distributed expertise to redress instances of injustice. Using critical participatory ethnography methodology with a social practice theory lens, we suggest that youth enact forms of CSA by directly incorporating their developing understandings of intersecting scales of injustices into their scientific knowledge and practice in an iterative and generative way. This process enabled the girls to reshape scientific knowledge and authority hierarchies in their science community. Finally, partly due to the disruption of dominant norms of science teaching and learning, the girls in our study utilized and shared expansive expertise enacting CSA. These findings advance our fields’ understanding of CSA, and its potential for pushing science education to be more justice-oriented.

Keywords

Critical science agency Equity Justice Identity 

Resumen

Ciencia para todos ha sido promovida como la vía principal hacia la equidad en la educación científica en los Estado Unidos. Sostemos que si no se atienden a las desigualdades de poder creadas y manteninas por las ideas dominantes de la educación científica; este planteamiento no está orientado a la equidad sino hacia la colonización científica. En este escrito recurrimos a perspectivas críticas de justicia para plantear que un acercamiento a la educación científica más orientado hacia la equidad se centra en la acción crítica científica (ACC) Utilizando conocimiento científico y otras formas de distribución de competencias para corregir casos de injusticia. Utilizando metodologías participativas y críticas de etnografía a traves del lente de la teoría de la práctica social, señalamos que la juventud llevan a cabo formas de ACC al incorporar directamente el entendimiento que desarrollan sobre las escalas transversales de injusticia a su conocimiento y práctica científica en forma reiterada y generativa. Este proceso habilita a las niñas para que den una nueva forma al conocimiento científico y las jerarquías de autoridad en su comunidad científica. Finalmente, y en parte por la disrupción de las normas de dominantes del aprendizaje y la enseñanza en ciencias, que la niñas en este estudio utilizaron y compartieron experiencias expansivas al llevar a cabo ACC. Estos hallazgos permiten que nuestro campo avance en el entendimiento de ACC y en su potencial para hacer que la educación científica sea más justa.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under DRL 1502755.

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: a cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of research in science teaching, 36(3), 269–287. ​ https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199903)36:3<269::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balibar, E., Mezzadra, S., & Samaddar, R. (2012). The borders of justice. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(1), 28–41.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1087572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basile, V., & Lopez, E. (2015). And still I see no changes: enduring views of students of color in science and mathematics education policy reports. Science Education, 99(3), 519–548.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu, S. J., Calabrese Barton, A., Clairmont, N., & Locke, D. (2009). Developing a framework for critical science agency through case study in a conceptual physics context. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(2), 345–371.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9135-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calabrese Barton, A. (2001). Science education in urban settings: Seeking new ways of praxis through critical ethnography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 899–917.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (Eds.). (2008). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. New York: Routledge.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203932100.
  9. Dawson, E. (2014). Equity in informal science education: developing an access and equity framework for science museums and science centres. Studies in Science Education, 50(2), 209–247.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.957558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualisation. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Finley-Brook, M., & Holloman, E. L. (2016). Empowering energy justice. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(9), 926.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13090926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition? A political-philosophical exchange. Brooklyn: Verso.Google Scholar
  13. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.Google Scholar
  14. Jurow, A. S., & Shea, M. (2015). Learning in equity-oriented scale-making projects. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(2), 286–307.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2015.1004677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Paris, D., & Winn, M. T. (2014). Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544329611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Philip, T. M., & Azevedo, F. S. (2017). Everyday science learning and equity: Mapping the contested terrain. Science Education, 101(4), 526–532.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice (Original ed.). Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Squire, V., & Darling, J. (2013). The “minor” politics of rightful presence: Justice and relationality in City of Sanctuary. International Political Sociology, 7(1), 59–74.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stanley, W., & Brickhouse, N. (1994). Multiculturalism, universalism, and science-education. Science Education, 78(4), 387–398.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730780405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
  21. Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathleen Schenkel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Angela Calabrese Barton
    • 1
  • Edna Tan
    • 2
  • Christina Restrepo Nazar
    • 3
  • Marcos D. González D. Flores
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Teacher EducationMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Department of Teacher Education and Higher Education, 402 School of EducationUniversity of North Carolina at GreensboroGreensboroUSA
  3. 3.Division of Curriculum & InstructionCalifornia State University, Los AngeleLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations