Three Perspectives on the Science-Religion Issue in Science Education: Interdisciplinarity, Value or Ideology Orientation and Responsible Personalization
What principles should guide the teaching of controversial, value- or ideology- oriented topics in science education? An answer to this question may provide a frame of reference for the science-religion-worldview issue in school contexts, as well as a necessary background for my main question: Is interdisciplinarity the way to go, and how important is responsible personalization (subjectification) in this context? References to selected sources aim to build connections between the literature on science education and educational theory of a more general character. This chapter is not simply one more contribution from the perspectives of theology, philosophy and science on the relationship between science, worldviews, ideologies etc. However, in the introduction, I summarize a knowledge base for the following discussion. The purpose is to highlight challenges and dilemmas by discussing a didactic model combined with ten theses, which relate to the claim that interdisciplinarity, value or ideology orientation and responsible personalization are necessary preconditions in science education. To concretize, I refer particularly to the debate on methodological versus metaphysical naturalism.
Thanks to my colleagues Solveig Magnus Reindal, Njål Skrunes and Geir Olav Toft. The models we have developed originate from The Linnaeus International Project on Integrative Approaches within Teacher Education initiated by Lena Fritzén and Anna Tapola, Linnaeus University, Sweden, with financial support from The Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education (STINT), Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (RJ), Linnaeus University, and NLA University College (Norway). Thanks also to the editors and reviewers.
- Afdal, G. (2004). Facts, values and moral education. Nordic Studies in Education, 24(3), 195210.Google Scholar
- Albert, M., Paradis, E., & Kuper, A. (2017). Interdisciplinary fantasy. In S. Frickel, M. Albert, & B. Prainsack (Eds.), Investigating interdisciplinary collaboration. Theory and practice across the disciplines (pp. 84–103). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). The nature of science. http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/sfaatoc.htm. Accessed 27 Mar 2017.
- Berliner, D. C. (2006). Educational psychology: Searching for essence throughout a century of influence. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 3–27). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder, Colo: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
- Biesta, G. (2013). Becoming educationally wise: Towards a virtue-based conception of teaching and teacher education. In A.-L. Østern, K. Smith, T. Ryghaug, T. Krüger, & M. B. Postholm (Eds.), Teacher education research between national identity and global trends (pp. 29–51). Trondheim: Akademika Publishing.Google Scholar
- Biesta, G. J. J. (2014a). The beautiful risk of education. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
- Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357–387). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
- Convention on the Rights of the Child. (2017). http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx. Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
- Czerniak, C. M., & Johnson, C. C. (2014). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education vol II (pp. 395–411). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Eisner, E. W. (1992). Curriculum ideologies. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 302–326). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
- Engen, T. O. (2009). Socialization, literacy, and empowerment. In J. A. Bank (Ed.), The Routledge international companion to multicultural education (pp. 252–262). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Geddis, A. N. (1998). Analyzing discourse about controversial issues in the science classroom. In D. A. Roberts & L. Østman (Eds.), Problems of meaning in science curriculum (pp. 115–129). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
- Goodlad, J. I., Klein, M. F., & Tye, K. A. (1979). The domains of curriculum and their study. In J. I. Goodlad et al. (Eds.), Curriculum inquiry. The study of curriculum practice (pp. 43–76). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Hawking, S. (2017). [Hawking on religious beliefs]. http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/551152-when-people-ask-me-if-a-god-created-theuniverse. Accessed 28 Mar 2017.
- Klafki, W. (1998). Characteristics of critical-constructive Didaktik. In B. B. Gundem & S. Hopman (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum (pp. 308–330). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Mahner, M. (2014). Science, religion, and naturalism: Metaphysical and methodological incompatibilities. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1793–1835). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1999). Values in science and in science education [Special issue]. Science & Education, 8(1).Google Scholar
- Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (2009). Science, worldviews and education. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- McNeil, J. D. (2009). Contemporary curriculum in thought and action. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- National Science Teacher Association (2000). The nature of science. http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/natureofscience.aspx. Accessed 27 Mar 2014.
- Patry, J.-L., Weinberger, A., Weyringer, S., & Nussbaumer, M. (2013). Combining values and knowledge education. In B. J. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of educational theories (pp. 565–579). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
- Pring, R. (2004). Philosophy of educational research (2nd ed.). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
- Pring, R. (2015). Philosophy of educational research (3rd ed.). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
- Reiss, M. (2014). What significance does Christianity have for science education? In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1637–1662). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Roberts, D. A. (1998). Analyzing school science courses: The concept of companion meaning. In D. A. Roberts & L. Østman (Eds.), Problems of meaning in science curriculum (pp. 5–12). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
- Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 545–558). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sæther, J., Reindal, S. M., Skrunes, N. & Toft, G.O. (2018). A model for analysing genetics and values in biology textbooks with focus on teacher education. MENON: Journal of Educational Research. Third thematic issue, pp. 46–57. Open access: http://www.edu.uowm.gr/site/system/files/menon_issue_3rd_special_112018.pdf
- Säther, J. (2003). The concept of ideology in analysis of fundamental questions in science education: A review with selected examples from Norwegian curricula and textbooks. Science & Education, 12(3), 237–260.Google Scholar
- Schulz, R. M. (2014). Philosophy of education and science education: A vital but underdeveloped relationship. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1259–1316). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- Sjøberg, S. (2014). Naturfag som allmenndannelse [Science education as “Bildung”]. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.Google Scholar
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948). http://www.un.org/en/universal-declarationhuman-rights/. Accessed 4 Apr 2017.
- Wikipedia (2017). The ideal speech situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_speech_situation. Accessed 20 Feb 2017.
- Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education vol II (pp. 697–726). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (Eds.). (2008). Social and ethical issues in science education [Special issue]. Science & Education, 17(8–9).Google Scholar