Abstract
In this chapter, we depart from the presupposition that science education reform must anticipate the scientific literacy required by the next generation of citizens. Particularly, this counts for rapidly emerging and evolving scientific disciplines such as genomics. Taking this discipline as a case, such anticipation is becoming increasingly problematic in today’s knowledge societies in which the dynamics of the natural sciences is unprecedented. This raises the question of how to appropriate in science education the dynamics of natural sciences such as genomics. We approach this question from a contemporary sociocultural perspective on the dynamics of science. From this perspective, the contours of a novelized science education become visible. In contrast, it becomes clear in what respect epicized images of science in current science curricula do not capture the dynamics of science. Finally, drawing on the resulting frames, we discuss the aims of science education as denoted by the concept of scientific literacy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 132–165). London: Routledge.
Callon, M. (2001). Actor network theory. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 62–66). Oxford: Elsevier Science.
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.
Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261–295.
Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (2007). A framework for practical work in science and scientific literacy through argumentation. Research in Science and Technological Education, 25, 271–291.
Holzkamp, K. (1993). Lernen: Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlagen [Learning: Subject-scientific foundations]. Frankfurt: Campus-Verlag.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE). (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
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.
Roth, W.-M. (2003a). Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of human practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 9–24.
Roth, W.-M., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York: Routledge.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 33–56.
Roth, W.-M., Lee, Y. J., & Boyer, L. (2008a). The eternal return: Reproduction and change in complex activity systems—The case of salmon enhancement. Berlin: Lehmanns Media.
Roth, W.-M., van Eijck, M., Reis, G., & Hsu, P.-L. (2008b). Authentic science revisited: In praise of diversity, heterogeneity, hybridity. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sanger, F., Air, G. M., Barrell, B. G., Brown, N. L., Coulson, A. R., Fiddes, C. A., Hutchison, C. A., Slocombe, P. M., & Smith, M. (1977). Nucleotide sequence of bacteriophage phi X174 DNA. Nature, 265, 687–695.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
van Eijck, M. W., & Roth, W.-M. (2007b). Improving science education for sustainable development. PLoS Biology, 5, 2763–2769.
Wang, C., Bowen, D. J., & Kardia, S. L. (2005). Research and practice opportunities at the intersection of health education, health behavior, and genomics. Health Education Behaviour, 32, 686–701.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Eijck, M., Roth, WM. (2013). Science as Dynamic Practice. In: Imagination of Science in Education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5392-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5392-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5391-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5392-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)