Skip to main content
Log in

A critical materialist entry into the comforts and dangers in defining academics’ of science teaching and learning research communities

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cultural Studies of Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on science teaching and learning commonly makes use of reductionism to specify conditions of science learning. In my studies of academics’-of-science-teaching-&-learning (academics’-of-st&l) research practices and values, I discuss how philosophic inquiry shifted my research practices from reductionism to critical (or, “new”) materialism, where critical materialism is a research approach attuned to the materiality of social practices. Reading materiality as affectual, intellectual, and spatial components of practices turns my attention toward the logics informing academics’-of-st&l research practices as well as the comfortable and dangerous effects of particular practices on our connectible landscape. In this forum response, I briefly explore multiple logics informing academics’-of-st&l conference attendance choices, in addition to these choices’ alignment to communal definition rendered by governmental and conference entities. I also explore other modes of communal boundary-marking experienced by academics-of-st&l that do not make use of formal definitions, but suggest that it is in the minutiae of conference relating that academics-of-st&l construct their sensing of communal un/boundedness. With these explorations, I hope to generate awareness of the small shifts that re-configuring practices can make possible in academics’-of-st&l connectivity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitken, V., Fraser, D., & Price, G. (2007). Negotiating the spaces: Relational pedagogy and power in drama teaching. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 8(14), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akarsu, B. (2010). Science education research vs. physics education research: A structural comparison. European Journal of Physics Education, 1(1), 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, M. (2004). A discourse that disciplines, governs, and regulates: The National Research Council’s report on scientific research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403259482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. (2012). Interview with Rosi Braidotti. New Materialism: Interviews & cartographies (pp. 19–37). Ann Arbor, Michigan: MPublishing, University of Michigan Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman (1st ed.). Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S. D., Pelaez, N. J., Rudd, J. A., Stevens, M. T., Tanner, K. D., & Williams, K. S. (2008). Science faculty with education specialties. Science, 322(5909), 1795–1796. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1162072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canguilhem, G. (1991). The Normal and the pathological. (C. R. Fawcett, Trans.). New York: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coole, D., & Frost, S. (Eds.). (2010). New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics. Durham NC; London: Duke University Press Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. (B. Massumi, Trans.) (1st ed.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1996). What is philosophy? (H. Tomlinson & G. Burchell, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (2010). The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Walnut Creek, California: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, E. L., Elliott, S. L., Henderson, C., Curran-Everett, D., John, K. S., & Ortiz, P. A. (2018). Evaluating discipline-based education research for promotion and tenure. Innovative Higher Education, 43(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-017-9406-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. (2010). The materialism of historical materialism. In D. Coole & S. Frost (Eds.), New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics (pp. 281–298). Durham NC; London: Duke University Press Books.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. (C. Gordon, Ed.) (1st ed.). New York: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1984). The Foucault reader. (P. Rabinow, Ed.). New York: Pantheon.

  • Foucault, M. (2009). Preface. In G. Deleuze & F. Guattari, R. Hurley (Trans.), Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. New York, NY: Penguin Classics. (Original work published in 1977).

  • Godfrey, E., & Parker, L. (2013). Mapping the cultural landscape in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01038.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, R. (2009). Framing equity: Helping students “play the game” and “change the game.” Teaching for Excellence and Equity in Mathematics, 1(1), 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C., Connolly, M., Dolan, E. L., Finkelstein, N., Franklin, S., Malcom, S., et al. (2017). Towards the STEM DBER Alliance: Why we need a discipline-based STEM education research community. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0076-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howley, A., & Hartnett, R. (1992). Pastoral power and the contemporary university: A Foucauldian analysis. Educational Theory, 42(3), 271–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2004). On qualitative inquiry: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayumova, S., McGuire, C. J., & Cardello, S. (2018). From empowerment to response-ability: rethinking socio-spatial, environmental justice, and nature-culture binaries in the context of STEM education. Cultural Studies of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9861-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Ulmer, J. B. (2015). Vital illusions, images, and education. In G. S. Cannella, M. S. Perez, & P. A. Pasque (Eds.), Critical qualitative inquiry. Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315431161/chapters/10.4324%2F9781315431178-17.

  • Kuntz, A. M. (2015). Logics of extraction. In The responsible methodologist: Inquiry, truth-telling, and social justice. Walnut Creek, California: Routledge.

  • Kuntz, A. M., & Guyotte, K. W. (2017). Inquiry on the sly: Playful intervention as philosophical action. Qualitative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417734566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, Y. G., Bollen, L., de Jong, T., & Lazonder, A. W. (2016). Scaffolding learning by modelling: The effects of partially worked-out models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(3), 502–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. National Academies Press.

  • Rutledge, M. (2013). “Biology education”—An emerging interdisciplinary area of research. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(3), 58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidman, I. (1997). Interviewing as qualitative research (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley, T. F., McConnell, D., McNeal, K. S., Petcovic, H. L., & John, K. E. S. (2017). Transdisciplinary science education research and practice: Opportunities for GER in a developing STEM discipline-based education research alliance (DBER-A). Journal of Geoscience Education, 65(4), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-65.4.354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. J., Slater, T. F., & Bailey, J. M. (2011). Discipline-based science education research: A scientist’s guide (1st ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taconis, R., Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M., & Broekkamp, H. (2001). Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 442–468. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trauth-Nare, A. (2016). Re-envisioning scientific literacy as relational, participatory thinking and doing. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9676-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulmer, J. B. (2017). Writing slow ontology. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416643994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulmer, J. B., & Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2014). Writing visually through (methodological) events and cartography. Qualitative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414542706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walkerdine, V. (2013). Using the work of Felix Guattari to understand space, place, social justice, and education. Qualitative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413502934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M. F. G. (2018). The paradox of un/making science people: practicing ethico-political hesitations in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9831-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooten, M. M. (2018). A cartographic approach to the study of academics’ of science teaching & learning (academics’-of-st&l) research practices and values. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Wooten, M. M., Coble, K., Puckett, A. W., & Rector, T. A. (in press). Investigating introductory astronomy students’ perceived impacts from participation in course-based undergraduate research experiences. Physical Review Physics Education Research.

  • Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and Methods (5th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeyer, A., Çetin-Dindar, A., Zain, A. N. M., Juriševič, M., Devetak, I., & Odermatt, F. (2013). Systemizing: A cross-cultural constant for motivation to learn science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(9), 1047–1067. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the University of Alabama College of Education’s William E. Sexton Endowed Scholarship and Dr. Brad S. Chissom Memorial Scholarship. I acknowledge Dr. Kelly Guyotte and MTSU’s Biology Education Association’s valuable input toward shaping my methodology’s phrasings and demonstration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michelle M. Wooten.

Additional information

Lead editor: J. Bazzul.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wooten, M.M. A critical materialist entry into the comforts and dangers in defining academics’ of science teaching and learning research communities. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 14, 231–247 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9871-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9871-3

Keywords

Navigation