Student Agency in Negotiating the Relationship Between Science and Religion

Article
  • 54 Downloads

Abstract

Research examining the relationship between science and religion has often painted a narrative of conflict for students with various religious beliefs. The purpose of this paper is to present a counter-narrative based on a study carried out in Singapore, which provides a unique multi-ethnic and multi-religious environment and geopolitical context to study the phenomenon. Informed by the theories of collateral learning, situated cognition and agency, the study examined how a group of high school biology students viewed and negotiated the relationship between biological evolution and their beliefs in Christianity. Case study methodology and semi-structured interviews were used to generate thick descriptions of their views. Findings from the study illustrate how the students exhibited agency in deliberately creating multiple resolution mechanisms as they recognised and negotiated the conceptual and social tensions between the worldviews of evolution and creationism. The findings suggest that the students exhibited more agency in resolving the perceived conflict between science and religion than we tend to ascribe based on previous interpretative accounts that emphasised confrontation, alienation and marginalisation. The implication is that students’ agency in negotiating the differing worldviews between science and religion should be seen as a resource for the learning of evolution, rather than a hindrance.

Keywords

Agency Religion Evolution Multi-culturalism 

References

  1. Ahearn, L. M. (2001). Language and agency. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 109–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Astley, J., & Francis, L. J. (2010). Promoting positive attitudes towards science and religion among sixth-form pupils: dealing with scientism and creationism. British Journal of Religious Education, 32(3), 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, B. (1995). Interviewing: a technique for assessing science knowledge. Learning science in the schools: research reforming practice, 347–364.Google Scholar
  6. Berkman, M. B., & Plutzer, E. (2011). Defeating creationism in the courtroom, but not in the classroom. Science, 331, 404–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Billingsley, B. (2013). Students’ perceptions of apparent contradictions between science and religion: creation is only the beginning. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science education for diversity: theory and practice (pp. 329–338). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Billingsley, B., Taber, K. S., Riga, F., & Newdick, H. (2012). Secondary school students’ epistemic insight into the relationships between science and religion—a preliminary enquiry. Research in Science Education, 43, 1715–1732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. BouJaoude, S., Wiles, J. R., Asghar, A., & Alters, B. (2011). Muslim Egyptian and Lebanese students’ conceptions of biological evolution. Science & Education, 20(9), 895–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bredo, E. (1994). Reconstructing educational psychology: situated cognition and Deweyian pragmatism. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clancey, W. J. (1997). Situated cognition: on human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Comaroff, J., & Comaroff, J. L. (1997). Of revelation and revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deniz, H., Donnelly, L. A., & Yilmaz, I. (2008). Exploring the factors related to acceptance of evolutionary theory among Turkish preservice biology teachers: toward a more informative conceptual ecology for biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 420–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Denzin, N. K. (2002). Interpretive interactionism (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Department of Statistics. (2010). Census of population 2010. Singapore Retrieved from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/publications/publications-and-papers/cop2010/census10_stat_release1.
  17. El-Hani, C. N., & Sepulveda, C. (2010). The relationship between science and religion in the education of protestant biology preservice teachers in a Brazilian university. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(1), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Francis, L. J., & Greer, J. E. (2001). Shaping adolescents’ attitudes towards science and religion in Northern Ireland: the role of scientism, creationism and denominational schools. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(1), 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (p. 1071). New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.Google Scholar
  20. Guthrie, J. T., & Davis, M. H. (2003). Motivating struggling readers in middle school through an engagement model of classroom practice. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 59–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hermann, R. S. (2008). Evolution as a controversial issue: a review of instructional approaches. Science & Education, 17(8–9), 1011–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heron, A. H. (2003). A study of agency: multiple constructions of choice and decision-making in an inquiry-based summer school program for struggling school readers. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 46(7), 568–579.Google Scholar
  23. Hinchman, K. A., Alvermann, D. E., Boyd, F. B., Brozo, W. G., & Vacca, R. T. (2004). Supporting older students’ in- and out-of-school literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, 304–310.Google Scholar
  24. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hung, D., Looi, C.-K., & Koh, T.-S. (2004). Situated cognition and communities of practice: first-person ‘lived experiences’ vs. third-person perspectives. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 193–200.Google Scholar
  26. Jegede, O. J. (1995). Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics education in Africa. Studies in Science Education, 25(1), 97–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Langen, A. v., & Dekkers, H. (2005). Cross-national differences in participating in tertiary science, technology, engineering and mathematics education. Comparative Education, 41(3), 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lawson, A. E., & Worsnop, W. A. (1992). Learning about evolution and rejecting a belief in special creation: effects of reflective reasoning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief and religious commitment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee, H. (2006). How to stay an oasis in a troubled world. The Straits Times.Google Scholar
  30. Martin-Hansen, L. M. (2008). First-year college students’ conflict with religion and science. Science Education, 17, 317–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCrory, C., & Murphy, C. (2009). The growing visibility of creationism in Northern Ireland: are new science teachers equipped to deal with the issues? Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(3), 372–385.Google Scholar
  32. Meadows, L., Doster, E., & Jackson, D. F. (2000). Managing the conflict between evolution & religion. The American Biology Teacher, 62(2), 102–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., & Okamoto, S. (2006). Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313, 765–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ministry of Education. (2015). Biology GCE ordinary level 2017 (Syllabus 5158) Retrieved from http://www.seab.gov.sg/content/syllabus/olevel/2017Syllabus/5158_2017.pdf.
  35. Ministry of Education. (2016). Biology syllabus pre-university higher 2 syllabus 9744. Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default-source/document/education/syllabuses/sciences/files/pre-university-h2-biology---2016.pdf.
  36. Moje, E. B., & Lewis, C. (2007). Examining opportunities to learn literacy: the role of critical sociocultural literacy research. In E. B. Moje, C. Lewis, & P. Enciso (Eds.), Reframing sociocultural research on literacy; identity, agency, and power (pp. 15–48). Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  37. Moore, R. (2007). The history of the creationism/evolution controversy and likely future developments. In L. Jones & M. J. Reiss (Eds.), Teaching about scientific origins: taking account of creationism (pp. 11–29). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  38. Murphy, C., Hickey, I., & Beggs, J. (2010). All Christians? Experiences of science educators in northern Ireland. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(1), 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections: London: The Nuffield Foundation. Vol. 13.Google Scholar
  40. Pazza, R., Penteado, P. R., & Kavalco, K. F. (2010). Misconceptions about evolution in Brazilian freshmen students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 3(1), 107–113.Google Scholar
  41. Perry, K. (2007). Sharing stories, linking lives: literacy practices among Sudanese refugees. I. In V. Purcell-Gates (Ed.), Cultural practices of literacy: case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and power (pp. 169–178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..Google Scholar
  42. Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Rappa, N. A., & Tang, K. S. (2017). Student agency: An analysis of students’ networked relations across the informal and formal learning domains. Research in Science Education, 47(3), 673–684.Google Scholar
  44. Reiss, M. J. (2008). Creationism, Darwinism and ID: what are biology teachers supposed to do? Biologist, 55, 28–32.Google Scholar
  45. Reiss, M. J. (2009). Imagining the world: the significance of religious worldviews for science education. Science and Education, 18, 783–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research Newbury Park, CA: Sage. (Vol. 15).Google Scholar
  47. Taber, K. S. (2008). Exploring conceptual integration in student thinking: evidence from a case study. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1915–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Taber, K. S. (2009). Progressing science education: constructing the scientific research programme into the contingent nature of learning science Springer Science & Business Media. Vol. 37.Google Scholar
  49. Taber, K. S., Billingsley, B., Riga, F., & Newdick, H. (2011). Secondary students’ responses to perceptions of the relationship between science and religion: stances identified from an interview study. Science Education, 95(6), 1000–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tan, C. (2008). The teaching of religious knowledge in a plural society: the case for Singapore. International Review of Education, 54(2), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tang, K. S. (2011). Hybridizing cultural understandings of the natural world to foster critical science literacy. (Doctoral dissertation), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3476796).Google Scholar
  52. Vadeboncoeur, J. A., Kostogriz, A., & Hirst, E. (2006). Spatializing sociocultural research: a reading of mediation and meaning as third spaces: a reading of mediation and meaning as third spaces. Mind, Culture and Activity, 13(3), 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wallace, C. S. (2004). Framing new research in science literacy and language use: authenticity, multiple discourses, and the Third Space. Science Education, 88(6).Google Scholar
  54. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: design and methods (5th ed.). Washington D.C.: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationCurtin University of TechnologyBentleyAustralia
  2. 2.National Institute of EducationNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations