Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Collective curriculum design as a tool for rethinking scientific literacy

  • 325 Accesses

  • 3 Citations

Abstract

This is a review essay from an educator’s point of view, on the article written by Maria Inês Mafra Goulart and Wolff-Michael Roth Engaging young children in collective curriculum design. The article as well as the commentary essay contributes to the current agenda about the feasibility of social practices in (science) education even from the early childhood. A child centered collective curriculum design can be a tool for rethinking scientific literacy towards a multi-science perspective, participative thinking and dialectical teaching strategies that take account of structure or/and agency relationships. The review is structured on five levels: (a) scientific literacy, (b) multi-science perspective, (c) participative thinking—structure or∣and agency, (d) comments on methodology—the emergency of a new order, (e) conclusions.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    Engels, Dialectics of nature, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1883/don/ch01.htm, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1878/05/dialectics.htm.

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1–52.

  2. Anderson, J. O., Lin, H.-S., Treagust, D. F., Ross, S. P., & Yore, L. D. (2007). Using large-scale assessment datasets for research in science and mathematics education: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 591–614.

  3. Aristotle (1975). Physics IV (In Greek). Scientific Society of Greek Literature “Papyrus”.

  4. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.

  5. Brooks, P. (1985). Reading for the plot: Design and intention in narrative. New York: Vintage.

  6. Bruner, J. S. (1996). Frames for thinking: Ways of making meaning. In D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Modes of thought: Explorations in culture and cognition (pp. 93–105). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  7. Cobern, W. W. (1991). World view theory and science education research, NARST Monograph no. 3. Manhattan, KS: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.

  8. Cobern, W. W. (1993). Contextual constructivism: The impact of culture on the learning and teaching of science. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 51–69). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

  9. Cobern, W. (1998). Socio-cultural perspectives on science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  10. Costa, V. B. (1995). When science is “another world”: Relationships between worlds of family, friends, school, and science. Science Education, 79, 313–333.

  11. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.

  12. Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261–295.

  13. Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.

  14. Hawkins, J., & Pea, R. D. (1987). Tools for bridging the cultures of everyday and scientific thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 291–307.

  15. Jenkins, E. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 703–710.

  16. Keller, E. F. (1983). A feeling for the organism. New York: W. H. Freeman.

  17. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  18. McCloskey, D. N. (1990). Storytelling in economics. In C. Nash (Ed.), Narrative in culture: The uses of storytelling in the sciences, philosophy, and literature (pp. 5–22). London: Routledge.

  19. Ogawa, M. (1995). Science education in a multi-science perspective. Science Education, 79, 583–593.

  20. Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development. (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework—Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving: Knowledge and skills. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

  21. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry science laboratories. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.

  22. Roth, W.-M. (2002). Taking science education beyond schooling. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 2, 37–48.

  23. Roth, W.-M. (2005). Doing qualitative research. Praxis of method. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  24. Roth, W.-M. (2009). Radical uncertainty in scientific discovery work. Science, Technology and Human Values, 34, 313–336.

  25. Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88, 263–291.

  26. Roth, W.-M., McGinn, M. K., Woszczyna, M., & Boutonne, S. (1999). Differential participation during science conversations: The interaction of focal artefacts, social configurations, and physical arrangements. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 293–347.

  27. Scribner, S. (1986). Literacy in three metaphors. In N. Stein (Ed.), Literacy in American schools: Learning to read and write (pp. 7–22). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  28. Whyte, H. (1981). The value of narrativity in the representation of reality. In W. Mitchell (Ed.), On narrative (pp. 5–27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  29. Wolcott, H. (1999). Ethnography: A way of seeing. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Katerina Plakitsi.

Additional information

This is a review essay of: Goulart, M. I. M. and Roth, W.-M., Engaging young children in collective curriculum design. Cultural Studies of Science Education.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Plakitsi, K. Collective curriculum design as a tool for rethinking scientific literacy. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 5, 577–590 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9288-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Early science education
  • Collective curriculum design
  • Scientific literacy