Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 1023–1028 | Cite as

How could it be? calling for science curricula that cultivate morals and values towards other animals and nature

  • Marianne R.  Logan
  • Joshua J.  Russell
Forum
First Online:

Abstract

Can science curricula truly cultivate morals and values towards nature? This is the question that is raised by Carolina Castano Rodriguez in her critique of the new Australian Science curriculum. In this response to Castano Rodriguez’s paper we ask two questions relating to: the influence of curricula on the relationships of children and other animals; and other models of science education regarding animals and nature that may be more relevant, just, or caring. In responding to these questions stimulated by the reading of Castano Rodriguez’s paper, we reflect on our own experiences. We note the conflict between the values depicted in the curriculum priorities and the underlying anthropocentric view that appears to be embedded in the Australian Science Curriculum and in curricula generally. With this conflict in mind we encourage educators to examine our own practices regarding how the relationships between humans and other animals are promoted. We put forward the idea of science education that responds to the shifting views of science and its applications outside the confines of the laboratory to one that encourages both ethical and political discussion that is already taking place in the community relating to the role of science and technology in our lives and the lives of other animals.

Keywords

Values Animals Nature National curriculum Science technology Society 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), (2015). Cross curriculum priorities. Sydney: ACARA. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/crosscurriculumpriorities/sustainability/overview.
  2. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), (2015b). The Australian curriculum science (Foundation to 10) (Version 8). Sydney: ACARA. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/download/f10.
  3. Birke, L. (1995). Exploring the boundaries: Feminism, animals, and science. In C. J. Adams & J. Donovan (Eds.), Animals and women feminist theoretical explorations. Durham and London: Duke University Press. Google Scholar
  4. Castano, C. (2012). Fostering compassionate attitudes and the amelioration of aggression through a science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 961–986. doi: 10.1002/tea.21023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castano Rodriguez, C. (2015). Which values regarding nature and other species are we promoting in the Australian Science Curriculum? Cultural Studies of Science Education. doi: 10.1007/s11422-015-9675-7.Google Scholar
  6. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  7. Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action. Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670. doi: 10.1080/09500690305021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jenkins, E. (2002). Linking school science education with action. Counterpoints, 210, 17–34.Google Scholar
  10. Kumar, D., & Chubin, D. (2000). Introduction. In D. D. Kumar & D. E. Chubin (Eds.), Science, technology, and society: A sourcebook on research and practice (pp. 2–8). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuzich, S. (2011). It’s not only green that matters: Understanding education for sustainability in schools. International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability, 7(3), 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pedersen, H. (2010). Is ‘the posthuman’educable? on the convergence of educational philosophy, animal studies, and posthumanist theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 237–250. doi: 10.1080/01596301003679750.Google Scholar
  13. Steffen, W., Crutzen, P., & McNeill, J. (2007). The Anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 36(8), 614–621. doi: 10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:TAAHNO]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Waldau, P. (2013). Animal studies: An introduction. Cambridge: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Wals, A. E., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Stevenson, R. B. (2014). Convergence between science and environmental education. Science, 344(6184), 583–584. doi: 10.1126/science.1250515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationSouthern Cross UniversityCoolangattaAustralia
  2. 2.Animal Behavior, Ecology, and ConservationCanisius CollegeBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options