Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 453–467 | Cite as

What does it means to be a critical scholar? A metalogue between science education doctoral students

  • Heidi Cian
  • Nikeetha Dsouza
  • Renee Lyons
  • Daniel Alston
Forum

Abstract

This manuscript is written in response to Lydia Burke and Jesse Bazzul’s article Locating a space of criticality as new scholars in science education. As doctoral students finding our place in the culture of science education, we respond by discussing our journeys towards the development of a scholarly identity, with particular focus on whether or how we see ourselves as critical scholars. Since each of us authoring this paper has a different perspective, a metalogue format is utilized to ensure all of our voices and journeys are represented. We use the Burke and Bazzul article as a platform for conversations about challenges faced for emerging scholars in the field of science education and explore how we see our role in responding to these challenges. Specifically, we discuss the barriers to publication, dissemination of research to practitioners, and how to approach these problems from a grounding in critical theory. As a result of our conversations, we conclude that there is a need to reshape the field of science education to invite more unorthodox research perspectives, methodologies, and publication formats. To do so, the issues we explore require a continued conversation between emerging scholars, practicing researchers, and practicing educators.

Keywords

Science education Metalogue Doctoral students Critical scholarship Identity development 

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27(1), 1–52.Google Scholar
  2. Apple, M. W. (2011). Paulo Freire, critical pedagogy and the tasks of the critical scholar/activist. Revista e-Curriculum, 7(3), 1–21.Google Scholar
  3. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. San Francisco: Chandler Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  4. Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Brookfield, S. D. (2014). Foundations of critical theory. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(4), 417–428. doi: 10.1177/1523422314543819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cochran-Smith, M. (2000). Blind vision: Unlearning racism in teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 70(2), 157–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collin, F., & Pedersen, D. B. (2015). The Frankfurt school, science and technology studies, and the humanities. Social Epistemology, 29(1), 44–72. doi: 10.1080/02691728.2013.782588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Derrida, J. (1995). The gift of death: Religion and postmodernism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  10. Derrida, J. (2001). I have a taste for the secret. In G. Donis & D. Webb (Eds.), A taste for the secret (pp. 1–92). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Foss, S., & Foss, K. (2013). A tale of two travelers: The divergent journeys of critical scholars and rhetorical theorists. Western Journal of Communication, 77(5), 529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.Google Scholar
  13. Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogy in process: The letters to Guinea-Bissau. New York: Seabury Press.Google Scholar
  14. Harper, S., & Nichols, A. (2008). Are they not all the same?: Racial heterogeneity among black male undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 49(3), 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2015). Methodological responsibility outside duty: Responsibility matters. In Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology, (pp. 115–134). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lemke, J. (2011). The secret identity of science education: Masculine and politically conservative? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(2), 287–292. doi: 10.1007/s11422-011-9326-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liddell, D. L., Wilson, M. E., Pasquesi, K., Hirschy, A. S., & Boyle, K. M. (2014). Development of professional identity through socialization in graduate school. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 51(1), 69–84. doi: 10.1515/jsarp-2014-0006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Martel, A. (1995). Margins of exclusion, margins of transformation the place of women. Inside-Out: Contemporary Critical Perspectives in Education, 152–166.Google Scholar
  20. Paul, J. L. (2005). Introduction to the philosophies of research and criticism in education and the social sciences. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  21. Roth, W., McRobbie, C. J., & Lucas, K. B. (1998). Four dialogues and metalogues about the nature of science. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 107–118. doi: 10.1007/BF02461645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sawyer, D, I. I. I., & Palmer, R. (2014). A different kind of black, but the same issues: Black males and counter stories at a predominantly white institution. Journal of Progressive Policy and Practice, 2(3), 255–272.Google Scholar
  23. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Solorzano, D., & Yosso, T. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Staller, K. (2007). Metalogue as methodology. Qualitative Social Work, 6(2), 137–157. doi: 10.1177/1473325007077236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tobin, K., & Roth, W. (2002). The contradictions in science education peer review and possibilities for change. Research in Science Education, 32(2), 269–280. doi: 10.1023/A:1016038414389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heidi Cian
    • 1
  • Nikeetha Dsouza
    • 1
  • Renee Lyons
    • 1
  • Daniel Alston
    • 1
  1. 1.Eugene T. Moore School of EducationClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations