Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 435–452 | Cite as

(Re)considering Foucault for science education research: considerations of truth, power and governance

  • Jesse Bazzul
  • Lyn Carter
Forum
First Online:

Abstract

This article is a response to Anna Danielsonn, Maria Berge, and Malena Lidar’s paper, “Knowledge and power in the technology classroom: a framework for studying teachers and students in action”, and an appeal to science educators of all epistemological orientations to (re)consider the work of Michel Foucault for research in science education. Although this essay does not come close to outlining the importance of Foucault’s work for science education, it does present a lesser-known side of Foucault as an anti-polemical, realist, modern philosopher interested in the way objective knowledge is entangled with governance in modernity. This latter point is important for science educators, as it is the intersection of objective knowledge and institutional imperatives that characterizes the field(s) of science education. Considering the lack of engagement with philosophy and social theory in science education, this paper offers one of many possible readings of Foucault (we as authors have also published different readings of Foucault) in order to engage crucial questions related to truth, power, governance, discourse, ethics and education.

Keywords

Michel Foucault Science Education Governance Knowledge Realism Power Biopolitics 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Althusser, L. (1998). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. In J. Rivkin & M. Ryan (Eds.), Literary theory, an anthology (pp. 294–304). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. J. (Ed.). (2013). Foucault and education: Disciplines and knowledge. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, A. C. (1998). Feminist science education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bazzul, J. (2012). Neoliberal ideology, global capitalism, and science education: Engaging the question of subjectivity. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 1001–1020. doi: 10.1007/s11422-012-9413-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bazzul, J. (2014a). Critical discourse analysis and science education texts: Employing Foucauldian notions of discourse and subjectivity. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 36, 422–437. doi: 10.1080/10714413.2014.958381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bazzul, J. (2014b). Science education as a site for biopolitical engagement and the reworking of subjectivities: Theoretical considerations and possibilities for research. In J. L. Bencze & S. Alsop (Eds.), Activist science and technology education (pp. 37–53). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bazzul, J. (2014c). Tracing “ethical subjectivities” in science education: How biology textbooks can frame ethico-political choices for students. Research in Science Education, 45, 23–40. doi: 10.1007/s11165-014-9411-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bazzul, J. (2016). Ethics and science education: How subjectivity matters. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-39132-8.Google Scholar
  9. Bazzul, J. (2017). The ‘subject of ethics’ and educational research OR Ethics or politics? Yes please! Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–11. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2016.1270184.
  10. Bencze, L., & Carter, L. (2011). Globalizing students acting for the common good. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 648–669. doi: 10.1002/tea.20419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blades, D. W. (1997). Procedures of power and curriculum change. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  12. Butler, J. (1997). The psychic life of power: Theories in subjection. Redwood city, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Butler, J. (2002). What is critique? An essay on Foucault’s virtue. http://f-origin.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/744/files/2012/03/butler-2002.pdf.
  14. Calabrese-Barton, A. (2000). Crafting multicultural science education with preservice teachers through service learning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32, 797–820. doi: 10.1080/00220270050167189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Canguilhem, G. (2001). The living and its milieu. Grey Room, 03, 7–31. doi: 10.1162/152638101300138521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carter, L. (2005). Globalisation and science education: Rethinking science education reforms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 561–580. doi: 10.1002/tea.20066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carter, L. (2008). Sociocultural influences on science education: Innovation for contemporary times. Science Education, 92, 165–181. doi: 10.1002/sce.20228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carter, L. (2014). The elephant in the room: Science education, neoliberalism and resistance. In L. Bencze & S. Alsop (Eds.), Activist science and technology education (pp. 23–36). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Danielsonn, A., Berge, M., & Lidar, M. (2017). Knowledge and power in the technology classroom: A framework forstudying teachers and students in action. Cultural Studies of Science Education. doi: 10.1007/s11422-016-9782-0.Google Scholar
  20. Deleuze, G. (1988). Foucault. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Deleuze, G. (Winter, 1992). Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59, 3–7.Google Scholar
  22. Eijck, M. V., & Roth, W. M. (2007). Keeping the local local: Recalibrating the status of science and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in education. Science Education, 91, 926–947. doi: 10.1002/sce.20227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Erickson, F. (2012). Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1451–1469). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_93.
  24. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  25. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge (1st American ed.). New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  26. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Random House LLC.Google Scholar
  27. Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: An introduction (Vol. 1) (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  28. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical inquiry, 8, 777–795. doi: 10.1086/448181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Foucault, M. (1984). What is enlightenment? In P. Rabinow (Ed.), The Foucault reader (pp. 32–50). New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  30. Foucault, M. (2003a). So is it important to think? In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault, selections from essential works of Foucault, 1954–1984 (pp. 170–174). New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  31. Foucault, M. (2003b). Ethics of a concerned self. In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault, selections from essential works of Foucault, 1954–1984 (pp. 25–42). New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  32. Foucault, M. (2003c). What is critique? In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault, selections from essential works of Foucault, 1954–1984 (pp. 263–278). New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  33. Foucault, M. (2003d). Polemics, politics, and problematizations: An interview with Michel Foucault. In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault, selections from essential works of Foucault, 1954–1984 (pp. 18–24). New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  34. Foucault, M. (2003e). Technologies of the self. In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault, selections from essential works of foucault, 1954–1984 (pp. 145–169). New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  35. Foucault, M. (2013). Speech begins after death. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  36. Foucault, M., & Senellart, M. (2010). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  37. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Higgins, M. (2016). Reconfiguring the optics of the critical gaze in science education (after the critique of critique): (Re)thinking “what counts” through Foucaultian prismatics. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1-8. doi: 10.1007/s11422-016-9799-4.
  39. Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. New York: Liberal Arts Press.Google Scholar
  40. Matthews, M. R. (1993). Constructivism and science education: Some epistemological problems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2(1), 359–370. doi: 10.1007/BF00694598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McKinley, E. (2008). From object to subject: Hybrid identities of indigenous women in science. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 959–975. doi: 10.1007/s11422-008-9128-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Melville, W., & Bartley, A. (2013). Constituting identities that challenge the contemporary discourse: Power, discourse, experience, and emotion. Science Education, 97, 171–190. doi: 10.1002/sce.21047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mills, S. (2003). Routledge critical thinkers: Michel Foucault. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nichols, R. (2010). Postcolonial studies and the discourse of Foucault: Survey of a field of problematization. Foucault Studies, 9, 111–114. doi: 10.22439/fs.v0i9.3062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nola, R. (1994). Postmodernism, a French cultural Chernobyl: Foucault on power/knowledge. Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 37, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nola, R. (2000). Saving Kuhn from the sociologists of science. Science & Education, 9, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peters, M. (2009). Education, enterprise culture and the entrepreneurial self: A Foucauldian perspective. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 2, 58–71.Google Scholar
  48. Pierce, C. (2012). Education in the age of biocapitalism: Optimizing educational life for a flat world. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  49. Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Rabinow, P., & Rose, N. (2006). Biopower today. BioSocieties, 1(2), 195–217. doi: 10.1017/S1745855206040014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rose, N. S. (2007). Politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1515/9781400827503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roth, W. M. (2015). Schooling is the problem: A plaidoyer for its deinstitutionalization. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15, 315–331. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2015.1051672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sharma, A. (2012). Global climate change: What has science education got to do with it? Science & Education, 21, 33–53. doi: 10.1007/s11191-011-9372-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sharma, A., & Muzaffar, I. (2012). The (non) making/becoming of inquiry practicing science teachers. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 175–191. doi: 10.1007/s11422-011-9372-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sokal, A. D., & Bricmont, J. (1998). Fashionable nonsense: Postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  56. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak. In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). London: Macmillan Education. doi: 10.1007/978-1-349-19059-1_20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weinstein, M. (2010). Bodies out of control: Rethinking science texts (Vol. 30). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  58. Ziman, J. (2002). Real science: What it is and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ReginaReginaCanada
  2. 2.Australian Catholic UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options