Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 1015–1047 | Cite as

Designing for expansive science learning and identification across settings

  • Shelley Stromholt
  • Philip Bell
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

In this study, we present a case for designing expansive science learning environments in relation to neoliberal instantiations of standards-based implementation projects in education. Using ethnographic and design-based research methods, we examine how the design of coordinated learning across settings can engage youth from non-dominant communities in scientific and engineering practices, resulting in learning experiences that are more relevant to youth and their communities. Analyses highlight: (a) transformative moments of identification for one fifth-grade student across school and non-school settings; (b) the disruption of societal, racial stereotypes on the capabilities of and expectations for marginalized youth; and (c) how youth recognized themselves as members of their community and agents of social change by engaging in personally consequential science investigations and learning.

Keywords

Science learning and identity Equity Neoliberalism Design-based research Learning across settings 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Achinstein, B., & Aguirre, J. (2008). Cultural match or culturally suspect: How new teachers of color negotiate sociocultural challenges in the classroom. The Teachers College Record, 110(8), 1505–1540.Google Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students’ ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science Education, 85(2), 180–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angelillo, C., Rogoff, B., & Chavajay, P. (2007). Examining shared endeavors by abstracting video coding schemes with fidelity to cases. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 189–206). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Bang, M., Curley, L., Kessel, A., Marin, A., Suzukovich, E. S., III, & Strack, G. (2014). Muskrat theories, tobacco in the streets, and living Chicago as Indigenous land. Environmental Education Research, 20(1), 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Banks, J. A., Au, K. H., Ball, A. F., Bell, P., Gordon, E. W., Gutiérrez, K., et al. (2007). Learning in and out of school in diverse environments: Life-long, life-wide, life-deep. Seattle: Center for Multicultural Education, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  8. Bell, P. (2004). On the theoretical breadth of design-based research in education. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bell, P., Bricker, L., Reeve, S., Zimmerman, H. T., & Tzou, C. (2013). Discovering and supporting successful learning pathways of youth in and out of school: Accounting for the development of everyday expertise across settings. In B. Bevan, P. Bell, R. Stevens, & A. Razfar (Eds.), Learning about out of school time (LOST) learning opportunities (pp. 119–140). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Bell, P., Bricker, L., Tzou, C., & Baines, A. D. (2012). Learning in diversities of structures of social practice. Human Development, 55, 269–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (Eds.). (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: Board on Science Education, National Research Council, The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bencze, L., & Carter, L. (2011). Globalizing students acting for the common good. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 648–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Booker, A., Vossoughi, S., & Hooper, P. (2014). Tensions and possibilities for political work in the learning sciences. Paper presented to ICLS (International Conference of the Learning Sciences).Google Scholar
  14. Brandt, D., & Clinton, K. (2002). Limits of the local: Expanding perspectives on literacy as a social practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(3), 337–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bricker, L., & Bell, P. (n.d.). “I want to be an engineer”: Networks, framing, and positioning in STEM expertise development in and out of school. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  16. Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Calabrese Barton, A., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 50–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carlone, H. B. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: Girls’ access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dewey, J. (1902/1990). The school and society and the child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dreier, O. (2009). Persons in structures of social practice. Theory & Psychology, 19(2), 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Drury, B. J., Siy, J. O., & Cheryan, S. (2011). When do female role models benefit women? the importance of differentiating recruitment from retention in STEM. Psychological Inquiry, 22(4), 265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eisenhart, M., & Allen, C. D. (2016). Hollowed out: Meaning and authoring of high school math and science identities in the context of neoliberal reform. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(3), 188–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Environmental Health Science Education. (n.d.). http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/scied/
  28. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014). Superfund sites where you live. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/
  29. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Lower [river] waterway record of decision. Fact sheet. Retrieved April 2, 2014. [site withheld for anonymity]Google Scholar
  30. Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125.Google Scholar
  31. Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano-López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gutiérrez, K. D., & Larson, J. (2007). Discussing expanded spaces for learning [Profiles and Perspectives]. Language Arts, 85, 69–77.Google Scholar
  33. Gutiérrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hall, J. (Ed.). (2014). Underprivileged school children and the assault on dignity: Policy challenges and resistance. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  35. Harré, R., Moghaddam, F., Cairnie, T., Rothbart, D., & Sabat, S. (2009). Recent advances in positioning theory. Theory & Psychology, 19(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Heath, S. B. (2012). Words at work and play: Three decades in family and community life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Holland, D. C., & Lave, J. (2001). History in person: Enduring struggles, contentious practice, intimate identities. J. Currey: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
  38. Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hursh, D. W., & Henderson, J. A. (2011). Contesting global neoliberalism and creating alternative futures. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(2), 171–185.Google Scholar
  40. Hursh, D., Henderson, J., & Greenwood, D. (2015). Environmental education in a neoliberal climate. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kirshner, B. (2008). Guided participation in three youth activism organizations: Facilitation, apprenticeship, and joint work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 60–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Kushmerick, A., Young, L., & Stein, S. E. (2007). Environmental justice content in mainstream US, 6–12 environmental education guides. Environmental Education Research, 13(3), 385–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lave, J. (1992). Learning as participation in communities of practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  45. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee, C. (2007). Culture, literacy, and learning: Taking bloom in the midst of the whirlwind. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  47. Luehmann, A. L. (2009). Accessing resources for identity development by urban students and teachers: Foregrounding context. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(1), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Medin, D. L., & Bang, M. (2014). Who’s asking? Native science, western science, and science education. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  50. Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Monbiot, G. (2016). Neoliberalism—the ideology at the root of all our problems. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot
  52. Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. M. (2006). Exploring sociocultural perspectives on race, culture, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 449–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
  54. National Research Council. (2015). Guide to implementing the next generation science standards. Committee on Guidance on Implementing the Next Generation Science Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  55. National Resources Defense Council. (2006). The environmental justice movement. http://www.nrdc.org/ej/history/hej.asp
  56. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  57. Penuel, W. R. (2014). Challenges to organizing pathways for STEM learning across settings. Unpublished manuscript, School of Education, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  58. Penuel, W. R., Lee, T. R., & Bevan, B. (2014). Designing and building infrastructures to support equitable STEM learning across settings. http://learndbir.org/talks-and-papers/designing-and-building-infrastructures-to-support-equitable-stem-learning-across-settings-2016
  59. Rahm, J., & Brandt, C. B. (2016). Reimagining science education in neoliberal global contexts: Sociocultural accounts of science learning in underserved communities. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(3), 183–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Razfar, A. (2012). Shifting languages, spaces, and learner identities: Learning mathematics after school. In B. Bevan, P. Bell, R. Stevens, & A. Razfar (Eds.), LOST Opportunities: Learning in out of school time (pp. 95–98). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  61. Rodriguez, A. J. (2015). What about a dimension of engagement, equity, and diversity practices? A critique of the Next Generation Science Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 1031–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, culture, and activity, 1(4), 209–229.Google Scholar
  63. Rosebery, A. S., Ogonowski, M., DiSchino, M., & Warren, B. (2010). “The coat traps all your body heat”: Heterogeneity as fundamental to learning. Journal of Learning Sciences, 19(3), 322–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Tucker-Raymond, E. (2015). Developing interpretive power in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1–30.Google Scholar
  65. Roth, W. M. (2009). Activism or science/technology education as byproduct of capacity building. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 1(1), 16–31.Google Scholar
  66. Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schindel Dimick, A. (2015). Supporting youth to develop environmental citizenship within/against a neoliberal context. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 390–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Smith, C. (2011). The high health costs of a [city’s] Superfund site: it can take years off your life. Investigative Journalism Site. Retrieved April 2, 2015. [site withheld for anonymity]Google Scholar
  70. Smith, G. A., & Sobel, D. (2010). Place- and community-based education in schools. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  71. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stromholt, S. (2015). How students engage in environmental science learning and engineering design across settings. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar
  73. Strong, L., Adams, J. D., Bellino, M. E., Pieroni, P., Stoops, J., & Das, A. (2016). Against neoliberal enclosure: Using a critical transdisciplinary approach in science teaching and learning. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(3), 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Taasoobshirazi, G., & Carr, M. (2008). Gender differences in science: An expertise perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.Google Scholar
  76. Traphagan, K. (2011). Strengthening science education: The power of more time to deepen inquiry and engagement. National Center on Time and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.timeandlearning.org/sites/default/files/resources/strengthening_science_education_full_report_.pdf
  77. Tzou, C., Scalone, G., & Bell, P. (2010). The role of environmental narratives and social positioning in how place gets constructed for and by youth. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43(1), 105–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Weinstein, M. (2016). Negotiating ambivalence: The Next Generation Science Standards and the neoliberal order. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Conference, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  79. Wortham, S. (2008). The objectification of identity across events. Linguistics and Education, 19, 294–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wrenn, M. (2014). Identity, identity politics, and neoliberalism. Panoeconomicus, 61(4), 503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of EducationUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options