Advertisement

From empowerment to response-ability: rethinking socio-spatial, environmental justice, and nature-culture binaries in the context of STEM education

  • Shakhnoza Kayumova
  • Chad J. McGuire
  • Suzanne Cardello
Original Paper

Abstract

In this conceptual paper, we draw upon the insights of Feminist Science Studies, in particular Karen Barad’s concept of agential realism, as a critical analytical tool to re-think nature and culture binaries in dominant science knowledge-making practices and explanatory accounts, and their possible implications for science education in the context of socio-spatial and environmental injustices. Barad’s framework proposes a relational and more expansive approach to justice, which takes into account consequential effects of nature-culture practices on humans, non-humans, and more than human vitalities. In efforts to understand potentialities of Barad’s theory of agential realism, we situate our argument in the “story” of local children who encounter a bottle of cyanide in a former manufacturing building. The story takes place in a post-industrial urban city located in the U.S., caught up in an inverse relationship between the technological and scientific advances observed “globally” and the deteriorating environmental and living conditions experienced “locally” as the result of erstwhile industrial activity. Based on agential realist readings of the story and taking into consideration children’s developing subjectivities, we argue that equity-oriented scholarship in science education might not be able to achieve justice devoid of understanding of the relatedness to plurality of life forms. We invite our readers to consider (re)configuring socio-spatial and environmental issues as an ethical response-ability that is constituted through relationships of care, recognition, openness, and responsiveness to vitalities of humans and nonhumans equally, one which cannot be conceptualized from a priori and distant calculations, but rather continuous entangled relations.

Keywords

Science education Feminist new materialisms Environmental justice Socio-spatial justice Material-discursive practices 

References

  1. Apple, M. W. (2008). Can schooling contribute to a more just society? Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 3(3), 239–261.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197908095134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnaut, K. (2011). The human zoo after Abu Ghraib: Performance and subalternity in the ‘cam era’. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, 11, 1–24.Google Scholar
  3. Atweh, B. (2011). Reflections on social justice, race, ethnicity and identity from an ethical perspective. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 33–47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-93053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bang, M., & Marin, A. (2015). Nature–culture constructs in science learning: Human/non-human agency and intentionality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 530–544.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bang, M., Warren, B., Rosebery, A. S., & Medin, D. (2012). Desettling expectations in science education. Human Development, 55(5–6), 302–318.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000345322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.  https://doi.org/10.1086/345321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barad, K. (2010). Quantum Entanglements and Hauntological Relations of Inheritance: Dis/continuities, SpaceTime Enfoldings, and Justice-to-Come. Derrida Today, 3(2), 240–268.  https://doi.org/10.3366/E1754850010000813 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barad, K. (2012). Interview with Karen Barad. In I. Van der Tuin & R. Dolphijn (Eds.), New materialism: Interviews & cartographies (pp. 48–70). Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  10. Basile, V., & Lopez, E. (2015). And still I see no changes: Enduring views of students of color in science and mathematics education policy reports. Science Education, 99(3), 519–548.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Basile, V., & Murray, K. (2015). Uncovering the need for diversity among K–12 STEM educators. Teacher Education and Practice, 28(2/3), 255–268.Google Scholar
  12. Bazzul, J., & Kayumova, S. (2016). Toward a social ontology for science education: Introducing Deleuze and Guattari’s assemblages. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 48(3), 284–299.Google Scholar
  13. Bazzul, J., & Kayumova, S. (2017). ‘STEPPING’ toward a critical-activist science education: Dialoguing subjectivity, social ontology and multiplicities. In J. L. Bencze (Ed.), Science and technology education promoting wellbeing for individuals, societies and environments (pp. 613–624). Dorecht: Springer International.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55505-8_30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bazzul, J., & Kayumova, S. (2018). Exploring ethical relations to self and new ontologies. In G. Reis, M. Mueller, R. Gisewhite, L. Siveres, & R. Brito (Eds.), Sociocultural perspectives on youth ethical consumerism (pp. 101–114). Cham: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65608-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bencze, L., & Carter, L. (2011). Globalizing students acting for the common good. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 648–669.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Boslaugh, S. (2013). Anthropocentrism. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/anthropocentrism.
  18. Braidotti, R. (2012). Interview with Rosi Braidotti. In I. Van der Tuin & R. Dolphijn (Eds.), New materialism: Interviews & cartographies (pp. 19–37). Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  19. Butler, L., Scammell, M., & Benson, E. (2016). The Flint, Michigan, water crisis: A case study in regulatory failure and environmental injustice. Environmental Justice, 9, 93–97.  https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2016.0014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Calabrese-Barton, A., & Upadhyay, B. (2010). Teaching and learning science for social justice: Introduction to the special issue. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43, 1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680903484917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Clark, L. P., Millet, D. B., & Marshall, J. D. (2014). National patterns in environmental injustice and inequality: Outdoor NO2 air pollution in the United States. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e94431.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cole, A. G. (2007). Expanding the field: Revisiting environmental education principles through multidisciplinary frameworks. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38, 35–45.  https://doi.org/10.3200/joee.38.1.35-46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dance, L. (2002). Tough fronts: The impact of street culture on schooling. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Davies, B. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 43–63.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. DeLanda, M. (2012). Interview with Manuel DeLanda. In I. Van der Tuin & R. Dolphijn (Eds.), New materialism: Interviews & cartographies (pp. 38–47). Ann Arbor: Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  26. Dimick, A. (2012). Student empowerment in an environmental science classroom: Toward a framework for social justice science education. Science Education, 96, 990–1012.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dobscha, S., & Ozanne, J. L. (2001). An ecofeminist analysis of environmentally sensitive women using qualitative methodology: The emancipatory potential of an ecological life. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 20(2), 201–214.  https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.20.2.201.17360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dreyfus, H. L. & Rabinow, P. (1982). Michel Foucault. Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Ellul, J. (1990). The technological bluff. (G. Bromiley, Trans.). Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  31. Feynman, R. P. (1995). Six easy pieces: Essentials of physics explained by its most brilliant teacher. In Reading: Helix Books (selected chapters from The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume 13, RP Feynman, Reading: Addison-Wesley, 19631965).Google Scholar
  32. Frost, S. (2011). The implications of the new materialisms for feminist epistemology. In H. E. Grasswick (Ed.), Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: Power in knowledge (pp. 69–83). Dorecht: Springer International.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6835-5_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Garcia, S. B., & Guerra, P. L. (2004). Deconstructing deficit thinking: Working with educators to create more equitable learning environments. Education and Urban Society, 36(2), 150–168.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124503261322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grosz, E. (2002). Jacques Lacan: A feminist introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for social justice. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  36. Gutiérrez, R. (2009). Framing equity: Helping students “play the game” and “change the game”. Teaching for excellence and Equity in Mathematics, 1(1), 4–8.Google Scholar
  37. Gutiérrez, R. (2017). Living mathematx: Towards a vision for the future. The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, 32, 1–34.Google Scholar
  38. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Haraway, D. J. (1994). A game of cat’s cradle: Science studies, feminist theory, cultural studies. Configurations, 2(1), 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Harris, S. (1952). The economics of New England: Economics of an older area. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hufnagel, E., Kelly, G. J., & Henderson, J. A. (2017). How the environment is positioned in the Next Generation Science Standards: A critical discourse analysis. Environmental Education Research.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1334876.Google Scholar
  44. Iovino, S. (2012). Material ecocriticism: Matter, text, and posthuman ethics. In S. Iovino & S. Oppermann (Eds.), Material ecocriticism: Materiality, agency, and models of narrativity (pp. 51–68). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Jeong, S., Tippins, D. J., & Kayumova, S. (2017). A story of chicks, science fairs and the ethics of students’ biomedical research. In M. P. Mueller, D. J. Tippins, & A. J. Stewart (Eds.), Animals and science education: Ethics, curriculum and pedagogy (Vol. 2, pp. 99–122). Cham: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56375-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kant, I. (1973). What is Enlightenment? In Peter Gay (Ed.), The enlightenment: A comprehensive anthology (pp. 383–389). New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  47. Kayumova, S., Karsli, E., Allexsaht-Snider, M., & Buxton, C. (2015). Latina mothers and daughters: Ways of knowing, being, and becoming in the context of bilingual family science workshops. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 46(3), 260–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kayumova, S., & Tippins, D. (2016). Toward re-thinking science education in terms of affective practices: Reflections from the field. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(3), 567–575.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9695-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883–915.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199910)36:8<883:aid-tea1>3.0.co;2-i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Knorr-Cetina, K. D., & Mulkay, M. (1983). Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Latour, B. (2012). We have never been modern. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Lazarus, R. (2004). The making of environmental law. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<296:aid-tea1007>3.0.co;2-r.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lim, S. R., Kang, D., Ogunseitan, O. A., & Schoenung, J. M. (2012). Potential environmental impacts from the metals in incandescent, compact fluorescent lamp (CFL), and light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs. Environmental Science and Technology, 47(2), 1040–1047.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es302886m.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mahernia, S., Amanlou, A., & Amanlou, M. (2015). Determination of hydrogen cyanide concentration in mainstream smoke of tobacco products by polarography. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 13(1), 57.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40201-015-0211-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Matusov, E., von Duyke, K., & Kayumova, S. (2016). Mapping concepts of agency in educational contexts. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50(3), 420–446.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-015-9334-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McDowell, L. (1999). Gender, identity and place: Understanding feminist geographies. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  58. Norgaard, R. B. (2006). Development betrayed: The end of progress and a co-evolutionary revisioning of the future. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Nystrom, E. (2007). Talking and taking positions: An encounter between action research and the gendered and racialized discourse of school science. Dissertations in Educational Work. Umea University.Google Scholar
  60. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York: Crown Press.Google Scholar
  61. Patel, L. (2014). Countering coloniality in educational research: From ownership to answerability. Educational Studies, 50(4), 357–377.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2014.924942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rodrigues, A., Camillo, J., & Mattos, C. (2014). Quasi-appropriation of dialectical materialism: A critical reading of Marxism in Vygotskian approaches to cultural studies in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(3), 583–589.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9570-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rosser, S. V. (2014). Opening the discussion through challenging companion meanings and pedagogical approaches that de-center. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, 433–439.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-012-9422-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Snaza, N., Appelbaum, P., Bayne, S., Carlson, D., Morris, M., Rotas, N., et al. (2014). Toward a posthumanist education. JCT (Online), 30(2), 39.Google Scholar
  65. Soja, E. W. (2009). Taking space personally. In B. Warf & S. Arias (Eds.), The spatial turn: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 11–35). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  66. Susskind, L., & Friedman, A. (2014). Quantum mechanics: The theoretical minimum. Philadelphia: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  67. Taylor, C. A., & Hughes, C. (2016). Edu-crafting a cacophonous ecology: Posthumanist research practices for education. In Posthuman research practices in education. Palgrave Macmillan.  https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137453082.
  68. Teixeira, S., & Krings, A. (2015). Sustainable social work: An environmental justice framework for social work education. Social Work Education, 34, 513–527.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2015.1063601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680903489338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wals, A. E. (1994). Nobody planted it, it just grew! Young adolescents’ perceptions and experiences of nature in the context of urban environmental education. Children, Youth and Environments, 11(3), 1–27.Google Scholar
  71. Warren, K. (1996). Ecological feminist philosophies: An overview of the issues. In K. J. Warren (Ed.), Ecological feminist philosophies (pp. ix–xxvi). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11, 11–26.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9578-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.STEM Education and Teacher Development, College of Arts and SciencesUniversity of Massachusetts DartmouthDartmouthUSA
  2. 2.Public Policy, College of Arts and SciencesUniversity of Massachusetts DartmouthDartmouthUSA

Personalised recommendations