Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 221–237 | Cite as

Jesús and María in the jungle: an essay on possibility and constraint in the third-shift third space

Forum

Abstract

One hundred years ago, Upton Sinclair, in The Jungle, exposed the deplorable working conditions of eastern European immigrants in the meatpacking houses of Chicago. The backdrop of this article is the new Jungle of the 21st century—the hog plants of the rural Midwest. Here I speak to the lives of the Mexican workers they employ, and, more specifically, the science-learning experiences and aspirations of third-shifters, Jesús and María. I use these students’ stories as an opportunity to examine the take-up, in education, of the concept of hybridity, and, more particularly, to interrogate what I have come to regard as the “third space fetish.” My principle argument is that Bhabha’s understanding of liberatory Third Space has been distorted, in education, through teacher-centered and power-neutral multicultural discourse. I call for a more robust approach to hybridity in science education research, guided by the lessons of possibility and constraint contained in Jesús’ and María’s third-shift third space lives.

Keywords

Hybridity Third space US Mexican students English learners Science education 

References

  1. Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Cook, M. (2005). “A place of their own”: Creating a classroom “third space” to support a continuum of text construction between home and school. Literacy, 39, 85–90. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4350.2005.00405.x.
  3. Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-López, P., & Turner, M. G. (1997). Putting language back into language arts: When the radical middle meets the third space. Language Arts, 74(5), 368–378.Google Scholar
  4. Gutierrez, K. D., Baquedano-Lopez, 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
  5. Koole, T. (2003). The interactive construction of heterogeneity in the classroom. Linguistics and Education, 14(1), 3–26. doi:10.1016/S0898-5898(03)00010-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). Maestro, what is ‘quality’?: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469–498. doi:10.1002/tea.1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pahl, K., & Kelly, S. (2005). Family literacy as a third space between home and school: Some case studies of practice. Literacy, 39, 91–96. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4350.2005.00406.x.
  8. Pollan, M. (2006). Omnivore’s dilemma: A natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  9. Schlosser, E. (2001). Fast food nation: The dark side of the all-American meal. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  10. Sinclair, U. (1906). The jungle. New York: Bantam Books (Reprint, 1981).Google Scholar
  11. Stetsenko, A. (2008). From relational ontology to transformative activist stance on development and learning: Expanding Vygotsy’s (CHJAT) project. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 471–491. doi:10.1007/s11422-008-9111-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of Human SciencesIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations