Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 283–291 | Cite as

Ways to prepare future teachers to teach science in multicultural classrooms

Original Paper

Abstract

Roussel De Carvalho uses the notion of superdiversity to draw attention to some of the pedagogical implications of teaching science in multicultural schools in cosmopolitan cities such as London. De Carvalho makes the case that if superdiverse classrooms exist then Science Initial Teacher Education has a role to play in helping future science teachers to become more knowledgeable and reflective about how to teach school students with a range of worldviews and religious beliefs. The aim of this paper is to take that proposition a step further by considering what the aims and content of a session in teacher education might be. The focus is on helping future teachers develop strategies to teach school students to think critically about the nature of science and what it means to have a scientific worldview. The paper draws on data gathered during an interview study with 28 students at five secondary schools in England. The data was analysed to discover students’ perceptions of science and their perceptions of the way that science responds to big questions about being human. The findings are used to inform a set of three strategies that teachers could use to help young people progress in their understanding of the nature of science. These strategies together with the conceptual framework that underpins them are used to develop a perspective on what kinds of pedagogical content knowledge teacher education might usefully provide.

Keywords

Science and religion Initial teacher education Scientism Epistemic insight 

References

  1. Astley, J., & Francis, L. J. (2010). Promoting positive attitudes towards science and religion among sixth-form pupils: Dealing with scientism and creationism. British Journal of Religious Education, 23(3), 189–200. doi:10.1080/01416200.2010.498604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Castéra, J., Clément, P., Abrougui, M., Nisiforou, O., Valanides, N., Turcinaviciene, J., et al. (2008). Genetic determinism in school textbooks: A comparative study conducted among sixteen countries. Science Education International, 19(2), 163–184.Google Scholar
  3. Charles, D., & Lennon, K. (1992). Reduction, explanation, and realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Crick, F. (1994). The astonishing hypothesis. London: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  5. Goddard, A. (2009). Unloved, law and order. Great Britain: ITV.Google Scholar
  6. Hubbard, R., & Wald, E. (1999). Exploding the gene myth: How genetic information is produced and manipulated by scientists, physicians, employers, insurance companies, educators, and law enforcers. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  7. Jones, R. H. (2013). Analysis and the fullness of reality: an introduction to reductionism and emergence. New York: Jackson Square Books.Google Scholar
  8. Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: the biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 686. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lahti, D. (2012). The genetics of human behaviour. Paper presented at the Science and Religion: The view both ways, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  10. Monterosso, J., Royzman, E. B., & Schwartz, B. (2005). Explaining away responsibility: effects of scientific explanation on perceived culpability. Ethics and Behavior, 15(2), 139–158. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb1502_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: a scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  12. Pinker, S. (2000). The blank slate, the noble savage, and the ghost in the machine. Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 21, 179–210.Google Scholar
  13. Racine, E., Bar-Ilan, O., & Illes, J. (2005). fMRI in the public eye. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(2), 159–164. doi:10.1038/nrn1609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smardon, R. (2009). Sociocultural and cultural-historical frameworks for science education. In W.-M. Roth & K. Tobin (Eds.), The world of science education: Handbook of research in North America (pp. 15–25). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Stenmark, M. (2001). Sceintism: Science, ethics and religion. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  16. Stenmark, M. (2013). Scientism Encyclopedia of sciences and religions (pp. 2103–2105). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations