Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 769–794 | Cite as

Specifying a curriculum for biopolitical critical literacy in science teacher education: exploring roles for science fiction

Original Paper

Abstract

In this essay I suggest some ways in which science teacher educators in Western neoliberal economies might facilitate learners’ development of a critical literacy concerning the social and cultural changes signified by the concept of biopolitics. I consider how such a biopolitically inflected critical literacy might find expression in a science teacher education curriculum and suggest a number of ways of materializing such a curriculum in specific literatures, media, procedures, and assessment tasks, with particular reference to the contributions of science fiction in popular media.

Keywords

Biopolitics Curriculum Popular media Science fiction 

References

  1. Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Agamben, G. (2005). State of exception (K. Attell, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aoki, T. T. (2005 [1985/1991]). Teaching as indwelling between two curriculum worlds. In W. F. Pinar & R. L. Irwin (Eds.), Curriculum in a new key: The collected works of Ted T. Aoki (pp. 159–165). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Arendt, H. (1951). The origins of totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Ballard, J. G. (1963). The drowned world. London: Victor Gollancz.Google Scholar
  6. Ballard, J. G. (1965). The drought. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  7. Ballard, J. G. (1970). The atrocity exhibition. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  8. Ballard, J. G. (1973). Crash. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  9. Ballard, J. G. (1988). Running wild. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
  10. Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacres et simulations [Simulacra and simulations]. Paris: Galilée.Google Scholar
  11. Bazzul, J. (2014). Science education as a site for biopolitical engagement and the reworking of subjectivities: Theoretical considerations and possibilities for research. In L. Bencze & S. Alsop (Eds.), Activist science and technology education (pp. 38–51). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1_3.Google Scholar
  12. Beard, S. (2002). Aftershocks: The end of style culture. London: Wallflower Press.Google Scholar
  13. Biesta, G. (2004). ‘Mind the gap!’ Communication and the educational relation. In C. Bingham & A. M. Sidorkin (Eds.), No education without relation (pp. 11–22). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  14. Biggs, J. B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. doi: 10.1007/bf00138871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bobbitt, F. (1928). How to make a curriculum. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  16. Boomer, G. (Ed.). (1982). Negotiating the curriculum. Gosford, NSW: Ashton Scholastic.Google Scholar
  17. Bourassa, G. N. (2011). Rethinking the curricular imagination: Curriculum and biopolitics in the age of neoliberalism. Curriculum Inquiry, 41(1), 5–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-873x.2010.00528.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Boyle, D. (Director). (2002). 28 days later [Motion Picture]. UK: DNA Films and UK Film Council.Google Scholar
  19. 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. 23–35). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Preparedness 101: Zombie pandemic. http://www.cdc.gov/phpr/documents/zombie_gn_final.pdf.
  21. Cohen, J., & Stewart, I. (1994). The collapse of chaos: Discovering simplicity in a complex world. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
  22. Collin, R., & Apple, M. W. (2007). Schooling, literacies and biopolitics in the global age. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28(4), 433–454. doi: 10.1080/01596300701625180.Google Scholar
  23. Cooper, M. (2008). Life as surplus: Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  24. Cover, R. (2011). Generating the self: The biopolitics of security and selfhood in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Science Fiction Film and Television, 4(2), 205–224. doi: 10.3828/sfftv.2011.13.
  25. Cuarón, A. (Director). (2006). Children of men [Motion Picture]. UK: Strike Entertainment and Hit and Run Productions.Google Scholar
  26. Daily Mail Reporter. (2011, 4 October). Wall Street demonstrators dressed as ‘corporate zombies’ lurch past stock exchange as protests spread beyond America, Daily Mail Australia. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2044983/Occupy-Wall-Street-protesters-dressed-corporate-zombies-lurch-past-stock-exchange-protests-spread-America.html.
  27. Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59, 3–7.Google Scholar
  28. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1977). Anti-oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (R. Hurley, M. Seem & H. R. Lane, Trans.). New York: The Viking Press.Google Scholar
  29. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  30. Di Vittorio, P. (2006). For your own good. Biopolitics told by J. G. Ballard. Journal of Science Communication, 5(1). http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/05/01/C050101/C050103.
  31. Drezner, D. W. (2011). Theories of international politics and zombies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Eco, U. (1984). Postscript to the name of the rose (W. Weaver, Trans.). New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  33. Esposito, R. (2008). Bios: Biopolitics and philosophy (T. Campbell, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  34. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaelogy of the human sciences (Alan Sheridan-Smith, Trans.). London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  35. Foucault, M. (1981). The history of sexuality, volume 1: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). London: Pelican Books.Google Scholar
  36. Foucault, M. (2003). Society must be defended: Lectures at the Collège de France 197576 (D. Macey, Trans.). New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  37. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 197879 (Eds. M. Senellart & G. Burchell, Trans.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. Foucault, M. (2009). Security, territory, population: lectures at the Collège de France 197778 (Eds. M. Senellart & G. Burchell, Trans.). New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  39. Franklin, S. (2007). Dolly mixtures: The remaking of genealogy. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fresnadillo, J. C.  (Director). (2007). 28 weeks later [Motion Picture]. UK: Fox Atomic, DNA Films and UK Film Council.Google Scholar
  41. Froula, A. (2010). Prolepsis and the ‘War on Terror’: Zombie pathology and the culture of fear in 28 Days Later. In J. Birkenstein, A. Froula, & K. Randell (Eds.), Reframing 9/11: Film, popular culture and the ‘War on Terror’ (pp. 195–208). New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  42. Giroux, H. A. (2006). Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, class, and the biopolitics of disposability. College Literature, 33(3), 171–196. doi: 10.1353/lit.2006.0037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Giroux, H. A. (2008). Beyond the biopolitics of disposability: Rethinking neoliberalism in the New Gilded Age. Social Identities, 14(5), 587–620. doi: 10.1080/13504630802343432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Giroux, H. A. (2009). Youth in a suspect society: Democracy or disposability?. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct: History and issues. Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 1(1), 49–72. doi: 10.1207/s15327000em0101_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gough, N. (1993). Laboratories in fiction: Science education and popular media. Geelong: Deakin University.Google Scholar
  47. Gough, N. (2001). Teaching in the (Crash) zone: Manifesting cultural studies in science education. In J. A. Weaver, M. Morris, & P. Appelbaum (Eds.), (Post) modern science (education): Propositions and alternative paths (pp. 249–273). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  48. Gough, N. (2006). Shaking the tree, making a rhizome: Towards a nomadic geophilosophy of science education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(5), 625–645. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2006.00216.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gough, N. (2007). Geophilosophy, rhizomes and mosquitoes: becoming nomadic in global science education research. In B. Atweh, M. Borba, A. Calabrese Barton, N. Gough, C. Keitel, C. Vistro-Yu, & R. Vithal (Eds.), Internationalisation and globalisation in mathematics and science education (pp. 57–77). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5908-7_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Gough, N. (2013). Towards deconstructive nonalignment: A complexivist view of curriculum, teaching and learning. South African Journal of Higher Education, 27(5), 1213–1233.Google Scholar
  51. Greenland, C. (1983). The entropy exhibition: Michael Moorcock and the British ‘New Wave’ in science fiction. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  52. Haraway, D. J. (1989). Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2004). Multitude: War and democracy in the age of empire. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  55. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Harman, C. (2012). Zombie capitalism: Global crisis and the relevance of Marx. Chicago: Haymarket Books.Google Scholar
  57. Hasse, C. (2014). The material co-construction of hard science fiction and physics. Cultural Studies of Science Education. doi: 10.1007/s11422-013-9547-y.Google Scholar
  58. Hayles, N. K. (2012). How we think: Digital media and contemporary technogenesis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226321370.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. James, P. D. (1992). Children of men. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  60. Kappeler, S. (1986). The pornography of representation. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  61. Lait, M. (2012). Review of Thomas Lemke, Biopolitics: An advanced introduction (New York: New York University Press, 2011), Foucault Studies, 14, 201–205. http://www.die-grenze.com/foucault_webkatalog/review.php?sid=1647.
  62. Lanci, Y. (2014). Zombie 2.0: Subjectivation in times of apocalypse. Journal of Cultural and Religious Theory, 13(2), 25–37.Google Scholar
  63. Lemke, T. (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction (E. F. Trump, Trans.). New York: New York University Press. doi:  10.22439/fs.v0i14.3906.
  64. Lewis, T. (2007). Biopolitical utopianism in educational theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(7), 683–702. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2007.00316.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lewis, T. (2008). Defining the political ontology of the classroom: Toward a multitudinous education. Teaching Education, 19(4), 249–260. doi: 10.1080/10476210802436302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lewis, T. (2009a). Biopower, play, and experience in education. In D. Kellner, T. Lewis, C. Pierce, & K. D. Cho (Eds.), Marcuse’s challenge to education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  67. Lewis, T. (2009b). Education and the immunization paradigm. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 28(6), 485–498. doi: 10.1007/s11217-009-9140-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lewis, T. (2009c). Understanding the logic of educational encampment: from Illich to Agamben. International Journal of Illich Studies, 1(1), 28–36.Google Scholar
  69. Lord, P., & Miller, C. (Directors). (2014). The LEGO movie [Motion Picture]. USA: Warner Animation Group.Google Scholar
  70. Manson, G., & Fawcett, J. (Writers). (2013–2017). Orphan black. Toronto: Temple Street Productions, BBC America. http://www.bbcamerica.com/orphan-black/.
  71. McHale, B. (1987). Postmodernist fiction. New York: Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. McNally, D. (2011). Monsters of the market: Zombies, vampires and global capitalism. Leiden: Brill. doi: 10.18740/s4959s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W., III. (1972). The limits to growth: A report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books.Google Scholar
  74. Munz, P., Hudea, I., Imad, J., & Smith, R. J. (2011). When zombies attack! Mathematical modelling of an outbreak of zombie infection. In J. M. Tchuenche & C. Chiyaka (Eds.), Infectious disease modelling research progress (pp. 133–150). New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  75. Neyrat, F. (2010). The birth of immunopolitics. Parrhesia, 10, 31–38.Google Scholar
  76. Pérez, J. (2014). Sympathy for the clone: (post)Human identities enhanced by the ‘evil science’ construct and its commodifying practices in contemporary clone fiction. Between, 4(8), 1–24. doi: 10.13125/2039-6597/1303.Google Scholar
  77. Pierce, C. (2012). The promissory future(s) of education: Rethinking scientific literacy in the era of biocapitalism. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(7), 721–745. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00736.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pierce, C. (2015a). Against neoliberal pedagogies of plants and people: Mapping actor networks of biocapital in learning gardens. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 460–477. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2014.994168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pierce, C. (2015b). Learning about a fish from an ANT: Actor network theory and science education in the postgenomic era. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(1), 83–107. doi: 10.1007/s11422-013-9498-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pierre, E. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), 175–189. doi: 10.1080/095183997237278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pinar, W. F. (Ed.). (1975). Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  82. Pinar, W. F. (2011). What is curriculum theory? (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. doi: 10.1057/9781137015839.Google Scholar
  83. Proctor, R. (1999). The Nazi war on cancer. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Quiggin, J. (2010). Zombie economics: How dead ideas still walk among us. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Ramsey, M. (2001). Mouvements anti-hygiénistes et libéralisme: vers une histoire comparée. In P. Bourdelais (Ed.), Les hygiénistes: enjeux, modèles et pratique (XVIIIe–XXe siècles) (pp. 319–340). Paris: Belin.Google Scholar
  86. Reynolds, W. M. (2006). The devils in curriculum studies: Multitudes and multiplicities. Taboo, 10(1), 69–80.Google Scholar
  87. Romero, G. A. (Director). (1968). Night of the living dead [Motion Picture]. USA: Image Ten, Laurel Group and Market Square Productions.Google Scholar
  88. Romero, G. A. (Director). (1979). Dawn of the dead [Motion Picture]. USA: Laurel Group Inc.Google Scholar
  89. Romero, G. A. (Director). (1985). Day of the dead. USA: Dead Films Inc. and Laurel Entertainment Inc.Google Scholar
  90. Schwab, J. J. (1969). The practical: A language for curriculum. School Review, 78(1), 1–23. doi: 10.1086/442881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sloan, C. L. (2014). The building blocks of biopolitics: The lego movie, empire, and multitude. http://viz.dwrl.utexas.edu/content/building-blocks-biopolitics-lego-movie-empire-and-multitude.
  92. Snyder, Z. (Director). (2004). Dawn of the dead [Motion Picture]. USA: Strike Entertainment.Google Scholar
  93. Stenhouse, L. (1980). Curriculum research and the art of the teacher. Curriculum, 1(1), 40–44.Google Scholar
  94. Sterling, B. (Ed.). (1986). Mirrorshades: The cyberpunk anthology. New York: Ace.Google Scholar
  95. Sullum, J. (1998). For your own good: The anti-smoking crusade and the tyranny of public health. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  96. Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  97. Trimble, S. (2011). Maternal back/grounds in Children of Men: Notes toward an Arendtian biopolitics. Science Fiction Film and Television, 4(2), 249–270. doi: 10.3828/sfftv.2011.15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  99. Vatter, M. (2009). Biopolitics: From surplus value to surplus life. Theory & Event, 12(2), n.p. https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/summary/v012/12.2.vatter.html.
  100. Verstynen, T., & Voytek, B. (2014). Do zombies dream of undead sheep? A neuroscientific view of the zombie brain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Vint, S. (2011). Introduction: Science fiction and biopolitics. Science Fiction Film and Television, 4(2), 161–172. doi: 10.3828/sfftv.2011.11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Virilio, P. (1986). Speed and politics: An essay on dromology (M. Polizotti, Trans.). New York: Semiotext(e).Google Scholar
  103. Weaver, J. A. (1999). Synthetically growing a post-human curriculum: Noel Gough’s curriculum as a popular cultural text. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 15(4), 161–169.Google Scholar
  104. Weaver, J. A. (2010). Educating the posthuman: Biosciences, fiction, and curriculum studies. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  105. Zembylas, M. (2010). Agamben’s theory of biopower and immigrants/refugees/asylum seekers: Discourses of citizenship and the implications for curriculum theorizing. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26(2), 31–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationLa Trobe UniversityVictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations