Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Et pourquoi pas une éducation aux sciences qui aborde la participation des acteurs sociaux aux controverses sociotechniques?

  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Résumé

Dans cet article nous faisons état d’une recherche qui s’est déroulée dans le cadre d’un projet orienté vers une éducation aux sciences citoyennes. Nous présentons la recherche et quelques-uns des résultats qui en sont issus, puis nous prenons position quant à la pertinence d’aborder, en classe de sciences, les questions de la participation citoyenne aux débats sociotechniques et des rôles et capacités des acteurs sociaux concernés.

Abstract

In this article we discuss research that was conducted as part of a project on citizen science education. We present the research and some of the results, and then take a position on the pertinence of examining, in science classes, questions on citizen participation in socio-technical debates and the roles and capacities of the social actors concerned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Références

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, F. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abell, S. K. et Lederman, N. G. (2007). Handbook of research on science education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albe, V. (2009). Enseigner des controverses. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alsop, S. et Bencze, J. L. (2010). Activism in SMT education in the claws of the hegemon (Editorial). Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 177–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bimber, B. et Guston, D. (1995). Politics by the same means. Dans S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen et T. Pinch (dir.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 554–571). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, D. (1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge et Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucchi, M. et Neresini, F. (2008). Science and public participation. Dans E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch et J. Wajcman (dir.), The handbook of science and technologies studies (p. 449–472). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 810–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1999). The roleof lay people in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Science, Technology and Society, 4(1), 81–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Lascoumes, P. et Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, J. (2008). Deliberating competence: Theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice. Science, Technology et Human Values, 33(2), 155–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. M. (1975). The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9(2), 205–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, G., Robbins, P. T. et Pieri, E. (2006). Words of mass destruction: British newspaper coverage of the genetically modified food debate, expert and non-expert reaction. Public Understanding of Science, 15(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(7), 582–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R, Leach, J., Millar, R. et Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (2008). Patient groups and health movements. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technologies studies (pp. 499–540). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fourez, G. (1997). Scientific and technological literacy as a social practice. Social Studies of Science, 27(11), 903–936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton-Salway, M. (2001). The construction of M. E.: The discursive action model. Dans M. Wetherell, S. Taylor et S. J. Taylor (dir.), Discourse as data. A guide for analysis (p. 147–188). London: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institut du Nouveau Monde (INM). (2009). Aux sciences, citoyens! Expériences et méthodes de consultation sur les enjeux scientifiques de notre temps. Sous la direction de L. Pion et F. Piron. Québec: Presses de l’Université de Montréal.

  • Irwin, A. et Michael, M. (2003). Science, social theory and public knowledge. Maidenhead, Berks: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2003). Breaking the waves in Science and technology studies: Comment on H. M Collins and Robert Evans, ‘The third wave of Science and technology studies’. Social Studies of Science, 33(3), 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallerud, E. et Ramberg, I. (2002). The order of discourse in surveys of public understanding of science. Public Understanding of Science, 11(3), 213–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawulich, B. (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Consulté le 10 février 2006 sur le site de la revue Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), Art. 43: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-05/05-2-43-e.htm

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. et Tutton, R. (2007). Shifting subject positions. Social Studies of Science, 37(3), 385–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, S. D. (2000). Consensus project: Teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 645–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (1995). The social construction of validity. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(1), 19–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larochelle, M. et Désautels, J. (2006). L’éducation aux sciences et le croisement des expertises. Dans A. Legardez et L. Simonneaux (dir.), L’école à l’épreuve de l’actualité. Enseigner les questions vives (p. 61–77). Paris: ESF Éditeur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: Students’ experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maingain, A., Dufour, B. et Fourez, G. (2002). Approches didactiques de l’interdisciplinarité. Bruxelles: De Boeck University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestre, D. (2006). Introduction aux Science and technology studies. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C. (2007). Appréhension d’une controverse sociotechnique et rapport aux experts: Une étude de cas. (Thèse doctorale inédite). Université Laval, Québec, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C. (2008). Students’ inventory of social actors concerned by the controversy surrounding cellular telephones: A case study. Science Education, 92(3), 543–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C.(2009). Using the deficit model, public debate model and co-production of knowledge models tointerpret points of view of students concerning citizens’ participation in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 49–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C. (2011). Post-secondary students’ relationship to people they consider to be scientific experts. Research in Science Education, 41(2), 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C., Bader B. et Therriault, G. (2010). The notion of the relationship to knowledge: A theoretical tool for research in science education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 5(3), 239–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., Goodrum, D. et Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in Australian schools: Results of a national study. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 455–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. et Désautels, J. (2004). Educating for citizenship: Reappraising the role of science education. Revue canadienne de l’enseignement des sciences, des mathématiques et des technologies / Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-C. (2007). Teachers’ scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students’ views. Science Education, 91(2), 222–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, N. et Nerlich, B. (2006). Use of the deficit model in a shared culture of argumentation: The case of foot and mouth science. Public Understanding of Science, 15(3), 331–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. (Deuxième édition d’un titre paru en 1984).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculté des sciences de l’éducation, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada

    Chantal Pouliot

Authors
  1. Chantal Pouliot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

L’éetude que nous avons menée a été supportée financièrement par le FQRSC sous forme d’une bourse doctorale de trois ans (2003–2006). Le projet de recherche dans lequel elle s’inscrivait a été financé par le CRSH.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pouliot, C. Et pourquoi pas une éducation aux sciences qui aborde la participation des acteurs sociaux aux controverses sociotechniques?. Can J Sci Math Techn 12, 367–379 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2012.732254

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2012.732254

Search

Navigation