Pursuing Response-Ability in De/Colonizing Science Education

  • Marc HigginsEmail author
Part of the Cultural Studies of Science Education book series (CSSE, volume 17)


Science education’s responsibility towards Indigenous ways-of-living-with-nature (IWLN) and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) is often and inadvertently over-coded by the (neo-)colonial logics that it sets out to refuse and resist; responsibility and the ability to respond are often not one and the same. Within this chapter, I revisit a significant personal pedagogical encounter in which this distinction made itself felt and known. Thinking with the work of Sami scholar Rauna Kuokkanen, this narrative provides a platform to explore practices of epistemic ignorance its (co-)constitutive relation to knowlege, as well as “the homework of response-ability” required to (re)open the norms of responsiveness towards the possibility of heeding the call of Indigenous science from within the structure of science education.


Decolonizing science education Indigenous science Responsibility Response-ability Epistemic ignorance 


  1. Battiste, M. (2005). You can’t be the global doctor if you’re the colonial disease. In P. Tripp & L. J. Muzzin (Eds.), Teaching as activism (pp. 121–133). Montreal: Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Battiste, M. (2013). Decolonizing education: Nourishing the learning spirit. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Cajete, G. (1994). Look to the mountain: An ecology of indigenous education. Durango: Kivaki Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cajete, G. (2000). Native science: Natural laws of interdependence. Santa Fe: Clear Light Books.Google Scholar
  5. Carter, L. (2004). Thinking differently about cultural diversity: Using postcolonial theory to (re)read science education. Science Education, 88(6), 819–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carter, L. (2010). The armchair at the borders: The ‘messy’ ideas of borders, border zones and epistemological diversity in multicultural science education. Science Education, 94, 1–20.Google Scholar
  7. Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn’t this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(3), 297–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Higgins, M. (2014). De/colonizing pedagogy and pedagogue: Science education through participatory and reflexive videography. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 14(2), 154–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Higgins, M. (2017). Post-qualitative mo(ve)ments: Concluding remarks on methodological response-abilities and being wounded by thought. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 8(3), 89–101.Google Scholar
  10. Higgins, M. (in press). Positing an(other) ontology within science education: Towards different practices of ethical accountability within multicultural science education. In K. Scantlebury & C. Milne (Eds.), Material practice and materiality: Too long ignored in science education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Higgins, M., Madden, B., & Korteweg, L. (2015). Witnessing (the lack of) deconstruction: White teachers’ ‘perfect stranger’ position in urban Indigenous education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 18(2), 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kuokkanen, R. J. (2007). Reshaping the university: Responsibility, indigenous epistemes, and the logic of the gift. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kuokkanen, R. J. (2008). What is hospitality in the academy? Epistemic ignorance and the (im)possible gift. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 30(1), 60–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuokkanen, R. (2010). The responsibility of the academy: A call for doing homework. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26(3), 61–74.Google Scholar
  15. Madden, B., & McGregor, H. E. (2013). Ex(er)cising student voice in pedagogy for decolonizing: Exploring complexities through duoethnography. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 35(5), 371–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McKinley, E. (2007). Postcolonialism, Indigenous students, and science education. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 199–226). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. McKinley, E., & Aikenhead, G. (2005). Comments on “Thinking differently about cultural diversity: Using postcolonial theory to (re)read science education”. Science Education, 89(6), 901–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sammel, A. (2009). Turning the focus from ‘other’ to science education: Exploring the invisibility of whiteness. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Spivak, G. C. (1999). A critique of postcolonial reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. M. (2007). Keeping the local local: Recalibrating the status of science and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in education. Science Education, 91(6), 926–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education, Department of Secondary EducationUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations