Abstract
The present chapter portrays a case study of a High School Biology teacher named ‘Arunima’ in order to understand the different facets of her knowledge in the area of ‘Ethical Issues in Biological Sciences’. The different knowledge domains that could be studied here include her knowledge about teaching, learning, pedagogy, curriculum, students’ misconceptions, assessment, views on Nature of Science (NOS), etc., in the context of ethical issues in Biological Sciences. Teaching and learning about ethical issues in Biological Sciences includes many areas and topics where a need is felt to think beyond the positivist view of Science and incorporate humanistic and liberal ideals for taking the ‘right’ decisions. It can be clearly seen here that science teaching can no more be an objective affair rather includes many areas where one’s own subjectivity and reasoning is reckoned and gets projected. The present case study will provide an insight into the categories of teachers’ knowledge that are needed for addressing the ethical issues in a more humanistic way in the Science classroom.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The present chapter involves the use of certain codes, e.g. KTS, OST, KNOS that refer to teacher’s knowledge domains (for detailed reference, see Appendix F).
- 2.
Source: Survey Proforma (Appendix C).
- 3.
Source: Questionnaire.
- 4.
Emotional Metaphors indicate how someone feels about events, objects or people in his/her life. Researches have also shown that how one’s professional knowledge in teaching may be identified and analyzed through the use of one’s metaphorical language. Metaphorical language is said to be an extraordinarily powerful tool through which teachers express the meaning of their experiences in teaching and much of their pedagogical knowledge which teachers hold (e.g., see Briscoe, 1991; Clandinin, 1986).
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N.G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665–701.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1980). Science in social issues: Implications for teaching. Ottawa, Canada: Science Council of Canada.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2007). Humanistic perspectives in the science curriculum. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), The handbook of research on science education (pp. 881–910). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Briscoe, C. (1991). The dynamic interactions among beliefs, role metaphors, and teaching practices: A case study of teacher change. Science Education 75(2), 185–199.
Bybee, R. W. (1993). Reforming science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Clandinin, D. J. (1986). Classroom practice: Teachers’ images in action. London: Falmer Press.
Cross, R. T., & Price, R. F. (1992). Teaching science for social responsibility. Sydney: St. Louis Press.
Cross, R. T., & Price, R. F. (2002). Teaching controversial science for social responsibility: The case of food production. In W.-M. Roth & J. Désautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 99–123). New York: Peter Lang.
Fensham, P. J. (1992). Science and technology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 789–829). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. U.S.A: Penguin Books.
Hurd, P. (1989). Science education and the nation’s economy. In A. B. Champagne, B. E. Lovitts & B. J. Calinger (Eds.), Scientific literacy (pp. 15–40). Washington DC: AAAS.
Kortland, J. (2001). A problem posing approach to teaching decision making about the waste issue. Utrecht: Cdβ Press.
Lee, S., & Roth, W. M. (2002). Learning science in the community. In W.M. Roth & J. Désautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 37–66). New York: Peter Lang.
Reiss, M. J. (2000). Understanding science lessons: Five years of science teaching. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Roberts, D. A. (1995). Junior high school science transformed: Analysing a science curriculum policy change. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 493–504.
Shermer, M. (2019). The case for scientific humanism. Retrieved March 17, 2019, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-case-for-scientific-humanism/.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument- an updated edition. U.K: Cambridge University Press.
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues- theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 49–58.
Zembylas, M. (2007). Emotional ecology: The intersection of emotional knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(4), 355–367.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Saxena, A. (2019). Establishing Linkages with Humanistic and Liberal Goals of Science—Case Narrative of a High School Teacher. In: Ethics in Science. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9009-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9009-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9008-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9009-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)