Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Students’ Research-Informed Socio-scientific Activism: Re/Visions for a Sustainable Future

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many educational contexts throughout the world, increasing focus has been placed on socio-scientific issues; that is, disagreements about potential personal, social and/or environmental problems associated with fields of science and technology. Some suggest (as do we) that many of these potential problems, such as those associated with climate change, are so serious that education needs to be oriented towards encouraging and enabling students to become citizen activists, ready and willing to take personal and social actions to reduce risks associated with the issues. Towards this outcome, teachers we studied encouraged and enabled students to direct open-ended primary (e.g., correlational studies), as well as secondary (e.g., internet searches), research as sources of motivation and direction for their activist projects. In this paper, we concluded, based on constant comparative analyses of qualitative data, that school students’ tendencies towards socio-political activism appeared to depend on myriad, possibly interacting, factors. We focused, though, on curriculum policy statements, school culture, teacher characteristics and student-generated research findings. Our conclusions may be useful to those promoting education for sustainability, generally, and, more specifically, to those encouraging activism on such issues informed by student-led research.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This term is one of several in use to describe issues associated with potential problems stemming from interactions among fields of science and technology and societies (or, more likely, interest groups in them). ‘Socio-scientific issues’ are, more or less, synonymous with ‘STS’ or ‘STSE’ issues, the former referring to relationships among fields of science (S) and technology (T) and societies (S), while the latter also considers environments (E). Different authors tend to use different terms for approximately the same meaning.

  2. The concept and definition of ‘scientific literacy’ is highly contested, with various stakeholders (e.g., scientists vs. educational researchers) placing different emphases on different possible elements (e.g., skills vs. knowledge) of what it might entail (Hodson 2008; Roberts 2011).

  3. Internalist conceptions about science refer to characteristics (e.g., psychological) involving individual scientists, along with those relating to their social interactions amongst colleagues within their fields (Ziman 1984). They generally ignore externalist conceptions, such as relationships among practitioners in fields of science and technology and societies and environments.

  4. http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/index.htm

  5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg

  6. Actor network theory is a ‘material-semiotic’ explanation for dynamics of social systems, positing that animate (e.g., people) and inanimate (e.g., graphs) ‘actants’ interact with each other to co-determine each other. Among implications are that: any one actant can be thought is being comprised of influences—to varying extents—from every other actant; powerful actants can realign other actants’ allegiances; and, characteristics of any one actant are in constant flux (Latour 2005).

  7. ‘STEPWISE’ is the acronym for ‘Science and Technology Education Promoting Wellbeing for Individuals, Societies and Environments, which is elaborated at: http://www.stepwiser.ca.

  8. Based on constructivist epistemological positions, ‘pure’ induction — which, theoretically, involves a direct translation from phenomena of the world to representation(s) of them — does not occur. Development of representations, accordingly, may be thought of in terms of abduction; that is, use of cognitive structures in interpreting phenomena (Lawson 2005).

  9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tX8fy-R8Ww&feature=player_embedded

  10. Pseudonyms

  11. The STP consists of a 2-dimensional grid. Its horizontal axis spans a continuum ranging from Rationalist through Naturalist positions regarding the nature of theory negotiation in the sciences. Rationalists tend to believe in highly systematic methods of science, including rational judgements about theory. Naturalists, by contrast, assume that the conduct of science is highly situational and idiosyncratic, depending on various factors, including psychological, social, cultural and political influences. The vertical axis depicts a continuum reflecting the truth value of knowledge, with Realist through Antirealist positions. Realists believe that scientific knowledge corresponds to reality, while (extreme) Antirealists claim that each person’s constructions are valid. More moderate Antirealists believe in useful knowledge.

  12. http://www.storyofstuff.com/

  13. Participants in STEPWISE generally agreed that forms of activism could include: educating others (e.g., via posters, websites, school announcements); lobbying ‘power-brokers’ (e.g., letter-writing to members of government, business, etc.); developing improved technologies (e.g., a better recycling method, safer recreational & exercise equipment, etc.); and, disrupting STSE problem situations (e.g., with municipal approval, disrupting automobile traffic by clogging the roads with bicyclists).

  14. http://waterlife.nfb.ca/

  15. http://www.storyofstuff.com/

References

  • Allchin, D. (2004). Should the sociology of science be rated X? Science Education, 88(6), 934–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angell, M. (2004). The truth about the drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, J., & Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical context knowledge: toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know. Science Education, 85(4), 426–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L. (2004). Perusing Pandora’s Box: exploring the what, when, and how of nature of science instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 427–446). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, J. L. (1996). Correlational studies in school science: breaking the science-experiment-certainty connection. School Science Review, 78(282), 95–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, J. L. (2000). Procedural apprenticeship in school science: constructivist enabling of connoisseurship. Science Education, 84(6), 727–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, L. E. (1998). Schooling for democracy: what kind? In L. E. Beyer & M. W. Apple (Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics, and possibilities (pp. 245–263). Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), The handbook of theory: Research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buxton, C. A. (2006). Creating contextually authentic science in a “Low-Performing” urban elementary school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7), 695–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Lewes: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, L. (2005). Globalisation and science education: rethinking science education reforms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 561–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socio-scientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • dos Santos, W. L. P. (2009). Scientific literacy: a Freirean perspective as a radical view of humanistic science education. Science Education, 93(2), 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1993). Academic influence on school science curricula. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(1), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S. (2002). Social epistemology (2nd ed.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1988). Naturalistic and rationalistic enquiry. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook (pp. 81–85). London: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2008). Towards scientific literacy: A teachers’ guide to the history, philosophy and sociology of science. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. G. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman, D. L. (2003). Impure cultures: University biology and the world of commerce. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky, S. (2003). Science in the private interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted biomedical research? Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. E. (2005). What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 716–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, K. (2001). Individualism, communitarianism and consensus. The Journal of Ethics, 5(2), 105–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lester, B. T., Ma, L., Lee, O., & Lambert, J. (2006). Social activism in elementary science education: a science, technology, and society approach to teach global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 315–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loving, C. C. (1991). The scientific theory profile: a philosophy of science model for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 823–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynas, M. (2008). Six degrees: Our future on a hotter planet (updated edition). London: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). The normative structure of science. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 256–278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education [MoE]. (2008). The Ontario curriculum, grades 9 and 10: Science. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Training [MoET]. (1999). The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 and 10: Science. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • MoE. (2008). Reach every student: Energizing Ontario education. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadeau, R., & Désautels, J. (1984). Epistemology and the teaching of science. A discussion paper for the Science Council of Canada (D84/2). Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services.

  • Pedretti, E. (2003). Teaching Science, Technology, Society and Environment (STSE) education: preservice teachers’ philosophical and pedagogical landscapes. In D. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and socio-scientific discourse in science education (pp. 219–239). Dortrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (2011). Competing visions of scientific literacy: the influence of a science curriculum policy image. In C. Linder et al. (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 11–27). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (2009). Activism or science/technology education as byproduct of capacity building. Journal for Activist Science & Technology Education, 1(1), 16–31.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, E. (2001). Fast food nation: The dark side of the All-American Meal. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2009). Students’ socio-scientific reasoning on controversies from the viewpoint of education for sustainable development. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 657–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tripp, P., & Muzzin, L. (Eds.) (2005). Teaching as activism: Equity meets environmentalism. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

  • van Eijck, M. (2010). Addressing the dynamics of science in curricular reform for scientific literacy: the case of genomics. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2429–2449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasser, J. D., & Bresler, L. (1996). Working in the interpretive zone: conceptualizing collaboration in qualitative research teams. Educational Researcher, 25(5), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. (Ed.). (2003). The role of moral reasoning and socio-scientific discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (1984). An introduction to science studies: The philosophical and social aspects of science and technology. Cambridge: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (2000). Real science: What it is, and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Larry Bencze & Erin Sperling

  2. Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia

    Lyn Carter

Authors
  1. Larry Bencze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erin Sperling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lyn Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larry Bencze.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bencze, L., Sperling, E. & Carter, L. Students’ Research-Informed Socio-scientific Activism: Re/Visions for a Sustainable Future. Res Sci Educ 42, 129–148 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9260-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9260-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation