Abstract
This forum paper responds to the article summarising the similarities between science, technology, societies, and the environment; socio-scientific inquiry; and socially acute questions. Collectively called science in context (SinC), the authors propose that philosophers, borrowing Marx, should also change the world, and not merely interpret it. In this forum paper, I take the opportunity to make problematic this intention to change the world. We in the English speaking world live in contexts that are intensely being overwhelmed by technocratic, reductionistic, accountability schemes that limit the imagination of what schools can do. It needs remembering that these conditions have come about with more than a little help from the natural sciences (and technology) that we seek to teach our students. Yet, the solution is not one of abandoning science and technology; students need science, but they need a vision of science that can lead them to think differently about what is possible. While it is important that they understand the problems that they will inherit, preparation for the future by merely understanding the past is like trying to shoot a moving target by aiming at where it once was. We need to educate for a certain openness of ambition, which may require that we as educators to come into the educational interaction with no desire for mechanistic processes guaranteeing outcomes. Yes, the world needs change, but only that which is desired by those who will inherit our problems. We educators occupy a unique position, and we should not abuse it, no matter how well intentioned these attempts at change may be.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The story is told of a drunken man searching for his car keys under a streetlight. When asked by a policeman where he dropped his keys, he pointed to the darkness. “Then why search here?” asked the policeman. “Because there is light here!” was the drunken man’s response.
References
Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Allchin, D. (2004). Should the sociology of science be rated X? Science Education, 88, 934–946. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20026.
Biesta, G. (2016). The beautiful risk of education. Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2017). Why democracies need science. Cambridge: Wiley.
Crick, B. (1962). In defence of politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Feyerabend, P. (1975). How to defend society against science. Radical Philosophy, 11, 3–8.
Harðarson, A. (2017). Aims of education: How to resist the temptation of technocratic models. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 51(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12182.
Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays (W. Lovitt, trans.). New York, NY: Garland Publishing, Inc.
McKie, R. (2019). Climate change deniers’ new battle front attacked. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/nov/09/doomism-new-tactic-fossil-fuel-lobby. Accessed 12 Nov 2019.
Midgley, M. (1990). The use and uselessness of learning. European Journal of Education, 25(3), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/1503318.
Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency and science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Pickering, A., & Guzik, K. (Eds.). (2008). The mangle in practice: Science, society, and becoming. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Soble, A. (1995). In defense of Bacon. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 25(2), 192–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839319502500203.
Zhao, Y. (2019). The rise of the useless: The case for talent diversity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(1), 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9743-3.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This review essay addresses issues raised in Larry Bencze, et al.’s paper entitled: SAQ, SSI and STSE education: defending and extending ‘science-in-context’ (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7).
Lead editor: Tan Aik Ling.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tan, M. Context matters in science education. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 15, 853–859 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-020-09971-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-020-09971-x