Bullock cart or satellite launch vehicle? Controversies over representing science and technology in India at the Science Museum in 1982

Sen, Joydeep

doi:10.1080/19472498.2012.693712

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The tension between scientific knowledge as modern and cultural knowledge as primitive creates negative perceptions and devalues cultural knowledge, setting scientific knowledge as the gold standard against which other knowledge systems are evaluated. The danger of this is perpetuation of a Western worldview as dominant and superior and the maintenance of biases and stereotypical essentialist depictions which hinder equity and social justice (Sen 2012). This can occur in multicultural societies where the dominant community fails to meaningfully engage with ''cultural others,'' holding on to a static and stereotypical view of diverse cultures without recognizing their contributions to broader understanding of the world.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This can occur in multicultural societies where the dominant community fails to meaningfully engage with ''cultural others,'' holding on to a static and stereotypical view of diverse cultures without recognizing their contributions to broader understanding of the world. This was a problem for the previously mentioned ''Science in India'' exhibition at the Science Museum, London, where the Indian organizers wanted a progressive representation of India through its rocket and satellite program, while the British curators opted for clichéd images such as a bullock cart depicting a stereotypical, poverty stricken India (Sen 2012).…”

Section: Group and Cohort Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the past, this has led to indiscriminate presentations of indigenous objects which anthropologist Julie Cruikshank (1995), in her ethnographic work with Native American communities, criticized as fixed, ahistorical, apathetic representations which lacked subjectivity, and ignored the political and social histories, environmental and economical challenges in which the knowledge was produced. Similarly, a 1982 exhibition ''Science in India'' at London's Science Museum gave rise to debate and controversy about how to represent Indian science and technology (Sen 2012). Sen (2012) described the British curators' desire to represent poverty and appropriate technology through a bullock cart while the Indian organizers wanted to showcase progress through a display of their satellite program.…”

Section: Representations Of Science and Culture In Informal Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, a 1982 exhibition ''Science in India'' at London's Science Museum gave rise to debate and controversy about how to represent Indian science and technology (Sen 2012). Sen (2012) described the British curators' desire to represent poverty and appropriate technology through a bullock cart while the Indian organizers wanted to showcase progress through a display of their satellite program. This disagreement echoed debates in which Indians said international exhibits were misrepresenting India through displays of tokenistic material culture.…”

Section: Representations Of Science and Culture In Informal Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Objects as Stimuli for Exploring Young People’s Views about Cultural and Scientific Knowledge

Gondwe

Longnecker

2015

Science, Technology, & Human Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An object-based activity-science and culture story box-was designed, developed, and used to explore young people's views about cultural knowledge and scientific knowledge. In informal education spaces (e.g., museums and science centers), culture is often presented via representations of easily observable features of ethnicity such as music or dress. The development and application of knowledge in culturally diverse communities can be difficult to visualize and is rarely presented. Instead, Western science often dominates as the authoritative, valid, systematic, and useful way of thinking. Conversations about science and culture can create a platform for meaningful dialogue and valuing of a variety of cultures and different funds of knowledge. Using an informal science education lens, we interrogated young people's views about different knowledge systems. Downloaded from Six cohorts of Western Australian young people (twelve to sixteen years old; N ¼ 171) participated in the study. The activity involved groups of three to four young people assigning seventeen photographs of objects and or processes (e.g., medicine, lightning, etc.) onto a Venn diagram of scientific knowledge, cultural knowledge, or both. Photographs were taken of the forty-four resulting Venn diagrams showing association of items with knowledge domain. This was quantified to show the number of times an item was associated with scientific knowledge, cultural knowledge, or both. Group discussions were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis of discussions and associations of items to knowledge domain revealed intriguing themes and perspectives. Young people in this study associated technology with electronic devices and scientific knowledge but not with cultural knowledge. Young people expressed views that culture was old and basic and science was new and progressive. Other impressions expressed were that cultures do not ''do'' science and that skin color determines culture. No clear or consistent conception emerged of Australian culture. These young people's perspectives are discussed within the context of meaningful intercultural understanding in multicultural societies. This activity was developed as a research tool for use with young people in a multicultural society to examine views of different funds of knowledge. We propose further development and directed use of the story box in informal education spaces as a process to stimulate conversations that might enhance intercultural understanding and appreciation of multiple ways of knowing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Group and Cohort Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%