Science and Cultural Process: Defining an Anthropological Approach to Science Education

Hammond, Lorie; Brandt, Carol B.

doi:10.1080/03057260408560202

Cited by 36 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We are attracted to the concept of culture because of its explanatory potential for the injustice and inequity tied up with science and science education's history and for science education's potential to use its power for the good of the people and the environment, and to challenge inequitable social structures. Science education, with cultural lenses, can be used as a tool for counter‐hegemony (Hammond & Brandt, 2004). A balance of lenses and perspectives, unlike the three blind men in the proverb and as implied by crystallization, and their reflexive enactment may enlarge the cultural box in science education in productive, inclusive, and thoughtful ways.…”

Section: Where Do We Go From Here? Importance and Implications Of Culmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and science education in the 21st century: Extending and making the cultural box more inclusive

Parsons

Carlone

2012

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are pleased to introduce the Special Issue, Culture and Science Education in the 21st Century. In the past 20 years, the concept of culture has become more prominent and relevant in science education. The culture of science, culture of school science, culture of science classrooms, and cultures of individual actors in the science educative process are among the many ways in which culture has been cast and examined in the science education literature. Many studies described culture and examined its role in the participation in and the teaching and learning of science but fewer studies comprehensively entertained culture as a structure and mechanism that can inform research and policies developed to address the numerous challenges in science education.Approaching culture as structure necessitates thinking simultaneously about local and global settings and their micro-and macro-organizing frames as well as thinking holistically, placing the local and global and the micro and macro within both historical and contemporary times. On one hand, thinking of culture as structure requires in-depth investigations that are rich and deconstructive in nature, two of many characteristics of cultural studies in science education over the past 20 years. On the other hand, if culture becomes a tool in addressing systemic issues in systemic ways then it is necessary for some research studies to be adaptable to large-scale economies. If both hands work together then culture can become a vehicle to not only advancing our understanding about an equitable, robust science education for the 21st century but for acting in systemic ways to create it. The articles contained in the Special Issue provide an impetus for continued conversations about the definition, relevance, and the visionary uses of culture.We came to this co-editing endeavor with different ideas about culture. Our differences prompted interesting and provocative conversations between us. We are excited about this Special Issue because each article forwards a different approach to study culture and applies the concept to different problems of science education. We see this diversity of perspectives as a strength; it reminds us of the notion of crystallization discussed as a research strategy in texts about qualitative research methodology (Tracy, 2010). Rather than use data to come up with a more valid, singular truth, the goal of crystallization is to leverage multiple data,

show abstract

Section: Where Do We Go From Here? Importance and Implications Of Culmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and science education in the 21st century: Extending and making the cultural box more inclusive

Parsons

Carlone

2012

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This interest has generally been fuelled by a desire for social justice in the equitable representation and success in school science and mathematics by students conventionally marginalized within those subjects on the basis of students' cultural self-identities. Hammond and Brandt (2004) documented this motivation through their analysis of anthropological studies devoted to a cultural perspective on science education published in key scholarly journals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous knowledge and science revisited

Aikenhead

Ogawa

2007

Cult Stud of Sci Educ

375

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a guided tour through three diverse cultural ways of understanding nature: an Indigenous way (with a focus on Indigenous nations in North America), a neo-indigenous way (a concept proposed to recognize many Asian nations' unique ways of knowing nature; in this case, Japan), and a Euro-American scientific way. An exploration of these three ways of knowing unfolds in a developmental way such that some key terms change to become more authentic terms that better represent each culture's collective, yet heterogeneous, worldview, metaphysics, epistemology, and values. For example, the three ways of understanding nature are eventually described as Indigenous ways of living in nature, a Japanese way of knowing seigyo-shizen, and Eurocentric sciences (plural). Characteristics of a postcolonial or anti-hegemonic discourse are suggested for science education, but some inherent difficulties with this discourse are also noted.

show abstract

“…In other words, it can be argued that the educational culture of a country regulates its science teachers at a deep level. Hammond and Brandt (2004), who discussed an anthropological approach to science education, indicated that pedagogical questions of who teaches science, how it is taught, and what ends it serves take on new meanings that can be addressed through research by using a cultural approach that assumes science learning is a cultural as well as a cognitive activity. Since culture is something that is inherited rather than changed, the paradigm possessed by each science teacher inevitably has been inherited to include some room for their improvement; it is not a new creation without an underlying framework.…”

Section: Approach From the Social Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What affects Japanese science teachers’ pedagogical perspectives in lower secondary schools? A case study of international comparison between Hiroshima (Japan) and Leeds (England)

Nozoe

Isozaki

2020

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science and Cultural Process: Defining an Anthropological Approach to Science Education

Cited by 36 publications

References 53 publications

Culture and science education in the 21st century: Extending and making the cultural box more inclusive

Culture and science education in the 21st century: Extending and making the cultural box more inclusive

Indigenous knowledge and science revisited

What affects Japanese science teachers’ pedagogical perspectives in lower secondary schools? A case study of international comparison between Hiroshima (Japan) and Leeds (England)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About