Tacit knowledge and girls’ notions about a field science community of practice

Abstract

The issue of girls' lack of connection to science has received much attention. Situated approaches such as research apprenticeships offer the chance to engage learners fully in science communities of practice and thus connect girls to science. However, such programs are often designed with lab settings, rather than field settings, in mind. This paper investigates a research apprenticeship program (Girls on Ice) that immerses girls in field science. In particular, the program makes explicit tacit elements needed for success in field science, such as a sense of adventure and physical and mental toughness. Using a qualitative approach, we explored how and in what ways girls connected to a field science community of practice. Emergent themes from the analysis illustrate that girls learned both explicit and tacit practices and ways of being that are associated with being a field scientist, such as teamoriented leadership and physical and mental perseverance. The results suggest that providing girls exposure to and practice with the tacit skills needed in science might constitute a new way to increase its perceived relevance and to counter gendered expectations of women in science.

How various material resources facilitate science identity work for girls in a research apprenticeship program

“…In particular, working with live seals and deceased seal specimens, as well as working in authentic field sites, particularly in the context of work from boats, inspired emotional connections to science. This is similar to the experience of practicing scientists, as disciplinary practice is permeated with affect (Carsten Conner et al, 2018). Scientists often acknowledge the ways emotional connection drives their work through, for instance, the pleasure of studying phenomenon, esthetics or empathy associated with the subject matter, cognitive challenge, or feelings involved in scholarly interactions (Hamza & Wickman, 2009;Jaber & Hammer, 2016).…”

“…Material resources include a host of things, from specialized tools to the setting of science itself. When science is conducted in the field, the physical settings and/or the specimens encountered there might serve to engender emotional connections due to having an awe-inspiring experience in nature (Carsten Conner, Perin, & Pettit, 2018;Mogk & Goodwin, 2012). Conversely, complex instruments and technology are sometimes experienced as alienating and dehumanizing (although everyday technologies such as iPhones might be expected to bring a sense of personal relevance).…”

Leaving the laboratory: Using Field Science to Disrupt and Expand Historically Enduring Narratives of Science Teaching and Learning

“…We argue that science educators do not fully understand what field science might offer K-12 youth in terms of reimagining learning opportunities despite multiple reforms efforts aimed at engaging youth in science practices (Carsten-Conner et al, 2018). Given the expansive view of expertise, the practices, and the opportunities of field science for educators and youth described above, we propose that engagement in field science might expand, rather than constrain, the practices and roles that youth and educators shape and take up across learning settings.…”

“…Such a community, often composed of scientists and local experts, encompasses a group of colleagues who negotiate norms for participation and action. One example of community-building for field science in K-12 settings is provided by Carsten-Conner et al (2018), who conducted the Girls on Ice (GOI) program. The GOI program brought nine girls from diverse backgrounds to participate in glacial research alongside scientists on two glaciers in Washington State and Alaska.…”

“…In particular, we are concerned with boundary guarding practices in typical science learning settings that unnecessarily perpetuate narrow definitions of science, scientific knowledge production, and science expertise (Bang et al, 2012). Even school science in the USA that is enacted in light of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) (Achieve, Inc., 2013) privileges knowledge and practices derived from laboratory science (Carsten-Conner et al, 2018;Wyner & Doherty, 2017). Furthermore, historically enduring ways of enacting school science positions students as "technicians" by completing activities with pre-determined outcomes and by deferring to those positioned by society as experts to make and verify knowledge (Addelson, 1983;Stroupe, 2014;Dillon et al, 2016;Medin & Bang, 2014).…”