Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, representation, and identity

Abstract

In this article, I explore the question of what it means to create a science for all from the vantage point of urban homeless children. I draw on the work of critical and feminist scholars in science and education, as well as my own teaching and research with urban homeless children, to question how inclusive the science education community is in its efforts to understand the margins of science for all. I frame this analysis through the pedagogical questions of representation in science (what science is made to be) and identity in science (who we think we must be to engage in that science).

The value of an emergent notion of authenticity: Examples from two student/teacher–scientist partnership programs

“…In essence, we have to become more aware and take seriously issues with which our children and teachers struggle. To begin with their needs and interests rather than science per se may be particularly promising (Barton, 1998a(Barton, , 1998b(Barton, , 2001a(Barton, , 2001b. In so doing, we have to keep in mind the social production of scientific knowledge and the social production of school science (Gaskell, 1992).…”

Emergent learning opportunities in an inner‐city youth gardening program

“…The account of the gardening program, along with other studies of out-of-school learning (Barton, 1998a;Heath & McLaughlin, 1993, 1994Rahm, 1998), apprenticeship and on-the-job training (Lave & Wenger, 1991), and practices of scientists of all sorts (Eisenhart & Finkel, 1998;McGinn & Roth, 1999) clearly put into question the traditional method of school science. Studies of informal educational programs that do not have science education as their primary goal may help de®ne an alternative to traditional science education, which had failed most of those in the City Farmers program.…”

“…They had already been discussed years ago by Dewey, Montessori, and Vygotsky and more recently by Brown and colleagues. The literature contains other accounts of the development of inquiry-driven science classroom communities that put students rather than the curriculum at the center (Brown & Campione, 1994;Crawford, Krajcik, & Marx, 1999;Gallas, 1995; see also Barton, 1998b). Most important in these articles is their emphasis on a conception of children as their own creators of knowledge, and of adults solely as guides in this process.…”

Science education against the rise of fascist and authoritarian movements: towards the development of a pedagogy for democracy

“…To give only a few examples in science education, Santos (2009), whilst criticising the STS approach which "corroborates an ideological model for the maintenance of the status quo", has pledged "a political agenda to science education that would include issues such as unequal access to technology around the world, the domination power of technology, and the oppressive context of scientific and modern technological society" (p. 362). Angela Calabrese Barton and colleagues' work has challenged the egalitarian aims of the 'science for all' movement (Calabrese Barton 1998) and advanced teaching approaches that aim at social action for poor/marginalised children (Calabrese Barton and Osborne 2002). She has also given new perspectives on the education of 'urban children' who live in a cross-cultural, multi-racial, high crime, polluted and socially discriminatory environment (Calabrese Barton and Tobin 2001).…”