Open Journal Systems

Contamination of water resources as a starting point for socio-scientific activism

Teresa Conceição, Mónica Baptista, Pedro Reis

Article ID: 2072
Vol 3, Issue 2, 2022

VIEWS - 95 (Abstract)

Abstract

Science curricula emphasize the need to involve students in civil society issues related to science, highlighting the primacy of learning about the science-technology-society-environment relationship. The objective of this work is to know the students' learning when they get involved in the attempt to solve the problem related to the pollution of the stream near their school. The research methodology is qualitative, interpretative and based on participant observation. Twenty-one students from two 8th grade classes[1] with an alternative curriculum, living in a rural environment in southwestern Portugal, participated in the study. Data were collected through the teacher's diary, written documents and interviews with the students (conducted at the ﬁnal of the study). The results reveal that the positive experiences provided by the radio club gave them confidence and encouraged them to engage in community activism related to the pollution of the local stream. This activism takes the form of a puppet show about sewage treatment. Also, the results show us that activism leads students to the identiﬁcation of the science and technology issues that are at the root of the pollution of the creek, expanding their knowledge about the problem and discussing different perspectives for its solution. In addition, young people recognize that knowledge enables them to inform other members of the community and realize that they have the right to become involved in socio-scientific issues that affect their quality of life.

Keywords

Socio-scientific issues, Socio-environmental issues in the classroom, Scientific literacy, Science education.

Full Text:

PDF

References

1. Aikenhead G. (2011) Towards a cultural view on quality science teaching. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, and R. Gunstone (Eds.) T⅛e Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. DOI.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_7

2. Alsop, S. and Bencze, L. (Eds.). Activism in science and technology education. London: Springer.

3. Apotheker, J., Blonder, R., Akaygun, S., Reis, P., Kampschulte, L. and Laherto, A. (2017). Responsible Research and Innovation in secondary school science classrooms: experiences from the project Irresistible. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 89(2), 211-219.

4. Baptista, M., Reis, P., & Andrade, V. (2018). Let's save the bees! An environmental activism initiative in elementary school. Visions for Sustainability, 9, 41-48.

5. Bogdan, R., and Biklen, S. (1994). Investigação qualitativa em educação: Uma introdução à teoria e aos métodos. Porto: Porto Editora.

6. Blatt, E. (2013). Local tree mapping: A collaborative, place-based activity integrating science, technology, math, and geography. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 50(3), 99-109. doi:10.1080/00368121.2013.808165.

7. Bybee. R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

8. Colucci-Gray, L., & Camino, E. (2014). From Knowledge to Action? Re-embedding Science Learning Within the Planet's Web. In S. Alsop & L. Bencze (Eds.), Activism in science and technology education (pp. 149-164). London: Springer.

9. Dawson, V. (2011). A case study of the impact ofi Socio-scientific issues into a reproduction unit in a catholic girls' school. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 313-346). London: Springer.

10. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Youngpeople's images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.

11. Eastwood, J., Schlegel, W., & Cook, K. (2011). Effects of an interdisciplinary program on students' reasoning with socioscientific issues and perceptions of their learning experiences. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 89-126). London: Springer.

12. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittroch (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York, NY: Macmillan.

13. Evagorou, M. (2011). Discussing a socioscientific issue in a primary school classroom: ¾e case of using a technology- supported environment in formal and nonformal settings. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 133-160). London: Springer.

14. Freire, S., Faria, C., Galvão, C. and Reis, P. (2013). New curricular material for science classes: how do students evaluate it? Research in Science Education, 43, 163-178.

15. Goldstein, D. (2017). Fukushima in Brazil: undone science, technophilia, epistemic murk. Culture, Heory and Critique, 1-22. DOI: 10.1080/14735784.2017. 1357480

16. Gray, D., Colucci-Gray, L. and Camino, E. (Eds) (2009). Science, society and sustainability: Education and empowerment for an uncertain world. London: Routledge Research.

17. Hodson, D. (2011). Looking to thefuture. Building a curriculumfor social activism. ¾e Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

18. Kolst0, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socio-scientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291-310.

19. Linhares, E. and Reis, P. (2014). La promotion de l'activism chez les futurs enseignants partant de discussion de questions socialement vives. Revue Francophone du Dévelopment Durable, 4, 80-93.

20. Little, P. (2009). Negotiating community engagement and science in the federal environmental public health sector. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 23(2), 94-118. DOI: 10∙1111∕j∙1548-1387∙2009∙01049∙χ

21. Marques, A. R., & Reis, P. (2017). Production and dissemination of digital videos on environmental pollution. Case study: research-based collective activism. Eureka Journal on Science Education and Outreach 14(1), 215-226. Available at http://hdl.handle.net/10498/18857

22. Millar, R. and Hunt, A. (2002). Science for public understanding: A different way to teach and learn science. School science review, 83(304), 35-42.

23. NRC (2010). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a conceptual framework for new K-12 science education standards. Board on science education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: ¾e National Academies Press.

24. NGSS (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: ¾e National Academies Press.

25. [North American Association for Environmental Education (2004). Excellence in environmental education: Guidelines for learning (Pre-K-12). Available at http://www.naaee.org/npeee/learner_guidelines.php

26. Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411-423.

27. Osborne, J. and Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. A report to the Nuffield Foundation. London: King's College London.

28. Puig. B., and Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2011). Different music to the same score: Teaching about genes, environment, and human performances. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 201-238). London: Springer.

29. Reis, P. (2014a). Promoting students' collective socio-scientific activism: Teacher's perspectives. In S. Alsop & L. Bencze (Eds.), Activism in science and technology education, (pp. 547-574). London: Springer.

30. Reis P. (2014b). Socio-political action on socio-scientific issues: reconstructing teacher education and curriculum. Uni-Pluri/versidad, 14(2), 16-26. Disponível em: http://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/ index.php/unip.

31. Reis, P. (2013). Da discussão à ação sócio-política sobre controvérsias sócio#científicas: uma questão de cidadania. Ensino de Ciências e Tecnologia em Revista, 3(1), 1-10.

32. Reis, P. and Galvão, C. (2004). Socio-scientific controversies and students' conceptions about scientists. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1621-1633.

33. Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N., & Crawford, B. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science education 88(4), 610-645.

34. Sadler, T. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientificIssues in the Classroom, (pp. 355-369). London: Springer.

35. Sadler, T., Klosterman, M., & Topcu, M. (2011). Learning science content and socioscientific reasoning through classroom explorations of global climate change. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 45-78). London: Springer.

36. Simon, S., and Amos, R. (2011). Decision making and use of evidence in a socioscientific problem on air quality. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientificIssues in the Classroom, (pp. 167-192). London: Springer.

37. Stawkowski, M. (2016). "I am a radioactive mutant": Emergent biological subjectivities at Kazakhstan's Semipalatinsk nuclear test site. American Ethnologist, 43(1), 144-157. DOI: 10.1111/amet.12269.

38. Stradling, R. (1985). Controversial issues in the curriculum. Bulletin of Environmental Education, 170, 9-13.

39. Wong, S., Zeidler, D., & Klosterman, M. (2011). Metalogue: Preconditions and resources for productive socioscientific issues teaching and learning. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientificIssues in the Classroom, (pp. 271-276). London: Springer.

40. Zeidler, D., Applebaum, S., & Sadler, T. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific Issues in the Classroom, (pp. 277-306). London: Springer.