The recently released National Science Education Standards claim that science is a social process, although that axiom is marginalized in the Standards' overall vision of a restructured science education. This article explores how science education might be shaped if that claim and one body of research that supports it, the cultural studies of science, were taken as a basis for science curriculum. Specifically it analyzes the multiple social positions and knowledges that science and science education create as observations and measurements are carried out and categories are created. These positions produce locations in which multiple contesting knowledges or perspectives are produced. The article argues that these multiple knowledges must be made part of the curriculum. In the conclusion, the article analyzes the importance of the cultural studies of science literature to realizing the Standards' dream of "science for all students."
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abdi, S. W.
(1997, February). Teaching tips: Practical suggestions for incorporating the diverse history of science into the classroom. The Science Teacher, pp. 34-37.
2.
Abu-Lughod, L.
(1991). Writing against culture. In R. G. Fox (Ed.), Recapturing anthropology: Working in the present. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.
3.
Ackerman, D.
(1990). A natural history of the senses. New York: Vintage Books.
4.
Aikenhead, G.
(1994). What is STS science teaching? In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
5.
Althusser, L.
(1971). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. In Lenin and philosophy and other essays (B. Brewster, Trans.). London: New Left Books.
6.
Anzaldua, G.
(1990). Makingface, making soul. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Foundation Books.
7.
Appadurai, A.
(1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Public Culture,2(2), 1-24.
8.
Apple, M. W.
(1982). Education and power. Boston: Ark.
9.
Atwater, M. M.
(1995, February). The multicultural science classroom. The Science Teacher, pp. 20-23.
10.
Bacon-Smith, C.
(1992). Enterprising women: Television fandom and the creation of popular myth. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
11.
Bakhtin, M. M.
(1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (Michael Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
12.
Banks, J. A.
(1994). An introduction to multicultural education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
13.
Barnes, B.
, & Edge, D. (Eds.). (1982). Science in context: Readings in the sociology of science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
Barton, A. C.
(1996, April). Our lives are our theories are our lives: Rebuilding the science curriculum from a feminist perspective. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
15.
Barton, A. C.
, & Osborne, M. (1997, April). Liberatory science education outside of schools: Playing with identities and borders. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association of Research on Science Teaching, Chicago.
16.
Bloor, D.
(1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
17.
Boundas, C. V.
(Ed.). (1993). The Deleuze reader. New York: Columbia University Press.
18.
Brightman, R.
(1995). Forget culture: Replacement, transcendence, reflexification. Cultural Anthropology, 10, 509-546.
19.
Bromley, H. (1995). Engendering technology: The social practice of educational computing. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
20.
Bryson, M.
, & de Castell, S. (1995). So we've got a chip on our shoulder! Sexing the texts of "educational technologies." In J. Gaskell & J. Willinsky (Eds.), Gender in/forms curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
21.
Butler, J.
(1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of "sex". New York: Routledge.
22.
Chamberlin, J. E.
, & Gilman, S. L. (Eds.). (1985). Degeneration: The dark side of progress. New York: Columbia University Press.
23.
Classen, C.
(1993). Worlds of sense: Exploring the senses in history and across cultures. New York: Routledge.
24.
Clune, W. H.
, Haimo, D. T., Roitman, J., Romberg, T., Wright, J. C., & Wright, C. S. (1997). Commentaries on mathematics and science standards (Occasional Paper No. 3). Madison: University of Wisconsin, National Institute for Science Education.
25.
Damarin, S.
(1994, Fall-Winter). Would you rather be a cyborg or a goddess? On being a teacher in a postmodern century. Feminist Teacher, pp. 54-60.
26.
Davis-Floyd, R. E.
(1992). The technocratic body and the organic body: Cultural models for women's birth choices. In D. J. Hess & L. L. Layne (Eds.), The anthropology of science and technology. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
27.
Donahue, D. M.
(1993). Serving students, science, or society? The secondary school physics curriculum in the United States, 1930-1965. History of Education Quarterly, 33, 321-352.
28.
Eisenhart, M.
, Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261-295.
29.
Ellsworth, E.
(1989). Why doesn't this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59, 297-324.
30.
Feyerabend, P.
(1987). Farewell to reason. London: Verso.
31.
Finkel, E.
(1996). Making sense of genetics: Students' knowledge use during problem solving in a high school genetics class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 345-368.
32.
Flower, M.
, Ramette, C., & Becker, W. (1997). Science in the liberal arts at Portland State University: A curriculum focusing on science-in-the-making. In A. P. McNeal & C. D'Avanzo (Eds.), Student-active science: Models of innovation in college science teaching. Fort Worth, TX: Saunders College Publishing.
33.
Flower, M. J.
(1994, November). A native speaks for himself: Reflections on techno scientific liberty. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco.
34.
Forsythe, D.
(1993). Engineering knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 23, 445-478.
35.
Foucault, M.
(1978). The history of sexuality: An introduction. New York: Vintage Books.
36.
Giroux, H. A.
(1983). Theory and resistance in education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
37.
Gough, N.
(1993). Environmental education, narrative complexity and postmodern science/fiction. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 607-625.
38.
Gross, P. R.
, & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
39.
Hacking, I.
(1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Hakken, D.
, & Andrews, B. (1993). Computing myths, class realities: An ethnography of technology and working people in Sheffield, England. Boulder, CO: Westview.
41.
Hall, S.
(1986). On postmodernism and articulation: An interview with Stuart Hall (edited by Lawrence Grossberg). Journal of Communication Inquiry, 10(2), 45-60.
42.
Haraway, D. J.
(1989). Primate visions: Gender, race and nature in the world of modern science. New York: Routledge.
43.
Haraway, D. J.
(199la). The actors are cyborg, nature is coyote, and the geography is elsewhere: Postscript to "Cyborgs at Large." In C. Penley & A. Ross (Eds.), Technoculture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
44.
Haraway, D. J.
(1991b). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
45.
Haraway, D. J.
(1997). Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan(c)_Meets_OncoMouseTh: Feminisms and technoscience. New York: Routledge.
46.
Harding, S.
(1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
47.
Harding, S.
(1994). Is science multicultural? Challenges, resources, opportunities, uncertainties. Configurations: A Journal of Literature, Science, and Technology, 2, 301-330.
48.
Heath, D.
(1994, November). Recombinant fieldsites: Chimeric ethnography and the co-production of technoscientific research. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Atlanta, GA.
49.
Heymann, J.
(1995). Equal partners: A physician's call for a new spirit of medicine. Boston: Little, Brown.
50.
Howes, D.
(Ed.). (1991). The varieties of sensory experience: A sourcebook in the anthropology of the senses. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
51.
Howes, E.
(1996, April). Feminism in high school science: Students critique the scientiflc enterprise. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
52.
Jones, J.
(1993). The Tuskegee syphilis experiment: "A moral astigmatism." In S. Harding (Ed.), The racial economy of science. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
53.
Keller, E. F.
(1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
54.
Kelly, G. J.
, Carlsen, W. S., & Cunningham, C. M. (1993). Science education in sociocultural context: Perspectives from the sociology of science. Science Education, 77, 207-220.
55.
King, B. B.
, & Ahlquist, R. (1990, April). Developing generative themes for the teaching of biology. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
56.
Kliebard, H. M.
(1986). The struggle for the American curriculum: 1893-1958. New York: Routledge.
57.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D.
, & Mulkay, M. (Eds.). (1983). Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science. London: Sage.
58.
Komisar, B. P.
, & McClellan, J. E. (1961). The logic of slogans. In B. O. Smith & R. H. Ennis (Eds.), Language and concepts in education. Chicago: Rand McNally.
59.
Latour, B.
(1983). Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world. In K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science. London: Sage.
60.
Latour, B.
(1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
61.
Latour, B.
, & Woolgar, S. (1979/1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
62.
Layne, L. L.
(1992). Of fetuses and angels: Fragmentation and integration in narratives of pregnancy loss. In D. J. Hess & L. L. Layne (Eds.), The anthropology of science and technology. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
63.
Lugones, M.
(1990). Playfulness, "world" travelling, and loving perception. In G. Anzaldua (Ed.), Making face, making soul. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Foundation Books.
64.
Lugones, M.
(1994). Purity, impurity, and separation. Signs, 19,458-479.
65.
Martin, E.
(1994). Flexible bodies: Tracking immunity in American culture-From the days of polio to the age of AIDS. Boston: Beacon.
66.
Millar, R.
(Ed.). (1989). Doing science: Images of science in science education. London: Falmer.
67.
Montgomery, S. L.
(1994). Minds for the making: The role of science in American education, 1750-1990. New York: Guilford.
68.
Nader, L.
(Ed.). (1996). Naked science: Anthropological inquiry into boundaries, power, and knowledge. New York: Routledge.
69.
National Research Council.
(1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
70.
Ndunda, M.
, & Munby, H. (1991). "Because I am a Woman": A study of culture, school, and futures in science. Science Education, 75, 683-699.
71.
Nieto, S.
(1996). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. White Plains, NY: Longman.
72.
Oakes, J.
(1985). Keeping track. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
73.
Ortner, S. B.
(1984). Theory in anthropology since the sixties. Comparative Study of Society and History, 26(1), 126-166.
74.
Pauly, P. J.
(1991). The development of high school biology: New York City, 1900-1925. Isis,82, 662-688.
75.
Penley, C.
, & Ross, A. (1991). Brownian motion: Women, tactics, and technology. In C. Penley & A. Ross (Eds.), Technoculture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
76.
Rabinow, P.
(1986). Representations are social facts: Modernity and post-modernity in anthro-pology. In J. Clifford & G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
77.
Rapp, R.
(1990). Constructing amniocentesis: Maternal and medical discourses. In F. Ginsburg & A. L. Tsing (Eds.), Uncertain terms: Negotiating gender in American culture. Boston: Beacon.
78.
Restivo, S.
, & Bauchspies, W. (1997). How to criticize science and maintain your sanity. Science as Culture, 6, 396-413.
79.
Rodriguez, A. J.
(1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the National Resource Council's National Science Education Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 19-37.
80.
Ross, A.
(1991). Strange weather: Culture, science, and technology in the age of limits. London: Verso.
81.
Ross, A.
(Ed.). (1996). Science wars. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
82.
Roth, W.-M.
(1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a Grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13(1), 73-128.
83.
Rouse, J.
(1993). What are cultural studies of scientific knowledge? Configurations, 1(1), 1-22.
84.
Roychoudhury, A.
, Tippins, D. J., & Nichols, S. E. (1995). Gender-inclusive science teaching: A feminist-constructivist approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 897-924.
85.
Schiebinger, L.
(1993). Nature's body: Gender in the making of modern science. Boston: Beacon.
86.
Selfe, C.
(1992). Politicizing and inhabiting virtual landscapes as discursive spaces. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan Technological University.
87.
Shutkin, D. S.
(1992, October). Constructing the child as the subject of information technology in the context of school restructuring. Paper presented at the meeting of the Journal of Curriculum Theory, Dayton, OH.
88.
Simonson, R.
, & Walker, S. (Eds.). (1988). Multicultural literacy. St. Paul, MN: Graywolf.
89.
Solomon, J.
, & Aikenhead, G. (Eds.). (1994). STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
90.
Springer, C.
(1996). Electronic eros: Bodies and desire in the postindustrial age. Austin: University of Texas Press.
91.
Stone, A. R.
(1995). The war of desire and technology at the close of the mechanical age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
92.
Strathem, M.
(1997). Dear David... Cultural Anthropology, 12, 281-282.
93.
Susskind, Y
, & Finkel, E. A. (1995, April). Encouraging the socially responsible use of science: Examples of curricular reform. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
94.
Toumey, C. P.
(1994). God's own scientists. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
95.
Toumey, C. P.
(1996). Conjuring science: Scientific symbols and cultural meanings in American life. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
96.
Traweek, S.
(1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
97.
Traweek, S.
(1996). Unity, dyads, triads, quads, and complexity: Cultural choreographies of science. In A. Ross (Ed.), Science wars. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
98.
Tyler, S.
(1987). The unspeakable: Discourse, dialogue, and rhetoric in the postmodern world. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
99.
Watson, J. D.
(1968). The double helix: A personal account of the discovery of the structure of DNA. New York: Atheneum.
100.
Wax, M. L.
(1993). How culture misdirects multiculturalism. Anthropology and Education Quarterly,24(2), 99-115.
101.
Weinberg, S.
(1992). Dreams of a final theory. New York: Pantheon Books.
102.
Weinstein, M.
(in press). Robot world: Education, popular culture, and science. New York: Peter Lang.
103.
Willis, P.
(1977). Learning to laborNew York: Columbia University Press.
