Adult STEM Education for Democratic Participation

Abstract

Many key concerns require engagement with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) knowledge. Consider the complexity and nuance of climate change, energy policy, health and medicine, and data security. Informed voting or decision-making on such issues is no easy task; effective participation in our society requires considerable STEM capabilities. Education of all age groups is essential for a scientifically knowledgeable population involved in making democratic decisions about the future. Lindeman argued for adult education learning processes hand-in-hand with democratic processes, yet, once adults leave formal education, there are woefully few opportunities for the general public to learn or engage with STEM content. Adult education as a field has an important obligation to continue to support adults’ STEM learning. This obligation includes helping scientists and STEM educators better connect to adult learners in informal and nonformal settings. This paper explores adult STEM education for democratic participation. We begin with an overview of adult STEM education, followed by STEM knowledge and skills, with a focus on the utility and value of scientific processes and ways of thinking. We then continue with the function of STEM learning in democratic processes followed by frameworks of adult STEM, specifically scientific literacy and place-based education, and conclude with implications and recommendations for adult education practice.

Keywords

STEM science literacy place-based education democratic participation informal learning nonformal learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Academy of Arts & Sciences (2019). Encountering science in America. https://www.amacad.org/publication/encountering-science

American Association for the Advancement of Science (1995). Science for all Americans summary: Project 2061. http://www.project2061.org/publications/articles/2061/sfaasum.htm

Barton

A. C.

Tan

(2010). It changed our lives”: Activism, science, and greening the community. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2010.504480

Bell

Clover

D. E.

(2017). Critical culture: Environmental adult education in public museums. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2017(153), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20218

Bonney

Phillips

T. B.

Ballard

H. L.

Enck

J. W.

(2016). Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515607406

Brookfield

(1984). The contribution of Eduard Lindeman to the development of theory and philosophy in adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, 34(4), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848184034004001

Brown

B. A.

(2021). Science in the city: Culturally relevant STEM education. Harvard Education Press.

Carcasson

Sprain

(2012). Deliberative democracy and adult civic education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2012(135), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20022

Chandler

Rullman

Cousins

Esmail

Begin

Venicx

Eisenbert

Studer

(2017). Contributions to publications and management plans from 7 years of citizen science: Use of a novel evaluation tool on Earthwatch-supported projects. Biological Conservation, 208(April 2017), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.024

10.

Committee on STEM Education . (2018). Charting a course for success: America’s strategy for STEM education. National Science & Technology Council. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED590474

11.

Dhillon

C. M.

(2017). Using citizen science in environmental justice: Participation and decision-making in a Southern California waste facility siting conflict. Local Environment, 22(12), 1479–1496. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2017.1360263

12.

Ehrlich

(Ed.), (2000). Civic responsibility and higher education. Oryx Press.

13.

Falk

J. H.

Dierking

L. D.

(2010). The 95 percent solution. American Scientist, 98(6), 486–493. https://doi.org/10.1511/2010.87.486

14.

Falk

J. H.

Dierking

L. D.

(2019). Reimagining public science education: The role of lifelong free-choice learning. Disciplinary and Interdiscisciplary Science Education Research, 1(10), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0013-x

15.

Falk

J. H.

Pattison

Meier

Bibas

Livingston

(2018). The contribution of science-rich resources to public science interest. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(3), 422–445. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21425

16.

Falk

J. H.

Storksdieck

Dierking

L. D.

(2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 455–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506064240

17.

Flanagan

Gallay

Pykett

Smallwood

(2019). The environmental commons in urban communities: The potential of place-based education. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(226), 226. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00226

18.

Gupta

Fraser

Rank

S. J.

Brucker

J. L.

Flinner

(2019). Multi-site case studies about zoo and aquarium visitors’ perceptions of the STEM learning ecology. Visitor Studies, 22(2), 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2019.1661737

19.

Gutwill

J. P.

(2018). Science self-efficacy and lifelong learning: Emerging adults in science museums. Visitor Studies, 21(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2018.1503875

20.

Heimlich

Horr

E. E.

(2010). Adult learning in free-choice, environmental settings: What makes it different? New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2010(127), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.381

21.

Hodson

(2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021

22.

Karrow

Fazio

(2010). Educating-within-place: Care, citizen science, and ecojustice. In Tippins

D. J.

Mueller

M. P.

van Eijck

Adams

J. D.

(Eds.), Cultural studies and environmentalism (pp. 193–214). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3929-3_16

23.

Kluttz

Walter

(2018). Conceptualizing learning in the climate justice movement. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713617751043

24.

Knowles

M. S.

Holton

E. F.

Swanson

R. A.

(2015). The adult learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

25.

Kollmann

E. K.

Reich

Bell

Goss

(2013). Tackling tough topics: Using socio-scientific issues to help museum visitors participate in democratic dialogue and increase their understandings of current science and technology. The Journal of Museum Education, 38(2), 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2013.11510768

26.

Levinson

(2010). Science education and democratic participation: An uneasy congruence? Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260903562433

27.

Lindeman

(1987). Adult education and the democratic discipline (1944). In Brookfield

(Ed.), Learning democracy: Eduard Lindeman on adult education and social change (pp. 152–161). Croom Helm.

28.

Morrissey

Fraser

Ball

(2022). Addressing social issues in informal STEM learning: A review of progress, potential, and gaps. Museums & Social Issues, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15596893.2022.2111883

29.

National Issues Forums . (2020). Deliberation. https://www.nifi.org/en/deliberation

30.

National Center for Education Statistics . (2022). Characteristics of postsecondary students. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/csb

31.

National Science Board . (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2018 (NSB-2018-1). National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report

32.

National Science Board . (2020). Science and technology: Public attitudes, knowledge, and interest. Science and Engineering Indicators 2020 (NSB-2020-7). National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20207/

33.

National Science Board . (2021). The STEM labor force of today: Scientists, engineers and skilled technical workers. Science and engineering indicators 2022 (NSB-2021-2). National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20212

34.

National Science Board . (2022). Science and technology: Public perceptions, awareness, and information sources. Science and engineering indicators 2022 (NSB-2022-7). National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20227

35.

National Science Foundation . (n.d.) Research areas. https://www.nsf.gov/about/research_areas.jsp

36.

Ottander

Simon

(2021). Learning democratic participation? Meaning-making in discussion of socioscientific issues in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 1895–1925. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1946200

37.

Pennycook

Rand

D. G.

(2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Science, 25(5), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007

38.

Pew Research Center . (2017). Science news and information today. https://www.journalism.org/2017/09/20/science-news-and-information-today/

39.

Phillips

T. B.

Ballard

H. L.

Lewenstein

B. V.

Bonney

(2019). Engagement in science through citizen science: Moving beyond data collection. Science Education, 103(3), 665–690. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21501

40.

Priest

(2013). Critical science literacy: What citizens and journalists need to know to make sense of science. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 33(5-6), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467614529707

41.

Ross

A. D.

Struminger

Winking

Wedemeyer-Strombel

K. R.

(2018). Science as a public good: Findings from a survey of March for Science participants. Science Communication, 40(2), 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018758076

42.

Roth

W. M.

Lee

(2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/302

43.

Sadler

T. D.

(2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009

44.

Shaughnessy

Prins

Hopkins

(2014). Adults learning about shale gas development: Information sharing, community engagement, and critical science literacy (pp. 473–478). Adult Education Research Conference. http://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2014/papers/81

45.

Shen

(1975). Views: Science literacy: Public understanding of science is becoming vitally needed in developing and industrialized countries alike. American Scientist, 63(3), 265–268. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27845461

46.

Singh

(2016). What is scientific literacy: A review paper. International Journal of Academic Research and Development, 1(2), 15–20.

47.

Sjöström

Eilks

(2018). Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of bildung. In Dori

Y. J.

Mevarech

Z. R.

Baker

D. R.

(Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in stem education. Innovations in science education and technology (24, pp. 65–88). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_4

48.

Sobel

(2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. The Orion Society.

49.

Taylor

(2010). Cultural institutions and adult education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2010(127), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.376

50.

Trefil

Hazen

R. M.

(2010). Scientific literacy: A modest proposal. In Meinwalkd

Hildebrand

J. G.

(Eds.), Science and educated American: A core component of liberal education (pp. 41–56). American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

51.

Tsai

C. Y.

Y. Y.

Cheng

Y. Y.

(2017). The relationships among adult affective factors, engagement in science, and scientific competencies. Adult Education Quarterly, 67(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0741713616673148

52.

University of California Museum of Paleontology . (2012). Understanding science: How science works. http://undsci.berkeley.edu/lessons/pdfs/how_science_works.pdf

53.

University of California Museum of Paleontology . (n.d) Understanding science: The philosophy of science. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/philosophy

54.

Verba

(1967). Democratic participation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 373(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271626737300103

55.

Zarestky

Vilen

(2021). Citizen science: Adult education for environmental sustainability and conservation. In Alfred

M. A.

Robinson

P. A.

Roumell

E. A.

(Eds.), Advancing the global agenda for human rights, vulnerable populations, and environmental sustainability (pp. 277–290). Information Age Publishing.

56.

Zarestky

Vilen

Short

R. A.

Struminger

Lawing

A. M.

(2022). Adult education at biological field stations: Building capacity for science learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 72(3), 284–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/07417136211044728