Science is boring!
Recently, as part of the #edureading group on Twitter, there was a discussion on the choice of text used in classrooms in relation to the cultural relevance to the readers. One idea behind this latter strategy is in giving more 'relevant' texts, this will motivate students more, as they see themselves in the books. We all remember studying the works of Shakespeare—a staple of high school English classes—but remember many of our fellow students struggling to read and understand his works.
The issue of a disconnect between young scientists and the science they’re learning isn’t new, though. Like previous generations, high school students have continued to spend science class learning about the fundamentals of science from the leaders of scientific thinking from the last 400 years like Newton, Mendeleev, and Darwin - old white guys.
The argument goes that, as social attitudes and population demographics have shifted, this creates a disconnect between the science and the audience of high school students. The cultural composition of schools has changed and that change has seen a clamor for minority (and in the case of women, majority)voices to be recognized in science.
To a growing number of teachers, the solution has been to introduce more diverse explanations of the natural world into science classes like Maori creation stories in New Zealand that are more reflective of the experiences of the students in the classrooms they teach and also introducing more contemporary contexts for them to choose from - rugby to teach parabolic motion.
Though polarizing—and at times highly contentious—the debate over introducing diverse voices and other cultural perspectives in science class has illuminated the rapid pace of change in what students are learning and the tension in trying to diversify voices without diluting the evolution of the nature of science - although, I would argue it would enrich it. The danger though is that science becomes more of a sociopolitical subject - the focus being on the development of science, rather than a method to effectively explore the natural world.
In 2020 and the calls for more racial equity, teachers have also argued that the focus on traditional Western science is especially pertinent for minority groups, who are less likely to be represented in the traditional representation of the development of science. Though classrooms are rapidly diversifying, the choices of what defines science, many argue, has remained mostly unchanged and mostly focused on white male characters and experiences.
However, is increasing the number of diverse voices and more importantly different views of the natural world the answer? At present, there isn’t any substantial evidence yet to suggest that using more culturally relevant contexts improves scientific understanding—or even fosters a love of science. Instead, only providing contexts that students are familiar with can be a limiting rather than expansive influence, permitting students to develop overly simplified models or to focus singularly on familiar topics and not expanding on their experiences - surely a key part of education.
Equity can be addressed by giving all students access to high-quality science teaching. It provides everyone with a shared scientific experience. You cannot teach students to engage in balanced and civil discourse if you’re discussing science that only some have actually studied.
Such an approach may not develop a love of science, the data also shows that teacher-led direct instruction in learning a particular scientific concept explicitly, combined with lots of experimental challenges, can reap academic success.
Yet while the data also suggests that we are failing to interest many of today’s students in science, it seems that teachers are starting to find some equilibrium between including minority voices and incorporating the key aspects of science education: Newton can exist in class alongside Dorothy Vaughan.
The key is to as US educator Nyree Clark suggests is to know your learners and develop relationships. Incorporate your student's voices in early discussions on a topic, acknowledge their experiences in the development of their understanding of science.
1) academic excellence that is not based on cultural deficit models of school failure.
2) cultural competence which locates excellence within the context of the students' community and cultural identity.
Academic achievement is a central goal of culturally relevant teaching. Unquestioningly, as students become culturally competent, their identity is affirmed. However, culturally relevant teaching must result in student learning. By knowing your students and their experiences, you do not devalue their cultural knowledge and worldviews. Students' learning is placed in a relevant context while their experiences are incorporated into the classroom.
Comments