Contrasting Orientations: STSE for Social Reconstruction or Social Reproduction?

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 106, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 237-247

  Barrett, Sarah Elizabeth ^a   Pedretti, Erminia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85167402752     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18082.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1994). What is STS science teaching? In G. S. Aikenhead & J. Solomon (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform (pp. 47-59). New York: Teachers College Press.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Project 2061: Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Aronowitz, S. (1998). Introduction. In Pedagogy of freedom (pp. 1-19). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.
4. Barrett, S. (2002). Learning about science, society and technology in the new Ontario curriculum: The challenge. Paper presented at the Canadian Society for the Study of Education 30th Annual Conference, Toronto.
5. Barrett, S. (2003). You do what you are: A case study of the manifestation of science teacher identity in a curriculum writing project. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto.
6. Council of Ministers of Education (Canada). (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes, K-12: Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum. Toronto: Council of Ministers of Education Canada.
7. Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy and civic courage. New York: Lantham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
8. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans. New Rev. 20th-Anniversary ed.). New York: Continuum.
9. Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, MA.: Bergin & Garvey.
10. Hodson, D. (1998). In pursuit of scientific literacy. In Teaching and learning science: Towards a personalized approach (pp. viii, 200). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
11. Hodson, D. (1999). Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science Education, 83, 775-796.
12. Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science-technology-society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37.(5), 426-440.
13. Kastnholtz, H. G., & Erdmann, K.-H. (1994). Education for responsibility within the framework of UNESCO. Journal of Environmental Education, 25.(2), 15-20.
14. Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socio-scientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291-310.
15. Lundgren, U. P. (1991). Between education and schooling: Outlines of a diachronic curriculum theory. Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.
16. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17. Mitcham, C. (1999). Why science, technology, and society studies Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society (April), 128–134.
18. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington: National Academy Press.
19. Ontario Ministry of Education and Training. (2000). The Ontario curriculum- Grades 11 and 12: Science. Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario.
20. Pedretti, E. (2002). T. Kuhn meets T. rex: Critical conversations and new directions in science centres and science museums. Studies in Science Education, 37, 1-41.
21. Pedretti, E. (2003). Teaching science, technology, society, environment (STSE) education: Preservice teachers' philosophical and pedagogical landscapes. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 219-239). Boston: Kluwer.
22. Pedretti, E., & Hodson, D. (1995). From rhetoric to action: Implementing STS education through action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32.(5), 463-485.
23. Pignatelli, F. (1993). What can I do? Foucault on freedom and the question of teacher agency. Educatioal Theory, 43.(4), 411-432.
24. Popkewitz, T. S., & Brennan, M. (1998). Restructuring of social and political theory in education: Foucault and a social epistemology of school practices. In T. S. Popkewitz & M. Brennan (Eds.), Foucault's challenge: Discourse, knowledge, and power in education (pp. 3-35). New York: Teachers College Press.
25. Roth, W.-M., & Désautels, J. (2002). Science education as/for sociopolitical action. New York: P. Lang.
26. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1994). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
27. Siegel, H. (1996). The role of reasons in (science) education. In W. Hare & J. P. Portelli (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Introductory readings. Calgary: Detselig.
28. Solomon, J. (1994). Conflict between mainstream science and STS. In G. S. Aikenhead & J. Solomon (Eds.), STS education, international perspectives on reform (pp. 3-10). New York: Teachers College Press.
29. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications Inc.
30. Wellington, J. (2001). What is science education for Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1.(1), 23-39.