Page 251 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

17 Invoking the Ontological Realm of Place: A Dialogic Response 225

that could easily be turned into a writing activity). It was always interesting to hear
people begin by describing the physical space and inevitably the discussions would
lead to narratives of activities, people, sensations, and so on – all experiences that
make it a place called home. This would lead to discussions about place in learning
– making the classroom a place for learning, the role of community (as a place and/
or cooperative) in teaching and learning. I could see using such an activity – talking
or writing – to make participants more aware of their “being-in-place and making
sense of it within their pedagogy” as you stated, Miyoun. Malpas (1999) makes this
connection between narrative and being: “[I]t is largely through narrative, in fact,
that we are able to project our lives from the past and present into the future, and,
in doing so, we are also able to explore and map out possibilities for future action”
(p. 94). I love this quote because it really speaks to the importance of bringing to
awareness our experiences of being in our “lifestories,” and especially for educators,
providing the space for reflective discussion about what it means for their teaching
philosophies and corresponding pedagogies.
Clifford Knapp (2008) developed a teacher education course, “Integrating
Community Resources in Curriculum and Instruction,” that uses principles of PBE
and experiential education structures to help students learn how to find, investigate,
and integrate local resources into their curricula. He lists design principles for this
approach:
• The surrounding phenomena provide the foundation for interdisciplinary curricu-
lum development and contain ecological, multigenerational, and multicultural
dimensions.
• Students and teachers are encouraged to cross the boundaries between the school
and the community and become involved in a variety of constructive ways.
• Learners are expected to become creators of knowledge as well as consumers of
knowledge, and their questions and concerns play central roles in this process.
They are assessed on the basis of how this knowledge contributes to the commu-
nity’s well-being and sustainability.
Given our discussion, while these are good tenets, I think it would be stronger if
the following design principle was added: Throughout the course, personal nar-
ratives and reflections will be used to encourage learners to make sense of their
own relationships with and in a place, both in their histories and their experiences
during the course.
Sheliza: I think Knapp’s principles are useful in that they mirror curriculum
reform that advocates for science, technology, society, and environment (collectively
referred to as STSE in Ontario curriculum, but known in other areas of science edu-
cation research and practice as science, technology, and society [STS]). (But see
how this notion connects with what was described in an earlier chapter by Mueller
and Zeidler on the limitations of STS.) For me, Knapp’s principles trigger another
important aspect to our discussions on place and PBE; that is, its position in science
education.
At the moment, science education calls for an understanding of the complex
hybridity of STSE. For example, the STSE framework is believed to illuminate