Page 378 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

30 Considering the Consequences of Hybridity 353

The village in which I worked during my time in Alaska was a traditional whaling
community, comprised of subsistence hunters who utilized the land and sea for
survival. Stories were told about the International Whaling Commission’s call for all
hunting of the bowhead whale to cease after scientists completed a population
count indicating that numbers were so low that continued hunting would cause
extinction. Many villages in Alaska are located along waterways to make food
collection easier, so when the locals were told of the extremely low numbers of
bowhead whales they were in disbelief. Not only did they question the scientific
count because it would eliminate a major food source, they questioned the count
because they had seen firsthand more whales than were recorded. Through commu-
nication with the commission and discussion of their experience with the bowhead
population, scientists looked once again to the waters of the Bering and Chukchi
Seas. What they found was a population much larger than their initial count tallied;
they found this because local populations had established a different connection
with their surroundings and often demonstrated a greater awareness for what actu-
ally exists and supplies the livelihood for their communities. As Ellen and Harris
(2000) point out, native populations have provided needed information about the
natural world for centuries. Yet Williams (2002) notes that this knowledge is often
assimilated into constraints that may not allow for credit to the source.
In terms of teaching science, this was an ideal community – the students often
taught me. In the grand scheme of science education, what does hybridity and border
crossing mean? Champagne and Abu-Saad (2006) argue for indigenous communities
who feel that their children should be educated in the ways of the world but not at the
possible loss of local awareness and appreciation for their own cultural knowledge.
They emphasize the need for communities to be included in planning for education.
Teachers are ultimately responsible for learning, but in order to maintain the native
knowledge network that exists within a community, local elders and other community
members must be involved in the education of students. Typical elementary and
secondary settings are not always readily accepting of outside influences, but in native
communities, the only way to increase student participation and community involve-
ment is to realize that schools are not sacred grounds, accessible to only teachers and
their students. The community must be involved in education in order to prevent
assimilation and further movement from TEK, which can be detrimental to the
culture and way of life that many work to protect from the encroaching influence of
culture as portrayed in today’s television, print, and internet-based society.
June: I am intrigued with Stacey’s point about the likely fate of “innate knowledge
or survival.” I can think of several possible outcomes of efforts that encourage
hybridization: (i) As Stacey suggests, hybridization might result in one becoming
“immune” to innate knowledge of survival and such knowledge might eventually
be lost if people are not engaged in the act of drawing on it; (ii) The making bare
of such knowledge to those who wield power opens up possibilities for exploita-
tion, thus rendering those who possess the indigenous knowledge vulnerable (as
Deb points out); (iii) Hybridization is allowed to work in informal settings. In my
own experience in a developing world context, I have encountered people who