Page 398 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

31 On Critical Thinking, Indigenous Knowledge and Raisins Floating in Soda Water 373

commonly expressed. When students get to the section of the handout that asks for
their opinion on possible uses for the “water lice,” most describe the water lice as
a solution to the current blue-green algae problems that have been increasingly
plaguing many drinking water sources in eastern Canada.
Nodding his head, Joe mentioned the social science research he had his under-
grad students carry out on some of the water quality problems in Shreveport,
Louisiana in the early 1980s. He recounted a lesson based on having his students
realize the significance of carrying out primary research, including science research,
for themselves, before embarking on such lessons with their elementary school
students. In one of his articles on this practice, he comments,
Indeed, the research background of most students was weak. Many confided that they had
never before had to undertake a research project of any magnitude. This revelation illus-
trated a broader problem among elementary, and many secondary, school social studies
teachers, that is, the inability to conduct research. It is no wonder that inquiry methodology
has often not worked in the public schools – too many teachers do not have the research
skills necessary to make it work. (Kincheloe 1985, p. 181)
For Joe, a key component to strong research is asking the fundamental question of
how knowledge is produced, where it comes from, and who produces it (Kincheloe
2008)? In the water lice lesson, I do my best to make sure most of the key elements
for unquestioned knowledge reproduction are included: The source of the knowledge
is scientific, it is derived from a North American source (the pinnacle location of
western/dominant knowledge), the author of the information is, from the sound of the
name at least, from a powerbloc or White background (which may not be true of
course). However, to confirm that my assumptions are valid, I have corroborated these
assumptions through a Canadian television show. Only once, in the past 3 years that
I have carried out this lesson did one exceptional student express doubt in what she
was looking at. But, all it took to silence her observation of disbelief was her peers
disapproving looks. With that peer pressure, she returned to her desk and robotically
completed the assignment, filling in information that she was entirely unsure of.
From a scientific reality, this disbelieving student was right; students were not
witnessing water lice cleaning polluted water. Rather, they were looking at raisins
moving in various stages of carbonated soda water and with varying degrees of
food colouring, creating the illusion of bugs cleaning water (for a description of
this experiment see Science as In?uiry (Hassard 2000, p. 258). Even the students
that I consider the “most critical,” in a critical pedagogy sense of this term,
expressed that they “got caught up” in not only the excitement, but with all of the
prestige of the scientific source of the information as well. Concomitantly, I’m
often asked if I carry out this little experiment to make my students “look bad.”
I am always prepared to say that my wife, Melanie, who is an elementary school
teacher, caught me not thinking critically as well when she did this study in her
class. We all need to think deeper and more critically, especially in an era where
a PowerPoint presentation at the United Nations can be seen as a “slam dunk” for
evidence and acquiescence for U.S. masses, leading the world’s most powerful
military force into Iraq and the death of hundreds of thousands (Denzin and
Giardina 2008).