Page 407 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

382 C. Buxton and E.F. Provenzo

developed in science that have little or nothing to do with politics, community, or
culture. For example, the freezing temperature of water, how an electric motor
works, the nature of cell division, and so on. The Deweyan approach is one that is
also closely connected to the work of Piaget. Piaget talks about the child learning
through a process of reinvention. In this context, Cory and I believe that an impor-
tant means of learning science (although not the only means), is to have the learner
reinvent the field for themselves, as well as by systematic experimentation and
rediscovery. Students using this method would learn about a subject such as astronomy,
for example, by making sundials and working astrolabes and doing measurements
with them, building telescopes, and making the types of observations with them
that Galileo and Newton did as pioneering scientists. Accompanying these types of
activities can also include instruction on how to observe and draw scientific conclu-
sions. In this context, I believe that Bruner’s approach to science instruction as
inquiry was essentially correct, although a greater emphasis on historical, political,
and a philosophical context would have been useful.
I question what purpose underlies Stonebanks’ model of instruction with the
water lice project. It seems fuzzy to me, rooted in a belief in the need to represent
diverse points of view, unbiased assumptions, and a model of personal discovery
and critical thinking. What is there not to agree with?
Stonebank’s account of his trip to Malawi is likewise problematic to me. In the
village he visited, few of the teachers had been to the local nature reserve at
Kasungu National Park. Although only a 20 min drive from where they lived,
Stonebanks discovers that very few people from the village have actually visited the
park, which seems to function to some extent as a tourist attraction. Stonebanks
finds three villagers to go with him on an excursion to the park, one of whom is an
aspiring applicant at the local teacher’s college.
Stonebanks’ potential future teacher, when questioned about what he thinks is
the purpose of schooling, responds by saying it is “civilization.” Stonebanks’ sug-
gests that “given any of the definitions for the term, in my brief time in Malawi –
civilization – was not exactly what I thought was Malawi’s most pressing need,
especially, given this young man’s comprehension of what it meant.” My interpreta-
tion is that “civilization” might have meant a dependable job, status in one’s
community, a comfortable life, good health for himself and his family. According
to Stonebanks, his vision was “diametrically opposed to our collective assignment
of going to the mountain to reclaim a knowledge for the villagers that had been
wiped out by colonialism.”
Perhaps the Freirian (2007) notion of dialogue could help here. Stonebanks
appeals to critical theory for guidance, and yet he seems to be wrestling with the
functions of an educational tourist and missionary. I would argue that any person
who visits another country or cultural group might spend as much time as they can
to develop a deep knowledge of the people they are visiting and their cultures. The
trap that many scholars find themselves in is not listening and observing enough
and unconsciously promoting a western model of education for the people they
are engaged with – one framed in the rhetoric of being “critical.” As critical
pedagogues, we have to remain constantly on the alert that we might be simply