Page 63 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

4 Toward Awakening Consciousness: A Response to EcoJustice Education 39

We need to grow up and move beyond the command-and-control discourse that
dominates government efforts to improve education. As a nation, we should have
learned by now that command and control is a losing strategy in the chaotic system
of the classroom. Trying to apply chaos and complexity theory to organizations
like schools, Dee Hock (2000) has coined the term “chaordic,” by which he means
chaos and order existing at the same time. Hock argues that the harmonious inter-
play of both is necessary for all vital, adaptable systems. He distinguishes between
control and order: control is imposed, an attempt to eliminate chaos. Control sti-
fles creativity and self-motivation. In contrast, order should arise naturally out of
a shared purpose that engages students deep down and calls forth their best efforts.
In an open letter to the current Secretary of Education, Herbert Kohl (2009)
reminds us that
[i]t is possible to maintain high standards for all children, to help students learn how to
speak thoughtfully, think through problems, and create imaginative representations of the
world as it is and as it could be, without forcing them through a regime of high-stakes testing.
Attention has to be paid to the richness of the curriculum itself and time has to be allocated
to thoughtful exploration and experimentation. It is easy to ignore content when the sole
focus is on test scores.
The Obama administration’s educational program will be an obstacle rather than a
segue to the implementation of Martusewicz, Lupinacci, and Schnakenberg’s eco-
justice education framework, but that does not mean that we science and social
studies educators should fold our hands in resignation. There are those already-
mentioned long-standing and respected movements in our field for us to draw
upon – the “STS” (science–technology–society) approach, place-based education,
experiential education. Even the National Science Education Standards make room
for the goal of teaching “science in personal and social perspectives” and “the
nature of science” (National Research Council 1996). If it turns out that compul-
sory national standards for science and social studies education are enacted and
then accompanied by high-stakes tests, perhaps there will be some comfort in that
these subject areas also will be assessed, even if by inappropriate and dubious
means, so that they will still have a place in the curriculum.

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy:
Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
Baines, L. (2007). Learning from the world: Achieving more by doing less. Phi Delta Kappan, 89,
98–100.
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal
environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Bentley, M. L., Fleury, S. C., & Garrison, J. W. (2007). Critical constructivism for teaching and
learning in a democratic society. Journal of Thought, 42, 9–22.
Bracey, G. W. (2009). Education hell: Rhetoric vs. reality. Alexandria: Educational Research
Service.