Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:11:07.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epistemological Renewal and Environmental Education: Science in Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

Barbara Bader
Barbara Bader*
Affiliation:
Université Laval, Canada
*
†Département d'études sur l'enseignement et l'apprentissage, Faculté des sciences de l'éducation, Université Laval, Québec, G1K 7P4, Canada. Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The instrumental relationship to nature and the realist epistemology that dominate the analysis of contemporary environmental issues have prompted me to develop an interest in a socialized conception of science in environmental education (EE) so as to throw into question a certain overappreciation of scientific expertise whenever the environment is at issue. This interest in an epistemological renewal has also impelled me to favour the socioconstructivist model of cognition in EE. The relevance of these various aspects is presented to the reader as the extension of a necessary epistemological renewal in EE, as various authors in this field of research have advocated.

Keywords

Instrumental relationship to natureepistemology and sociology of science in Environmental Educationsocioconstructivist model of cognition
Type
Research Article
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , 2004 , pp. 13 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

References

Aikenhead, G. S. (2002). Whose scientific knowledge? The colonizer and the colonized. In Roth, W.-M. & Désautels, J. (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 151–166). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Aikenhead, G. S. (1997). Students' views of the influence of culture on science. International Journal of Science Education, 19(4), 419–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bader, B. (2003). Interprétation d'une controverse scientifique: Stratégies argumentatives d'adolescentes et d'adolescents québécois. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(2), 231–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bader, B. (2001). Étude de conversations estudiantines autour d'une controverse entre scientifiques sur la question du réchauffement climatique. Ph.D. theses in didactics, Faculté des sciences de l'éducation, Université Laval.Google Scholar
Beck, U. (2001). La société du risque. Sur la voie d'une autre modernité. Paris: Aubier.Google Scholar
Bingle, W. H. & Gaskell, P. J. (1994). Scientific literacy for decision-making and the construction of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 78(2), 185–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bougnoux, D. (dir.), (1993). Sciences de l'information et de la communication, Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
Camino, E., & Calcagno, C. (1995). An interactive methodology for empowering students to deal with controversial environmental problems. Environmental Education Research, 1(1), 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, H. M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Cunningham, C. M. & Helm, J. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 483–499.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Désautels, J., & Larochelle, M. (1998). The epistemology of students: The “thingified” nature of scientific knowledge. In Fraser, B. J. & Tobin, K. (dir.), International Handbook of Science Education, (pp. 115–26). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, A., Wals, A., & van Weelie, D. (1999). Biodiversity as a postmodern theme for environmental education. Canadian Journal ofEnvironmental Education, 4, 155–175.Google Scholar
Fien, J. (1993). Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorising and environmental education. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
von Foerster, H. (1992) Ethics and Second-order Cybernetics. Cybernetics & Human Knowing: A Journal of Second Order Cybernetics & Cyber-Semiotics, 1(1), 1–9. Retrieved March 2004, from http://www.flec.kvl.dk/sbr/Cyber/cybernetics/vol1/v11hvf.htm).Google Scholar
Fourez, G. (1997). Science teaching and the STL movement: A socio-historical view. In Jenkins, E. (Ed.), Innovations in Science and Technology Education, (vol. 6, 43–57). Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Gough, A. (2002). Mutualism: a different agenda for environmental and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(1), 1201–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gough, N. (2004). Living in a material world. In Scott, W. & Gough, S., (2004). Key issues in sustainable development and learning. A critical review (pp. 236–240). London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
Gough, N. (1999). Rethinking the subject: (De)constructing human agency in environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 5(1), 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenall Gough, A. (1993). Founders in Environmental Education. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Greenall Gough, A. & Robottom, I. (1993). Towards a socially critical environmental education: Water quality studiesin a coastal school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(4), 301–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, P. (2000). Requisite Variety: The problem with generic guidelines for diverse genres of inquiry. Environmental Education Research, 6(1), 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, P., & Nolan, K. (1999). A critical analysis of research in environmental education. Studies in Science Education, 34, 1–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996). IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995. World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environmental Program.Google Scholar
Lash, S., Szerszynski, B. & Wynne, B. (1996). Risk, Environment and Modernity. Towards a New Ecology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1999). Politiques de la nature. Comment faire entrer les sciences en démocratie, Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Maturana, U. & Varela, F. (1987). The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: New Science Library, Shambala Publications.Google Scholar
Mayer, M. (1998–1999). Éducation relative à l'environnement et recherche-action. Éducation relative à l'environnement. Regards, Recherches, Réflexions, 1, 195–202.Google Scholar
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R. & Duschl, R. (2003). What “Ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robottom, I., (Ed.) (1987). Environmental Education: Practice and Possibility. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Robottom, I. (1983). Science: A limited vehicle for environmental education. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 29(1), 27–31.Google Scholar
Robottom, I. & Hart, P. (1993). Research in Environmental Education: Engaging the Debate. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Roth, M. (2003). Scientific Literacy as an Emergent Feature of Collective Human Praxis. Journal of curriculum studies, 35(1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, W-M. & Désautels, J. (2002). (Eds.) Science Education as/for Sociopolitical Action (pp. 151–166). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Segal, L. (1990). Le rêve de la réalité. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Testart, J. (2000). Les experts, la science et la loi. Le Monde Diplomatique, 558, 09, pp. 1, 26–27.Google Scholar
Wynne, B. (1997). “Controverses, indéterminations et contrôls social de la technologie. Leçons du nucléaire et de quelques autres cas auRoyaume-Uni”, in Godard, O. (Ed.), Le principe de précaution dans la conduite des affaires humaines, Paris, Fondation Maison des sciences de l'homme et Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 149–178.Google Scholar
Wynne, B. (1992). Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change, 2(2), 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zehr, S. (2000). Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 9(2), 85–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar