Suchergebnisse

Invited Key-note speaker Conference ; International audience ; We call values that which founds a judgment (good or bad, important or not, right or wrong, true or false, beautiful or ugly, expensive or cheap, .). After giving some definitions, this paper analyzes the values that are identifiable inside science, and then inside science education. The value of science comes from its economical and political importance, but science seeks the truth by observing important values: a scientist must be honest, modest, always critical, rejecting any dogmatism and any fraud, but also creative, imaginative and able to work collectively. Nevertheless, a scientist is a human being with emotions and ideologies often interfering with his/her work and results. Some examples are discussed. Science must be separated from religion but the values of science and those of ethics overlap (bio-ethics, citizen values). UNESCO promotes Education for All, even if there are still important inequalities among countries. The values of science education are analyzed, and developed furtheron the example of ESD (Education for a Sustainable Development). They are then analyzed in some images of science textbooks, showing implicit ideologies linked to the scientific messages. They are also identified through different pedagogical styles. The analysis of teachers' conceptions, through an international survey covering more than 8 000 teachers, reveals deep differences among countries, as well as opposite systems of values, in interaction with social practices and actual or out-dated scientific knowledge, illustrating the KVP model as is also the case throughout this paper.

Invited Key-note speaker Conference ; International audience ; We call values that which founds a judgment (good or bad, important or not, right or wrong, true or false, beautiful or ugly, expensive or cheap, .). After giving some definitions, this paper analyzes the values that are identifiable inside science, and then inside science education. The value of science comes from its economical and political importance, but science seeks the truth by observing important values: a scientist must be honest, modest, always critical, rejecting any dogmatism and any fraud, but also creative, imaginative and able to work collectively. Nevertheless, a scientist is a human being with emotions and ideologies often interfering with his/her work and results. Some examples are discussed. Science must be separated from religion but the values of science and those of ethics overlap (bio-ethics, citizen values). UNESCO promotes Education for All, even if there are still important inequalities among countries. The values of science education are analyzed, and developed furtheron the example of ESD (Education for a Sustainable Development). They are then analyzed in some images of science textbooks, showing implicit ideologies linked to the scientific messages. They are also identified through different pedagogical styles. The analysis of teachers' conceptions, through an international survey covering more than 8 000 teachers, reveals deep differences among countries, as well as opposite systems of values, in interaction with social practices and actual or out-dated scientific knowledge, illustrating the KVP model as is also the case throughout this paper.

All three of the books under review— Science and Social Science by Malcolm Williams, Rethinking Science by Jan Faye, and Open the Social Sciences by the members of the Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences (Immanuel Wallerstein, chair)—argue for a broadly naturalist approach in which the social sciences are seen as of a piece with the natural sciences. Fortunately, all three do so in a discriminating way that avoids simple options and that appreciates the important ways the social-scientific disciplines require their own approach. Open the Social Sciences in particular also contains detailed and wise advice as to how the contemporary social sciences should proceed if they want to fulfill their ambition to explain human social behavior in a scientific way.

The idea for this text stemmed from the fruitful experience gathered during the training course of 9 Nigerian university students organized in Naples from 3 to 18 September 2008 by the team of Fondazione IDIS-Città della Scienza under the project Science Centre Owerri. The training course turned out to be not only an educational opportunity to acquire knowledge and skills for these students, but also a real and practical tool that later led to the realization of the first Science Festival of Owerri in Nigeria in May 2009. This in turn sparked the idea of creating a highly practical handbook for those who want to face the challenge of developing new projects for the dissemination and socialization of science in developing countries. In these countries, the role of scientific education and training in schools is not sufficient to arouse scientific curiosity among young people and make the population aware of the importance of scientific knowledge in everyday life. Moreover science and technology are indispensable tools for people's empowerment and should be supported with actions that encourage curiosity about science and the intelligent use of technology to bridge the divide with developed countries. It is therefore necessary to set up activities that are carefully targeted to promote and communicate science. The text has been designed as a practical guide to be used in a variety of contexts: scientific events or more structured science festivals, training, the creation of scientific cultural associations, and the development of new science centres. Besides being an excellent tool for training and supporting the design and planning phases, the manual can also be used as a reference work for institutions and local cultural services which have to select projects of this type.

"The answers to scientific questions depend on who's asking, because the questions asked and the answers sought reflect the cultural values and orientations of the questioner. These values and orientations are most often those of Western science. In Who's Asking?, Douglas Medin and Megan Bang argue that despite the widely held view that science is objective, value-neutral, and acultural, scientists do not shed their cultures at the laboratory or classroom door; their practices reflect their values, belief systems, and worldviews. Medin and Bang argue further that scientist diversity -- the participation of researchers and educators with different cultural orientations -- provides new perspectives and leads to more effective science and better science education. Medin and Bang compare Native American and European American orientations toward the natural world and apply these findings to science education. The European American model, they find, sees humans as separated from nature; the Native American model sees humans as part of a natural ecosystem. Medin and Bang then report on the development of ecologically oriented and community-based science education programs on the Menominee reservation in Wisconsin and at the American Indian Center of Chicago. Medin and Bang's novel argument for scientist diversity also has important implications for questions of minority underrepresentation in science."

This trenchant study analyzes the rise and decline in the quality and format of science in America since World War II. During the Cold War, the U.S. government amply funded basic research in science and medicine. Starting in the 1980s, however, this support began to decline and for-profit corporations became the largest funders of research. Philip Mirowski argues that a powerful neoliberal ideology promoted a radically different view of knowledge and discovery: the fruits of scientific investigation are not a public good that should be freely available to all, but are commodities that could be monetized. Consequently, patent and intellectual property laws were greatly strengthened, universities demanded patents on the discoveries of their faculty, information sharing among researchers was impeded, and the line between universities and corporations began to blur. At the same time, corporations shed their in-house research laboratories, contracting with independent firms both in the States and abroad to supply new products. Among such firms were AT & T and IBM, whose outstanding research laboratories during much of the twentieth century produced Nobel Prize-winning work in chemistry and physics, ranging from the transistor to superconductivity. Science-Mart offers a provocative, learned, and timely critique, of interest to anyone concerned that American science--once the envy of the world--must be more than just another way to make money

'Come, then, my friends; it would be better to decide at once to come about and change our ways. We must shake off the heavy darkness in which we were plunged, and leave it behind... 'Come, then, my friends; the European game has definitely ended; we must find something different. We today can do everything, so long as we do not ape Europe, so long as we are not obsessed by the desire to catch up with Europe... . 'Two centuries ago, a former European colony set its mind on catching up with Europe. It succeeded so well at it that the United States of America became a monster, in which the taints, the sicknesses, and the inhumanity of Europe have grown to appalling dimensions... 'Today we witness the stasis of Europe. Comrades, let us flee from this motionless movement where gradually, dialectics has been changed into the logic of equilibrium. Let us reconsider the question of mankind... 'The Third World today faces Europe like a colossal mass whose aim must be to try to resolve the problems to which Europe has not been able to bring a solution... 'But if we want humanity to advance a notch higher, if we want to bring it up to a different level than that which Europe displayed, then we must invent and we must discover new ways.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to Oren, Ozminkowski, and Strake's
comments on my recent article on myths about the physical sciences. All of them in my
judgment either misperceive parts of my original argument or raise concerns that allow me to
extend that argument. To the degree that others share their views, this essay may address
widespread differences of opinion or misperceptions about these matters.