Suchergebnisse

Hydraulic fracturing ('fracking'), like other complex social and environmental issues, is a controversy about science which raises educational questions about how best to prepare young people to understand, respond to and, where necessary, act (or not) in response. It raises political questions. We present a state-of-the-art review of research literature on fracking and education using systematic strategies, with a view to finding out how it is framed in educational situations, and how politics enters the science classroom. This serves as an illustrative case of how contested scientific and technological interventions with implications for the environment and society are treated in school science. The review is supplemented by interviews with 10 teachers of science and engineering working in schools or colleges near sites of operational exploratory fracking. We find that the research literature on teaching hydraulic fracturing is sparse, with only 25 studies relating to teaching and learning about fracking. Few studies (n=7) relate to high school education. Where it features in science education, fracking is used as a context for interdisciplinarity and critical thinking, and lends itself to approaches using discussion, dialogue and modelling. Outcomes from fracking education range include knowledge gains and critical thinking. Teachers interviewed tended not to see a place for fracking in the curriculum or in the classroom and were averse to including politics in upper high school science education. Our analysis suggests depoliticization through absence of this specific complex environmental issue from the public (education) sphere, reinforced by the desire for 'balance' in high school science education and instrumental approaches to science education which prioritise assessed learning outcomes. Dealing with complex social and environmental issues such as hydraulic fracturing in the years of compulsory science schooling is necessary because scientific knowledge is necessary but not sufficient to prepare young ...

A necessary condition for a functioning democracy is the participation of its citizens, including its youth. This is particularly true for political participation in environmental decisions because these decisions can have intergenerational consequences. In this article we examine young people's beliefs about one form of political participation - protest - in the context of communities affected by fracking and associated anti-fracking protest, and discuss the implications of these representations for education. Drawing on focus groups with 121 young people (age 15-19) in 5 schools and colleges near sites which have experienced anti-fracking protest in England and Northern Ireland, we find young people well-informed about avenues for formal and non-formal political participation against a background of disillusionment with formal political processes and varying levels of support for protest. We find representations of protest as disruptive, divisive, extreme, less desirable than other forms of participation, and ineffective in bringing about change but effective in awareness-raising. These representations are challenging, not least because the way protest is interpreted is critical to the way people think and act in the world. These representations of environmental protest must be challenged through formal education in order to safeguard the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and ensure that the spirit of Article 11 of the UK Human Rights Act is protected.

Over the past decade, public policy initiatives have promoted public engagement with science, incentivized in part by the increased role of engagement in securing research funding. Many routes to engagement rely on schools and young people. Since the Apollo missions, human spaceflight has been advocated as a means of promoting such engagement. This paper presents a case study of how young people were engaged with human spaceflight during the Principia mission. Principia launched Britain's first government-funded astronaut to the International Space Station and had education and inspiring young people as a core objective. Drawing on actor-network-theory we trace the ways in which young people encountered human spaceflight through a qualitative empirical case study involving 113 children and 66 key informants including teachers, scientists, outreach providers and others involved in human spaceflight. Our findings have implications for policymakers and practitioners. We suggest a need for greater clarity over the role of live science in mediating science communication messages. If they are to succeed, science policy and outreach goals need to be aligned with existing school priorities. This can be achieved by paying attention to school planning cycles and making use of the affordances of social media for direct communication to teachers and young people.

Large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system ('geoengineering' or 'climate engineering') is increasingly present in discussions about possible responses to climate change. Research has tended to focus on the acceptability of geoengineering proposals to adults, with youth perspectives under-represented despite the intergenerational consequences of policy in this field. We report on a novel participatory approach to research and practice, resulting in the co-creation of a youth guide and policy brief by participants (aged 17-26) and facilitators. Findings fall into two categories: those pertaining to youth priorities for geoengineering and those in relation to authorial responsibility as an approach to engagement and advancing youth voices. We argue that co-creative and participatory approaches avoid polarisation and build reciprocity into the research process, promoting rational discourse about geoengineering and climate change and its intersection with ethics, politics and society. The model is potentially valuable for engaging youth at the early stages of technoscientific innovations. Tentative conclusions from youth participants are that mitigation efforts must be prioritised, i.e. action is needed now to mitigate and adapt to climate change, and there is a need for proactive international cooperation on the governance of geoengineering and for investment in research to understand potential environmental and social consequences of geoengineering for people at different temporal and spatial scales. Greater public dialogue on geoengineering and its governance is needed, particularly involving young people. The youth guide and policy brief co-authored by participants and facilitators, and the dialogic methods used in their production, can contribute to this dialogue.