Diversity and Inclusion in Science Education: Why? A Literature Review
Abstract
In the last twenty years, there has been a consensus around the world that effective science education is vital to economic success in the emerging knowledge age. It is also suggested that knowledge of science and scientific ways of thinking is essential to participation in democratic decisionmaking. Students may recognise differences and advocate diversity, but assimilating those ideas requires the creation of conditions in which students can think deeply about situations that require tolerance. Schools in many countries and regions of the world are places shaped by cultural diversity. One may observe that in many schools there are social developments like migration and demographic and value change, consequently increasing the diversity of students. The issue of diversity in science education is therefore tackled according to many aspects, e.g., culture, language, scientific literacy and gender. The aim of the present literature review is to align the ERASMUS+ project Diversity in Science towards Social Inclusion with studies and views regarding diversity and inclusion in science education. The main goals of this project were to promote inclusive education and to train and foster the education of disadvantaged learners through a range of measures, including supporting education staff in addressing diversity and reinforcing diversity among education staff. Practices dealing with dimensions of diversity and inclusion in science education are developed and the partners shared the good practices that they developed.
Downloads
References
AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. AAAS.
Aikenhead, G. S., & Ogawa, M. (2007). Indigenous knowledge and science revisited. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2(3), 539–620.
Barnard, S., Powell, A., Bagilhole, B., & Dainty, A. (2010). Researching UK women professionals in SET: A critical review of current approaches. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 2(3), 361–381.
Belova N., Stuckey M., Marks R., & Eilks, I., (2015). Understanding the use of chemistry related information. In I. Eilks, & A. Hofstein (Ed.), Relevant chemistry education – from theory to practice (pp. 185–204). Sense Publishers.
Bianchini, J. A., Whitney, D. J., Breton, T. D., & Hilton-Brown, B. A. (2002). Toward inclusive science education: University scientists’ views of students, instructional practices, and the nature of science. Science Education, 86(1), 42–78.
Blickenstaff, C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–386.
BouJaoude, S., & Gholam, G. (2013). Gender and science in the Arab states: Current status and future prospects. In N. Mansour, & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science education for diversity theory and practice (pp. 339–359). Springer.
Childs, P. E., Markic, S., & Ryan, M. C. (2015). The role of language in the teaching and learning of chemistry. In J. Garcia-Martinez (Ed.), Chemistry education: Best practices, opportunities and trends (pp. 421–446). Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527679300.ch17
Chiu, M. H., & Cesa, M. (2020). Gender gap in science: A global approach to the gender gap in mathematical, computing, and natural sciences – how to measure it, how to reduce it? Chemistry Teacher International, 42(3), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1515/ci-2020-0306
Eilks I., Nielsen J. A., & Hofstein, A. (2014). Learning about the role of science in public debate as an essential component of scientific literacy. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, & P. Clément (Eds.), Topics and trends in current science education (pp. 85–100). Springer.
Erduran, S. (2003). Examining the mismatch between pupil and teacher knowledge in acid-base chemistry. School Science Review, 84(308), 81–87.
Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111
Friedman, I. A. (1991). High and low-burnout schools: School culture aspects of teacher burnout. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(6), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1991.9941813
Harrison, J., & Globman, R. (1988). Assessment of training teachers in active learning: A research report (in Hebrew). Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Hilferty, F. (2008). Teacher professionalism and cultural diversity: Skills, knowledge and values for a changing Australia. Australian Educational Researcher, 35(3), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03246289
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275–288.
Hora, M. T., Smolarek, B. B., Martin, K. N., & Scrivener, L. (2019). Exploring the situated and cultural aspects of communication in the professions: Implications for teaching, student employability, and equity in higher education. American Educational Research Journal, 56(6), 2221–2261. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219840333
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1983). Power and staff development through research on training. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Lareau, A., Weininger, E. B. (2003). Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32, 567–606. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RYSO.0000004951.04408.b0
Laszlo, P. (2013). Towards teaching chemistry as a language. Science & Education, 22(7), 1669–1706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9408-6
Lee, O. (2003). Equity for culturally and linguistically diverse students in science education: A research agenda. Teachers College Record, 105(3), 465–489.
Lee, O. (2004). Teacher change in beliefs and practices in science and literacy instruction with English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 65–93.
Lee, O. (2005). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 10(4), 431–440. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327671espr1004_5
Lee, O., & Luykx, A. (2009). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617508
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values (Vol. 1). Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin Press.
Makarova, E., Aesclimann, B., & Herzog, W. (2019). The gender gap in fields: The impact of the gender stereotype of math and science on secondary. Frontiers in students’ career aspirations. Frontiers in Education, 4(60), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00060
Mamlok, D. (2021). The great promise of educational technology: Citizenship and education in a globalized world. Springer International Publishing AG.
Mamlok, D. (2023). The quest to cultivate tolerance through education. Studies in philosophy education, 42(3), 231–246 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-023-09874-8
Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2021). Socio-cultural developments of women in science. Pure and Applied Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2021-0104
Mamlok-Naaman, R., Abels, S., & Markic, S. (2015). Learning about gender and minority sensitivity in chemistry education. In I. Eilks, & A. Hofstein (Eds.), Relevant chemistry education – from theory to practice (pp. 219–240). Sense Publishers.
Mamlok-Naaman, R., Blonder, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2011). One hundred years of women in chemistry in the 20th century: Sociocultural developments of women’s status. In M.H. Chiu, P. J. Gilmer, & D. F. Treagust (Eds.). Celebrating the 100th anniversary of Madam Maria Sklodowska Curie’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry (pp. 119–139). Sense Publishers.
Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Eilks, I. (2012). Different types of action research to promote chemistry teachers’ professional development – A joint theoretical reflection on two cases from Israel and Germany. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 581–610.
Mamlok-Naaman, R., Eilks, I., Bodner, A., & Hofstein, A. (2018). Professional development of chemistry teachers. RSC Publications.
Mamlok-Naaman, R., Franz R., Markic, S., & Fernandez, C. (2013). How to keep myself being a professional chemistry teacher? In I. Eilks, & A. Hofstein (Eds.). Teaching chemistry – A studybook: A practical guide and textbook for student teachers, teacher trainees and teachers (pp. 269–298). Sense Publishers.
Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Penick, J. (2007). Involving teachers in the STS curricular process: A long-term intensive support framework for science teachers. Journal of Science Teachers Education, 18(4), 497–524.
Mansour, N. (2013). Science teachers’ cultural beliefs and diversities: A sociocultural perspective to science education. In N. Mansour, N., & Wegerif, R. (Eds.), Science education for diversity. Cultural studies of science education (pp. 205–230). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4563-6_10
Marais, P., & Jordaan, F. (2000). Are we taking symbolic language for granted? Journal of Chemical Education, 77(10), 1355–1357.
Markic, S., & Abels, S. (2014). Heterogeneity and diversity: A growing challenge or enrichment for science education in German schools? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(4), 271–283.
Markic, S., & Childs, P. E. (2016). Language and the teaching and learning of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 434–438.
Markic, S., Eilks, I., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hugerat, M., Kortam, N., Dkeidek, I., & Hofstein, A. (2016). One country, two cultures—A multi-perspective view on Israeli chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 22(2), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1055423
Marks R., & Eilks I. (2009). Promoting scientific literacy using a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach in chemistry education: Concept, examples, experiences, International Journal of Environmental Science Education, 4(2), 131–145.
Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. National Academies Press.
Niaz, M., & Maza, A. (2011). Nature of Science in General Chemistry Textbook. Springer.
Norris S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy, Science Education, 87(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066
OECD (2013). PISA 2015 Draft Science Framework. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Science%20Framework%20.pdf
Osborne, J. (2002), Science without literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640220147559
Pomeroy, D. (1994) Science Education and cultural diversity: Mapping the field, 24(2), 49–73. http://doi.org/10.1080/03057269408560039
Rees, S., Kind, V., & Newton, D. (2021). The development of chemical language usage by “nontraditional†students: the interlanguage analogy. Research in Science Education, 51(2), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9801-0
Rodrigues, S. (2010), Multiple literacy and science education: ICTs in formal and informal learning environments. IGI Global.
Rüschenpöhler, L., & Markic, S. (2019). Self-concept research in science and technology education – theoretical foundation, measurement instruments, and main findings, Studies in Science Education, 55(1), 37–68. http://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2019.1645533
Rüschenpöhler, L., & Markic, S. (2020). Secondary school students’ acquisition of science capital in the field of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research Practice, 21, 220–236.
Saet, O. (2021). What does inclusive education mean?. The United Nations Refugee Agency.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 219–231.
Sjöström J., Frerichs N., Zuin V. G., & Eilks I. (2017). The use of the concept of Bildung in the international literature in science education and its implications for the teaching and learning of science, Studies in Science Education, 53(2), 165–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1384649
SlapniÄar, M., Tompa, V., Glazar, S. A., & Devetak, I. (2018). Fourteen-year-old students’ misconceptions regarding the sub-micro and symbolic levels of specific chemical concepts. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(4), 620–632.
Stinken-Rösner, L., Rott., Hundertmark, S., Baumann, T., Menthe, J., Hoffmann, T., Nehring, A., & Abels, S. (2020). Thinking inclusive science education from two perspectives: Inclusive pedagogy and science education. Research in Subject-matter Teaching and Learning (RISTAL), 3(1), 2020, 30–45. https://doi.org/10.23770/rt1831
Stocklmayer, S. M., Leonie J. R., & Gilbert, J. K., (2010) The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 1–44. https:/doi.org/10.1080/03057260903562284
Stuckey, M., Heering, P., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Eilks, I. (2015). The philosophical works of Ludwik Fleck and their potential meaning for teaching and learning science. Science & Education, 24(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-014-9723-9
Taber, S. (2009). Learning at the symbolic level. Multiple Representations in Chemical Education, 75–105. Springer Netherlands.
Taber, K. S. (2013). Revisiting the chemistry triplet: Drawing upon the nature of chemical knowledge and the psychology of learning to inform chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(2), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00012E
Taber, K. S., & Riga, F. (2016). From each according to her capabilities; to each according to her needs: Fully including the gifted school science education. In S. Markic, & S. Abels (Eds.), Science education towards inclusion (pp. 195–219). Nova Publishing.
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “tripletâ€. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
UNESCO. (2016). Measuring Gender Equality in Science and Engineering: The SAGA Science, Technology and Innovation Gender Objectives List (STI GOL): Working paper 1. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245006
Wellington, J. J., & Osborne, J. (2009). Language and literacy in science education. Open University Press.
In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in CEPS Journal, we ask Authors to transfer to the Publisher (Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana) the rights of copyright in the Articles they contribute. This enables the Publisher to ensure protection against infringement.
