mdh.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publikasjoner (10 av 35) Visa alla publikasjoner
Sund, P. & Sund, L. (2017). ”Alla gör fel?!” – Hinder för lärares bedömning av elevers praktiska förmågor under ett nationellt prov. NorDiNa: Nordic Studies in Science Education, 13(1), 3-16
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>”Alla gör fel?!” – Hinder för lärares bedömning av elevers praktiska förmågor under ett nationellt prov
2017 (svensk)Inngår i: NorDiNa: Nordic Studies in Science Education, ISSN 1504-4556, E-ISSN 1894-1257, Vol. 13, nr 1, s. 3-16Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [sv]

Storskaliga och kostsamma nationella tester genomförs i hela västvärlden och tar stora lärarresurser i anspråk. Med stora satsningar som dessa är det viktigt att ställa frågan om betygsunderlaget som genereras är likvärdigt? Studiens titel, ”alla gör fel” anspelar på just detta och kommer från en elevs uttalande då eleven inser det sannolika i att samtliga elever i elevgruppen gör på samma sätt av sociala skäl istället för att använda sig av sina individuella naturvetenskapliga kunskaper. Denna fallstudie undersöker svenska lärares möjligheter att bedöma elevers individuella förmågor i tre undervisningsgrupper under genomförandet av ett praktiskt delmoment i det nationella provet i kemi i åk 9. Datainsamling genomfördes med två fasta videokameror och tre par spionglasögon. Trots att provinstruktioner till elever och lärare är väl utvecklade och bedömningsanvisningar till läraren är detaljerade visar resultaten i denna studie att det är svårt att bedöma elevers individuella praktiska förmågor. Det finns många olika slags faktorer som påverkar provresultatet. En sådan faktor är provet genomförs i en laborationssal där situationen skiljer sig väsentligt från miljön för ett teoretiskt prov i ett klassrum. En annan faktor är att det under den praktiska provdelen i en laborationssal närmast är omöjligt för eleverna att undvika att kommunicera. Studiens resultat visar att det finns påverkansfaktorer som sociala interaktioner och systematiska fysiska felkällor. I resultatet diskuteras hur lärares möjligheter att bedöma elevers individuella praktiska förmågor under nationella prov bättre kan säkerställas.

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33035 (URN)
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2017-11-21bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2016). Assessing environmental and sustainability education in times of accountability, measurement and evidence. In: Leading Education: The Distinct Contributions of Educational Research and Researchers: . Paper presented at European Conference on Educational Research, ECER, Sept 22-26th, Dublin, Ireland.
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Assessing environmental and sustainability education in times of accountability, measurement and evidence
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: Leading Education: The Distinct Contributions of Educational Research and Researchers, 2016Konferansepaper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

The tendency to assess students has increased worldwide (Broadfoot & Black, 2004; Lundahl, Roman, & Riis, 2010). The purpose is usually to assess their knowledge but large scale tests also aim to build foundations to make grading more equivalent on a national level (Lundqvist & Sund, In Press; Sund, In Press). The theoretical tests are suitable for subject matter knowledge but the challenge is to assess practical abilities. This is often done by theoretical tests asking questions on experiences and results from practical work (Cfr the outlines in Ofqual (2015)). Another approach is to develop test with parts containing a practical inquiry. In Sweden the national school agency have developed a national test which include a practical part where the task is related to acidification of lakes. Within this part teachers are expected to conduct a given systematic inquiry to assess student’s achievements supported by well-developed assessment guides.  It is well known in earlier research that it is complicated to conduct practical tests (Abrahams & Reiss, 2012; Harlen, 1999). This case study focus on the possible obstacles for teachers when they are assessing practical abilities during a test in a laboratory environment. This type of test and test environment is complicated. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prerequisites for teachers to make an individual assessment of students’ individual abilities during a practical work. Differences in three groups way of choosing equipment in the beginning of their practical test inspired to study the conditions for teachers’ equivalent assessments of student’s independent practical work. The research question is:

What obstacles are present when teachers assess student’s individual achievements?

 

The results make a number of practical and social obstacles visible. They are discussed in relation equivalent assessment, alternative ways of assessing students’ practical abilities to be able avoid some of the discerned challenges.

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33055 (URN)
Konferanse
European Conference on Educational Research, ECER, Sept 22-26th, Dublin, Ireland
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2016-12-19bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2016). Discerning selective traditions in science education – A qualitative study of teachers’ responses to what is important in science teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 387-409
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Discerning selective traditions in science education – A qualitative study of teachers’ responses to what is important in science teaching
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: Cultural Studies of Science Education, ISSN 1871-1502, E-ISSN 1871-1510, Vol. 11, nr 2, s. 387-409Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Science teachers have differing views about what students should learn. Their teaching experience often leads them to develop habitual answers to students’ questions, such as – why should I learn this? Some teachers argue that students need to learn more ‘canonical’ science knowledge so that they can become scientists, while others tell students to apply scientific knowledge in order to make their everyday lives easier. If a group of teachers argue and act in similar ways in similar situations, they can be described as working in a similar collective habit. In this study these are called selective traditions in science teaching. In practical terms they work well in everyday, multifaceted, hectic teaching situations. However, the traditions can obstruct the inclusion of socio-scientific issues (SSI) in national science education tests. Some research has been conducted on selective traditions in written curriculum material, although little is known about how they can be discerned in teachers’ descriptions of their science teaching. This study draws on Dewey’s discussion of the interplay between individual and collective habits to discern teaching traditions by regarding them as institutionalized teaching habits. A firmly developed analytical tool is applied to the extensive data consisting of twenty-nine Swedish science teachers’ responses in semi-structured interviews. The methodology used in this study is inspired by earlier environmental and sustainability education (ESE) research. The results are discussed in relation to earlier research on ‘scientific literacy’ and how research can support teachers’ changes of practice to encourage students to perform better in large-scale tests.

Emneord
science education, socio-scientific issues, sustainability, selective traditions, socialization content
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-28809 (URN)10.1007/s11422-015-9666-8 (DOI)000387959400012 ()2-s2.0-84966716015 (Scopus ID)
Forskningsfinansiär
Swedish Research Council
Tilgjengelig fra: 2015-09-01 Laget: 2015-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2017-12-04bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2016). Science teachers’ mission impossible? – A Qualitative Study of Obstacles in Assessing Students’ Practical Abilities. International Journal of Science Education, 38(14), 2220-2238
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Science teachers’ mission impossible? – A Qualitative Study of Obstacles in Assessing Students’ Practical Abilities
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: International Journal of Science Education, ISSN 0950-0693, E-ISSN 1464-5289, Vol. 38, nr 14, s. 2220-2238Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Science teachers regard practical work as important and many claim that it helps students to learn science. Besides theoretical knowledge, such as concepts and formulas, practical work is considered to be an integral and basic part of science education. This implies that in addition to theoretical science tests, there is a need to find new ways of assessing students’ practical performances. As practical work is perceived and understood in different ways, comparing the results between classes and schools is difficult. One way of making the results comparable is to develop systematic inquiries to be assessed in national large scale tests. However, introducing similar testing conditions in a laboratory environment is not always possible. Although the instructions and assessments guides for such tests are detailed, many obstacles need to be overcome if equality in the overall test situation is to be achieved and an equivalent assessment of students’ practical abilities guaranteed. For example, in a test situation in the laboratory it is almost impossible for students not to communicate with each other. This empirical case study investigates two secondary school science teachers’ assessments of 15-16 years old students in three separate groups in the practical part of a Swedish national test in chemistry. Data is gathered using two video cameras and three pairs of spy camera glasses. The results show that individual and independent assessments are difficult due to the social interactions that take place and the physical sources of errors that occur in this type of setting.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Taylor & Francis Group, 2016
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33036 (URN)10.1080/09500693.2016.1232500 (DOI)000387060000002 ()2-s2.0-84987638439 (Scopus ID)
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2017-11-21bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. & Lundqvist, E. (2016). Selective traditions in group discussions – teachers’ views about good science and the possible obstacles when encountering a new topic. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1-18
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Selective traditions in group discussions – teachers’ views about good science and the possible obstacles when encountering a new topic
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: Cultural Studies of Science Education, ISSN 1871-1502, E-ISSN 1871-1510, s. 1-18Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

There is an ongoing discussion about what content that should be taught in science education and there are different views among teachers about what represent good science content. However, teachers are not isolated individuals making their own interpretations, but are part of institutionalised systems building on patterns in the selection of teaching goals and content. Earlier research shows that teachers teach in alignment with different selective traditions, which can be understood as well-developed teaching habits. Individual teachers seem to develop their personal habits on the basis of the contextual situations created by earlier generations of teachers.

In order to find out which content teachers find representative for science education, we asked nine teachers to take part in group interviews to talk about what they value as “good” science content. The participants were grouped according to their selective traditions expressed in earlier studies. The method was used to dynamically explore, challenge and probe teachers views.

The starting point for the group discussions is national tests in science. In Sweden, national tests in biology, physics and chemistry were introduced in secondary school science (Year 9) in 2009. One overarching aim of these tests is to support the implementation of the science curricula and to include for example knowledge about socio-scientific issues (SSI). The content of the tests can consequently be seen as important for teachers to consider.

The findings show on the one hand that the individual science teachers choose science content in alignment with an earlier categorisation illustrated in a selective tradition study. On the other hand, teachers seem to return to a scientific rational discourse when they discuss questions in the tests relating to socio-scientific issues. The results are discussed in relation to the issue that teachers seem to be more comfortable when working with traditional science content but also in relation to the finding about how teachers’ selective traditions appear to become less visible in group discussions.

Emneord
science education, content, selective traditions, teachers’ views, socio scientific issues
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
naturvetenskapernas och teknikens didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-29135 (URN)10.1007/s11422-016-9768-y (DOI)000435360600003 ()2-s2.0-84997170494 (Scopus ID)
Prosjekter
Nationella prov i biologi, fysik och kemi: eventuell betydelse för lärares undervisning och bedömning
Forskningsfinansiär
Swedish Research Council
Tilgjengelig fra: 2015-09-25 Laget: 2015-09-25 Sist oppdatert: 2018-07-05bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, L., Neilson, A., Spannring, R., Greve Lysgaard, J., Kronlid O., D. & Sund, P. (2015). Can we unpack the global in ESE? An introduction.. In: Neilson, A.L., Spannring, R., Lysgaard, J.G., Kronlid, D. O., Sund, L., Sund, P. (2015). "All Our Relations": Respecting People and Scholarship. Creative roundtable for European Conference on Educational Research. : . Paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) Budapest, Hungary, September 8-11, 2015..
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Can we unpack the global in ESE? An introduction.
Vise andre…
2015 (engelsk)Inngår i: Neilson, A.L., Spannring, R., Lysgaard, J.G., Kronlid, D. O., Sund, L., Sund, P. (2015). "All Our Relations": Respecting People and Scholarship. Creative roundtable for European Conference on Educational Research. , 2015Konferansepaper, Oral presentation only (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

In seeking co-provocateurs for this roundtable, the initial outreach was fuelled by anger regarding the devaluing of social sciences compared to natural sciences and economics (Mendel, 2014) as well as the frustration of seeing poorly designed research by natural scientists studying human behaviour and education without being informed by protocols and best practices developed for such work by the social sciences (Pooley, Mendelsohn & Milner-Gulland, 2014), and ignorance of deep critical explorations of educational and other social processes by sociologists, anthropologists amongst others (Sund & Lysgaard, 2013). However, the initial response provoked an offer to discuss the role of love in environmental and sustainability education research, ESER. While this reply was clearly housed in the same concerns and critique initially expressed, the use of the word “love”, a powerful concept simultaneously simple and complex, drew us to seek a circle of renewal and remembering of life and lives that may have been forgotten at times within ESER.

The phrase “all our/my relations” comes from indigenous worldviews and practices of honouring all the people who have come before you as well as the other living beings with whom we share this planet (Kulnieks, Longboat & Young, 2013). This round table discussion will honour all our relations by remembering the current and past practices which take on issues related to motivation rooted in social and cultural patterns, as well as politics of knowledge with complex histories and inequities (Glass, Scott & Price, 2012; Sund & Öhman, 2014). We will respect people and scholarship via three main currents of discussion:

  1. The role of love in ESER
  2. “Ignored concepts” - Research and extensive discourse that gets ignored when defining questions that assume people are selfish and have never cooperated to protect the commons, or are not politically active (Gaiser, Rijke & Spanning, 2010) uncritical acceptance of people/nature dichotomy, uncritical use of education as transferring information from expert to ignorant.
  3. Political dimensions of ESER (postcolonial lens, global inequities, poverty in the “south”)

The discussions will flow at the level of and through individuals, but also at infrastructural and conceptual spaces and places. Creative methodologies provide powerful avenues to disrupt imbalances and injustices and take into account issues of representation, legitimation and politics in research as well as communications about research (McKenzie, 2005). Philip Payne (2005) challenges the limitations of textual discourse as a way of knowing; he focuses on “being, doing and becoming a relational, social and ecological ‘self’” (p. 415) and suggests that strong cultural production constrains these qualities. Framing, metaphors and narratives are important for meaning making (Lakoff, 2010) and are particularly important to deconstruct when challenging dominant views that may have been taken as common sense (Stone-Mediatore, 2003), as well as inviting critical reflection on the very story being told. We will use creative juxtapositioning of the currents of discussion in order to evoke deeper insights than may arise from sequential presentations of the three discussion themes (Neilson, 2009). Additionally, the format of the round table will include multiple forms of communications to involve all who attend, and, the participants along with the provocateurs will physically be seated within a circle.

References

Gaiser, W., Rijke, J.D., & Spanning, R. (2010). Youth and political participation – empirical results for Germany within a European context. Youth 18(4), 427-450. Glass, J. H., Scott, A., & Price, M. F. (2012). Getting active at the interface: How can sustainability researchers stimulate social learning? In A. Wals & P. Blaze Concoran (Eds.) Learning for sustainability in times of accelerating change. pp. 167-183. Wageningen University Press, NL. Kronlid, D.O., & Öhman, J. (2012). An environmental ethical conceptual framework for research on sustainability and environmental education. Environmental Education Research, ifirst article, 1-24. Kulnieks, A., Longboat, D. R. & Young, K. (2013). Contemporary Studies in Environmental and Indigenous Pedagogies. A Curricula of Stories and Place. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Lakoff, G. (2010). Praxis forum. Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication, 4(1), 70-81. McKenzie, M. (2005). The ‘post-post period’ and environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 11(4), 401-412. Mendel, J. (2014). Bad Research and High Impact: The Science: So What Campaign and Social Media Criticism. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 13(1), 56-61. Neilson, A. L. (2009). The power of nature and the nature of power. Special Issue: Inquiries into practice. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 136-148. Payne, P. (2005). Lifeworld and textualism: Reassembling the researcher/ed and ‘others’. Environmental Education Research, 11(4), 413-431. Pooley, S. P., Mendelsohn, J. A., & Milner‐Gulland, E. J. (2014). Hunting Down the Chimera of Multiple Disciplinarity in Conservation Science. Conservation Biology, 28(1), 22-32. Stone-Mediatore, S. (2003). Reading across border: Storytelling and knowledges of resistance. New York, NY: Palgrave. Sund, L., & Öhman, J. (2014). On the need to repoliticise environmental and sustainability education: Rethinking the postpolitical consensus. Environmental Education Research, 20(5), 639-659. Sund, P., & Lysgaard, J. (2013). Reclaim “Education” in Environmental and Sustainability Education Research. Sustainability, 5(4), 1598–1616.

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-36353 (URN)
Konferanse
The Annual Meeting of the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) Budapest, Hungary, September 8-11, 2015.
Tilgjengelig fra: 2017-09-07 Laget: 2017-09-07 Sist oppdatert: 2017-10-06bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2015). Experienced ESD schoolteachers’ teaching – an issue of complexity. Environmental Education Research, 21(1), 24-44
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Experienced ESD schoolteachers’ teaching – an issue of complexity
2015 (engelsk)Inngår i: Environmental Education Research, ISSN 1350-4622, E-ISSN 1469-5871, Vol. 21, nr 1, s. 24-44Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

In educational settings, sustainable development (SD) is often handled with the aim of reducing the contested aspects of the concept. Issues like trade, conservation, public health and international relations are often presented in a simplified way so that they are easier for students to grasp. However, in education, this tendency to simplify sustainability issues can be a disadvantage. This study explores how Swedish upper secondary schoolteachers’ education for sustainable development (ESD) in award-winning ‘ESD-schools’ supports students to become informed and autonomous democratic citizens by appreciating the complexity of the concept of SD. This empirical study is part of a larger research project studying progressive upper secondary schools and is a development of earlier research on teachers’ starting points for long-term purposes beyond the teaching – which we have termed objects of responsibility.

 

In interviews of five teachers from two schools, experienced in ESD issues and working in teacher teams, an interesting commonality in their arguments for teaching sustainability emerged during the analytical process. The implications of the study’s results are important for EE/ESD research into teaching continuity as well as for teachers in practice.

 

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Taylor & Francis, 2015
Emneord
education for sustainable development, teaching and learning approach, sustainability, teachers’ objects of responsibility, complexity
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-22757 (URN)10.1080/13504622.2013.862614 (DOI)000345835700002 ()2-s2.0-84917696058 (Scopus ID)
Prosjekter
Implementering av utbildning för hållbar utveckling: relationen mellan normstödjande strukturer och studerandes moraliska lärande
Forskningsfinansiär
Swedish Research Council, 2008:4844
Tilgjengelig fra: 2013-11-12 Laget: 2013-11-12 Sist oppdatert: 2017-12-06bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2015). Political dimensions of environmental and sustaianbility education reserach - postcolonial lens, global inequities, poverty in the “south”. In: Education and Transition – Contributions from Educational Research: . Paper presented at The European Conference on Educational Research, Sept 8th -11th, Budapest, Hungary.
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Political dimensions of environmental and sustaianbility education reserach - postcolonial lens, global inequities, poverty in the “south”
2015 (engelsk)Inngår i: Education and Transition – Contributions from Educational Research, 2015Konferansepaper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

For many years there has been calls from international organisations (UNESCO) and national governments for education to be oriented towards social change, sustainability and preparing students for life in a global society. This has been described as a curricular global turn in national school curricula and international policies (Mannion, Biesta, Priestley & Ross 2011; Martin 2011). As educators we are encouraged to ‘globalise’ education or ‘think globally’ through ‘bringing the world into the classroom’ and promoting global issues and perspectives in the curriculum.

Within our field of research global development issues have been critically investigated and discussed. A number of debaters have described education for the environment as indoctrination and that such an approach to education has universalizing tendencies that seek to marginalise other approaches and turns education into a political tool (cf. Jickling 1992; Jickling and Spork 1998; Sauvé 1999; Jickling and Wals, 2008; Van Poeck and Vandenabeele, 2012; Sund and Lysgaard, 2013, etc.). Deploying feminist and postcolonial scholars, Noel Gough (2002) criticised the position that a culturally transcendent environmental science is possible and instead suggested ‘that “thinking globally” in science and environmental education might best be understood as a process of creating transnational “spaces” in which scholars from different localities collaborate in reframing and decentring their own knowledge traditions’ (cf. Sund and Öhman, 2014a)

Despite this, ESE is quite often treated as politically neutral and/or intrinsically good. We would like to turn your attention to the fact that policies[1], curricular reform and activities with the objective of developing global solidarity and building a sustainable citizenship very often foreclose the complex historical, cultural and political nature of these issues. These universal global perspectives tend to overlook and respect locally identified needs.

ESE educators cannot, therefore, hide behind ‘good intentions’. This is further exemplified when universal values and a universal ethics are connected to the Enlightenment and to Western culture. ESE then risks becoming problematic if it is to enlighten people in other parts of the world. We argue that the apparent rush to ‘globalise’ and/or ‘universalize’ would benefit from an unpacking of the assumption that global/universal is better and a reminder that the universal is always articulated in a particular context.[2]

[1] Examples are the Earth Charter (2000) and the Johannesburg Declaration (World Summit on Sustainable Development [WSSD] 2002). The WSSD borrows language from the Charter on the theme ‘Making it happen’: ‘We commit ourselves to act together, united by a common determination to save our planet, promote human development and achieve universal prosperity and peace’ (Paragraph 35, WSSD 2002).

[2] The contextuality of ESE-related issues and the importance of using non-western values and traditions to inform the development of ESE curricula is described by Wals (2009, 16), who underlines that: ‘Although both the challenge of sustainable development and the call for ESD is worldwide, there is a general understanding that the local realities and manifestations of ‘unsustainability’ are often quite different and deeply rooted in local histories and political and cultural traditions.

 

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33047 (URN)
Konferanse
The European Conference on Educational Research, Sept 8th -11th, Budapest, Hungary
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2016-12-19bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. & Lysgaard, J. (2015). Reclaim “Education” in Environmental and Sustainability Education Research. In: Planet and Planet- How can they develop together?: . Paper presented at World Environmental Congress, WEEC 8, June 29th – July 2nd , Gothenburg Sweden.
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Reclaim “Education” in Environmental and Sustainability Education Research
2015 (engelsk)Inngår i: Planet and Planet- How can they develop together?, 2015Konferansepaper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

Introduction: this short presentation looks into the nascent research area of Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) and argues that it needs a firm grounding in educational philosophy in order to focus more on education. The discussion is based on experiences at two recent conferences focusing on research in this field. Issues related to content, attitudes

and long-term aims dominated at these conferences, while learning processes were often taken for granted.

 

Objectives: This presentation highlights the risk that, without a connection to educational philosophy, Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) research can result in normative statements that may essentially be regarded as miseducative. All education is normative in the sense that it has a purpose. The normativity that is problematized here is the tendency to use ESE as a platform for prescribing how the knowledge that is acquired in school should be applied beyond the learning context. Change for the better, whatever this might mean, can be a noble cause, but it should not tempt researchers and educators to force distinct solutions and behavior change strategies onto students and members of the public. The purpose of this presentation is thus to signal the need for more democratic and student participative ESE research by providing examples of connections between ESE research and educational philosophy.

 

Methods: In the presentation the role of education is briefly discussed as a prelude to reflection on some of the authors’ personal experiences at two quite recent Educational research conferences. This is followed by examples of how tendencies toward normativity and behavior modification occur and influence educational activities. Previous research initiatives incorporating insights from educational philosophy are discussed.

 

Results: By looking at trends within current ESE research, especially as found at conferences such as WEEC, the presentation exihibits examples of tendencies towards Normativity and Behavior Modification and looks into how educational philosophy can remind us about the lure of Normativity. The presentation also looks into earlier examples within the field of drawing on educational philosophy in order to strengthen the quality of the research within the field, and how this could be of relevance to contemporary research.

 

Conclusion: The argument of this presentation relates to the importance of how the field of ESE continues to push important and necessary agendas, as demonstrated in Ardoin, Clark and Kelsey’s survey of future trends. Although central future topics might include community and the link between the social and ecological, urbanity and the digital age, these need to be linked to a more substantial interest in the educational process and the many philosophical strands associated with it. If this is not done, EE and ESD research could become a 'large fish in a small pond'.

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33048 (URN)
Konferanse
World Environmental Congress, WEEC 8, June 29th – July 2nd , Gothenburg Sweden
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2016-12-19bibliografisk kontrollert
Sund, P. (2015). Science teacher group discussions – the forming of consensus and the exclusion of ESE related issues. In: Education and Transition - Contributions from Educational Research: . Paper presented at The European Conference on Educational Research, Sept 8-11th, Budapest, Hungary.
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Science teacher group discussions – the forming of consensus and the exclusion of ESE related issues
2015 (engelsk)Inngår i: Education and Transition - Contributions from Educational Research, 2015Konferansepaper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

In environmental and sustainability education, ESE there are different interpretations about which content should be taught in school. This leads to teachers having to make decisions about how to select, structure and contextualise the content (Wickman, 2012). However, teachers are not isolated individuals making their own interpretations, but are part of different institutionalised systems. Earlier research shows that teachers teach according to different selective traditions, which can be understood as well-developed teaching habits. Individual teachers seem to develop their personal habits on the basis of the contextual situations created by earlier generations of teachers.

 

In order to find out which content teachers find representative for socio-scientific issues in science education which are ESE related, I asked nine teachers, representing three selective traditions, to take part in group interviews to talk about what they value as “good” content. The starting point for the discussion is national tests in science. One aim of these national tests is to include knowledge about socio-scientific issues (SSI).

 

The aim of this study is to determine which content teachers find representative for science education in national tests. This content issue is approached from two perspectives. The first concerns the teachers’ selection of questions from the national tests and their discussions about what constitutes good science content. The second relates to the teachers’ more open discussions about the knowledge to be learned in science education and the relation between science and social science. This relation is important to study when science teachers teaching environmental issues also are supposed to include more ESE issues according to the new Swedish curriculum. These perspectives form the starting point for discussions about what counts as good science related content. This quest is formulated in two research questions:

 

What is significant in the individual teacher’s selection of content?

What are the significant differences in the group discussions representative scientific content?

 

As such, the research intends to contribute to a discussion about teachers’ selective traditions in terms of content selection can that this can be understood as situated. It also contributes to the debate about policy intentions in relation to how teachers do policy.

 

In this study, teaching traditions are theoretically approached as teachers’ habitual ways of arguing or acting. According to John Dewey (1922), an analysis of such habits does not mean comparing simple repetitive actions, but rather looking at more complex actions that are fruitful in everyday hectic teaching situations. These habits are acquired and continuously developed as a result of encounters between earlier and current experiences. Individuals develop their personal habits on the basis of the contextual situations created by earlier generations of teachers, in school and in teacher education as students, or by following one of the disciplinary traditions in their university studies. Dewey’s (1922) discussion of individual habits, and their interplay with a collective level (for example institutionalised disciplinary traditions), seems to be an accurate description of how selective traditions in teaching evolve and are consolidated in the school system.

 

The theoretical framework is developed from earlier research (Sund, forthcoming; Sund & Wickman, 2011) and Östman’s study (1995) of dominating discourses in science education.

HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
didaktik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-33046 (URN)
Konferanse
The European Conference on Educational Research, Sept 8-11th, Budapest, Hungary
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-09-01 Laget: 2016-09-01 Sist oppdatert: 2016-12-19bibliografisk kontrollert
Organisasjoner
Identifikatorer
ORCID-id: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0003-3386-3411