Science Teachers Making Sense of Ideological Dimensions of Disciplinary Knowledge Production

• In Event: Interaction as a Site for Ideological Negotiation and Transformation in Science Teachers' Learning

Abstract

Objectives.
Teacher professional learning, like other forms of learning, is ideological (Philip, 2011; Philip et al., 2018). Whereas many studies of teacher learning focus on views of students (i.e., deficit versus asset conceptions) and goals predetermined by researchers, fewer attend to the ideological components of disciplinary knowledge or learning as understood by participants themselves. This study examines secondary science teachers’ ideological sense-making during a planning institute for participatory, community-based classroom projects.

Theoretical framework.
Teachers’ disciplinary commitments are ideological stances with important implications for practice and student learning (Author and colleagues, 2021; Rodriguez, 1998). Teachers communicate why students should learn physics, whether an explanation is scientific, or what counts as a biology topic (Bang et al., 2013; Jones, 2021). Whereas science teachers’ assumed role is promoting the scientific enterprise, this is problematic in communities harmed by the chemical industry or other scientific undertakings (Authors, 2019).

Methods and data.
This study takes a participatory design-based approach (Bang & Vossoughi, 2016) to examining teacher learning as defined by participants and captured in moment-to-moment interactions (Walkoe & Luna, 2020). Data include recordings of a 3-day teacher institute and contextual documents. The institute was designed in response to a group consensus prioritizing learning about the histories of local industrial pollution. We identified episodes where participants (including teachers, scientists, youth, and community organizers) shifted from discussing history to science or vice-versa. We conducted microgenetic analyses of these episodes, focusing on intertwined disciplinary and ideological sense-making.

Results and significance.
Teachers’ sense-making was supported by studying specific historical examples that elucidated the ideological character of scientific knowledge production. In one episode, a youth participant summarized an article about the evolution of racist ideas in science: “Basically it was talking about how white scientists, over the course of history, have tried their best to prove the inferiority of other races through science.” After some elaboration, his teacher asked, “What studies do they talk about specifically?” The student offered two examples from the text related to IQ and DNA testing. Together, this teacher and student considered how some biology concepts and white supremacist ideologies were co-constructed, which could shape how they critically engage the discipline of biology.
In another episode, a teacher explained how chemical engineers ignored warnings about a dangerous chemical to proceed with industrial-scale production. In response, a community organizer gasped, “What?!” and a scientist affirmed the teacher’s recounting, contrasting two principles for regulating dangerous chemicals: “That’s part of what they call the ‘show me rule’ as opposed to the ‘precautionary rule.’” The teachers’ subsequent response questioned whether the harmful effects of science are unforeseen. This interaction illustrates a teacher, scientist, and organizer making sense of the role of ideologies in shaping how scientific evidence intervenes in chemical engineering and the regulation of dangerous chemicals.
Through these episodes and others, we see how teachers make sense of their discipline as worthy of critical engagement rather than promotion or denunciation. This implies that justice-oriented teacher development includes studying disciplinary knowledge development in critical historical context.

Authors

• Daniel Morales-Doyle, University of Illinois at Chicago

• Alejandra Frausto, Northwestern University

• Mindy J. Chappell, Portland State University

• Tiffany Childress Price, University of Illinois at Chicago

• Abel Farias, University of Illinois at Chicago