EARTH-SCIENCES EDUCATION IN THE CONTEXT OF SCIENCE-TECHNOLOGY-SOCIETY:
AN ETHICS CHALLENGE
1. INTRODUCTION
The authors assume in this Conference their
professional involvement as science educator researchers. Therefore, this paper
starts with a reflection about the
science education approach in the knowledge society in the context of
science-technology-society (STS), emphasizing the role played by the ethical
dimension of this challenge. Afterwards, a discussion concerning the
contribution of the earth sciences’ curricular topics to the achievement of this issue, takes place.
The authors of
this study recognize that the need for
change in today’s modern knowledge-driven society - in which science plays a relevant role - is generally accepted
as being one of the major challenges at the beginning of this millennium; they
also assume the high level of complexity in the society itself, including the
development of new science teaching context approaches, in accordance with the
suggestions emerging from science
education research. Science education here seen as a wider brief than providing
future professional scientists.
The science teaching context means that science
contents are taught in connection and integrated with the students’ everyday worlds, and in a manner that
mirrors students’ natural efforts at making
sense out of those worlds. In other words, teaching science through
science-technology-society (STS) refers to teaching natural phenomena in a way that embeds science in the technological and social environments of the student. The
intention is to help learners live in democratic countries effectively, and
therefore environmental and social problems
which have evolved in part from the use of science to produce
the technology for the 21st century should and, we believe, will become the major objectives of publicly
supported science.
Within all this framework it seems clear that in a democratic society, with
understandable conflicting voices,
nobody – teachers, students, … - is in
a neutral position as far as the possibility of deciding upon what actions will be most
beneficial for the citizen, for the
society, for the environment and, particularly, for the interaction between all
of them. Nevertheless, to take
decisions, a broad and balanced view about the natural world –
biosphere, lithosphere, atmosphere and
hydrosphere - is needed, and not one only based on the circumstances
which occur at a particular moment. To take decisions does not only depend on the
content knowledge previously achieved;
it is not value free. Decisions
should be taken within an ethical framework, and it is crucial to
recognize the best educational, particularly
science educational, strategy to
construct an information society that
is ethically sound.
Earth sciences and earth sciences education, strongly
linked with the Earth, are exceptional fields to contribute to the
achievement of this dream. In fact the Earth that supports and sustain us, feeds our children and receives our dead,
is the very image of solidarity, and the source of all our productions,
economic or otherwise. Viewed in this
way, the discipline is as much a part
of the humanities as it is science. Alongside the field of sedimentology, hydrology, and economic geology
one should find geopoetry and geometaphysics, geopolitics and
geotheology, geoaesthetics and a geoepistemology (Frodeman 2003, 217).
2. INFORMATION SOCIETY AND SCIENCE
EDUCATION
A few comments about the relationship between science
and technology in a sociological context; this articulation cannot be divorced from an ethics compromise.
It seems to be true
that not to know any
science is to be an “outsider” - an alien to the culture as much as somebody who cannot
recognize the cultural referents
that are a product of the Ancient Civilization, i.e. Greek
Civilization. On the other hand, the idea of technology is in the
discussions’ agenda all over the world.
Nevertheless, the authors assume that the scientific
and technological worlds, despite their idiosyncrasy, are no longer separated in our society. And this strong link has a cultural impact on our thinking and
behavior because it is not possible nowadays to think about the scientific
knowledge out of a technological framework. There is a temptation to start
strengtherning a technological
ideology, meaning that there is a close
relationship between
science/technology and the best solutions we are looking for. This ideology argues that socio-political
and ethical criteria are not very much relevant when one finds a solution for broad current problems,
taking into account that they should only
be overcome from the science/technology
contribution (Praia and Cachapuz, 2005).
Although science is one of the major achievements of
Western civilization, and permeates our culture rather as mica pervades
granite, the pretence that science, technology
and scientists are separate from
society and its applications has been unsustainable. In addition, technologies
are not only tools, but also vehicles of affordances, values and
interpretations of the surrounding reality and, therefore any significant
technology is always ethically charged. So it is understandable that the
construction and development of the triangle science-technology-society (STS)
taking into consideration the correspondent in depth interaction.
The institutions and also the citizens need to develop
an efficient and effective strategy to
deal with the new ethical challenges
arising in the development of the information society. Essentially in
our society, science is moving from a view where it is perceived as a source of solutions towards another
one where it is also seen as a source of
problems. And this is a critical and urgent issue. It is critical
because the international community
feels that it is crucial to get sources
for conceptual and ethical guidance. It is urgent because the information
society is developing at a fantastic pace, and has already posed
fundamental ethical problems, whose complexity and global dimensions are
rapidly evolving. In fact in a few decades mankind has moved from a state of submission to nature, to a
state of power of potential total destruction. In the
present state we have the means
and tools to engineer
entirely new realities, tailor them to
our needs and invent the future. For the first time in history, we are
responsible for the very existence
of whole aspects
of our new environment (UNESCO,
2001). Science and technology, when associated, have an immense power.
Nevertheless our moral responsibility towards the world and future generations
is also enormous. Unfortunately, technological power and moral responsibilities
are not necessarily followed by ethical
intelligence and wisdom. And this tremendous responsibility starts with
scientists themselves … as a first step, they have to become conscious
of the part they play in producing certain knowledge and certain products and the uses to which
they are put; secondly, scientists have to learn to view their work in the context of values and goals that affect it and the ways it affects society. Ethical concerns should include an attitude of reverence
toward human and other creatures,
concern for the safety of products as regard
health and possible impacts on the environment. Also, scientists should
take care to point out benefits
and risks more openly, both in the front of decision
makers and the public. (Sandal 1998). And the same author concludes saying
that these considerations and responsibilities must be part of the scientist’s
education.
Of all the
above, the authors of this paper argue about the relevance of including an
ethics reflection in the scientists
education but also in the educational core curriculum of those who are in the
front line of an education for the citizenship i.e. the teachers in general and
the science teachers in particular. If there is no doubt about the remarkable
role played by science/technology in
the construction of the knowledge society, it is also understandable to argue
that the ethics dimension is essential to strength both a joint and individual conscience which are able to
become the foundation of a society concerned with the effectiveness, solidarity, the environment and the future generations.
How to face this big challenge? Science education has
to be prepared to contribute to this issue, which means to help the learners to
be democratic and, therefore, intervenient citizens. Any consideration of the
role of science education must begin not with an internalist view of its
content and curricula, but rather with
an externalist perception of the society it serves.
The deep changes in the global society, the challenges
raised by the increasing development in
science/technology and, last but not
least, the complexity of current problems have stimulated new ways of
approaching the processes of production and dissemination of
knowledge and the resulting impact on modes of teaching and learning. For
example, learning how to learn, and being able to use what one has learned (for
social reconstruction, perhaps) within an externalist framework is a demanding competence to achieve. And this competence is considered quite
superior to amassing academic knowledge
(Aikenhead, 2002), something quite
close to what is mainly carried
out at the present.
A different approach is needed to develop the kinds of
competencies, knowledge and values that our future citizens are likely to need.
When one thinks about main aims of science education
within this information society there are four arguments emerging from the
literature (Thomas and Durant, 1987; Millar 1996; Osborne 2000). They are the
utilitarian arguments, the economic arguments, the democratic arguments and the
cultural arguments.
The utilitarian and the economic are respectively
strongly related to:
. the fact
that learners and citizens might
benefit in a practical sense from
learning science and
. to the argument
that an advanced
technological society needs a constant supply of scientists to sustain
its economic base and
international competitiveness.
These issues will not be discussed in the context of
this paper. Nevertheless a few comments are conducted as far as the democratic
and cultural arguments are concerned.
The democratic argument is very much related to the
fact that each citizen has to construct his/her own view related, among others,
with the following issues:
. the way scientists work, how they decide that a
particular study is the “right science”, how the controversy and uncertainty
surrounds contemporary scientific research. There is no more room for a picture
of science as a body of knowledge which is unequivocal,
uncontested and unquestioned (Claxton 1997);
. aspects such as global warming, rising sea level,
water resource – sterilization and pollution, soil loss, desertification, waste
disposal, energy and mineral supply, water resources;
. the need of
the recognition that the damage in the
public faith in the expertise of
science is a result of a
misunderstanding of the nature of science;
. that future debates in society will be strongly concerned with political and moral dilemmas;
. taking into account the characteristics of the
problems that mankind is faced with – complexity, uncertainty, systemic
framework, … - the correspondent
solutions have to be reached through a cooperative engagement, rather than an
individual participation.
Therefore a healthy democratic society implies the
participation and involvement of as many citizen as possible looking for the
solutions of the decisions rising from the choices that contemporary science
will present. All of this is only
likely if the citizens have a basic understanding of the underlying science,
and can engage both critically and reflectively in a participatory debate
(Osborne, 2000)
About the cultural argument. There is no doubt about
the fact that science is one of the most important achievements of our culture.
Science, as well as technology, play such an important role in our society, are
deeply linked to our procedures and behaviors, are so strongly connected to our
way of life that, it is understandable
why they belong to the cultural
dimension. There are implications of this on science education. This means that
understanding the culture of science is needed. So it is relevant the pay
attention to the set of issues that follow, such as: the history of science,
science ethics, science argument , and
scientific controversy, i.e., more
emphasis on the human dimension rather than only on the body of knowledge.
3. EARTH SCIENCE APPROACH: AN ETIHCS CHALLENGE
The authors discuss through this section the implications of the previous views in
the context of earth- sciences curricular approach towards the
achievement of a relevant role for
earth-sciences education..
Figure 1 is a useful contribution of Woodrock (1995)
for displaying the relationship between earth-sciences and society. A careful
reading of the diagram helps the reader
understand, as it was previously emphasized, that:
* teaching earth-sciences through STS refers to
teaching natural phenomena in a way that embeds science in the technological
and social environments of the learner (think about fossil fuels related to ethics dimensions);
Fig. 1 Earth
sciences and society (adapted from Woodrock, 1995)
* in a democratic society, with conflicting voices and
interests, nobody is in a neutral position as far as a possibility of deciding
upon what actions – concerned with subsurface water, fossil fuels, land use
planning, … - would be most beneficial for the citizen, for the society, for the
environment and, particularly, for the interaction between all of them. It is
obvious here the relevance of ethical issues;
* earth-sciences education has to be prepared to argue
against the idea that socio-political and ethical criteria are not very much
relevant when one looks for a
solution to our current problems (see
the citizen responsibility about nuclear power and the ethics implications);
* earth-sciences approach cannot be internalist
anymore; it. Any consideration of the role of science should be carried out
within an externalist perception of the
society (see earthquakes and their consequences in the context of ethical perspectives) ).
* earth sciences is an area of knowledge enabling a
science teaching approach close to the utilitarian, economic, democratic and
cultural reasons and all of them
underlined by ethical perspectives (see
the radioactive wastes or the geological hazards).
One can think with a little bit more of details
about five great earth-sciences
curricular topics (at least in Portugal),
among many others, as good
examples of approaching which
enables articulation with ethical
concerns. These examples are as
follows: geological hazards, mineral resources, urban and rural planning,
environmental pollution and communication (Soares de Andrade 2001).
In this paper two examples are discussed in some
details, i.e. geological hazardous and urban and rural planning.
Geological
hazards -
the hazards arise through internal processes of the Earth (volcanic
eruptions, …) or by action of external processes (coastal erosion, landslides,
…). Coastal erosion is the most common geological hazard in Portugal. This event has consequences on the one hand
because of its frequency and one the
other hand taking into account the impact on small fishing communities and the
development of tourism along the coast.
The example of the Aveiro region is a
good one; every year, specially in
winter the media dramatically
report continuous assaults of the Atlantic Ocean on the coast line.
Let us think about a starting problem such as - will the Atlantic Ocean
eventually overcome all the artificial
protection barriers and destroy beaches
and settlements alongside the Aveiro coast?
From this point it is possible to design an approach
strategy, to develop with the students,
taking into account that the
irregular but progressive coastal
erosion is a consequence of natural factors (the last deglaciation) but also of
factors provoked by man (the building of hydroelectric dams, coastal engineering works,
the urbanization of dunes, …).
Geological processes are much more complex than they
seem at first glance, since they
work in interdependent ways and on variable spatial and temporal scales. When people react by
fighting , and not understanding, nature
the latter tends to restore the
balance. In time the result is mainly
disadvantageous to the human
aggressor.
In the classroom the teacher should be prepared to
include in the teaching and learning strategy as far as the topics like these
are concerned, an ethical reflection
about the responsibility of our
generation for the present and for the future as well. It is crucial to link the didactic approach of the
geological contents to a set of values and attitudes rather than to develop an
approach strictly rooted on the concepts themselves.
Regional
Planning – the rapid urban expansion of
Aveiro has raised serious problems related to factors having a significant
socio-economic relevance i.e. underground water supply, the exploitation of
mineral resources, the confinement of polluting substances, the conservation of
agricultural soils.
Thinking in earth-sciences curricular approach one can
face the students with questions such as: How is it possible to balance urban
expansion, and in general the economic development, with the preservation of
geo-environmental resources?
Information
provided by figure 1 is quite useful. In fact the region is situated
geologically in a small Cretaceous
basin with a monocline structure that
is slightly deep to the west. The sedimentary structure may be simplified as
follows: (i) underlying sediments: coarse-grained, permeable sandstones
(Cretaceous Coarse Sandstones); (ii) overlying sediments: fine grained,
practically impermeable mudstones
(Aveiro-Vagos clay).
Fig. 2 Geological structure of Aveiro region (adapted
from Barbosa, 1996)
The Cretaceous coarse sandstones constitute the
water-bearing unit of the region (Cretaceous multi-aquifer) one of the best of
the Portuguese sedimentary basins. The recharge of the aquifer unit is practically impossible from the surface (in
vertical direction) due to the
relative impermeability of the overlying
ceramic unit; it is achieved in
an horizontal way from east, the aquifer unit outcrop and readily absorbs rain and river water. .
The inexorable expansion of the cities as well as the
expansion of the existing planned
industrial areas, constitute a real threat to the preservation of
hydrological resources. As far as the
hydrogeological unit is concerned, the recharge zone should allow an easy
infiltration of superficial waters; the planning of pine tree forests is a good
option.
Once more, in the classroom, teachers should define
teaching and learning strategies which enable the learner to understand that
for several reasons, but also for
ethical issues it is forbidden:
(i) urban and industrial developments that limit the superficial recharge of the aquifer; (ii) agricultural
procedures that may cause contamination
such as the over use of
fertilizers and pesticides.
Regional planning is traditionally assumed as a task
for geographers nevertheless, things are becoming more and more complex and
therefore they require a multidisciplinary approach and also the critical
attention of each citizen with an ethical perspective.
4. FINAL
COMMENTS
This is the broad context in which each citizen should
start to recognize first, and to understand next, the complexity of the science
social dimension. Science education plays here a crucial role strenghtening the
conscience of the learner. This means that types of teaching based on
replication, on teacher as an authoritarian didactic instructor and “fountains
of knowledge” (Thompson 2001) or on the contents themselves, without relations
to their social and cultural contexts, cannot be accepted. The learners are
citizens of the third millennium and, therefore, science teaching has to look
for something relevant which is happening i.e. the change of the science ethos.
The way the knowledge society uses science and
technology is a demanding one for the science education approach. This approach
implies an investigative perspective towards the development of competences by
the students, what means to change from a view of knowledge not relevant by
itself, to a knowledge in action. Action is synonymous with making decisions
and if the ethical issues were not also in the front line, in strong
articulation with science, there is no doubt about the weakness of the answers
to the problems one is faced with. In addition one needs to pay attention to
care for nature which concerns an
important ethical dimension in relation to the national and international focus
on education for a sustainable development. (Svennbeck, 2004).
Nevertheless, all the above requires a change both in
the scientists and the science teachers’ patterns. Scientists have, on the one
hand to become conscious of the part they play in producing certain knowledge
and products and the uses to which they are put, and, on the other hand, they
have to learn to view their work in the
context of values and goals that affect humanity. Science teachers have to
think that, what they do also depends on what is happening in the broad
society; in addition, they also should
achieve a wider vision of their purpose beyond the delivery of subject
knowledge. Science teachers are concerned with developing young people who
value for themselves. Values are
about self and one’s relation to other
people.
This means that ethical concerns should include an
attitude of reverence toward humans and other creatures, concern for the safety
of products and regard for them as possible impacts on the environment.
Earth-sciences education are very well placed to play here a relevant role, to work as guardian of planet
Earth; they should aim to influence
governments to adopt policies which sustain, rather than degrade, the
global environment. Earth-science educators have to co-operate with other
science professions, to contribute to a transnational education policy, and to
work towards a well-informed general
public which is a credit to a democratic society. This is the real
challenge for the 21st century!
Bibliography
Aikenhead, G. (2002). STS education. A rose by any other name. In Cross,
R. (Ed.). A Vision for Science Education.
London. Routledge Falmer. 59-75.
Barbosa, B. (1995). Implicações de estrutura geológica de Aveiro-Vagos no
planeamento regional e urbano. Porto, IGM.
Claxton, G. (1997). A 2020 vision of education. In Levinson, R. and Thomas , J. (Eds). Science Today. London. Routledge.
Frodeman, R. (2003). Geo-Logic.
Breaking Ground Between Philosophy and
the Earth Sciences. New York. State University Press.
Lee, Y. (2004). Science , Information and Ethics. TWAS, Newsletter,
16(2), 13-16.
Millar, R. (1996). Towards a science curriculum for public
understanding. School Science Review,
77(280), 7-18.
Osborne, J. (2000). Science for Citizenship. Monk, M. and Osborne, J.
(Eds.) In Good Practice in Science
Teaching. What Research has to say. London. Open University Press, 225-240.
Praia, J. e Cachapuz, A. (2005).
Ciência-Tecnologia- Sociedade: um compromisso ético. Revista
Ibero-Americana de Educación. (in press).
Sandal, R. (1998). Truth and scepticism. In The Social Science Bridge, Lisboa. Ministério da Ciência e
Tecnologia, 93-100.
Soares de Andrade, A. (2001). Problem solving in earth-sciences. In
Marques, L. and Praia, J. (Orgs.) Geoscience
in the Secondary School Curriculum. Aveiro, University of Aveiro285-298.
Svennbeck; M. (2004). Care for nature . In Wickenberg, P., Axelsson, H., Fritzén, L., Helldén, G. and Ohman,
J. (Eds.). Learning to change the world?
Swedish research on education & sustainable development. Lund.
Studentlitteratur, 21-31
Thomas, G. and Durant, J. (1987). Why should we promote the public understanding of science? In M.
Shortland (Ed.) Scientific Literacy
Papers. Oxford. Oxford Department of External Studies.
Thompson , D. (2001). Towards an earth-environmental science education
for all aged 4-16. In Marques, L. and
Praia, J. (Org.) Geoscience in the
Secondary School Curriculum. Aveiro. Universidade de Aveiro 299-332.
UNESCO (2001).World Commission on the ethics of scientific
knowledge and technology (COMMEST).
Sub-Commission on ethics of the Information society. Paris. UNESCO
Woodrock, N. (1995). Eart´s History as a Guide to the Eareth’s Future. In T. Wakeford & M. Walters (Eds.). Science
for Earth. London, J. Wiley & Sons, 173-194
Luis Marques* lmarques@dte.ua.pt