Getting back to the real world

Abstract

Today, STEM and/or STEAM frameworks dominate the discourse around science education and what constitutes a ‘scientific’ literacy.  While no one definition prevails in the literature, this literacy is often defined in the context of a current national concerns and focuses largely on Eurocentric (western) models of science and/ or scientific knowledge in terms of concepts, models, theories, or principles. As it currently stands, the term STEM is mostly used when addressing educational policy and curriculum choices in schools, aimed at improving competitiveness in science and technology with implications for workforce and economic development (often with some missing voices from women and Indigenous communities).  Without an important socio-cultural critique, education of this kind can maintain and promote hegemonic beliefs and values while ignoring collateral problems relating to scientific or technological development: many of which have been linked to social and environmental injustice.  In this paper, I offer three perspectives in an effort to decentre the discourse around the STEM movement.  Using the overlapping themes of biocultural diversity, two-eyed seeing and guided inquiry, I offer suggestions on how to reframe science education as an interdisciplinary practice centred on student and community needs.  In these ways, science education can ‘get back to the real world’ and promote creative approaches to science literacy, problem solving and cultural inquiry.