![]() In this presentation, I discussed the taken-for-grantedness and social constructedness of conceptual norms of science education produced with/in Eurocentrism through a focus on its entangled epistemologies (e.g., epistemic realism) and ontologies (e.g., Cartesianism). Significantly, I was being invited to consider the ways in which “the” critical attitude is but a critical attitude. During this presentation, given on a curriculum studies panel, new possible possibilities for critique and critical engagement began to bubble not as the result of my own work, but rather an insightful comment about the ways in which I was being critical. ![]() 4 During the 42nd annual Canadian Society for the Study of Education (CSSE) conference, I am giving a talk titled Post- Cartesian possibilities for schools as places of learning: Putting to work an intra- active pedagogy (see Higgins, 2016). To animate this discussion, these conceptual and metaphoric critical apparatuses are employed to ask questions anew about the multicultural science education debate (from the previous chapter).īecause we need to “begin” some-where and some-time, let’s begin in St. Lastly, extending upon the prism, I investigate diffraction as metaphor that builds upon prismatic dispersal (Barad, 2007, 2012a see also Cajete, 1994, 2000 Latour, 1993). Fourth, I explore prismatic dispersal as a first optical alternative (Butler, 2001 Deleuze, 1988 Foucault, 1997) as well as the types of critiques that can made be with/in this optics. Third, a thumbnail account 3 of the crisis of the critical stance (Latour, 1993) is presented with attention to mirror metaphor it makes operational and the outcome for critical engagement within science education. Secondly, I propose critical and complicit (mis)reading as the deconstructive methodological approach in the potentiality of (re)signifying science education otherwise. In turn, I posit that (an) unsettling criticality is not only one which critiques settler colonial logics and practices but also the taken-for-granted ways-of-critiquing which can undergird these very efforts.Īs critique is always in relation (Foucault, 1997), I begin by positioning my own critical relation in and to science education. Specifically, the adversary mode therein not only excludes, differs, and defers Indigenous science to-come, but also upholds the metaphysics of modernity through its enactment (via distance, dichotomy as mutual exclusivity discussed within this chapter). The possibility of critique as plural is significant as the mode of critique within the multicultural science education debate from the previous chapter (re)produce Indigenous science as yet-to-come. Drawing from Foucault’s ( 1997) insight that the critical attitude is but a critical attitude, I explore possibilities for and of critique that stem from and respond to the crisis and critique of critique (see Barad, 2012a Kirby, 2011 Latour, 1993, 2004a). Excavating the concepts that linger and lurk when critique is presented as atheoretical in science education, the following chapter engages with the theoretical homework of response-ability. The purpose of this chapter 1 is to explore what Foucault refers to as “the” critical attitude and its relationship to science education. In particular, three optical apparatus-the mirror, the prism, and the diffraction grating-are employed to analyse and inform how the critical gaze might be differentially configured within science education to (re)open the space of responsiveness. Building on the insight that scientific knowledge-practice is always already situated, the ways in which criticality in science education is always mediated by conceptual apparatuses, whether real or imagined, is considered. In turn, the possibility of critique as plural is significant as the mode of critique within the multicultural science education debate (re)produces Indigenous science as yet-to-come. Drawing from the insight that the critical attitude is but a critical attitude, the possibility of critique as plural and multiplicative is explored herein positing that (an) unsettling criticality is not only one which critiques settler colonial logics and practices but also the taken-for-granted ways-of-critiquing which can undergird these very efforts. However, the effect is still there, and there is a diffraction limit to what is observable.The purpose of this chapter is to explore what Foucault refers to as “the” critical attitude and its relationship to science education. As noticed, diffraction effects are most noticeable when light interacts with objects having sizes on the order of the wavelength of light. ![]() The angle found in part (a) is extraordinarily small (less than 1/50,000 of a degree), because the primary mirror is so large compared with the wavelength of light.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |