THE HEURISTIC POTENTIAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP: AN AXIOLOGICAL ASPECT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31392/cult.alm.2024.2.23Keywords:
science education, citizen science, citizen science education, axiological priorities, heuristic potential.Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the heuristic potential of science education for the development of responsible citizenship, promoting the formation of critical thinking, research abilities, and problem-solving skills. The concepts of citizen science and citizen science education, their axiological priorities, and their potential impact on society are analyzed. The article emphasizes the need to change the approach to understanding science, encouraging critical analysis of the connections between scientific ideas and social structures, emphasizing the importance of transparency in citizen science, and actualizing the role of community involvement in strengthening trust between scientists and the public. The article also examines the moral purpose of science education, aimed at alleviating public skepticism about science and promoting ethical decision-making. In addition, various modalities of citizen science and citizen scientific education and their role in social progress are analyzed, and the importance of science education in educating responsible citizens capable of critically evaluating information and contributing to social progress is highlighted.
References
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cohn, J. (2008). Citizen Science: Can Volunteers Do Real Research? BioScience, 58 (3), 192–197.
Cooper, C., Dickinson, J, Phillips, T. and Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12 (2), 11.
English, P.B., Richardson, M.J., & Garzón-Galvis, C. (2018). From crowdsourcing to extreme citizen science: Participatory research for environmental health. Annual Review of Public Health, 39, 335.
Flanagan. C., Gallay, E.E., & Pykett, A. (2022). Civic science: Addressing racial inequalities in environmental and science, technology, engineering, and math education. Child Development Perspectives, 16, 223–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12467.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language (A.M.S. Smith, Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon.
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann.
Hemment, D., Ellis, R. and Wynne. B. (2011) Participatory mass observation and citizen science. Leonardo, 44 (1), 62–63.
Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. Routledge, London.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Levy, B.L.M., Oliveira, A.W., & Harris, C.B. (2021, August 26). The potential of “civic science education”: Theory, research, practice, and uncertainties. Science Education, 105 (6), 1053–1075. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21678.
Riesch, H. and Potter, C., (2014). Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science, 23 (1): 107–120.
Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., & Shirk, J. (2009, December). Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy. BioScience, 59 (11), 977–984. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9.
Rudolph, J.L. (2020). The lost moral purpose of science education. Science Education, 104 (5), 895–906.
Warmbrod, L., Trotochaud, M., & Connell, N. (2019). The scientist citizen and the citizen scientist: Blurring the lines. ILAR Journal, 60 (1), 5–8.
