SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCE

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Integrating Western and Aboriginal sciences: Cross-cultural science teaching. Research in Science Education, 31(3), 337355.
  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2002). Cross-cultural science teaching: Rekindling traditions for Aboriginal students. Retrieved June 14, 2002, from http://www.usask.ca/education/people/aikenhead/cjsmte.htm
  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation for a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 269287.
  • Aikenhead, G. S., & Lewis, B. F. (2001). Introduction: Shifting perspectives from universalism to cross-culturalism. Science Education, 85, 35.
  • Aikman, S. (1997). Interculturality and intercultural education: A challenge for democracy. In V.Masemann & A.Welch (Eds.), Tradition, modernity and post-modernity in comparative education (pp. 463480). Hamburg, Germany: UNESCO Institute for Education and Kluwer Academic Publishing.
  • Andersson, B., & Wallin, A. (2000). Students' understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and the problem of ozone layer depletion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10) 10961111.
  • Appelbaum, P. (2001). Pastiche science: Bringing cultural studies of science to education and education to the cultural studies of science. In J. A.Weaver, M.Morris, & P.Appelbaum (Eds.), (Post) modern science (education): Propositions and alternative paths (pp. 111127). New York: Peter Lang.
  • Arellano, E. L., Barcenal, T. L., Bilbao, P. P., Castellano, M. A., Nichols, S., & Tippins, D. J. (2001). Case-based pedagogy as a context for collaborative inquiry in the Philippines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 502528.
  • Aronowitz, S., Martinsons, B., & Menser, M. (1996). Technoscience and cyberculture. New York: Routledge.
  • Ashcroft, B. (2001). Post-colonial transformations. London: Routledge.
  • Atwar, M. (1996). Social constructivism: Infusion into the multicultural science education research agenda. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 821838.
  • Bauman, Z. (1995). Making and unmaking strangers. In P.Beilharz (Ed.), The Bauman reader (pp. 200217). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishers.
  • Bauman, Z. (2001). The great war of recognition. Theory into Practice, 18(2/3), 137150.
  • Beck, U. (2000). What is globalization? Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
  • Beck, U., Bonass, W., & Lau, C. (2003). The theory of reflexive modernization. Problematic, hypotheses and research programme. Theory, Culture & Society, 20(2), 133.
  • Bianchini, J. A., & Kelly, G. J. (2003). Challenges of standards-based reform: The example of California's science content standards and textbook adoption process. Science Education, 87, 378389.
  • Boulton, A., & Panizzon, D. (1998). The knowledge explosion in science education: Balancing practical and theoretical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 475481.
  • Bromley, H., & Shutkin, D. S. (1998). Science and technology studies and education: An introduction to the special issue. Educational Policy, 12(5), 467475.
  • Brown, L. (Ed.). (2004). The state of the world 2004. London: Earthscan Publications.
  • Calabrese Barton, A. (2000). Crafting multicultural science education with preservice teachers through service-learning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(6), 797820.
  • Calabrese Barton, A., & Osborne, M. D. (1998). Marginalized discourses and pedagogies: Constructively confronting science for all. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 339340.
  • Calabrese Barton, A., & Tobin, K. (2001). Urban science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 843846.
  • Calabrese Barton, A., & Tobin, K. (2002). Learning about transformative research through other's stories: What does it mean to involve “others” in science education reform? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 110113.
  • Carter, L. (2004). Thinking differently about cultural diversity: Using postcolonial theory to (re)read science education. Science Education, 88(6), 819836.
  • Carter, L. (2005a). Globalisation and science education: Rethinking science education reforms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 561580.
  • Carter, L. (2005b). Globalisation and science education. In J.Zajda (Ed.), The international handbook globalisation and education policy research (Vol. 2, pp. 733744) Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Carter, L. (2006). The challenges of postcolonialism to science education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(5), 677692.
  • Carter, L. (2007). Globalisation and science education: The implications for science in the new economy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10).
  • Carter, L. (in press). Repositioning science education research: The challenges of globalisation. In B.Atweh, M.Borba, A.Calabrese Barton, D.Clark, N.Gough, C.Keitel, C.Vistro-Yu, & R.Vithal (Eds.), Internationalisation and globalisation in mathematics and science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Carter, L., & Smith (2001). Re-visioning science education from a futures perspective. Paper presented at the XXVIIth World Futures Studies Federation conference, Brasov, Romania.
  • Carter, L., & Smith, C. (2003). Revisioning science education from a science studies and futures perspective. Journal of Futures Studies, 7(4), 4554.
  • Carter, L., & Smith, C. (2004). Science education: For the future or for the past? Taking science education to task. EQ Australia, 3, 57.
  • Carter, L., & Smith, C. (2005). Course notes.
  • Clark, W. C., & Dickson, N. M. (2003). Sustainability science: The emerging research program. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(14), 80498061.
  • Cobern, W. W., & Loving, C. C. (2001). Defining “science” in a multicultural world: Implications for science education. Science Education, 85, 5067.
  • Cocks, D. (2003). Deep futures: Our prospects for survival. Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  • Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1993). The golem: What everyone should know about science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Costa, S., Hughes, T. B., & Pinch, T. (1998). Bringing it all back home: Some implications of recent science and technology studies for the classroom science teacher. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 921.
  • Cross, R. T. (1997). ‘Back to the future’: The sixties come to school—Science in Victorian schools. Melbourne Studies in Education, 38(2), 103113.
  • Cunningham, C. M., & Helms, J. V. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 483499.
  • de Alba, A., Edgar, G.-G., Lankshear, C., & Peters, M. (2000). Curriculum and the postmodern condition. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Dear, M., & Flusty, S. (1999). The postmodern urban condition. In M.Featherstone & S.Lash (Eds.), Spaces of culture: City-nation-world (pp. 6485). London: Sage.
  • Dekkers, J., & de Laeter, J. (2001). Enrolment trends in school science education in Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 487500.
  • De Landa, M. (1996). Markets and antimarkets in a world economy. In S.Aronowitz, B.Martinsons, & M.Menser (Eds.), Technoscience and cyberculture (pp. 181194). New York: Routledge.
  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261295.
  • Fraser, N. (2001). Recognition without ethics? Theory, Culture & Society, 18(2/3), 2139.
  • Fuller, S. (2000). The governance of science: Ideology and the future of society. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
  • Fusco, D., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2001). Representing student achievements in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 337384.
  • Gallopin, G. (2002). The challenges posed by sustainable development to science and technology. Interciencia, 27(8), 389391.
  • Gieryn, T. (Ed.). (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Gore, A. (2006). An inconvenient truth: The planetary emergency of global warming and what we can do about it. New York: Rodale.
  • Gough, N. (2003). Thinking globally in environmental education: Some implications for internationalizing curriculum inquiry. In W. F.Pinar (Ed.), Handbook of international curriculum research (pp. 5372). New York: Erlbaum.
  • Gross, P. R., & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrel with science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Hamilton, C. (2003). Growth fetish. Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
  • Haraway, D. (1996). Modest witness: Feminist diffractions in science studies. In P.Galison & D.Stump (Eds.), The disunity of science: Boundaries, contexts, and power (pp. 428441). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
  • Harding, S. (1998). Multiculturalism, postcolonialism, feminism: Do they require new research epistemologies? Australian Educational Researcher, 25(1), 3751.
  • Harvey, D. (2000). Spaces of hope. Edinburgh, England: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Hicks, D. (1996). A lesson for the future: Young people's hopes and fears for tomorrow. Futures, 28(1), 113.
  • Hodson, D. (1999). Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science Education, 83, 775796
  • Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341368.
  • Holmgren, D. (2002). Permaculture: Principles and pathways beyond sustainability. Tasmania, Australia: Holmgren Design Services.
  • Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1995). Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Jegede, O. J., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1999). Transcending cultural borders: Implications for science teaching. Journal for Science and Technology Education, 17, 4566.
  • Jenkins, E. W. (2005). Important but not for me: Students' attitudes towards secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23(1), 4157.
  • Jenkins, E. W., & Pell R. G. (2006). “Me and the environmental challenges”: A survey of English secondary school students' attitudes towards the environment. International Journal of Science Education, 28(7), 765780.
  • International Council for Science (2002). Report of the scientific and technological community to the world summit on sustainable development. Paris: Author.
  • Kaneshiro, K. Y., Chinn, P., Duin, K., Hood, A. P., Maly, K., & Wilcox, B. A. (2005). Hawaii's mountain-to-sea ecosystems: Social–ecological microcosms for sustainability science and practice. Ecohealth, 2(4), 112.
  • Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R., Hall, M. J., Jaeger, C. C., Lowe, I., et al. (2001). Environment and development: Sustainability science. Science, 292(5517), 641642.
  • Kates, R., & Parris, T. M (2003). Long-term trends and a sustainability transition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(14), 80688073.
  • Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883915.
  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1995). Laboratory studies: The cultural approach to the study of science. In S.Jasanoff, G.Markle, J.Petersen, & T.Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 140166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Kraniauskas, J. (2000). Hybridity in a transformational frame: Latin-Americanist and post-colonial perspectives on cultural studies. In A. E.Coombes & A.Brah (Eds.), Hybridity and its discontents. Politics, science and culture (pp. 235256). London, Routledge.
  • Krugly-Smolska, E. (1999). Research on multiculturalism applied to student's learning school science: Some theoretical issues. Retrieved June 14, 2002, from http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/cridal/misc/krugly.htm
  • Lash, S., & Featherstone, M. (2001). Recognition and difference: Politics, identity, multiculture. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(2/3), 119.
  • Lee, O. (1999). Equity implications based on the conceptions of science achievement in major reform documents. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 83115.
  • Lee, O. (2001). Culture and language in science education: What do we know and what do we need to know? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 499501.
  • Lee, O. (2003). Equity for linguistically and culturally diverse students in science education: A research agenda. Teachers College Record, 105(3), 465489.
    Direct Link:
  • Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English-language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(4), 1221.
  • Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296316.
  • Lowe, I. (2001, July). Sustainability science. Ockham's razor, ABC Radio, Australia.
  • Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: Students' experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591613.
  • Manzanal, R., Barreiro, L. M., & Jiménez, M. (1999). Relationship between ecology fieldwork and student attitudes toward environmental protection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 431453.
  • McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. Science and Education, 7(6), 511532.
  • McGinn, M., & Roth, W.-M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3), 1424.
  • McNay, M. (2000). The conservative political agenda in curriculum: Ontario's recent experience in science education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(6), 749756.
  • Meadows, D., Randers, J., & Meadows, D. (2004). Limits to growth: The 30-year update. Chelsea, England: Green Publishing.
  • Michie, M. (2003). The role of cultural brokers in intercultural science education: A research proposal. Paper presented at the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Melbourne, Australia.
  • Mignolo, W. (2000). Local histories/global designs. Coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. Retrieved August 28, 2006, from http://www.kcl.ac.uk/education
  • Mudzeilwana, N., & Smith, C. (2001). Using young people's images of the future to develop futures-orientated education. Paper presented at the XVIIth Conference of the World Futures Studies Federation, University of the Black Sea, Brasov, Romania.
  • Nakayama, H., Kawano, R., & Kawasaki, K. (2003). A term characterizing Japanese course of study for science: “Yosu,” a Japanese equivalent of “appearance.” Paper presented at the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Melbourne, Australia.
  • National Research Council. (1999). Our common journey. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Ninnes, P. (2001). Representations of ways of knowing in junior high school science texts used in Australia. Discourse, 22(1), 8194.
  • Nuffield Foundation. (2005). Twenty-first century science project. Retrieved August 28, 2006, from http://www.21stcenturyscience.org/
  • Ogawa, M. (1996). Four-eyed fish: The ideal for non-Western graduates of Western science education graduate programs. Science Education, 80, 107110.
  • Ogawa, M. (2001). Reform Japanese style: Voyage into an unknown and chaotic future. Science Education, 85, 586606.
  • Osborne, M. A. (1999). Introduction: The social history of science, technoscience and imperialism. Science Technology and Society, 4(2), 161170.
  • Paty, M. (1999). Comparative history of modern science and the context of dependency. Science, Technology and Society, 4(2), 171203.
  • Raven, P. (2002). Science, sustainability, and the human prospect. Science, 297(5583), 954958.
  • Reid, R., & Traweek, S. (Eds.). (2000). Doing science + culture: How cultural and interdisciplinary studies are changing the way we look at science and medicine. New York: Routledge.
  • Rodriguez, A. J. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 1937.
  • Rose, H. (1997). Science wars: My enemy's enemy is—only perhaps—my friend. In R.Levinson & J.Thomas (Eds.), Science today: Problem or crisis? (pp. 5166). London: Routledge.
  • ROSE Project. (2004). Relevance of Science Education Project. Retrieved August 28, 2006, from http://www.ils.uio.no/english/rose/about/rose-brief.html
  • Ross, A. (Ed.). (1996). Science wars. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  • Roth, W.-M. (1998). Science and technology studies and science education: A natural match? Research in Science Education, 28(1), 17.
  • Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. (1998). Knowing, researching, and reporting science education: Lessons from science and technology studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 213235.
  • Roth, W.-M., & McRobbie, C. (1999). Lifeworlds and the ‘w/ri(gh)ting’ of classroom research. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(5), 501522.
  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE. Background, rationale, questionnaire development and data collection for ROSE (The Relevance of Science Education)—A comparative study of students' views of science and science education. Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo, Department of Teacher Education and School Development.
  • Segal, G. (1997). Towards a pragmatic science in schools. Research in Science Education, 27(2), 289307.
  • Semali, L. (1999). Community as classroom: Dilemmas of valuing African indigenous literacy in education. In L.King (Ed.), Learning, knowledge and cultural context (pp. 302319). Hamburg, Germany: UNESCO Institute for Education and Kluwer Academic Publishing.
  • Settlage, J., & Meadows, L. (2002). Standards-based reform and its unintended consequences: Implications for science education within America's urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 114127.
  • Siegel, H. (2002). Multiculturalism, universalism, and science education: In search of common ground. Science Education, 86, 803820.
  • Slaughter, R. (Ed.). (1996). The knowledge base of futures studies (Vol. 1). Melbourne, Australia: Futures Study Centre.
  • Smith, C. (2004). Futures in education. Principles, practice and potential. (Monograph). Melbourne, Australia: Swinburne University of Technology.
  • Smith, C. (2001a). Permaculture: Education for a sustainable future. Paper presented at ‘The Future is Here’ Conference of the Australian Association for Environmental Education, RMIT, Melbourne.
  • Smith, C. (2001b). The getting of hope: Personal empowerment through learning permaculture. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Melbourne.
  • Snively, G., & Corsiglia, J. (2001). Discovering indigenous science: Implications for science education. Science Education, 85, 634.
  • Sokal, A., & Bricmont, J. (1997). Intellectual impostures. London: Profile Books.
  • Stanley, W. B., & Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Teaching sciences: The multicultural question revisited. Science Education, 85, 3549.
  • Turnbull, D. (2000). Masons, tricksters and cartographers. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.
  • Tyson, L. (1999). Critical theory today: A user-friendly guide. London: Garland Publishing.
  • United Nations General Assembly. (1992). Agenda 21 Earth Summit: United Nations program of action from Rio. New York: Author.
  • United Nations General Assembly. (2000). United Nations Millennium Declaration. New York: Author.
  • United Nations World Summit on Sustainable Development. (2002). WEHAB framework papers. Retrieved April 21, 2004, from www.un.org/jsummit/html/documents/wehab_papers.html
  • Vondracek, B., Pullins, E., Rosales, J., & Savanik, S. (2002). Full syllabus for sustainability science. University of Minnesota.
  • Walby, S. (2001). From community to coalition: The politics of recognition as the handmaiden of the politics of equality in the era of globalization. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(2/3), 113135.
  • Warren, K. (Ed.). (2000). Ecofeminism: Women, culture, nature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  • Weaver, J. A. (2001). Introduction. (Post)modern science (education): Propositions and alternative paths. In J. A.Weaver, M.Morris, & P.Appelbaum (Eds.), (Post)modern science (education): Propositions and alternative paths (pp. 121). New York: Peter Lang.
  • Weinstein, M. (1998). Playing the paramecium: Science education from the stance of the cultural studies of science. Educational Policy, 12(5), 484506.
  • Wolpert, L. (1997). In praise of science. In R.Levinson & J.Thomas (Eds.), Science today: Problem or crisis? London: Routledge.
  • Wong, D. (2001). Perspectives on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 279281.
  • Young, R. (2003). Postcolonialism: A very short introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.