Going Beyond Cultural Pluralism:
Science Education for
Sociopolitical Action

skian notions of education as enculturation in order to produce a set of proposals for a radical form of multicultural science education for sociopolitical action. Major educational goals include: raising participation and attainment levels in science for students from ethnic minority groups; and sensitizing all students to racism, and other forms of discrimination and oppression, in science and technology, science education, and contemporary society. This article outlines a radical form of curriculum development, involving the politicization of teachers, as the only effective way of implementing such a curriculum.\ue0001999 John

Multiculturalism in science education generates considerable passion and is a source of deep controversy. There is little consensus about what it is, who it is for, and why we need it, and anyone brave or foolhardy enough to venture an answer to these questions is likely to be vigorously attacked from both extremes of the political\u2013educational spectrum. Among the several variants of multicultural science education are the following:

Thus, for some, multicultural education is concerned with coping with the learning problems created by cultural diversity and dealing with the educational challenges posed by children from ethnic, cultural, or religious minorities. Of course, language is not neutral. Continued use of particular language de\ufb01nes what are considered appropriate conceptu- alizations of the issues; it \ufb01xes the nature of the debate and identi\ufb01es the priorities. How different this particular view of multicultural science education sounds if it is expressed as: \u201cresponding to the opportunities created by a group of students from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds.\u201d It is more usual, however, to express the issue as a set of problems to be overcome. Within this framework of thought, success is achieved when those seen as \u201ceducationally disadvantaged\u201d conform and accommodate to the dominant culture. This openlyassimilationist approach sees its goal as the perpetuation, transmission, and promotion of the cultural beliefs and norms of the dominant community. It is a one- way process, through which members of an ethnic group give up (or have taken away) their original cultural identity. On this model, multicultural education is clearlyfor the educationally disadvantaged to help them assimilate into mainstream society (i.e., the dominant culture).

By contrast,ethnic and cultural pluralism accepts and actively promotes diversity. The intentions are, \ufb01rst, that members of the dominant community learn to appreciate, understand, and value the different conventions and cultural norms of other groups and, second, that members of racial and ethnic minority communities are enabled to re- inforce and perpetuate their own cultural identities, thereby developing more positive self- images. Although it varies enormously from country to country in the ways it is implemented, cultural pluralism is probably the dominant interpretation of multiculturalism in Europe, North America, and Australasia. Indeed, it is of\ufb01cial government policy in Canada.

While cultural pluralism may sound \ufb01ne in principle, it may serve to hide an underlying set of problems. Disadvantage and discrimination may remain hidden because, super\ufb01- cially, there is equality of opportunity, even equality of value. Appearances divert attention away from cultural suppression occurring within the wider community and away from the racist and discriminatory practices that follow from it. Attention in school becomes focused on the quaint and the colorful, while underlying political injustices are ignored. The dom- inant group \u2014 maybe without realizing it, and maybe without intending to oppress \u2014 con- tinues to: set up policies, practices, and institutions that preserve and promote its own values and beliefs; control the economy, the education system, and the media; and ignore or make only passing reference to the interests, needs, aspirations, and values of other communities. Those who are members of the dominant group do not see it happening. They have been socialized into seeing things from a particular perspective, which becomes accepted as the \u201cnormal\u201d view, or even as the only view. Those who do see things differ- ently, and have the courage to say so, often become labeled as militants, agitators, extrem- ists, and the like, to further emphasize that this is not the normal view of things.

Considerations such as these have prompted a move in some parts of the world toward a more overtantiracist approach. Antiracism is concerned to reveal, confront, and combat racist attitudes and practices which disadvantage and discriminate against some minority groups and result in an unequal distribution of opportunity, wealth, and power \u2014 that is,

not justcan result in inequality and injustice, but do result in inequality and injustice both here, in the United States, UK, Australia, or wherever, and now, in 1999. Despite \u201cof\ufb01cial equality\u201d in terms of voting rights, legal rights, and educational and employment oppor- tunities, in all these countries, members of some ethnic minority groups are underrepre- sented in positions of power and in higher education, underachieve in school, are overrepresented in crime statistics, and tend to have poorer health, lower life expectancy and poorer housing conditions. Why and how this happens, and what can and should be done about it, are the questions that antiracist education asks through the history and social studies curriculum, through literature and art, but also through science education.

Antiracist education has a number of key elements or principles (Dei, 1996): it recog- nizes and directly addresses the social effects of \u201crace\u201d through the curriculum; acknowl- edges that the full social effects of race cannot be understood without recognizing how race intersects with other forms of social oppression, based on class, gender, and sexual orientation; questions white (male) power and privilege, and the rationality for this dom- inance; addresses the marginalization of certain voices in society and the discounting of the knowledge, beliefs, and experiences of minority groups; recognizes that the personal identity of students plays a crucial part in learning, and so acknowledges both the need for a pedagogy that meets the challenges of ethnic diversity in the classroom and the urgency for a more inclusive education system that is responsive to minority concerns; challenges \u201cde\ufb01cit model\u201d and \u201cblame the victim\u201d explanations of educational failure, which locate the problem in the family, home environment, or local community, and so divert attention away from the institutional structures of schooling and the curriculum as the real cause of the problems. Above all, antiracist education acknowledges the role of the education system in producing and reproducing inequalities based on differences in race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, religion, or class, and aims to \u201cdo something about it.\u201d Further, it recognizes that education is a political act inseparable from the ma- terial and ideological circumstances in which students are positioned.

Hodson (1993) discussed multiculturalism in science education in terms of three broad, but overlapping and interacting, categories: \u201cscience education in a multicultural setting\u201d; \u201cantiracist science education\u201d; and \u201ctaking a global view.\u201d This article strengthens the antiracist dimensions of those proposals, in line with Dei\u2019s (1996) principles, and develops the \u201ctaking a global view\u201d element into a more radical form ofcritical multiculturalism

tudes and behavior, and sows the seeds for the reshaping of contemporary society and its underlying values. In these proposals, multicultural education is clearly seen to befor students who are members of ethnic minority groups and for others who currently feel unwelcome or uncomfortable in science education. Its major goals include the raising of participation rates and attainment in science for these students. It is alsofor members of the dominant or mainstream culture, to assist them in recognizing the racism, and other forms of discrimination and oppression, operating in contemporary society, especially in science and technology. However, before proceeding to discuss proposals for the politi- cization of science education, it is necessary to address some of the problems of access to science experienced by many students from minority groups.

There are some major advantages in regarding science education as enculturation into the knowledge, practices, codes of behavior, language, and values of the community of scientists. As Driver (1989) remarked: