Cultural Studies of Science Education

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10044-w

FORUM

Exploring nature of criticality in high school science

teaching: sociopolitical consciousness in multicultural
science education

Jenny Tilsen1 · Jessica Forrester1 · Bhaskar Upadhyay1 

Received: 17 February 2021 / Accepted: 15 March 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021

Abstract
In this forum, we discuss the need for multicultural education that is supported by cultur-
ally relevant pedagogy to fashion science teaching that intimately connects science content
to students’ sociocultural and linguistic experiences. In Nepal, teacher education programs
and teachers’ pedagogical practices view students’ multiple cultural and linguistic back-
grounds as afterthoughts rather than an integral part of being an effective science teacher.
This kind of lack of recognition of multicultural education and cultural relevancy in sci-
ence teaching fails to excite students to learn science and find its use in social change and
personal transformation. We also extend the findings from a single teacher case study into
the larger issues of theoretical alignments when exploring science teachers and teaching in
the Global South. Additionally, we believe multicultural science education and culturally
relevant pedagogy needs to go hand-in-hand if the goal of science teaching and learning is
for equity, social change, and sociopolitical consciousness. Finally, we argue that multicul-
tural and culturally relevant science education is influential theories to understand Nepali
science teachers, students, and their successes and struggles.

Lead Editor: Alejandro J. Gallard Martínez.

This review essay addresses issues raised in Kamal Prasad Koirala’s Multicultural classroom teaching
in Nepal:perspectives and practices of a secondary level science teacher. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11422-​020-​10012w.

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 J. Tilsen et al.

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

Keywords  Multicultural science education · Culturally relevant pedagogy · Teacher

education · Critical consciousness · Diversity

This paper describes the tension within a multicultural, multiethnic, and multilingual
Nepali science classroom that utilizes a national science curriculum for teaching and learn-
ing. The school is known for having high academic achievement in testing and other rep-
utable performance markers while also making instruction more equitable and inclusive.
The tension described by Kamal Koirala, the researcher author, demonstrates two different
teaching methods: teaching to pass a test and teaching to be culturally responsive to the
students in front of a teacher. Koirala contends that Nepal’s national science standards tend
to support content mastery as the most important goal of teaching. Therefore, he feels the
effective practices and professionalization of teaching have decreased. He argues for an
increase in multicultural education, including more inclusive teacher education programs
for Nepali science teachers to make instruction more equitable.
In this forum, we explore the nature of multicultural and culturally relevant science edu-
cation in the context of Koirala’s paper “Multicultural classroom teaching in Nepal: Per-
spectives and practices of a secondary level science teacher”. We extend the rationale for
multicultural and culturally relevant science education in Nepal and to the larger Global
South community for social change and inclusion. Two important aspects of teacher educa-
tion research by a native (citizen of a country or place) of the Global South are that these
studies bring out more nuanced understandings of the sociocultural, historical, and socio-
political nature of science education and build the research capacity of the homegrown
people. In each of these cases, we engage in critically examining the adequacy of the theo-
ries and ideas used in the paper to understand sociocultural and sociohistorical aspects of
science education in Nepal. We begin by providing the positionalities of three authors so
the readers have reference points to our understanding of the paper and engagement with it.

13
 J. Tilsen et al.

Positionality

The three authors bring diverse experiences from their early years as well as their racial and
cultural backgrounds. The authors’ diversity allows us to draw upon our struggles, oppor-
tunities, and ideas about what science teaching and learning should look like for students
from multicultural and multiethnic groups. Our philosophical and ontological views about
science, science teachers, students, multicultural education, and culturally relevant pedago-
gies are informed by our intimate experiences with race, immigrant status, and identities.
Jenny Tilsen is a white woman educated in predominantly white institutions. Her teach-
ing experiences in a majority Black Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) urban schools
have shaped her outlook on teachers and teacher education programs. This experience
shaped her advocacy for equity and social justice in science education. She critically views
science teaching and learning practices that disregard social justice, race, and immigrant
issues in everyday classrooms and teacher education programs.
Jessica Forrester is a Black woman whose views about culturally relevant science
teaching and multicultural science education are based on her racialized experiences with
schooling. Her philosophy and identities shaped by racialized experiences guide her out-
look, research, and teacher education practices focused on equity-based, culturally-con-
nected science and mathematics education. She is a mathematics education researcher,
teacher, and teacher educator who supports race-informed science and mathematics educa-
tion as an essential aspect of multicultural teaching and learning. She finds that cultural
identities in research and teaching add criticality in content and activities.
Bhaskar Upadhyay grew up in southern Nepal among multiethnic and indigenous com-
munity members. His ideas about science education draw from indigenous, ethnic, and lin-
guistic diversities that he encountered in the early years of his education. Therefore, he
continuously seeks to understand and promote science education for social justice, race,
social and personal change, equity, and sociopolitical consciousness. The politics and cul-
ture of discrimination in science teaching and learning, teacher preparation programs, cur-
riculum, and national science standards are at the center of his work.

Attempt in the right direction

Research in science education with an emphasis on multicultural perspectives, critical the-

ories and pedagogies, culturally responsive practices, and sociopolitical consciousness is
just beginning to be a part of science teaching and learning in Nepal. Historically in Nepali
classrooms, teacher education, curriculum development, and teaching are influenced by the
traditions of students absorbing knowledge from elders and teachers as obedient, passive
learners. However, in many indigenous and other communities, learning is still experiential
by engaging with elders through apprenticeships and by exploring nature. Unfortunately,
this kind of engaged learning hardly enters science classrooms.
Koirala gives the readers a detailed overview of the Nepali education system, acknowl-
edging its growth in participatory engagement, the influence of various political systems,
and the ever-changing educational reform landscapes over the last 25 years. Nepal’s educa-
tion reform initiatives are highly political in nature because the country is still figuring out
the best governance model after the fall of the King’s rule in 2008. As Nepal experienced
successive governments led by different coalitions, the nature of education reform also
shifted in different directions. Some of the transformative changes seen in the education

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

system include greater local control in schools’ overall administration, writing textbooks
and resource materials in local languages, less punitive grading system, greater awareness
and inclusion of cultural and linguistic differences in schools, teacher licensing, and rea-
lignment of K-12 schooling with K-8 labeled as ‘Basic Education’ and 9–12 labeled as
‘High school’. These changes are transformative for Nepal and Nepali teachers, students,
and parents with varied outcomes in teacher education, curricular development, textbook
writing, assessment, and teacher hiring processes. Yet, these changes are also marred and
challenged by the highly political nature of teacher education programs, teaching as a pro-
fession, and scarcity of teaching resources. One of the consequences of the overt nature of
politics in teaching and learning is visible when hiring, dismissing, and transferring teach-
ers from one public school to another based on which party is in power or the next change
in the education system. This has created a revolving door phenomenon in the teaching
profession in public schools.
In the paper, we feel that Ramsagar, the high school science teacher in this case study,
embodies some of the effects of the transferring from one school to another. In the con-
text of Southeastern  Nepal, Ramsagar belongs to one of the linguistic minority groups,
Maithali. Many Maithali ethnic groups have a close bond with the same ethnic group in
India. Maithali community members are traditionally farmers, but they are a highly edu-
cated group because of easier access to education in India. Therefore, they are seen in
schools across Nepal, mostly as teachers of mathematics and science. The education in
India and speaking Maithali at home has created stereotypes and prejudice against Maithali
speaking people. This kind of linguistic discrimination has been one of the Nepali commu-
nity’s challenges, specifically against those who speak Nepali with an accent like Ramsa-
gar. We wonder if Ramsagar’s struggles and frustrations in a multicultural classroom result
from constant uncertainty of his job placement as well as the idea of again acclimating to a
new sociocultural and linguistic environment. Koirala also points out that teachers experi-
ence dissonance between cultural relevance in pedagogy and school’s demand for content
mastery when instruction in the English language is more valued than Nepali and local
languages. As Koirala points out: “Accommodating these many languages and cultures is
a daunting task to any teacher but to a teacher from Maithali ethnic group it’s even more
challenging because of perceived lower value of other languages except Nepali and English
for better jobs and college education.” Thus, managing the public school system’s poli-
tics seems to drain his enthusiasm to focus on multicultural and culturally relevant science
teaching. For him, the easiest route to stay in one school depended on preparing students
to excel in mandated testing. Even though the author focused on test scores as the driving
force behind pedagogical decisions, the politics of test results is linked to him being trans-
ferred to another school that is less accommodating to his ethnic group or less resource-
ful to teaching science. Because the government holds all public school teachers’ tenure,
Ramsagar can be sent to any public school in Nepal without much input from the teacher
or the school. Therefore, Ramsagar continuously had to adapt to the new school culture
every so many year. This kind of uncertainty clearly shows exasperation and struggles for
Ramsagar. Koirala’s research clearly shows that teachers like Ramsagar are caught in the
politics of better results on national exams rather than teaching culturally relevant science
that benefits student learning.
What we see very promising in this study is the beginnings of research exploring the
value of culturally relevant pedagogy in a multicultural and multilinguistic country for stu-
dent success in science. Additionally, we also see promise when young scholars like Koi-
rala are taking charge of understanding and advocating for teacher education programs that
will prepare teachers for diverse students and ultimately personal and social transformation

13
 J. Tilsen et al.

through culturally inclusive science. This study’s value is in its exposition of how teachers
from non-dominant communities in Nepal need teacher education and professional devel-
opment programs that support students from multilingual and multicultural backgrounds.
However, we also recognize that multicultural and culturally relevant science focuses on
preparing and supporting teachers for a critical pedagogy that pushes against the margin-
alization of cultural diversity and cultural knowledge that originates from students’ experi-
ences and communities. Although Koirala’s attempts to point to the kernels of criticality
in science instruction, he neglects to emphasize critical components of culturally relevant
science teacher education. In the following sections, we will expand on those components.

Rethinking criticality in Nepali context

Koirala utilizes the frameworks of culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) (Ladson-Billings

1995) and multicultural education (Banks 2016) throughout his analysis. CRP focuses on
supporting students’ cultural competence, academic achievement, and sociopolitical aware-
ness, while multicultural education aims to create equitable learning environments for
diverse learners. Multicultural education and CRP originate from critical theories includ-
ing critical race theories (Delgado and Stefancic 2012) and feminism (hooks 1984), mak-
ing them fitting frameworks in understanding Ramsagar’s actions, decisions, and current
educational priorities in schools.
Koirala acknowledges the need for sociopolitical consciousness in science teaching
and learning, but he didn’t explore much in that area in Ramsagar’s class and his students.
Therefore, the analysis may have missed some of the more critical aspects of science
engagement in the class and science textbooks. For example, this paper could have further
explored the sociopolitical nature of multicultural and culturally relevant science education
where students from many indigenous communities such as the ‘majhis’ attend. Having
said this, Koirala later in the paper acknowledges the need for sociopolitical consciousness,
cultural inclusivity, linguistic diversity, and multicultural experiences in science textbooks,
standards, assessments, and teacher preparation programs to make science teaching and
learning truly multicultural and transformative experience.
In addition, we suggest that an often overlooked yet critical component of CRP is the
importance of building relationships with students. Instead of developing a whole new cur-
riculum that focuses on cultural and sociopolitical consciousness and academic success, a
proposed way to achieve the same goals is through building relationships with the students
in the teacher’s classroom. Part of the tension of having culturally relevant teaching in this
school in particular is displayed in the magnitude of teaching multiple ethnicities, cultures,
and languages in one classroom with 80 students while also simultaneously focusing on
passing tests. This is a daunting task even for a seasoned science teacher committed to
CRP and multiculturalism. This burden is clearly demonstrated in the text when Ramsagar
explains, “I don’t even know their names.” Such comments from Ramsagar puts a spotlight
on ‘Do Nepali teachers value relationships with students?’; the answer is definitely ‘Yes’.
A sociocultural norm in the Nepali culture is the teacher is more important than the con-
tents they teach. Teachers generally have a very revered place in the communities. There-
fore, Ramsagar not knowing his students’ names is very concerning for effective teaching.
This is not the intent of Ramsagar, but it is the reality when there are crowded classes,
cultural differences between the teacher and students, and teaching is more about content
rather than building a relationship with students. Thus, Koirala’s focus on the current status

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

of science teachers’ use of CRP and multicultural education and their classroom actions are
much needed areas of study in Nepal and in many Global South nations.
CRP and multicultural education rely heavily on the ideas of self-reflections and criti-
cal reflections, whereby teachers partake in the process and also encourage and support
students to do the same. What makes science teaching devoid of critical reflections and
cultural connections is the myth of objectivity and ahistoricity. Perhaps teachers like Ram-
sagar could promote and extend science learning to be more about critical refelctions of
social and cultural discriminations, enhancing the value of science for social conscious-
ness. Similarly, Ramsagar, who has incurred linguistic discrimination in science curric-
ulum and instruction, could share his own challenges and how he overcame them. This
would be in line with Koirala’s attempts to draw on this idea of criticality by indicating
that Ramsagar could be a role model science person, thus encouraging many students in his
class. We envision Ramsagar taking a more critical stance on what science teaching meant
to him, what science learning should mean to students, and how he views students’ knowl-
edge in content learning and transformational learning of the indigenous group Majhi.
In addition to reflecting on the science curriculum, it is important to allow for self-
reflection of the teacher, Ramsagar, and his personal and professional background. A pow-
erful addition to this research study would be to include interview questions that delve
deeper into the connection between Ramsagar’s decision for relocation, his experiences as
a marginalized teacher, and his teaching objectives and practices. Koirala states that Ram-
sagar’s choice to move to his current school was influenced “by his desire to raise his own
family in an urban community where there are greater opportunities for them”. Additional
opportunities for critical inquiry would help bridge the gap between Ramsagar’s personal
desire for greater social and economic mobility for his family and his hopes for his stu-
dents, especially those students with similar cultural backgrounds. How can he utilize his
cultural and professional experiences and philosophies in the classroom to connect with
more students? The balancing acts between family’s economic and educational opportuni-
ties and an altruistic science teacher profession are real issues that challenge many teachers
from the Global South.

Student voices: place in learning

Koirala utilized case study methodology, with the data base for analysis including observa-
tions of Ramsagar’s science classroom and an interview between Ramsagar and Koirala.
In the study, the teacher is framed as the center of the classroom—with the students listen-
ing to him and taking notes of what is said. The author describes teacher-focused limita-
tions of integrating culturally relevant teaching practices into science instruction, including
pressure from the school to teach to a mandated external test, 80 + students per class, lack
of physical space to engage in science activities, and valuing students as passive learners.
Many of these classroom behaviors are considered valuable for passing the high-stakes test
in which the school’s reputation hangs.
If this school is known for being a school that teaches students to perform well on tests,
do students specifically go to that school to do well on tests, which act as gatekeeper to
higher educational and economic mobility? Learning how to perform within the culture
of power (Delpit 1988) is also an important skill and part of a cultural practice, especially
in science fields. We believe that part of a teacher’s responsibility is to teach these skills
to their students but are very mindful of the contextual factors that mitigate this effort

13
 J. Tilsen et al.

(Gallard M. et al. 2018). By fulfilling this responsibility, teachers would add to experiences
that reinforce the tension between teaching to a test and teaching to students for social and
personal transformation.
To support the development of teaching and learning pedagogy that promotes social and
personal transformation at the school, future studies could include students’ voices to influ-
ence teacher preparation programs and develop culturally appropriate solutions to mitigate
the tensions between testing, national science standards, and culturally relevant teaching
practices. The voices of students can illuminate what is and what is not working differently
than the voice of the teacher. Student voices can also complexify the issues of culturally
relevant pedagogy, because students are invited to describe what they value in science edu-
cation, and if that differs from the values of their families, communities, or the schools.
This implies understanding the relationship between students and teachers.
However, the relationship between the teacher and the student is not the only connection
to where learning does or does not occur in a classroom. By studying relationships that stu-
dents have with science, with each other, and with their communities beyond the classroom
the tension of culturally relevant pedagogy and teaching to the skills and language on tests
could be explored. In Global South schools, students need more opportunities to bring their
voices into science learning and build stronger connections between differing science con-
tents and social and personal change (Upadhyay et al. 2010, 2021). The place for student
voices has to be more about social change and local issues and less about test results and
acceptance of prevalent dominant group’s norms.
For many students in Nepal, learning science is analogous to crossing a border into
another country (Aikenhead 1996). The language, tools, and skills are broadly specific in
science fields. Yet, they are not prioritized as being transferable to other disciplines. This
makes entering a science classroom to be as foreign for some as entering another country.
Multiple border crossings happen depending on the student’s language, and cultural sci-
ence practices that are positioned into the science’s culture of power. Instructional practices
that actively acknowledge this role and position students to take ownership in this are also
a facet of CRP. Science teachers can act as mediators to help students find an amicable
space in the culture of science that also values students’ culture. Yet, for many students,
particularly in the Global South, the subculture of science demands expanding individual
cultural, social, and linguistic borders to accommodate science culture without much suc-
cess. Because modern Western Science is set in White European culture, many students
and also their teachers struggle to locate boundaries in science classes that provide respect-
able situations for student voices. These voices not only bring cultural diversity but also
help connect science to students’ personal experiences.
What teaching and learning methods can be set in place that can be supportive of
the  school′s goals of being not only a high performing test taking school but also a  cul-
turally inclusive and equitable space for the multiple ethnicities and cultures that students
bring to the classrooms? Or are both of these goals at such odds with each other that a
teacher cannot accomplish both at the same time.

Building a multicultural consciousness in teacher preparation

The perennial challenge of any teacher preparation program is how to develop teachers
who are knowledgeable about local culture, languages, customs, values, and relationships.
These attributes are essential for a successful science teaching and learning environment

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

where multiple cultures, voices, and experiences are valued and embedded in content and
in pedagogy.
Drawing from Gallard et al.’s (2018) framework of contextual mitigating factors (CFM),
we felt it necessary to reflect on how Ramsagar envisioned and incorporated students’ cultural,
social, linguistic, and political nature of science teaching and learning as “limit-situations”
(p. 18) for him and also for students. What we see in the paper is that Ramsagar, as a sci-
ence teacher from Terai in the southern plains and the Maithali speaking area of Nepal, finds
himself at a loss to recognize fully his own place in the science textbook and pedagogy. This
extends to students’ cultural and linguistic limiting-situations to access science in a pedagogy
that is less accommodating to multicultural education. Koirala argues that this lack of multi-
cultural consciousness is not solely Ramsagar’s fault because it is missing from the teacher
preparation programs in Nepal. The paper further asserts that despite teachers’ lack of peda-
gogical tools to infuse and recognize the value of multicultural education in science teaching,
many Nepali teachers should “naturally” flock to this pedagogy. One of the reasons for Koirala
to advocate for multicultural education is that multicultural education could encourage sci-
ence teachers to accommodate and accept the culturally and linguistic diversities that exist
in Nepal more readily in science instruction. Furthermore, many Nepali communites are still
geographically isolated with unique cultural practices, langagues, and local knowledge. Thus,
multicultural education could help teachers better support and navigate cultural differences in
building productive science learning environment.
Koirala and the forum writers believe that in a country with more than 60 indigenous
and ethnic groups bound in a geographical space that is less than 145,000 square kilometers
(56,000 square miles), the importance of multicultural education should be obvious (Central
Bureau of Statistics 2014). These facts highlight the importance of using a CFM framework of
analysis to understand the need for recognizing various contexts of school and students for a
meaningful science teaching for equity and inclusivity.
Additionally, we also believe that multicultural science education needs to focus more on
transformative aspects of personal and social connections rather than just content and skills
mastery. However, in Ramsagar’s school the focus on content mastery supersedes personal
and social transformation through science teaching and learning. The ideas of transforma-
tional teaching and learning are essential in a multicultural society like Nepal. Sociocultural
and sociohistorical discrimination and marginalization have produced acute economic chal-
lenges, low literacy rates, a bonded-labor system in Tharu communities, and ‘chaupadi’ sys-
tem. The chaupadi system is a practice in Far-western part of Nepal where women and girls
have to leave the comfort of the home and stay for four days in isolation in a shanty cottage
during mensuration. Also, ignoring the plethora of languages used in Nepal textbooks and
classroom instructions are dominated by the Nepali language (Upadhyay et al. 2020).
We agree with Koirala’s assertion and desire for science teaching that is framed by the
ideas of sociopolitical consciousness. We add that sociocultural and sociopolitical conscious-
ness through science needs to be about transformational teaching for equity and social justice.
Our suggestion to all science teachers and teacher education programs in the Global South is
that multicultural science education needs to not only “[socialize] students around [science
practices and] values; its purpose [should be] to produce enlightened change agents (Frenk
et  al. 2010, p. 6).” We believe Koirala tries to locate this kind of transformational science
teaching in Ramsagar’s classroom. Even though, Koirala doesn’t find transformational peda-
gogy in Ramsagar’s teaching that he is able to highlight the direction Nepali teacher prepara-
tion and teacher professional development program need to take in a multiethnic and multilin-
guistic country.

13
 J. Tilsen et al.

Reflecting on the nature of teaching in Ramsagar’s class and the contexts of the Nepali
education system, we find CMFs and transformational teaching frameworks to be very useful
both at the theoretical level and as analytical guides. Both of these frameworks build on the
ideas that teaching is always framed by “sociocultural contextual mitigating factors” that are
less obvious in science contents. When teachers, curriculum, teacher education programs, and
pedagogies fail to account for the value of students’ experiences, content learning, and trans-
formational learning are less successful (Gallard M. et al. 2018; Upadhyay et al. 2020, 2021).
Thus, Koirala provides a window through which the readers, educators, and researchers view
the needs for science education that is rooted in multicultural education and CRP that engages
students and teachers for a science education that is socially and personally transformative.

Learning from a teacher: a single case study

The frameworks of multicultural education and CRP provided suitable theoretical lenses
that fit with Nepali cultural experiences. Even though these theories were conceived to
understand marginalized groups in educational settings setup by the dominant group in
Western contexts, Koirala found them fitting to understand a science teacher’s experiences
in a multicultural and multiethnic classroom in Nepal.
Methodologically, a single teacher case study provides the readers a window into the
nuances of a teacher’s decisions, actions, and challenges. It also provides a lens to under-
stand the relationships between a researcher and a teacher. In Nepal, science teacher
research that focuses on their professional and pedagogical growth is less prevalent. The
nature of research in science education in Nepal is still with a large ‘n’ and quantitative
designs and analyses. Therefore, sociocultural, historical, and political aspects of teach-
ing and learning are either missing or scantily covered in research. Yet, all along, science
educators, scholars, and researchers understand that teachers are key stakeholders in any
educational research. Teachers are even more important in science education research for
the purposes of achieving equity and social justice. Kieran et al. (2012) assert that teachers
have stakes in educational research in three “important dimensions’’: “reflective, inquiry-
based activity with respect to teaching action; action-research [that explores their praxis];
and the dynamic [relationships between] research and professional development” (p. 361).
While reading this paper, we specifically noticed Ramsagar’s ‘reflective’ voices but less on
the ‘relationship between research and professional education’. Koirala clearly sets out to
focus on a science teacher who speaks an ethnic language such as Maithali and works in
a school that values the dominant languages Nepali and English. He chooses a case study
methodology not only for convenience sampling purposes but also a methodology that
would help better understand the intersections between science, culture, and language.
In this study, both the researcher and the participant teacher are advocates of multi-
cultural and culturally relevant science education. Koirala’s sociocultural positionality as
a member of dominant group and a university faculty puts him in a privileged position,
whereas the teacher from an ethnic minority group positions him in a less privileged state.
This variance in sociocultural positions could have created some degree of reluctance in
Ramsagar to share his ‘true’ feelings about the kinds of discrimination he experiences
because of his ‘Maithali accent’ while teaching and socially interacting in Nepali and Eng-
lish. Analytical nuances from multicultural education and CRP would have added a greater
complexity in understanding this dynamic in a school dominated by teachers from domi-
nant groups.

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

The case successfully presents the turmoil and lack of preparation on the part of Ramsa-
gar to be able to recognize and implement cultural relevance in science instruction. Koirala
and Ramsagar both reflect on the inadequacies of teacher preparation programs in educat-
ing teachers for CRP and multicultural education in everyday Nepalese classrooms. How-
ever, a more in-depth description and sociopolitical analysis of the kinds of discrimination
Ramsagar himself endured because of his geographical affiliation (Terai) and the linguistic
proficiency in his mother tongue, Maithali, would have provided a more emic view of how
he was positioned by the sociocultural context to include the discrimination that people in
Nepal experience because of where their ancestors are from. Our impression is that being
from the Terai is more detrimental than being from a non-dominant group. For example,
many in public offices consider individuals from the Terai less proficient in Nepali or ‘tak-
ing the jobs away’ from more deserving Nepali or ‘culturally conservative’. We think all of
these labels could have worked against Ramsagar both as a teacher and as an influencer on
culturally relevant science. In future research, Koirala and others could further investigate
the discrimination of marginalized teachers in order to understand the supports that profes-
sional development or administration can provide.
How can this study influence professional development and policies in Nepali contexts
to increase and support marginalized teachers? In addition, how does Ramsagar’s experi-
ence relate to other underrepresented teachers in the area? Are there opportunities for com-
munities of practice and affinity groups that allow for critical conversations surrounding
representation and multicultural education? These questions are outside of the scope of
Koirala’s research study; however, they are possible avenues for future research to increase
understanding of Nepali educational system.

Reflecting on the researcher: context of global south

We conclude by reflecting on why science education researchers in the Global South need
greater space in international journals. Science education research in Nepali contexts is a
recent phenomenon. The barriers to research and publications are still immense for young
scholars in Nepal and other Global South countries. Some of the most common barriers
are a lack of access to international journals, limited proficiency in the written English
language, narrow understanding of research methodologies, low acceptance of qualitative
methods—specifically single participant case studies, lack of mentoring and support, lim-
ited resources to conduct research work, and poor promotion and tenure incentives in aca-
demic institutions. Therefore, most opportunities for young scholars in many Global South
countries to publish and participate in international journals are through Western scholars
as co-authors. In many of these co-authored research efforts with Western scholars, Nepali
voices are silenced, and Nepali cultures are explained as ‘primitive’, less valued, exoticized
and/or appropriated to push a Western view of ‘best teaching practices and what contents
are to be mastered’. We are very encouraged to read and learn from a Nepali scholar’s per-
spectives about teacher pedagogies for cultural relevancy and multiculturalism in science.
Scholars of the Global South experience epistemic and ontological gaps between how
Western science and social theories tend to understand their cultures and learning. This gap
shows up in the Global South cultures in an unflattering manner when Western researchers
engaged in understanding ‘foreign’ cultures through Western theoretical lenses. Koirala’s
work gives a much-balanced analysis and understanding of a science teacher in Nepal.

13
 J. Tilsen et al.

He not only brings nuances of politics, educational systems, and Nepali cultural systems
but also draws on theories that match with Nepali experiences and values. He balances
between the need to recognize Ramsagar’s personal experiences because of his ethnicity
and Ramsagr’s struggle to recognize students’ cultural difficulties in science. What is so
refreshing about this paper is that Koirala both challenges the science teaching practices in
Nepal and juxtaposes these challenges with the need for students to pass the test in a class-
room environment that has more than a dozen culturally and linguistically different stu-
dents. This line of research has the potential for furthering the visibility of Nepali science
instruction, with the goal of addressing academic success and valuing cultural differences
within the classroom.

References
Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Sci-
ence Education, 27(1), 1–52. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​03057​26960​85600​77.
Banks, J. (2016). Multicultural education: Characteristics and goals. In J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.), Multi-
cultural education: Issues and perspectives. (9th ed., pp. 2–21). New York: Wiley.
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2014). Population of Nepal (vol. II): Social Demography. Retrieved on
November 8, 2020 from https://​cbs.​gov.​np/​wp-​conte​nt/​upLoa​ds/​2018/​12/​Popul​ation-​Monog​raph-​V02.​
pdf.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction. (2nd ed.). New York: New York
University Press.
Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard
Educational Review, 58(3), 280–299. https://​doi.​org/​10.​17763/​haer.​58.3.​c4348​1778r​528qw4.
Frenk, J., Chen, L., Bhutta, Z. A., Cohen, J., Crisp, N., Evans, T., & Kistnasamy, B. (2010). Health profes-
sionals for a new century: Transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent
world. The Lancet, 376(9756), 1923–1958.
Gallard, M. A. J., Pitts, W. B., Brkich, K., & Ramos de Robles, S. L. (2018). How does one recognize
contextual mitigating factors (CMFs) as a basis to understand and arrive at better approaches to
research designs? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15, 545–567. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11422-​018-​9872-2.
hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From the margins to the center. Boston: South End Press.
Kieran, C., Krainer, K., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (2012). Linking research to practice: Teachers as key stake-
holders in mathematics education research. In M. Clements, A. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F.
Leung (Eds.), Third international handbook of mathematics education. (Vol. 27, pp. 361–392). New
York: Springer. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-1-​4614-​4684-2_​12.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational
Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3102/​00028​31203​20034​65.
Upadhyay, B., Regmi, J., & Sharma, U. (2010). Seeking for empowerment and social justice through science
education in Nepal. In Y.-J. Lee (Ed.), The world of science education: Handbook of research in Asia.
(pp. 393–414). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Upadhyay, B., Atwood, E., & Tharu, B. (2020). Actions for sociopolitical consciousness in a high school
science class: A case study of ninth grade class with predominantly indigenous students. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 57(7), 1119–1147. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​tea.​21626.
Upadhyay, B., Atwood, E., & Tharu, B. (2021). Antiracist pedagogy in a high school science class: A case
of high school science teacher in an Indigenous high school. Journal of Science Teacher Education.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10465​60X.​2020.​18698​86.

Publisher’s Note  Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

13
Exploring nature of criticality in high school science teaching:…

Jenny Tilsen  is a doctoral student in the STEM Education Program at the University of Minnesota. Her
research interests explore socio political consciousness in science education, People’s Science Movements,
and identity and relationship formation within science education and society. Prior to her doctoral studies,
she received her Master’s in Education from Harvard Graduate School of Education. She previously worked
as a researcher at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in the Science Education Department.
She also has four years of experience teaching high school science in high schools in Minneapolis, MN,
Brooklyn, NY, and Boston, MA.

Jessica Forrester  is a doctoral candidate in the STEM Education Program at the University of Minnesota
(UMN). Her research interests include communities of critical practice, mentoring, and culturally respon-
sive practices in mathematics education. Before starting her studies at UMN, she received her Bachelors of
Science and Masters of Science in Biomedical Engineering and then transitioned to middle school teaching
in Washington D.C. Currently, she is combining her passion for mathematics with her interests in commu-
nity-engaged learning to meet the contextual needs of urban youth in North Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Bhaskar Upadhyay  Ph.D., is an associate professor of STEM and Science Education Programs at the Uni-
versity of Minnesota. His work explores cultural relevance, social justice, equity, social transformation, and
sociopolitical consciousness in STEM education in urban and Indigenous schools in the US and Nepal. He
is collaborating with Indigenous communities to document and understand issues on STEM participation,
indigenous science knowledge, and crossnational STEM education leadership. He is currently an Executive
Board Member of National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST), the Chair of Indigenous
Science Knowledge Research Interest Group (ISK RIG), NARST, and the NARST Board liaison for the
Equity and Ethics Committee.

Authors and Affiliations

Jenny Tilsen1 · Jessica Forrester1 · Bhaskar Upadhyay1 

* Bhaskar Upadhyay
bhaskar@umn.edu
1
Curriculum and Instruction, University of Minnesota, 125 Peik Hall, Twin Cities, Minneapolis,
MN, USA

13