Text
E-book Unsettling Responsibility in Science Education
As critical science studies scholar Karen Barad (2010) reminds us, “thepresent is not simplyhere-now” (p. 244, emphasis mine). Rather, it isalso a dis/continuous enfolding of heterogenousthere-thens.1This isto say that the central process of this book—accounting for and beingaccountable to the uneven and unequal relation between Indigenousmetaphysics and classical Western metaphysics by way of quantum meta-physics, and the ethical, epistemological, and ontological implications forscience education—has and will have already begunelsewhereandelsewhen(both past and futures to-come).Such is significant in science education where often, or perhapstoooften, the work is framed in way that askswhere do we begin to engagethe question of including Indigenous knowledges or perspectives in scienceeducation? While there is usually an intent of being in relation in a goodway, the language and the practices they signal are fraught. There is often a forgetting (be it one that is individual or systemic) that scienceeducation isalways alreadyin relation to Indigenous ways-of-knowing-in-being.2As Ng ?ati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa and Ng ?ai Tahu scholar andscience educator Liz McKinley (2001) states, this has much to do withthe ways in which dominance operates in science education: its responseto difference is often a form of “masking power with innocence” (seealso Kuokkanen,2007). Primarily, McKinley (2001) suggests that a lackof knowledge (or a positional stance of “not knowing”) often serves to(re)produce the norms of power; in turn, “we need to challenge themask of innocence and ask ourselves how relations of domination andsubordination regulate encounters in classrooms” (p. 76). This is notonly significant because science education has a responsibility towardsIndigenous ways-of-knowing-in-being that goes beyond a responsibilityforthe Other, but it is also a responsibility as well as an indebtednesstothe Other.3If responsibility is an “an incarnate relation that precedesthe intentionality of consciousness” (Barad,2010, p. 265) the questionis no longer whether or not we are responsible but rather if we are ableto respond. Importantly, “we no longer have any excuse, only alibis forturning away from this responsibility” . Then again, the question of already having begun is substantially rele-vant. Both quantum and Indigenous metaphysics “caus[e] trouble forthe very notion of ‘from the beginning’” (Barad,2010, p. 245; seealso Cajete,2000; Kawagley,2006). They areun-settling. Nonetheless,because the ability to respond is always situated, this inquiry must beginsome-where and some-time (as well as given over to someone; see Butler,2005), even though these spacetime coordinates (what are conventionallyreferred to as history and geography, as separate and separable; see Barad,Barad2010) cannot be torn asunder from their co-constitutive otherness(see also Cajete,2000; Kawagley,2006;Kirby,2011; Kuokkanen,2007).This book’s intended purpose is to take seriously this simultaneouslyco-constitutive and othering relation between Western modern scienceand Indigenous ways-of-knowing-in-being; dialogically engaging withthe field of science education4to so that it might practice “an itera-tive (re)opening up to, an enabling of responsiveness” (Barad,2010,p. 265) to the possibility of Indigenous metaphysics (to-come). Yet,before “beginning” if one could make such a proposition, the purposeof this introductory chapter is to put forward the relationships betweenmetaphysics, decolonizing, and post-colonial approaches to science educa-tion, and deconstruction that are central to the work to-come within this book.
Tidak tersedia versi lain