Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

152811-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Efforts to privilege STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) disciplines, initiatives, and industries in American discourse are arguably the foremost expressions of scientific authority in contemporary educational policy. Citing a diverse body of STEM literature, I discuss the histories and rationales that sustain the promotion of STEM. In doing so,

Efforts to privilege STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) disciplines, initiatives, and industries in American discourse are arguably the foremost expressions of scientific authority in contemporary educational policy. Citing a diverse body of STEM literature, I discuss the histories and rationales that sustain the promotion of STEM. In doing so, I appropriate two concepts -Michel Foucault's Regime of Truth and Hayden White's Emplotment- for the purpose of analyzing the complex interests embodied by STEM discourse. I argue that the Sputnik Narrative is the prevailing story in STEM advocacy discourse. I claim that STEM advocates typically emplot this history as a Romance. Furthermore, I classify two major bases of appeal (rationales) that appear within this literature to justify STEM projects and proposals, "competition" and "equity." Throughout my writing, I cite discursive strategies for challenging and reimagining STEM history. My goal in indicating these sites of narrative possibilities is broaden the discursive field to new, perhaps liberating possibilities.
ContributorsGeldis, Christopher (Author) / Harris, Lauren M (Thesis advisor) / Lyon, Edward (Committee member) / Greenes, Carole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
150170-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The need for a critical education in a democracy, its difficulties, and how to reform this field requires urgent attention. This project begins with the premise that education is necessary for a vibrant democracy. While examining differing voices that advocate for educational reform, mainly that of Critical Pedagogy, it is

The need for a critical education in a democracy, its difficulties, and how to reform this field requires urgent attention. This project begins with the premise that education is necessary for a vibrant democracy. While examining differing voices that advocate for educational reform, mainly that of Critical Pedagogy, it is shown how conflicting forms are advocating similar ideals. Henry Giroux and David Horowitz, both reformers that are on opposite sides of the political spectrum appear to have similar goals. Yet, the question becomes how to solve these differences between these parties? By examining the philosophical origins of these projects and explicating differences rooted in human nature and the good, the basic differences can begin to be shown. In showing these differences it requires going back to the work of Kant. Kant shows the necessity of beginning with philosophy and examining basic assumptions in order to begin to critique and build an education that would guarantee equality.
ContributorsNolen, Matthew (Author) / Wise, Greg (Thesis advisor) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Ramsey, Ramsey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
152910-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The landscape of science education is changing. Scientific research and the academy are both becoming increasingly complex, competitive, interdisciplinary, and international. Many federal research agencies, scientific professional societies, and science educators seem to agree on the importance of strong ethics education to help young scientists navigate this increasingly craggy terrain.

The landscape of science education is changing. Scientific research and the academy are both becoming increasingly complex, competitive, interdisciplinary, and international. Many federal research agencies, scientific professional societies, and science educators seem to agree on the importance of strong ethics education to help young scientists navigate this increasingly craggy terrain. But, what actually should be done? When it comes to teaching ethics to future scientists, is the apparent current emphasis on basic responsible conduct of research (RCR) sufficient, or should moral theory also be taught in science ethics education? In this thesis I try engage this question by focusing on an existing, related debate on whether moral theory should be part of teaching professional ethics more generally. After delving into the respective approaches promoted by the three primary participants in this debate (C. E. Harris, Bernard Gert, and Michael Davis) I unpack their views in order to ascertain their practical application potential and relative benefits. I then take these findings and apply them to ethics education in science, paying particular attention to its purported learning objectives. In the end I conclude that the presentation of these objectives suggests that moral theory may well be required in order for these objectives of ethics education in science to be fully achieved.
ContributorsMilleson, Valerye Michelle (Author) / Robert, Jason (Thesis advisor) / Herkert, Joseph (Committee member) / Ellison, Karin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014