Transforming saltbush : science, mobility and metaphor in the remaking of intercolonial worlds

The movement of exotic biota into native ecosystems are central to debates about the acclimatisation of plants in the settler colonies of the nineteenth century. For example, plants like lucerne from Europe and sudan grass from South Africa were transferred to Australia to support pastoral economies. The saltbush Atriplex spp. is an anomaly-it too, eventually, became the subject of acclimatisation within its native Australia because it was also deemed useful to the pastoralists of arid and semi-arid New South Wales. When settlers first came to this part of Australia, however, initial perceptions were that the plants were useless. We trace this transformation from the desert 'desperation' plant during early settlement to the 'precious' conservation species, from the 1880s, when there were changes in both management strategies and cultural responses to saltbush in Australia. This reconsideration can be seen in scientific assessments and experiments, in the way that it was commoditised by seeds and nursery traders, and in its use as a metaphor in bush poetry to connote a gendered nationalist figure in Saltbush Bill. We argue that while initial settlers were often so optimistic about European management techniques, they had nothing but contempt for indigenous plants. The later impulses to the conservation of natives arose from experiences of bitter failure and despair over attempts to impose European methods, which in turn forced this re-evaluation of Australian species.

Reason is too large : analogy and precedent in law

Hunter argues that cognitive science models of human thinking explain how analogical reasoning and precedential reasoning operate in law. He offers an explanation of why various legal theories are so limited and calls for greater attention to what is actually happening when lawyers and judges reason, by analogy, with precedent.

The link between policy and practice in science education : the role of research

Policy has been a much neglected area for research in science education. In their neglect of policy studies, researchers have maintained an ongoing naivete about the politics of science education. In doing so, they often overestimate the implications of their research findings about practice and ignore the interplay between the stakeholders beyond and in-school who determine the nature of the curriculum for science education and its enacted character. Policies for education (and science education in particular) always involve authority and values, both of which raise sets of fascinating questions for research. The location of authority for science education differs across educational systems in ways that affect the role teachers are expected to play. Policies very often value some groups in society over others, as the long history of attempts to provide science for all students testifies. As research on teaching/learning science identifies pedagogies that have widespread effectiveness, the policy issue of mandating these becomes important. Illustrations of successful policy to practice suggest that establishing conditions that will facilitate the intended implementation is critically important. The responsibility of researchers for critiquing and establishing policy for improving the practice of science education is discussed, together with the role research associations could play if they are to claim their place as key stakeholders in science education.

Leading the transformation of learning and praxis in science classrooms

Individual science teachers who have inspired colleagues to transform their classroom praxis have been labelled transformational leaders. As the notion of distributed leadership became more accepted in the educational literature, the focus on the individual teacher-leader shifted to the study of leadership praxis both by individuals (whoever they might be) and by collectives within schools and science classrooms. This review traces the trajectory of leadership research, in the context of learning and teaching science, from an individual focus to a dialectical relationship between individual and collective praxis. The implications of applying an individual-collective perspective to praxis for teachers, students and their designated leaders are discussed.

Risk, uncertainty and complexity in science education

Increasingly societies and their governments are facing important social issues that have science and technology as key features. A number of these socio-scientific issues have two features that distinguish them from the restricted contexts in which school science has traditionally been presented. Some of their science is uncertain and scientific knowledge is not the only knowledge involved. As a result, the concepts of uncertainty, risk and complexity become essential aspects of the science underlying these issues. In this chapter we discuss the nature and role of these concepts in the public understanding of science and consider their links with school science. We argue that these same concepts and their role in contemporary scientific knowledge need to be addressed in school science curricula. The new features for content, pedagogy and assessment of this urgent challenge for science educators are outlined. These will be essential if the goal of science education for citizenship is to be achieved with our students, who will increasingly be required to make personal and collective decisions on issues involving science and technology.

When all you have is a hammer ...: RCTs and hegemony in science

People diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) deserve the same respect as any other person and should be free to benefit from scientific research that can help them achieve skills which enable them to reach their full potential. Over the past 40 years Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) has utilised inductive, natural science methods to investigate techniques for the analysis and augmentation of socially significant behaviours. Unfortunately, many individuals with ASD in the UK cannot avail of these techniques because of an obdurate reliance on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as the single most respectable measure of effectiveness of interventions. In this paper we focus on how the debate about RCTs is played out in the ‘autism wars’.