Concept maps as a tool to analyze the ideas of teacher training students regarding what to teach on human nutrition in Primary Education

Concept maps are a technique used to obtain a visual representation of a person's ideas about a concept or a set of related concepts. Specifically, in this paper, through a qualitative methodology, we analyze the concept maps proposed by 52 groups of teacher training students in order to find out the characteristics of the maps and the degree of adequacy of the contents with regard to the teaching of human nutrition in the 3rd cycle of primary education. The participants were enrolled in the Teacher Training Degree majoring in Primary Education, and the data collection was carried out through a training activity under the theme of what to teach about Science in Primary School? The results show that the maps are a useful tool for working in teacher education as they allow organizing, synthesizing, and communicating what students know. Moreover, through this work, it has been possible to see that future teachers have acceptable skills for representing the concepts/ideas in a concept map, although the level of adequacy of concepts/ideas about human nutrition and its relations is usually medium or low. These results are a wake-up call for teacher training, both initial and ongoing, because they shows the inability to change priorities as far as the selection of content is concerned.

Of Marx and Makers: an Historical Perspective on Generative Justice

In Marxist frameworks “distributive justice” depends on extracting value through a centralized state. Many new social movements—peer to peer economy, maker activism, community agriculture, queer ecology, etc.—take the opposite approach, keeping value in its unalienated form and allowing it to freely circulate from the bottom up. Unlike Marxism, there is no general theory for bottom-up, unalienated value circulation. This paper examines the concept of “generative justice” through an historical contrast between Marx’s writings and the indigenous cultures that he drew upon. Marx erroneously concluded that while indigenous cultures had unalienated forms of production, only centralized value extraction could allow the productivity needed for a high quality of life. To the contrary, indigenous cultures now provide a robust model for the “gift economy” that underpins open source technological production, agroecology, and restorative approaches to civil rights. Expanding Marx’s concept of unalienated labor value to include unalienated ecological (nonhuman) value, as well as the domain of freedom in speech, sexual orientation, spirituality and other forms of “expressive” value, we arrive at an historically informed perspective for generative justice.