RESILIENT WOMEN, METISTIC SCIENTISTS: A MULTIPLE CASE STUDY OF HOW WOMEN NEGOTIATE THEIR SITUATEDNESS IN SCIENCE FIELDS

The concept of feminist metistic resilience postulates that the voiceless, the marginalized and the minority in societies employ strategies in order to turn tables in their favor. This study presents a qualitative analysis of how women, considered to be the minority, negotiate their situatedness in science fields in order to effect change in their lives or that of the society and why they become successful. By “situatedness,” I refer to the everyday life of women as they live and encounter people, society and culture, especially, the life of women who have transcended the culturally stipulated role of women and are excelling in a male dominated field. The study, in different dimensions, conceptualizes the reason for the fewer number of women in science; looks at how scientific methods and practices inhibit the development of women in science; and, finally, interrogates the question of objectivity in science. It becomes apparent, through feminist metistic resilience, that women become successful when they accept conventional practices in scientific arrangements and structures. They accept the practices by embracing and not questioning structures and arrangements that have shaped the field of science and by shifting shapes and assuming different forms in order to adapt to conditions they encounter. Apart from adapting and shape shifting, the women also become successful through environmental and social influences. My analysis suggests that more women can be encouraged to pursue science when women practicing science begin to question structures and arrangements that have shaped the practice of science over the centuries. The overall findings of the research provide implications for policy makers, educators and feminist researchers.

Comparison of the effects of inquiry-based cooperative learning and demonstrations in science education

The reported research project involved studying how teaching science using demonstrations, inquiry-based cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two methods affected sixth grade students’ understanding of air pressure and density. Three different groups of students were each taught the two units using different teaching methods. Group one learned about the topics through both demonstrations and inquirybased cooperative learning, whereas group two only viewed demonstrations, and group three only participated in inquiry-based learning in cooperative learning groups. The study was designed to answer the following two questions: 1. Which teaching strategy works best for supporting student understanding of air pressure and density: demonstrations, inquirybased labs in cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two? 2. And what effect does the time spent engaging in a particular learning experience (demonstrations or labs) have on student learning? Overall, the data did not provide sufficient evidence that one method of learning was more effective than the others. The results also suggested that spending more time on a unit does not necessarily equate to a better understanding of the concepts by the students. Implications for science instruction are discussed.