Mark Wolfmeyer

Anarchist Epistemologies and the Separation of Science and State: The Critique and Relevance of Paul Feyerabend to Educational Foundations.

This article synthesizes Paul Feyerabends controversial contributions to 20th-century philosophy of science through the synthesis of his works and the secondary literature, with specific foci on current trends in educational foundations and the potentials and pitfalls for applying Feyerabendian logics to our work. First, I situate his strains of thought within 20th-century philosophy of science contributions from Popper, Lakatos, and Kuhn. Drawing on this explication, the second section pushes against the primary misconception/controversy regarding Feyerabend as a science-hater. In reality, his contributions promote a pluralistic methodology, termed by Feyerabend (1975) as “anarchist epistemologies,” whereby (a) knowledge seekers draw from scientific methodologies and other traditions to develop competing theories and (b) they adjudicate the best methods to move forward as they seek knowledge and/or solve problems. In the third section, I tease out Feyerabends complicated relationship to anarchism, where, on the one hand, he himself denounced political anarchism and, on the other, Feyerabend committed to anarchism by using its theory to discuss knowledge production and the role of science in society. Finally, a concluding discussion makes more explicit the specific relevance of these arguments to trends in educational foundations.

Inserting Critical Mathematics into STEM Education

The chapter begins by asking whether STEM education is a friend or foe to the field of critical mathematics education (CME) by reviewing how mainstream STEM conflicts with CME but also provides spaces for critical work. Tensions between CME and STEM include mainstream STEM’s emphasis on human capital, inattention to environmental degradation, and soft-critical orientation to social justice issues. However, STEM’s emphases on interdisciplinarity can provide opportunities for critical mathematics education to take place. We argue that STEM education as policy can be an opportunistic space to simultaneously resist and reconstitute in line with the values and goals of CME. We extend CME’s goals with deeper theoretical consideration to the nature of the ecological and social crises, in so doing we draw on ecofeminism and EcoJustice Education. The chapter concludes with a model “critical STEM” unit plan sketch that is appropriate for the Junior Secondary level. CME, ecofeminist theory, and internationally benchmarked content standards provide the foundation for our STEM unit plan titled “A Story of Incarceration.” By this example, we intend to show that critical STEM projects can be transformative for learners as well meet the content goals of standard STEM education.

Ecocritical Urban Education

For those of us with critical worldviews, our attention is consistently called to the gross injustices witnessed across racial, class, and gender divides as well as the poor health of all life on this planet. However, conversations regarding social injustice seem to happen over here and discussions about environmental crises over there, with little connection between the two.

Introduction to STEM Education

We provide a brief review of STEM’s history, particularly as it relates to the philosophical mode of inquiry used in the book. The introductions here include discussions of STEM as a whole as well as some examples from among STEM subfields, such as mathematics and science education. Notably absent in this review is the use of philosophical methods, thus justifying our present inquiry. In the final section, we motivate our philosophical inquiry with a review of the little scholarship attending to it, mostly the philosophies of mathematics and science that are just beginning to be applied to education research.

Critical Opportunities in STEM Education

This chapter is organized along the philosophical domains of ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Here, we consider the potential of STEM education in future educational theory and practice. We begin by exploring the possible contributions of critical theory in STEM education by attending to recent advancements in critical philosophies of mathematics, science, and technology; next with epistemology, we examine more deeply the transformative pedagogy of STEM education; and finally with axiology, we describe the values of STEM education that addresses the social and ecological crises.

Critical Inquiry into STEM Education

In this chapter, we offer a detailed, rigorous inquiry into STEM education policy that uses philosophical methods resting primarily on the philosophical categories: axiology ontology, and epistemology. In a deep exploration of the what, why, and how of STEM, we employ a unique approach rooted in the work of philosopher Alain Badiou. To begin, we review his writings on mathematics and set theory in particular, as this will launch our exploration. After which, we detail our approach in selecting and analyzing STEM policy documents. The inquiry and analysis reveal the revolutionary potential in STEM education, something that might not be intended by policy but exists nonetheless.

STEM’s What, Why, and How? Ontology, Axiology, and Epistemology

In this chapter we use the philosophical concepts of ontology, axiology, and epistemology to understand STEM more completely. We first provide a brief orientation to the history of how these terms have been used in philosophical discourse; then we delve into an overview of these three categories with respect to each subarea of STEM, starting with mathematics and science. In each case we explain how they have historically been implemented in education, and philosophically how they have been utilized to critique and/or aid inquiry into each subcontent area. In conclusion, we refine the picture by addressing the axiology, epistemology, and ontology of STEM as a singular unit.