|
|
and dislocation have become the leitmotifs of the global age” (p. 166). Finally, a recognition of the fact that the high resource consumption as a result of the “global technoscientific progress paradigm” (Carter, 2008, p. 166) begs for conversations about a sustainable future and thus sustainability issues. In addition, engaging future citizens in these conversations would be crucial as well. As Hodson (2003) argued:
These conversations are beginning to gain prominence in science education and emerging conversations in science education include traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and sociocultural frameworks that are outside of science education (for example, hybridity discourse that builds on students', teachers', and researchers' existing cultural capital and funds of knowledge). These ideas focus on science for sustainability or ecological sustainable focus in science education (Barton, Koch, Contento, & Hagiwara, 2005; Paige, Lloyd, & Chartres, 2008). Sustainability science is not yet a recognized field or discipline, and “it has developed from a variety of the fields including environmental science, science and technology for sustainability, Third World development studies, economics, social and political sciences, globalization, cultural studies, and anthropology” (Carter, 2005, p. 168). Sustainability science is a transdisciplinary approach that “recognizes the limitations of traditional science and other disciplines in investigating the complexities of socioecological assemblages” (Carter, 2005, p. 169).
Kimmerer (2002) posited, “traditional ecological knowledge refers to the knowledge, practice, and belief concerning the relationship of living beings to one another and to the physical environment, which is held by