The report “International Commission on the Futures of Education. 2020. Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. Paris, UNESCO” is used to explore whether scientific literacy is an equity or equality issues because of gender, race and ethnicity, class structure due to family income, schooling, and economic status. The aim of this study is to understand how scientific literacy continues to be an educational issue and can be challenged by three-dimensional model of social justice of Nancy Fraser. According to this secondary research, a trans and interdisciplinary curriculum can help to challenge systemic injustice and redistributing educational resources to economically disadvantaged school may challenge the issues of maldistribution of school facilities. It is mentioned here that gaps of being scientifically literate among individuals can be mitigated by recognizing individuals’ needs according to gender, race. Representation of the contributing individuals especially from the disenfranchised is necessary to address the issues of inequity for establishing the right to become a scientifically literate person. This study may help the teachers to understand their role in the teaching-learning process as leaders and professionals, the students to be the contributors to society and the policymakers to reshape their policies.
KeywordsScientific LiteracyEquity or EqualityThree-Dimensional Model of Social Justice of Nancy Fraser International Commission on the Futures of Education. 2020. Education in a Post-COVID World: Nine Ideas for Public Action. ParisUNESCO
Aikenhead, G., & Orpwood, G. (2010). Scientific Literacy for a Knowledge Society. In C. Linder, L. Ostman, D. A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Erickson, & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the Landscape of Scientific Literacy (pp. 28-44). Routledge.
Ajayi, V. O. (2018). Scientific Literacy (pp. 1-11). Benue State University.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). Science for All Americans . Author.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Project 2061 . Author.
Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in Qualitative Research Revisited. Qualitative R e search, 6, 319-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106065006
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education . Routledge.
Comprehensive Review of the Master Plan for ICT in Education (2012-2021) (2019). Ministry of Education.
Cook, D. A., & West, C. P. (2012). Conducting Systematic Reviews in Medical Education: A Stepwise Approach. Medical Education, 46, 943-952. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04328.x
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches . Sage Publications.
de Oliveira, A. S., Simon, V. L. B., & Simon, A. (2018). Childhood and Scientific Literacy: Contributions of History and Epistemology. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 216-225. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2018.68017
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction . New York University Press.
Duke, N. K., Halvorsen, A., Strachan, S. L., Kim, J., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2021). Putting PjBL to the Test: The Impact of Project-Based Learning on Second Graders’ Social Studies and Literacy Learning and Motivation in Low-SES School Settings. American Educational Research Journal, 58, 160-200. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220929638
Fitzgerald, M. S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2019). Teaching Practices That Support Student Sensemaking across Grades and Disciplines: A Conceptual Review. Review of Research in Education, 43, 227-248. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821115
Fraser, N. (2005). Reframing Global Justice. New Left Review, 36, 69.
Gibbons, S., & McNally, S. (2013). The Effects of Resources across School Phases: A Summary of Recent Evidence . CEP Discussion Papers (CEPDP1226), Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science.
Godrum, D. (2004). Teaching Strategies for Science Classrooms. In G. Venville, & V. Dawson (Eds.), The Art of Teaching Science (pp. 54-72). Allen & Unwin.
Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005). Effectiveness and Efficiency of Search Methods in Systematic Reviews of Complex Evidence: Audit of Primary Sources. BMJ, 331, 1064-1065. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
Hakim, C. (1982). Secondary Analysis and the Relationship between Official and Academic Social Research. Sociology , 16, 12-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038582016001005
Haig, A., & Dozier, M. (2003). BEME Guide No. 3: Systematic Searching for Evidence in Medical Education—Part 2: Constructing Searches. Medical Teacher, 25, 463-484. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590310001608667
Hanushek, E. A. (1996). Measuring Investment in Education. Journal of Economic Per s pectives, 10, 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.10.4.9
Harden, M., Grant, J., & Graham Buck, R. (1999). BEME Guide No. 1: Best Evidence Medical Education. Medical Teacher, 21, 553-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421599978960
Hoq, T., Toma, M. J., & Rahman, S. H. (2019). COVID-19 Related News in Media: COVID-19 Related News in Media: Analysing the Response of Mass People Using Scientific Literacy Framework in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Education Journal, 18 , 53-64.
Howell, K. E. (2013). Empiricism, Positivism and Post-Positivism. In K. E. Howell (Ed.), An Introduction to the Philosophy of Methodology . SAGE Publications.
Jordansson, B., & Peterson, H. (2019). Jämställdhetsintegrering vid svenska universitet och högskolor. Det politiska uppdraget återspeglat i lärosätenas planer. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, No. 1-2 , 58-70. https://doi.org/10.7146/kkf.v28i1-2.116117
Kuhn, T. S. (2015). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . University of Chicago Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the Achievement Gap to the Education Debt: Understanding Achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35, 3-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x035007003
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2006). Naturalistic Inquiry . Sage Publications.
Liu, X. (2009). Beyond Science Literacy: Science and the Public. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4, 301-311.
Liu, X. (2013). Expanding Notions of Scientific Literacy: A Reconceptualization of Aims of Science Education in the Knowledge Society. In N. Mansour, & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science Education for Diversity (pp. 23-39). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4563-6_2
Logan, T. (2020). A Practical, Iterative Framework for Secondary Data Analysis in Educational Research. The Australian Educational Researcher , 47, 129-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00329-z
Ma, J. J., & Ma, Y. X. (2022). The Discussions of Positivism and Interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4, 10-14. https://doi.org/10.36348/gajhss.2022.v04i01.002
Mansour, N., & Wegerif, R. (2013). Science Education for Diversity : Theory and Practice . Springer.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R. et al. (2004). Inquiry-Based Science in the Middle Grades: Assessment of Learning in Urban Systemic Reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1063-1080. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20039
McManus, R. J., Wilson, S., Delaney, B. C., Fitzmaurice, D. A., Hyde, C. J., Tobias, R. S. et al. (1998). Review of the Usefulness of Contacting Other Experts When Conducting a Literature Search for Systematic Reviews. BMJ, 317, 1562-1563. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.317.7172.1562
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLOS Medicine, 6, e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Musset, P. (2012). School Choice and Equity: Current Policies in OECD Countries and a Literature Review . OECD Education Working Papers, No. 66, OECD Publishing.
Nash, K., & Bell, V. (2007). The Politics of Framing: An Interview with Nancy Fraser. Theory, Culture & Society, 24, 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407080097
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018). How People Learn II: Learners, Contexts, and Cultures . National Academies Press.
National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards . National Academies Press.
National Science Board (2016). Science and Engineering Indicators . National Science Foundation.
NEP (2010). National Education Policy . Ministry of Education.
Nguyen, A., & Catalan-Matamoros, D. (2020). Digital Mis/Disinformation and Public Engagement with Health and Science Controversies: Fresh Perspectives from Covid-19. Media and Communication, 8, 323-328. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.3352
Orozco Fuentes, B. (2020). Interrogar el sentido del conocimiento escolar ante la pandemia. Perfiles Educativos, 42 , 63-71.
Parker, W. C., Lo, J., Yeo, A. J., Valencia, S. W., Nguyen, D., Abbott, R. D. et al. (2013). Beyond Breadth-Speed-Test: Toward Deeper Knowing and Engagement in an Advanced Placement Course. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 1424-1459. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213504237
Parker, W., Mosborg, S., Bransford, J., Vye, N., Wilkerson, J., & Abbott, R. (2011). Rethinking Advanced High School Coursework: Tackling the Depth/Breadth Tension in the AP US Government and Politics Course. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 533-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2011.584561
Pei, S., Cui, F., & Sun, T. (2012). The Unity of Scientific Literacy Education and Humanistic Spirit Education in Higher Education. Creative Education, 3, 121-125. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.37b032
Powell, S., & Grubbström, A. (2021). Leading Gender Equality Change in Higher Education—The Case of Forestry. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 29, 199-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224x.2021.2008997
Regmi, K. D. (2019). Critical Policy Sociology: Key Underlying Assumptions and Their Implications for Educational Policy Research. International Journal of Research & M e thod in Education, 42, 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727x.2017.1398228
Ryan, G. (2018). Introduction to Positivism, Interpretivism and Critical Theory. Nurse Researcher, 25, 14-20. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2018.e1466
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the Philosophical Underpinnings of Research: Relating Ontology and Epistemology to the Methodology and Methods of the Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical Research Paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5, 9-16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n9p9
Shaffer, J. F., Ferguson, J., & Denaro, K. (2019). Use of the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills Reveals That Fundamental Literacy Is an Important Contributor to Scientific Literacy. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18, ar31. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-12-0238
Snow, C. E. (2016). Literacy . Paper Presented to Committee on Scientific Literacy and Public Perception of Science, March 7, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Stromquist, N. P. (2000). On Truth, Voice, and Qualitative Research. International Jou r nal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13, 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/095183900235663
UNESCO (2020). Education in a Post-COVID World: Nine Ideas for Public Action . UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373717/PDF/373717eng.pdf.multi
Valladares, L. (2021). Scientific Literacy and Social Transformation. Science & Education, 30, 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman., Eds.; A. R. Luria, M. Lopez-Morillas & M. Cole [with J. V. Wertsch], Trans.). Harvard University Press.
Weber, M., & Henderson, A. M. (2012). Max Weber: The Theory of Social and Economic Organization . Martino Publishing.