Educação científica e relação com o saber: o que nos dizem os jovens estudante?

Abstract

This study aimed to identify young high school students’ relationships with knowledge based on what they tell us about the science education they receive at school and their thoughts on what it offers them for their actions in the world. We adopted a qualitative methodological approach, using data collection instruments that enabled us to conduct group interviews and a textual elaboration – “Balanço do Saber” (Balance of Knowledge). By analyzing the young students’ manifestations, we took into account their voices, propositions, criticisms, ideas, and desires, which allowed us to reach considerations about the relationship they establish with knowledge, identifying the “Epistemic”; “Social” and “Identity” dimensions, which are from Charlot’s (2000) theoretical proposition, adopted by us as a priori categories. In the case of the “Epistemic” dimension, we adopted the three forms of epistemic relationship proposed by the author as subcategories a priori: “Objectification-Denomination”; “Distanciation-Regulation” and “Imbrication of the Self”. For the other dimensions, we created the respective subcategories: “My Eco-reflection” and “Me and the Other” for the “Identity” dimension, and “World as: Environment and Nature” and “World as: Reality and Existing Knowledge” for the “Social” dimension. We also analyzed the students’ statements about the science education they receive at school and their considerations about what it offers for their actions in the world, configuring the categories: “Thinking about school: ‘I should start learning what actually matters’“; “Learning: ‘I’m here in life, but what for?’”; “Learning: How and what?” and “Improvements and investments for Education and Science in the country”. Finally, we were able to identify central aspects of criticality in the young students’ manifestations based on our theoretical references, which shaped the categories: “Singularity: an important reflection for learning in science education”; “Mobilization: the action of caring for nature and the environment” and “Negationism and the Relationship with Knowledge”. At the end of this work, we have come to some broad conclusions, the main ones being that young students objectify and name knowledge, without making the processes for learning explicit; they relate according to a process of regulating their actions, according to the way they want to act in the world; their actions are inscribed in their bodies and this allows them to dominate them; they understand what themselves are, based on their conceptions of life and what makes sense in terms of their histories, interpretations and values; they imagine and interpret what others think of them and based on this they act, create expectations, interpret and live in a world that exists before them; this world is a place that already exists and is filled with knowledge based on an existing reality. They also say that school, on the one hand, should focus on and prioritize knowledge for everyday life, but on the other hand, it would have to meet external assessments; that learning at school means having to face your doubts, suspend convictions, and even resort to philosophical reflections on the meaning of life; and that investment in education and science in the country could increase the conditions for forming more aware, proactive citizens with positive attitudes. Finally, we believe that the concepts of “Meaning”; “Mobilization” and “Negationism” are relevant elements that bring criticality to science education, mainly based on education for science, technology, and society (STS), considering the latter as a considerable prerequisite for reflecting and stimulating students’ decision-making.