A.Kardiakou - 2nd Entry: Researchers Presentations

I believe that what struck me the most today was the ANIMATE research project. It might have been a mixture of this odd presentation template that had random flies on it but I was very touched by the subject and these 20 mins of presentation by Paulina Rautio actually managed to make me reconsider some life stances!

I had never really heard about a research project involving animals as equal, if not superior, entities to humans. It is sad to observe this, but animals in science historically have been viewed mostly as experiments, not as equal sources of knowledge. In education specifically, early behaviorist examples (Pavlov) prove this point.

I found it truly amazing that so many different aspects of human life (democracy,industrialized violence,philosophical questions,) were tackled , and it made the complexity of this project really hard to wrap my head around.

Lastly, there was a part of the presentation when the speaker played us a musical track, which was actually created by "translating" an animal's vital signs into electronic music variables (tempo,...). This was very familiar but also surprising, the former because ... and the latter because I didn't expect Musical Computing to be involved as part of studying different species.

Another point that was made today that really surprised me, was the speaker's comment on the research methods of the LET research unit.

How did my understanding or perception change?

As I introduced in the previous question, one point that was made today that really surprised me and changed my perception on the topic, was the speaker's comment on the research methods of the LET research unit.

Specifically, it was mentioned that there is not much lab study being done there, but instead the learning scientists are mostly studying authentic learning environments, which makes research a lot more complex.

I did not anticipate this kind of approach, because until now I had this perception of research as mostly a "passive" procedure. I would expect that most of the work, even the phase of collecting data and testing them, would be done inside a lab environment through computers, and not by actively visiting schools and being present in real-life educational settings.

It surprised me in a positive way that the research activity seems to be very geared towards practicality and directness. It made me think that this approach is key to tackle educational challenges in meaningful ways, because it takes into account the complexity and multi-factorial situations that affect students' learning experiences.

Also, the ANIMATE research project really opened my eyes to an antispecist aproach in science and research, an approach in which other species' wellbeing matters, that challenges the human experience.

My reflections on article 'For whom? By Whom? Redifining participation in citizen science.'

Rautio, P., Tammi, T., Aivelo, T., Hohti, R., Kervinen, A., & Saari, M. (2022). For whom? By Whom? Redefining participation in citizen science. Cultural Studies of Science Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10099-9

Who and what are the stakeholders of science and education (Whose lives do science and education affect)?

Based on the perspectives in the article around the intersections of ecological citizen science, childhood studies and human-animal studies (HAS)/ critical animal studies (CAS), the effect of science and education is much more broad and deep than this of people involved in formal learning contexts, for example researchers, teachers, students. On the contrary, the stakeholders are very diverse, because science and education impacts not only people and communities but also has an ecological impact on other species, animals & the environment in general. In the article, there is a focus on children and animals as examples of stakeholders that have a very broad participation in research, thus play a very important role in the production of scientific products/scientific advancements, but their participation is limited to the data collection phase. They are not viewed as equally . Specifically, in the article it is mentioned that "In education at large and science education in particular, the participation of children and young people is well researched (e.g., Olitsky and Weathers 2005); however, participation in knowledge construction as part of ecological research, also beyond species lines, still demands attention."

Why is it important to include a diversity of people in the creation of scientific knowledge?

Based on the article, the answer lies on an intersection between democracy, ecology, ethics. Usually scientific products are a result of complex processes. If the approach to constructing scientific knowledge is narrow-sighted, the results are likely to be narrow-sighted as well, meaning that experts might lack valuable insights from diverse human experiences. More people, communities and societies in general are likely to be benefited from scientific knowledge if more relevant issues to them are addressed and analyzed.

Why is it important that the viewpoints of other animals and beings are recognized and considered in producing scientific knowledge?

A multispecies approach as the article introduces, is very significant in because it opens new paths and lenses to look at science and educational sources. There are matters of ethics as well as ecology, but also rethinking about our place as humans and our hierarchy towards other species.

References and Resources

⮜⮜

⮝⮝

⮞⮞

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse