AN AFFIRMATION OF THE PLACE OF INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE IN DEVELOPING GLOBALISED SCIENCE CURRICULUM

Drafted by Michael Michie

Why should our children learn about everyone, but themselves?

 Keiyo (Kenyan) elders, cited in Thomson (2003, p.91)

Global developments in science education

Over the past 20 years there has been redevelopment of the science curriculum in many of the world’s developed nations consistent with the ideology, Science for all. These developments typically focus on scientific literacy for their nationals, promoting science and technology as a way for national advancement. As well, such courses are outcomes-based, placing high levels of professionalism and accountability on teachers.

In some of the developed countries with minority indigenous populations (e.g. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States of America) there has been recognition that indigenous knowledge is a valuable teaching resource (as well as having commercial value). For example, in Australia, this was expressed as

“Scientific knowledge.... has been enriched by the pooling of understanding from different cultures - western, eastern and indigenous cultures including those of Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders - and has become a truly international activity.” (Australian Education Council, 1994, p. 3)

In the Work plan of the Asia-Pacific Centre of Educational Innovation for Development (UNESCO-ACEID, 1997) there is the continuing theme of Education for all, and within the theme the two ideas which are relevant to Indigenous peoples as participants are

·        diversity: “Each country has a unique culture (and within the national culture, many sub-cultures) which, if shared, may possibly benefit and enrich each other.” (p. 6)

·        equality: “... there are also other population groups who, by virtue of language, ethnicity, geographical location, or economic status, are underserved by education systems.” (p. 56)

Indigenous peoples make up some of these sub-cultures and they (and in particular Indigenous girls and women) suffer from multiple disabilities and should be the focus of equity programs.

Recently it has come to our attention that curriculum development in some developing countries is being undertaken as a global project rather than inclusive of the needs, policies and cultures of the host nation (e.g. Ryan, 2003). Ryan described how expatriate education consultants in Papua New Guinea have developed and are now implementing a science curriculum which bears the hallmarks of a globalised curriculum with limited acknowledgement of government policies or of the needs of the indigenous population. At the same time we have heard that even when initiatives such as the Maori science curriculum in Aotearoa/New Zealand have been initiated, their uptake by students, teachers and schools has still been eclipsed by the western curriculum (Bell, 2003).

This is not the first time that there has been comment on the hegemony of western science in the curriculum of developing countries. The influences of a globalised science curriculum on indigenous peoples have been documented by science education researchers in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and the South Pacific[1].

As early as 1981 there were concerns expressed about curriculum development in non-western cultures based on western models (Ingle & Turner, 1981; Wilson, 1981) as this approach seemed to ignore the importance of the cultural background of the learner. There was little evidence that culturally relevant science curricula for developing countries existed (Maddock, 1981; Ogunniyi, 1981). In 1984, Knamiller wrote regarding the struggle for relevance in science education in developing countries. June George (1988) suggested that, “in the Caribbean context, it is (her) experience that the cultural context of the learner has hardly been an issue in science curriculum development” (p.817, her emphasis). She also cited Chisman (1987) on science curriculum development: “To step into a school science lesson anywhere in the world is to move into an atmosphere of cultural neutrality[2]”, a situation which he himself questioned.

Kyle (1999) suggested in a special issue of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching on science education in the developing world that “we can no longer afford to make comparisons between different kinds of knowledge in Western and non-Western cultures. … we must acknowledge that multiple knowledges exist and it is incumbent on all cultures to contribute in meaningful ways to the development and environmental sustainability of our global community” (p.260).

Gray (1999), writing as guest editor in the same issue, commented that,

“My fear is that the developing countries will, once again, simply follow developments in the First World, but in their own particular way, whether they have resources to support the change and whether it is contextually relevant or not. … The proposals [in South Africa] represent a major shift from the current curriculum land lack sufficient thinking on issues such as the relevance of the programs to the context, resources available to support such changes, and the time scale proposed for implementation. …”(p. 262)

“Developing countries need to have greater confidence in their ability to produce curricular programs and not simply emulate what happens in the developed world. They need to develop policies that are authentic, contextually relevant, and affordable in their own particular country.” (p. 262)

Later in his editorial, Gray makes comments regarding the use of expatriate consultants:

“There are many examples of aid programs that have come and gone with little substantial or lasting effect, … except perhaps the donor country who have kept some of their nationals employed and helped secure their markets a little further through the development of programs and texts that relate quite closely to what their “experts” are most familiar with, that is, programs in their home country.” (p. 265)

Gray also lists several reasons why aid programs are sometimes not successful, some which apply to the way in which aid programs operate but including issues to do with students, schools and teachers.

Jegede (1995) developed the ecocultural paradigm in which “the growth and development of an individual’s perception is drawn from the sociocultural environment in which the learner lives and operates” and consists of

·        “generating information about the African environment to explain natural phenomena

·        identifying and using the indigenous scientific and technological principles, theories and concepts within African society

·        teaching the values of the typical African humane feelings in relation to, and in the practice of, technology as a human enterprise” (p. 124).

George (1999) identified a number of critical issues in the context of teaching students with alternative cultural backgrounds conventional science, to

• “enculturate students into science with the hope that some (albeit, a few) would become future scientists and make a contribution to national development in the areas of science and technology” (p. 93)
• “provide students with enough basic science to allow them to improve the efficiency of their indigenous technologies and to be more “scientific” in their day-to-day living” (p. 93)
• “provide a teaching/learning situation in science that makes it possible for students in traditional settings to have easier access to science through overt comparisons of their world view with that of science, so that they would be in a better position to evaluate the likely contribution of science to their lives” (p. 94).

The relevance of the curriculum and particularly of resources by including local examples is a common theme in the science education literature from Africa (e.g. Jegede, 1994, 1995; Jegede & Okebukola, 1991a, 1991b; Kesamang & Taiwo, 2002; Ogunniyi, 1987, 1988; Okebukola, 1999; Thomson, 2003; Yakuba, 1994). Jegede (1995) was concerned with students’ abilities to deal with incompatibilities of two different ideas or worldviews of traditional and western science that he introduced the concept of collateral learning, which has subsequently been used in examining the compatibility of ideas at subcultural and school science levels (Aikenhead, 1996, 1997) and between science and religion (e.g. Fysh & Lucas, 1998).

In the South Pacific as elsewhere, students often perceive Western science as a stepping stone to careers of importance, and they may either reject or forget their cultural knowledge. Often they attend boarding schools away from their villages and do not complete their education in their cultural knowledge. In many cases they do not enter their anticipated careers and find themselves lost somewhere between the traditional culture of their villages and the new culture of development (Waldrip & Taylor, 1999)[3]. Tavana (2001) confirms anecdotial evidence of the loss of traditional knowledge by young people in the South Pacific, noting that, “In the islands, young people who have a formal education and do not find employment are no longer happy and content to learn about their own culture. They return to family employment dissatisfied, disoriented and ill prepared for the traditional village life.” (p. 6)

As well, there is a difference in the ways that people understand the world, what is called their worldview. This is most apparent in considering the nature of western science and indigenous perspectives. June George (1999) proposed a scheme which categorises the relationship between cultural (indigenous) knowledge and conventional (western) science:

·        Category 1: the cultural knowledge can be explained in Western science terms

·        Category 2: a conventional science explanation for the cultural knowledge seems likely but it is not yet available

·        Category 3: a conventional science link can be established but the underlying principles are different

·        Category 4: the cultural knowledge cannot be explained in conventional science terms.

Baker and Taylor (1995) undertook an overview of the effect of culture on learning science in non-western countries. They concluded that, “although science purports to be universal, the predominant world-views of different cultural groups and the needs of different economies are not”. (p. 702)

In general science-trained teachers in non-western countries ascribe to the concept of the universality of science. The results of a study crossing continental boundaries by Ogunniyi, Jegede, Ogawa, Yandila and Oladele (1995) showed that science teachers in non-western countries share a similar worldview towards western science with minor variations from one culture to another.

Some of these issues are not only of concern to science educators in developing countries but these concerns are also held by indigenous peoples in developed countries. In North America there have been inputs from several indigenous people (e.g. in Alaska: Kawagley, 1995; Kawagley, Norris-Tull & Norris-Tull, 1998; USA: Cajete, 1999; Canada: MacIvor, 1995), trying to resolve the tensions between the need to understand science in a developed world with their own cultural ancestry. Similar efforts have been made in Aotearoa New Zealand (McKinley, 1996; McKinley, Waiti & Bell, 1992) and the Islamic world (Haidar, 1997, 2002; Loo, 1996).

The science perspective

In 1999 the Science for the Twenty-First Century conference, sponsored by UNESCO, was held in Budapest. From this conference came two statements, the Declaration of science and the use of scientific knowledge (UNESCO, 1999a) and Science agenda: Framework for action (UNESCO, 1999b). Both of these documents include references to Indigenous peoples and their knowledge.

In the Declaration of science and the use of scientific knowledge it states

26. that traditional and local knowledge systems as dynamic expressions of perceiving and understanding the world, can make and historically have made, a valuable contribution to science and technology, and that there is a need to preserve, protect, research and promote this cultural heritage and empirical knowledge. (UNESCO, 1999a)

The Declaration also considers Indigenous peoples to be disadvantaged as participants in the scientific endeavour.

25. ... there are barriers which have precluded the full participation of other groups, of both sexes, including disabled people, Indigenous peoples and ethnic minorities hereafter referred to as disadvantaged groups. (UNESCO, 1999a)

The legal obligation to protect the intellectual property rights is addressed in paragraph 38 of the Declaration.

38. … There is also a need to further develop appropriate national legal frameworks to accommodate the specific requirements of developing countries and traditional knowledge, sources and products, to ensure their recognition and adequate protection on the basis of the informed consent of the customary or traditional owners of this knowledge. (UNESCO, 1999a)

The following comment is made about curriculum in paragraph 41 of the Declaration.

41. … Science curricula should include science ethics, as well as training in the history and philosophy of science and its cultural impact. (UNESCO, 1999a)

The Science agenda: Framework for action (UNESCO, 1999b) focuses on actions in a series of statements which promote the utilitarian values of traditional ecological knowledge, rather than the worldview aspects of other systems of knowledge.

83. Governments are called upon to formulate national policies that allow a wider use of the applications of traditional forms of learning and knowledge, while at the same time ensuring that its commercialization is properly rewarded.

84. Enhanced support for activities at the national and international levels on traditional and local knowledge systems should be considered.

85. Countries should promote better understanding and use of traditional knowledge systems, instead of focusing only on extracting elements for their perceived utility to the S&T system. Knowledge should flow simultaneously to and from rural communities

86. Governmental and non-governmental organizations should sustain traditional knowledge systems through active support to the societies that are keepers and developers of this knowledge, their ways of life, their languages, their social organization and the environments in which they live, and fully recognize the contribution of women as repositories of a large part of traditional knowledge.

87. Governments should support cooperation between holders of traditional knowledge and scientists to explore the relationships between different knowledge systems and to foster inter-linkages of mutual benefit. (UNESCO, 1999b)

As a result of the Budapest meeting, the International Council for Science (ICSU) set up a study group on science and traditional knowledge, which reported back to its general assembly in September 2002 (ICSU, 2002). Among its recommendations was:

The Study Group has been particularly concerned with the gradual weakening and disappearance of traditional knowledge. This is a trend that must be reversed and the Study Group recommends that ICSU and Member Organizations take steps

- to sustain traditional knowledge systems through active support to the societies that are keepers and developers of this knowledge,

- to promote training to better equip young scientists and indigenous people to carry out research on traditional knowledge,

- to promote and develop research to better appreciate traditional knowledge,

- to organize an international symposium on science and traditional knowledge.

A proper understanding of the relationship between science, traditional knowledge and pseudo-science is important for the further development of both science and traditional knowledge. Given the current impact of pseudo-science, it is important to better understand this phenomenon in order to enhance awareness among decision-makers and the public at large. The Study Group therefore recommends that ICSU and its Member Organizations support further critical studies on pseudo-science in its social context, especially on its functioning and its motivation. (ICSU, 2002, p. 12)

However, none of these actions looks at how to maintain the Indigenous knowledge, particularly in the modern era of globalisation. This is the issue which is driving Indigenous peoples in the developed world and for which they are seeking solutions.

Maintaining Indigenous knowledge: some culturally appropriate curriculum development models

A number of models of curriculum and resource development have been examined by Michie and Linkson (1999), which have the potential for teaching Western science to Indigenous students while retaining a high degree of cultural appropriateness. This list is far from exclusive and many other examples exist which have not been examined; most of these would probably fit into the third category.

An Indigenous curriculum

Inuuqatigiit (1998) is a curriculum developed by Inuit educators from the North West Territories of Canada, and it reflects the Inuit direction and perspective. Elders were first involved for their guidance and information, then later for continued validation of collected information. Its goals are a summary of what Inuit say is important for children now and in the future. The goals are to

·        maintain, strengthen, recall and enhance Inuit language and culture in the community and the school

·        enhance unity within Inuit groups

·        create a link between the past and the present

·        encourage the practice of Inuit values and beliefs

·        encourage pride in Inuit identity to enhance personal identity (from Foreword).

The Dene people in the North West Territories of Canada (Dene Kede, 1999) developed a similar curriculum. In it, the learning expectations are categorised into four areas and relate to the students' relationships with the spiritual world, the land, other people and themselves. When these relationships become the focus of education within a classroom, the classroom takes on a Dene perspective or worldview. This is what is meant by Dene culture in this curriculum. Dene language competence is also an expectation and the curriculum includes language expectations for both first and second language teaching.

Inuuqatigiit and Dene Kede are not science curriculum but they promote culturally appropriate experiences in a wide range of contexts. In this they share some of the features of culturally sensitive resource materials, where there is the potential for articulating Western scientific ideas with Indigenous knowledge or technologies. These need to be scaffolded in a culturally-appropriate fashion, rather than as tenuous links between Indigenous and Western ideas; concept mapping is an extremely valuable exercise, to ensure a conceptual flow from one culture to the other, making for smooth border crossings.

Restructuring a Western curriculum

McKinley (1996) has discussed the development of a Maori curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand which offers a precedent for similar curriculum development elsewhere. In writing the Maori science curriculum, the curriculum was reconstructed to match up with Maori understandings of the world, “much of the Planet Earth and Beyond strand, in the Maori version, has gone into the Biological World strand, which was renamed Mataora. What is important for Maori it that this represents the joining of Papatuanuku (earth) with the rest of living things (as defined through science).” (p. 164). An important consideration is that the process the participation of the Maori people throughout.

However, there are a number of conditions which limited the accessibility of students to the curriculum. Firstly, the document is written in Maori, for students who are learning through the medium of Maori. Secondly, there were issues regarding language at two levels. At one level there were differences which are apparent with the syntax construction between native speakers and second language learners of Maori. Then there were issues of a ‘standardised’' Maori language in a country made up of various tribal groups with differing dialects. A third problem is one of uptake, with a majority of Maori students attending schools where English is the language of instruction.

Writing resource materials based on a Western curriculum

This is probably the main approach which has been taken to provide Indigenous students with culturally sensitive materials. The following examples are some familiar to the author.

·        In the Northern Territory of Australia, the Implementing the Common Curriculum in Aboriginal Schools project (ICCAS) curriculum resource materials were developed centrally and primarily interpret the curriculum from a Western, rather than Indigenous science perspective (Linkson, 1999; Michie & Linkson, 1999). The materials generally start by negotiating Indigenous knowledge of a concept, then move to Western scientific investigations of the same concept. The curriculum was designed to be inclusive of Indigenous people (Michie, 1998) and the ICCAS materials have been supported by preparation of a teachers’ handbook relating to teaching in Indigenous schools (NT Board of Studies, 1999).

·        In Alaska, the Alaskan Native Knowledge Network curriculum focuses on the Alaskan/US standards complemented by cultural standards they have developed (ANKN, 1998). Resource materials focus on culturally appropriate contexts (e.g. moose, snowshoes, plants of the tundra, animal classification) for learning science and on the Alaskan standards. Village science (Dick, 1997) develops physical science concepts through Inuit ‘village’ contexts. In 2000 they produced a handbook for culturally-responsive science curriculum (Stephens, 2000).

·        Materials from Nunivut, Canada (Baffin DBE, nd), examine the science behind some Indigenous technologies and the weather, and are written to the Pan-Canadian science curriculum standards.

·        In another Canadian project, Cross-Cultural Science & Technology Units for Northern Saskatchewan Schools (CCSTU), has produced some teaching strategies and materials that exemplify culturally sensitive science teaching for Aboriginal schools, as well as developing a prototype process for producing resources within any particular community (CCSTU, 1999).

References

Aikenhead, G.S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1-52.

Aikenhead, G.S. (1997). Towards a First Nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217-238.

ANKN. (1998). Alaska standards for culturally responsive schools. Anchorage, AK: Alaskan Native Knowledge Network. http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/standards.html

Anon. (1999). Foreword. II.12 Science and other systems of knowledge. Science for the twenty-first conference, Budapest, 26 June-1 July. http://www.unesco.org/general/eng/programmes/science/wcs/abstracts/II_12_knowledge.htm

Australian Education Council. (1994). A statement on science for Australian schools. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.

Baffin DBE (nd). Nunavut High School Project ­ Science. Iqaluit: Baffin Divisional Board of Education.

Baker, D. & Taylor, P.C.S. (1995). The effect of culture on the learning of science in non-western countries: the results of an integrated research review. International Journal of Science Education, 17(6), 693-704.

Bell, B. (2003). 20 years of science education research: a review. Paper presented at the 34^th annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Melbourne Vic., 10-12 July 2003.

Cajete, G.A. (1999). Igniting the sparkle: An indigenous science education model. Skyand, NC: Kivaki Press.

CCSTU. (1999). Cross-cultural science & technology units (CCSTU) for northern Saskatchewan schools. http://capes.usask.ca/ccstu/abstract.htm

Chisman, D., & Holbrook, J. (Eds.). (1987). Advances in science and technology education: The ICASE 1987 yearbook.

Dene Kede. (1999). Education: A Dene perspective. Teacher Resource manual. http://siksik.learnnet.nt.ca/Denekede/3/INDEX.HTM

Dick, A. (1997). Village science. (Pilot edition). Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Knowledge Network.

Fysh, R., & Lucas, K. (1998). Science and religion: Acknowledging student beliefs. Australian Science Teacher’s Journal, 44(2), 60-68.

George, J. (1999). World view analysis of knowledge in a rural village: Implications for science education. Science Education, 83, 77-95.

George, J.M. (1988). The role of native technology in science education in developing countries: A Caribbean perspective. School Science Review, 69(249), 815-820.

George, J.M. (1999, January). Contextualised science teaching in developing countries: possibilities and dilemmas. Paper presented to conference of Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics and Science Education, Zimbabwe.

Gray, B. (1999). Science education in the developing world: Issues and considerations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 261-268.

Haidar, A.H. (1997). Arab prospective science teachers’ world view: Presuppositions towards nature. International Journal of Science Education, 19(9), 1093-1109.

Haidar, A.H. (2002). Emirates secondary school science teachers' perspectives on the nexus between modern science and Arab culture. International Journal of Science Education, 24(6), 611-626.

Hemara, W. (2000). Maori Pedagogies: A view from the literature. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

ICSU. (2002). Science and traditional knowledge. Report from the ICSU Study Group on Science and Traditional Knowledge.
www.icsu.org/Library/ProcRep/ TK-report/FinalTKreport.pdf

Ingle, R., & Turner, A. (1981). Science curricula as cultural misfits. European Journal of Science Education, 3(4), 357-371.

Inuuqatigiit. (1998). The curriculum from the Inuit perspective.
http://siksik.learnnet.nt.ca/Inuuqatigiit/1/index.htm

Jegede, O. (1994). African cultural perspectives and the teaching of science. In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform (pp. 120-130). New York: Teachers College Press.

Jegede, O.J. (1995). Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics education in Africa. Studies in Science Education, 25, 97-137.

Jegede, O.J., & Okebukola, P.A. (1991a). The relationship between African traditional cosmology and students’ acquisition of a science process skill. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 37-47.

Jegede, O.J., & Okebukola, P.A.O. (1991b). The effect of instruction on socio-cultural beliefs hindering the learning of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 275-285.

Kawagley, A.O. (1995). A Yupiaq worldview: A pathway to ecology and spirit. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

Kawagley, A.O., Norris-Tull, D., & Norris-Tull, R.A. (1998). The Indigenous worldview of Yupiaq culture: Its scientific nature and relevance to the practice and teaching of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 133-144.

Kesamang, M.E.E.& Taiwo, A.A. (2002). The correlates of the socio-cultural background of Botswana junior secondary school students with their attitudes towards and achievements in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(9), 919-940.

Knamiller, G.W. (1984). The struggle for relevance in science education in developing countries. Studies in Science Education, 11, 60-78.

Kyle, W.C. (1999). Science education in developing countries: Challenging first world hegemony in a global context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 255-260.

Linkson, M. (1999). Some issues in providing culturally appropriate science curriculum support for Indigenous students. Australian Science Teacher’s Journal, 45(1), 41-48.

Loo, S.P. (1996). The four horsemen of Islamic science: A critical analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 18(3), 285-294.

MacIvor, M. (1995). Redefining science education for Aboriginal students. In M. Battiste & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations education in Canada: The circle unfolds (pp. 73-98). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Maddock, M.N. (1981). Science education: An anthropological outlook. Studies in Science Education, 8, 1-26.

McKinley, E. (1996). Towards an Indigenous science curriculum. Research in Science Education, 26(2), 155-167.

McKinley, E., Waiti, P.M., & Bell, B. (1992). Language, culture and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 579-595.

Michie, M. (1998). Crossing borders: Understanding differing worldviews of science through the Northern Territory science curriculum. In J.E. Goodell (Ed.), Proceedings of the Australasian Joint Regional Conference of GASAT and IOSTE, 441-448.

Michie, M., & Linkson, M. (1999). Interfacing Western science and Indigenous knowledge: A Northern Territory perspective. Science and Mathematics Education Papers 1999, 265-286.

Michie, M., Anlezark, J., & Uibo, D. (1998). Beyond bush tucker: Implementing Indigenous perspectives through the science curriculum. CONASTA 47 Proceedings, Science Teachers Association of the NT Journal, 18, 101-110.

NT Board of Studies. (1999) Intercultural understandings in teaching science: A handbook for teachers. Darwin: Northern Territory Board of Studies.

Ogawa, M. (1995). Science education in a multiscience perspective. Science Education, 79(5), 583-593.

Ogunniyi, M.B. (1981). Two decades of science education in Africa. Science Education, 70(2), 111-122.

Ogunniyi, M.B. (1987). Conceptions of traditional cosmological ideas among literate and non-literate Nigerians. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(2), 107-118.

Ogunniyi, M.B. (1988). Adapting western science to traditional African culture. International Journal of Science Education, 10(1), 1-9.

Ogunniyi, M.B., Jegede, O.J., Ogawa, M., Yandila, C.D., & Oladele, F.K. (1995). Nature of the worldview presuppositions among science teachers in Botswana, Indonesia, Japan, Nigeria, and the Philippines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(8), 817-831.

Okebukola, P. (1999). Nomadic and street children's development and use of science concepts: Implications for cross-cultural science teaching. http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/cridal/misc/narst99.htm

Ryan, A. (2003). The intended curriculum and cultural border crossings. Paper presented at the 34^th annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Melbourne Vic., 10-12 July 2003.

Stephens, S. (2000) Handbook for culturally responsive science curriculum. Fairbanks, AL: Alaska Science Consortium and the Alaska Rural Systemic Initiative.

Tavana, G. (2001). The passing of plants, peoples and cultures. Plant Talk, 24, 6.

Taylor, N., & MacPherson, C., (1997). Traditional and religious beliefs and the teaching of science in Fiji. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 32(2), 191-205.

Taylor, P.C. (1999). Whose interests are being served in cross-cultural science teaching? Paper presented to 1999 conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston. http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/cridal/misc/taylor.htm

Thomson, N. (2003). Science education researchers as orthographers: Documenting Keiyo (Kenyan) knowledge, learning and narratives about snakes. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 89-115.

UNESCO. (1999a). Declaration of science and the use of scientific knowledge. Science for the Twenty-First Century.
http://www.unesco.org/general/eng/programmes/science/wcs/eng/declaration_e.htm

UNESCO. (1999b). Science agenda: Framework for action. Science for the Twenty-First Century. http://www.unesco.org/general/eng/programmes/science/wcs/eng/framework.htm

UNESCO-APEID. (1997).Work plan of APEID for the sixth planning cycle 1997-2001. Bangkok: UNESCO Principal Office for Asia and the Pacific.

Vlaardingerbroek, B. (1991). Trainee teachers’ ethnoscientific views of the paranormal variety and views on the role of ethnoscience in science education. Papua New Guinea Journal of Education. 27(2). 31-43.

Waldrip, B.G., & Taylor, P.C. (1999). Permeability of students' worldviews to their school views in a non-Western developing country. Journal of Research in Science Education, 36(3), 289-303.

Wilson, B. (1981). The cultural contexts of science and mathematics education: Preparation of a bibliographic guide. Studies in Science Education, 8, 27-44.

Yakuba, J.M. (1994). Integration of indigenous thought with science and technology: A case study of Ghana. International Journal of Science Education, 16(3), 343-360.

Zembylas, M. (2002). The global, the local, and the science curriculum: A struggle for balance in Cyprus. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 499-519.