Line 6
Education for assessment and decision-making on civilisational risks
Coordinator: Prof. Dr. Maurício Pietrocola
Since its inception, the thematic project has been committed to rethinking science teacher training in an integrated manner. This explains the centrality and relevance attributed to the concept of “interdisciplinarity”. In this context, some essential questions arose for the team, such as: should knowledge be integrated? Yes. But to what end? To answer this question, line 6 considers it essential to rethink the fragmentation that characterises the entire Western tradition, both in terms of knowledge production and teaching and teacher training. The creation of so-called ‘knowledge disciplines’ has enabled advances such as the current hyper-specialisation of the sciences and the deepening and stabilisation of knowledge built up by the scientific community. In part, the value of such knowledge lies precisely in the fact that its construction separates the object of study from its context. However, when it comes to addressing the problems of everyday life and especially the most relevant contemporary issues, this approach has serious limitations.
In response to this demand, two new research fronts were created by the project in its third year of operation: lines 5 and 6. They are dedicated, respectively, to the contemporary challenges of the school curriculum and civilisational risks, which represent the limits of the disciplinary approach described above. This creates a cluster that interacts with the
project’s other lines of research in the quest to understand what an integrated curriculum proposal would look like that correlates the Anthropocene and the civilisational risks that accompany it. It also operates in close harmony with line 4, which is concerned with studying the role and potential of technology in solving and contributing to, while at the same time generating new problems that, in turn, must be understood and managed.
To understand the importance of this work, it is necessary to realise that, far beyond contributing to the training of teachers so that they can deal with contemporary demands, the research conducted in line 6 materialises the presence of what can be described as a new epistemological matrix. It allows for a complete reinterpretation of the entire current process of knowledge construction, technology and social artefacts (commonly associated with the CTS perspective). In addition to reframing the interactions between these elements, the
Associated researchers
- Prof. Áurea Ianni (Faculdade de Saúde Pública / USP)
- Prof. Paulo Rogério (EACH / USP)
- PhD. Rafaela Samagaia (IEA / USP)
- Prof. Samuel Schnorr (Instituto de Biologia / UNB)
- Prof. Ernani Rodrigues (Departamento de Física / UFES)
- Prof. Tarcilo Vallois (Faculdade de Educação / Universidade Pedagógica de Medelin)
- Prof. Néstor Alexander Zambrano González (Universidade Nacional de Bogotá)
- Profa. Olívia Levrini (Departamento de Física / Universidade de Bologna)
new matrix serves to integrate them with the idea of a global ecosystem, so that the preservation of living conditions on the planet can be included in decision-making and considered a priority.
To this end, the research developed by line 6 focuses on two keywords: risk and uncertainty. The work carried out by the group is based on the ideas of two leading authors, sociologists Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens. Both authors converge on the conclusion that the great challenges of the contemporary world can be perceived not as mistakes to be avoided or evils to be fought, but rather as the result or consequence of actions produced within the very matrix of social development. The context that generated the demand for the creation of the term Anthropocene materialises this debate. When observing the proposed arguments, it becomes clear that the problems faced in this period are the direct consequence of the process that allowed for what could be called ‘progress.’ For example, the intensive use of fossil fuels has made transport and energy use cheaper, allowing for the automation of all kinds of processes, as well as many of the social developments that are known and valued today. At the same time, it has also generated a large amount of gases that are present in the atmosphere, contributing to changes in the planet’s climate and threatening the system that sustains life on Earth. This effect was not and could not have been identified at the beginning of the industrialisation process, even though it is a consequence of it.
Thus, while there is a need to understand global warming from a disciplinary perspective (such as atmospheric thermodynamics or chemical composition, for example), we now know that the sum of conclusions obtained from isolated approaches does not allow us to understand what is happening in the world. Yes, specialised knowledge is necessary, but it is also essential to integrate this knowledge in order to discuss how to manage the situations faced and, where possible, the best solution to the problems.
In this context, the decision-making process also needs to be reviewed. Whereas previously it was based primarily on the selection of experts (who would be entrusted with the analysis) and respect for the information they provided after studying the situation, today dialogue and diversification of the arguments considered seem to be more appropriate alternatives. Furthermore, based on the idea that uncertainties are part of all development and that risks are inevitable, decision-making needs to involve a larger number of subjects if it is to be perceived as legitimate. And while experts occupy a prominent place in this group, there are a number of other profiles that need to be included. For example, one must bear in mind those who will be directly or indirectly affected, now or in the future, by the indeterminate and inevitable consequences of decisions made today. This perspective profoundly alters the demands placed on an education system committed to training individuals who are responsible and capable of dealing with the complexity of the problems faced today and in the future.
Keywords: risk, uncertainty, complexity, Anthropocene.
Undergraduate and postgraduate students:
- João Pedro Ghidini / Doutorando – Bolsista CAPES (IF/USP)
- Leandro Nascimento e Silva -Doutorando / Bolsista FAPESP (FE/USP)
- Gabriel Lanzillota Merlo – Doutorando / Bolsista CNPq (IF/USP)
- Júlia Ogata – Doutoranda (PIEC/USP)
- Lyon Salute – Doutorando (PIEC/USP)
- Pina Di Nuovo Sollero – Doutoranda (PIEC / USP)