Someone Like Me: A Trial of Context-Responsive Science as a Mechanism to Promote Inclusion

  • Jane Essex Institute of Education, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom
  • Kirsty Ross Institute of Education, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom
  • Ingeborg Birnie Institute of Education, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Keywords: inclusion, equity, culture, diversity, context-based science


This paper provides evidence gathered from two suites of non-formal science activities that were intended to increase engagement in science by culturally diverse groups. Both studies involved the delivery of science activities that were designed, implemented and evaluated to show culturally contextualised science. The activities were run in two very different contexts (urban and very rural areas) and were designed to be of relevance to two distinctive cultural groups (those with links to South Asia, and those being educated through the medium of Gaelic, an indigenous minority language in Scotland), while also actively engaging with those beyond the target group. The link between language identity and culture was incorporated into the design of both sets of activities as well as the qualitative evaluation. The latter considers how the participants’ assessment of the interventions, implemented by writing or drawing on a blank postcard, was designed to provide unstructured responses and explores what the resulting data revealed about the impact of the interventions. The findings suggest that the set of activities that most strongly engaged participants on the value of diversity in the creation of scientific knowledge, as well as increasing their focus on the consequences of scientific activity, were those that facilitated a more exploratory approach to the subject matter. By contrast, activities that had to be done according to a standard scientific protocol produced growth in subject-specific knowledge. The present paper explores the principles of the inclusive pedagogies that informed the design of the activities and discusses how these were operationalised in two very contrasting cultural contexts. The key finding was that presenting science as social practice, rather than as being socially neutral, is key to promoting engagement, along with the benefits of explicitly demonstrating the relevance of science to participants’ daily lives.


Download data is not yet available.


Alexiadou, N., & Essex, J. (2015). Teacher education for inclusive practice – Responding to policy. Journal of Teacher Education and Teachers’ Work, 39(1), 5-19.

All-Party Parliamentary Group. (2020). Diversity and inclusion in STEM: Inquiry on equity in STEM education.

Archer, L., Moote, J., MacLeod, E., Francis, B., & DeWitt, J. (2020). ASPIRES 2: Young people’s science and career aspirations, age 10-19. UCL Institute of Education.

Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 564–582.

Begum, N., & Saini, R. (2019). Decolonising the curriculum. Political Studies Review, 17(2), 196–201.

Bennett, J., Lubben, F., & Hogarth, S. (2007). Bringing science to life: A synthesis of the research evidence on the effects of context-based and STS approaches to science teaching. Science Education, 91(3), 347–370.

Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Paradigm Publishers.

Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson, (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood.

Braun V., & Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.

Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.

Chambers D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education, 67(2), 255–265.

Cobian K. P., Hurtado S., Romero A. L., & Gutzwa, J. A. (2024) Enacting inclusive science: Culturally responsive higher education practices in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). PLoS ONE, 19(1).

Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Children from Ethnic Minority Groups. (1985). Education for All. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Archer, L., Dillon, J. Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2103). Children’s aspirations in science: The unequivocal, the uncertain and the unthinkable. International Journal of Science Education, 35(6), 1037-1063.

DrobniÄ, J. (2023). People with Special needs and career development based on strength. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 13(3), 231-232.

European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. (2012). Teacher Education for Inclusion.

Essex, J. (2023). Inclusive and accessible science for students with additional or special needs: How to teach science effectively to diverse learners in secondary schools. Routledge.

Essex, J., Alexiadou, N, & Zwozdiak-Myers, P. (2019). Understanding inclusion in teacher education – a view from student teachers in England. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(12), 1425-1442.

Finson K. D., Beaver J. B., & Cramond, B. L. (1995). Development and field test of a checklist for the draw-a-scientist test. School Science and Mathematics, 95(4), 195–205.

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

Gibson, S. (2015). When rights are not enough: What is? Moving towards new pedagogy for inclusive education within UK universities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(8), 875-886.

Göransson, K., & Nilholm, C. (2014). Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings – A critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29(3), 265-280.

Gunstone, R., Klopfer, L. E., & Champagne, A. B. (1983). Naive knowledge and science learning. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1(2), 173-183.

Hall, J. R., Neitz, J., & Battani, M. (2003). Sociology on culture. Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need. Doubleday.

Jenkins, E. W. (1979). From Armstrong to Nuffield: Studies in twentieth-century science education in England and Wales. John Murray.

Jenkins, E. W. (2013). Advancing science education: The first fifty years of the Association for Science Education. Association for Science Education.

King, N. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell, & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 257–270). Sage.

Kraus, P. A. (2012). The politics of complex diversity: A European perspective. Ethnicities, 12(1), 3–25.

McComas, W. (1996). The nature of science in science instruction: Rationales and strategies. Springer.

Mensah, F. M., & Larson, K. (2017). A summary of inclusive pedagogies for science education. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine.

Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2010). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079.

Palid, O., Cashdollar, S., Deangelo, S., Chu, C., & Bates, M. (2023). Inclusion in practice: A systematic review of diversity-focused STEM programming in the United States. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(2).

Pomeroy, D. (1994). Science education and cultural diversity: Mapping the field, Studies in Science Education, 24, 49-73.

Rapp, A. C., & Corral-Granados, A. (2021). Understanding inclusive education – a theoretical contribution from system theory and the constructionist perspective. International Journal of Inclusive Education.

Reingold, R., & Zamir, S. (2017). Multicultural education vs. implicit and explicit ethnocentric education: text analysis of a contemporary Israeli value education program. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(4), 63-83.

Ross, K. (2023). Pre- and post-evaluation cards: CSI The Poorly Puffin. [Online resource].

Ross, K., Bhatti, S., Birnie, I., & Essex, J. (2023). DiSSI: GlasWeeAsian evaluation tools. [Online resource].

Schachne, M. K. (2019). From equality and inclusion to cultural pluralism – Evolution and effects of cultural diversity perspectives in schools, European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(1), 1-17.

Scottish Government. (2017). Science Technology Engineering Mathematics Education and Training Strategy for Scotland.

Scottish Government. (2019). Presumption to provide education in a mainstream setting: guidance.

Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge University Press.

Underwood, J. B., & Mensah, F. M. (2018). An investigation of science teacher educators’ perceptions of culturally relevant pedagogy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(1), 46-64.

UNICEF. (n.d.). Inclusive education.

Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and its role as the driver of student choices. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(48), 1-12.

Wendt, J. L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2018). A psychometric evaluation of the English version of the dimensions of attitudes toward science instrument with a U.S. population of elementary educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 24-33.

How to Cite
Essex, J., Ross, K., & Birnie, I. (2024). Someone Like Me: A Trial of Context-Responsive Science as a Mechanism to Promote Inclusion. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 14(1), 79-103.