Hi
Well, I have spent lots of time looking at the alleged evidence for all
sorts of strange ideas, and think that there is a huge problem with having
science teachers explaining why mainstream scientists are not convinced by
the evidence for such fringe claims. The main problem is that there are
lots of them. For example, 50% of the population believe in telepathy, and
about 30% in ghosts. Then there are UFOs, Big Foot, precognitive dreams,
psychic healing, paranormal effects of prayer, and angels, to name just a
few. Having to explain why the evidence for each is unconvincing would be
complicated and time consuming. In principle, it would be good to think
that this could happen in science lessons, but I suspect that such lessons
are already quite full, and devoting time to these fringe topics would mean
even less time for the existing curriculum. I guess you could just choose
one - such as creationism or ESP - but it is not clear to me how you would
made that choice without being biased. My vote would be for something like
a a separate course in critical thinking, or a book exploring how to
scientifically evaluate the (often v poor) evidence for such claims.
Best
Richard
on 18/9/08 13:26, jenny koenig at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> I guess you will all be aware of the resignation of the Royal Society's
> director of education. I think this has important consequences for
> science communication as well as science education. Dr Keith Taber of
> the Faculty of Education in Cambridge has written an email response to
> the Times Educational Supplement which I received through a science
> education list and I've copied it below. I think it makes a very strong,
> evidence-based case and in my view the same principles apply to science
> communication with adults as they do to education in schools. To me the
> Royal Society's decision sends a message that scientists aren't prepared
> to even listen to people. If that is the case then we will simply be
> "preaching to the converted".
>
> One of my interests is engaging complementary and alternative health
> practitioners in the science of pharmacology and that is the reason I
> worry about this sort of thing. Any comments/advice from others involved
> in potentially contentious fields would be welcomed!
>
> Dr Jennifer Koenig
>
> Consultant
> Science ETC
> www.sci-etc.co.uk
>
>
> Keith's email is below - from the "learning-science-concepts" mailing
> list.
>
> On Sep 17 2008, Dr. Keith S. Taber wrote:
>
>> Copy of email sent to the Times Educational Supplement
>>
>> I was saddened to learn of the Royal Society's decision (announced
>> today at http://royalsociety.org/) to ask Prof. Michael Reiss to
>> stand down form his post as Director of Education following
>> widespread coverage of remarks he made about teaching evolution to
>> students with creationist world-views. The gist of Prof. Reiss'
>> argument was that the appropriate response to students who raise
>> their beliefs in class when they are taught the scientific theory of
>> natural selection should not be to ignore, dismiss or ridicule the
>> students' views, but rather to respect their ideas as a starting pint
>> for discussion, and to challenge them through the scientific
>> arguments that have led to evolution by natural selection becoming
>> some a strongly supported and widely accepted model for how life on
>> earth has developed.
>>
>> Prof. Reiss' comments are said to have damaged the reputation of the
>> Royal Society. As it seems accepted that, as Prof. Reiss has made it
>> absolutely clear, he was not suggesting teaching creationist ideas
>> (as some misleading media reports implied or suggested); and that his
>> views about the status of evolution (as a successful scientific
>> theory) and creationism (as something that is not scientifically
>> supported and so not a scientific theory or model) seem totally in
>> keeping with the broad scientific consensus, it is hard to see how
>> his comments are objectionable. If the mis-reporting was seen as
>> potentially damaging to the Royal Society, then it should have taken
>> the opportunity to use the widespread media interest to reiterate and
>> explain its own position.
>>
>> I can only conclude that what was found objectionable about Prof.
>> Reiss' position was that he was using his vast experience as a
>> science teacher and researcher of science classrooms to suggest that
>> certain approaches naively offered by some academic scientists with
>> no experience of teaching in the school system, are likely to be
>> ineffective. Rather, he draws upon the widely accepted,
>> evidence-based position adopted by most science educators, that the
>> best way to develop children's thinking is to give them the chance to
>> talk about their ideas, and to explore and understand why scientists
>> have come to understand things differently. This general principle is
>> central to science education, and is strongly supported by research
>> evidence: just as natural selection is in biology. It reflects the
>> scientific values of maintaining an open mind, and of considering and
>> evaluating evidence, that we hope to instill in students. Of course,
>> children with strong creationist views may not be prepared to
>> question their existing ideas if these are central to their cultural
>> and family identities: but Reiss' recommendations make more sense
>> than simply dismissing their ideas as irrelevant and telling them to
>> instead learn something that contradicts their own strong
>> convictions. Children's creationist views may be irrelevant to
>> science, but they are highly significant to both their learning of
>> the science, and their developing attitudes to science as a source of
>> reliable knowledge. Those FRS who decided to ignore this and call for
>> Reiss dismissal, seem to be forgetting that their own expertise is in
>> science, not schooling, which is presumably why they appointed a
>> science teacher and educational researcher to high office in the
>> Society.
>>
>> In summary, the decision to dismiss Reiss seems to suggests that some
>> academic scientists feel they know best in education, and are not
>> prepared to listen to experts informed by a different field of
>> research than their own. I fear that it will be this decision to sack
>> rather than explain which could bring the Royal Society in disrepute,
>> not the inaccurate reporting of a talk in the media. In my view, the
>> Royal Society has today done a disservice to science education in the
>> UK, and so indirectly to the future of science.
>
> **********************************************************************
> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
>
> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>
> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask]
> with the message:
>
> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>
> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
> message:
>
> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>
> 4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list
> archive, can be found at the list web site:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
>
> 5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and
> science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
>
> 6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> **********************************************************************
--
Professor Richard Wiseman
Psychology Department
University of Hertfordshire
College Lane
Hatfield
Herts
AL10 9AB
Tel: 077 909 05219
www.richardwiseman.com
www.quirkology.com
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
|