"What I also see is a failure by some media reports and most blogs or 
comments on newspaper websites to understand how science works and how 
the scientific community operates."

And this is why I find it so frustrating that so many people criticise 
the How Science Works GCSE curriculum, just on principle. (I'm looking 
at you, Alom Shaha;-))

I mean we can argue about the details of implementation, but broadly, 
this is exactly what HSW is designed to get over. And I for one think 
it's a good thing!

Sophia Collins
Producer
I'm a Scientist - Winner of the Sciencewise-ERC People's Choice Award for excellence in Public Engagement with Science.
	event site | www.imascientist.org.uk
	project blog | http://imascientist.org.uk
	twitter | http://twitter.com/imascientist
I'm a Councillor | www.bigvote.org.uk

Gallomanor Communications Ltd | www.gallomanor.com
01225 869413
31 Silver Street
Bradford on Avon
BA15 1JX

Registered in England & Wales, No. 03980700. 
Registered Address: Duckmead Cottage, Farleigh Wick, Bradford-on-Avon, BA15 2PU



Stephan Matthiesen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 15.02.2010 15:34, schrieb Chris Stokes:
>> Out of interest, how easily do science communicators nowadays go
>> about engaging the public in dialogue about climate change without
>> acknowledging the contested nature of the science?
>
> Well, the science is not really contested. However there is a change 
> in public perception that is very worrying. I've spent too much time 
> recently reading skeptics' blogs and newspaper comments recently and 
> there isn't much of a scientific argument (although they do show 
> graphs and stuff), but clearly mostly driven by a political agenda 
> (often libertarian or pseudo-intellectual, i.e. criticising 
> authorities for the sake of appearing critical).
>
> What I also see is a failure by some media reports and most blogs or 
> comments on newspaper websites to understand how science works and how 
> the scientific community operates. 
And this is why I find it so frustrating that so many people criticise 
the How Science Works GCSE curriculum, just on principle. I mean we can 
argue about the details, but broadly, this is exactly what HSW is 
designed to get over.
> For example, that just because universities are government funded that 
> doesn't mean they are like a government agency where politicians 
> determine the agenda. Or a failure to see that universities and 
> research institutes are inherently open with millions of students 
> passing through and lots of researchers moving between institutions, 
> which would make it really difficult to orchestrate a big cover-up.
>
> And everybody is trying to do something that hasn't been done before, 
> so often there are no established protocols, and mistakes and errors 
> can happen, which are mostly discovered (and sometimes not) but don't 
> invalidate the whole picture. That scientists are neither the perfect 
> geniusses nor the perfect scrupulous villains that appear in movies 
> and TV productions (have you ever seen a scientist in a drama who was 
> just a normal guy?). Etc. etc.
>
> Most of the debate seems to be about these aspects, there are very few 
> solid argument that would change the scientific conclusion one bit.
>
> You've probably seen the recent BBC poll about a significan swing of 
> opinion in short time. Personally I think this is an indication that 
> the dynamics and social aspects of science are not understood by 
> non-scientists, otherwise a swing like this would hardly be possible.
>
> I don't want to be critical, but to be honest I think there is a 
> certain failure of the science communication community to make it 
> clear to non-scientist how science works in social terms; who the 
> scientists are, how they think and what drives them.
>
> I have seen many science communication "shows", and many do appear as 
> shows - slick presentations of "fun"tastic phenomena etc. But they 
> seem just like many other entertainment shows, from stage magicians to 
> TV special effects. Everybody knows these are fakes - so how do we 
> know the science shows are real? Sometimes shows are presented by a 
> "mad scientist" because everybody thinks that's fun. Yes it is, but it 
> also reinforces the stereotypes about scientists' personalities.
>
> There can be a place for these activities, no doubt, to get people 
> interested. But I think as science communicators we also have to put 
> more emphasis on showing non-scientists how science works in practice, 
> with all its mess, uncertainties and trying to make sense of results 
> that are far from obvious. I don't think this really comes across in 
> many engagement activities.
>
> Back to climate: I'm teaching an open studies class on climate change 
> and human history right now, looking at how climate in the past has 
> influenced human history. Before the course I expected to have all 
> climate skeptics in the course (that's why I read all the blogs, see 
> above). But fortunately that's not the case. However, in the 
> discussions students told me that they find it very difficult to make 
> sense of the contradictory newspaper reports. They come from different 
> backgrounds, some with more technical knowledge (retired teacher, 
> engineers), others not so much (artists for example). Mostly these 
> classes attract a more educated audience though.
>
> In the class we have great discussions, and as the evidence from the 
> past is of varying quality (both with respect to climate and to the 
> response of human societies) there is plenty of opportunities to 
> discuss uncertainties and also give an impression how different 
> researchers interpret certain evidence differently. It really works 
> well, but of course can only be done in small groups (I have 14 
> students, the course runs 10 weeks with 2 hours per week).
>
> Now I've written more than I planned and have to get back to work to 
> prepare tomorrow's class!
>
> But I hope this personal comment helps
> Cheers
> Stephan
>

**********************************************************************
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]
**********************************************************************