 |
 |
"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] **********************************************************************