Jenny Gristock said:
> If we don't teach science and engineering students about what makes
scientific
> enquiry special, how can we expect the process to be associated with the
> subject?
>
> By that I mean, how can we create a situation where science is first and
> foremost percieved to be about "an interest in why things happen" as
opposed
> to "an interest in green liquid in odd-shaped bottles".
Jon Turney said:
> I agree with some of Jenny Gristock's lengthy diagnosis - but we should
> also take a look at what is actually in the National Curriculum.
>
> From year six (last year in primary school) tests, which are basically
rote
> learning, it is pretty uninspiring. Item: elder daughter's first science
> lesson in secondary school - "this is a laboratory: there are six safety
> rules to learn. Write them out for homework."
And just look at us! We're such a formal and boring lot, that one of us
just felt obliged to APOLOGISE for a passionate contribution to this
thread!
Passion is precisely what the Public Understanding of Science movement
needs. So much of this discussion continues to be centred around
'science-as-a-career' etc. Is this what the word "science" means to us?
I refuse to believe that the world's greatest scientists throughout history
were pursuing sound careers and life-styles. If so, Charles Darwin
would certainly have ended his days as an obscure, contented country
vicar.
What about that consuming desire to explore the mysteries of nature? The
very reason, in fact, that children find good hands-on science centres
truly irresistible. Until, by their teenage years, the prim, grown-up
world finally gets the message through to them that this isn't what
"science" is really about at all ... that "science" is really about the
National Curriculum's "knowledge and understanding", about the formal
academic world, and thinking seriously about your career...
Personally, I am quite convinced that the strong interactive science
centre movement in Britain has always been driven and steered by
young children, simply voting with their feet for what captures their
enthusiasm, not by educational research, flashy museum designers or by
us earnest PUS practitioners!
Suggestion: perhaps we need to find a way of making science centre visits
and science-as-a-hobby into an illicit activity for teenagers, and actively
discourage them. At least we should confess to them the awful truth, that
the most successful scientists study the textbooks and listen to
their teachers in order to be able to prove them wrong!
Such "science" might then stand some chance of being regarded as
cool. But as long as we remain so formal about it, I think there's no
chance. Passion is caught, not taught. That must mean it's OK for science
communicators to have it!
:-)
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤
Ian Russell :-)nteractive Science Ltd, UK Useful quote:
- "Facts do not speak." Jules Henri Poincaré 1854-1912
[log in to unmask] http://www.interactives.co.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|