|
Chemical
Education International, Vol. 1, No. 1, 6-7, Published in August
31, 2000
THE SCIENCE EDUCATION OF NON-SCIENTISTS
J. J. Lagowski
Department
of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
Telephone & FAX: 512/471-3288
e-mail:
[email protected]
Numerous
studies have documented the pitifully low level of scientific literacy
of current college graduates in many countries. Too many college
graduates--future citizens in democratic societies that are becoming
increasingly dependent upon science and technology--can't understand
even the simplest science-related news articles. They have difficulty
distinguishing nuclear radiation from UV radiation; atoms from molecules;
power from force; (nuclear) magnetic resonance from radioactivity.
Clearly, if modern society is to continue to operate on the principle
of an informed electorate, our educational systems must do a better
job of educating that electorate. If we don't, important and far-reaching
decisions will shift into the hands of a few technically competent
people who will form a sort of scientific priesthood. We don't need
more science majors, we need non-science majors who are better informed
about science and who represent the overwhelming majority of our
future citizens. Most citizens don't need to know how to synthesize
a super-conductor or sequence a protein. Most citizens do need the
background to understand science in its day-to-day context with
technology. That kind of understanding has two basic components:
an understanding of the way scientists make decisions--how science
works--and a discussion of the importance of the results of scientific
discoveries in our lives--the way that science has been translated
into technology--as well as the importance of that technology in
our modern life.
For
the future of modern society, it is imperative that practicing basic
scientists develop courses that will improve the scientific literacy
of college graduates. Some universities already require one or two
science courses (or areas of study) for non-science majors. Such
requirements provide a good starting point. The central question
concerns the content of the courses designed for non-science majors.
Such courses could attempt to communicate either of two basic messages
(vide supra). One approach could be to develop an appreciation
for the process of science--how science works--and the elements
necessary to make science work. This approach could be cast in the
context of any of the basic sciences since they all work in the
same way. Each depends upon the accumulation of evidence and the
formulation of an internally consistent set of hypotheses, such
as the particulate nature of matter, the process of evolution, or
the nature of electromagnetic phenomena. Important in such approaches
is the recognition of ambiguities and the way such ambiguities are
resolved, that is, by the design of appropriate experiments and
the evidence gathered therefrom. Such an approach could be readily
formulated by practicing scientists in a variety of disciplines
including chemistry. A basic science course developed for non-scientists
using this approach would tend to stress the processes of science
and the idea that what we know changes in the face of new evidence.
The
other approach could be the creation of courses designed to emphasize
the scientific basis for solving key issues facing today's citizens,
such as nuclear waste disposal and access to pure water. In a sense,
this approach is the more practical of the two for the average person
because it addresses subjects that are more likely to influence
their lives directly and, therefore, give rise to at least a passing
interest in science. This approach requires teachers to take a broader
view than many (perhaps, even most) basic scientists are comfortable
with; but people who have shown a capacity to learn technical subjects,
as most academic scientists have, should be able to gain such perspectives.
Chemistry could be the logical focus for discussions of new materials,
for example, which are certainly important to our modern society.
It would appear that the subject of chemistry could be a useful
vehicle to help people gain an appreciation of the importance of
this discipline in their lives, much in the way as we expect that
the study of literature provides insights into their existence in
society. This general approach to chemistry courses for non-scientists
would provide students with a day-to-day context for appreciating
the importance of science in their lives and a way to think about
science. Hopefully, it would also ensure that these students would
have a science-oriented basis for making future decisions.
The
challenge is clear. Who will lead the way?
Last
updated
16.05.02
|
|