How science literate is the general public?

[mrnike992]

https://chronicle.com/article/How-Science-Literate-Are-You-/229753/This appeared in my news feed on the old Facebook, and my interest was piqued. Upon taking the quiz myself, I discovered a few noteworthy things.

First of all, to my surprise, I was reported to have missed one of the eleven questions. It was question number five. Am I incorrect to have believed that the universe did not begin with a "huge explosion," but rather an infinitesimal expansion? Perhaps it's a trivial difference, as I can see how a 'big explosion' would be easier to teach to the general, non-scientific public. Thoughts?

Second, the reported percentage of Americans who answered each question correctly shocked and terrified me, although I've spent the last six years of my life surrounded by (for the most part) fairly intelligent (or at least semi-well educated) folks. Clearly the public school system has failed. Yet on the ACT/SAT or other standardized tests, we have schools parading their collective scores, acting as if they've accomplished something. Clearly this means nothing, as most people are still incapable of answering some of the most basic questions of the world we live in.

Also, I invite you and ask you to share your thoughts. I would love to hear what PF has to say about this article.

 

[QuantumCurt]

I took this same quiz earlier. You're correct in thinking that the Universe didn't begin with a giant explosion. This is a common misconception in the public though. I inferred the meaning, and got 11/11. It's far more correct to say that the Universe began with an incredibly rapid expansion, but 'Big Bang' translates to 'big explosion' in the public view for the most part.

It really is quite shocking to see how many Americans answered wrong. Although it really shouldn't be that surprising. When it comes to issues around evolution, geological timescales, and universal origins, a large portion of the American public has rather drastically misguided views.

 

[George Jones]

Physics Forums Rules, to which everyone agrees when registering, state

Mixing science and religion, e.g. using religious doctrines in support of scientific arguments or vice versa.

is not allowed, and that

Discussions that assert the a priori truth or falsity of religious dogmas and belief systems, or value judgments stemming from such religious belief systems, will not be tolerated.

 

[WWGD]

But still, there is the issue of whether the test is statistically-sound: are the questions representative-enough of all general science? Is the phrasing accurate, etc? Why aren't any Mathematics included here; Mathematics may not in a sense be science, but it is a key tool for the understanding of science. And I did get 9 out of 11, BTW. Can you make a representative sample of all scientific knowledge with just 11 questions? I would believe you would need around 100.

 

[Evo]

Let's leave religion out of this discussion, religion has nothing to do with science.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I think some of these questions encourage over-thinking. #5 has the problem mentioned. In #3, the electron wavefunction in atoms is what gives atoms their size - and can be larger than atoms in certain circumstances. #6 is better answered that plates, some of which are associated with continents, are what's moving. #8 could be considered false, given that birds are a subgroup of theropod dinosaurs.

As for #11, the fact that it has only one answer implies what the answer is, irrespective of the question.

 

[QuantumCurt]

I think this article itself really speaks to how scientifically illiterate the American public is. As previously pointed out, there are flaws with several of these questions, even if they are possibly less obvious than #5. In making their point about scientific illiteracy, the people making the point have demonstrated a bit of their own.

 

[mrnike992]

Forgive my basic knowledge of physics, but the size of an electron (both mass and radius) is smaller than any atom; isn't this pretty much a given? Considering that the atom contains electron(s)? But yes, I guess I see how the objective of the article is to show that people don't know these things. I don't believe that half of Americans raised these questions, causing them to *miss* the correct answer. I believe they likely had no idea of the answer.

 

[QuantumCurt]

This is something of a flaw in how the atomic model has been presented classically. Quantum mechanically, it isn't entirely correct to think of an electron as a point particle. It's defined by a wave function and can more correctly be thought of as "smeared out" around the nucleus. It can be modeled as a point particle, and very often is, but the reality is more complicated than that.

 

[mesa]

I think some of these questions encourage over-thinking. #5 has the problem mentioned. In #3, the electron wavefunction in atoms is what gives atoms their size - and can be larger than atoms in certain circumstances. #6 is better answered that plates, some of which are associated with continents, are what's moving. #8 could be considered false, given that birds are a subgroup of theropod dinosaurs.

As for #11, the fact that it has only one answer implies what the answer is, irrespective of the question.

And we could also add the plates have been doing so for about 3 orders of magnitude longer than the question implies :)

 

[BobG]

But yes, I guess I see how the objective of the article is to show that people don't know these things. I don't believe that half of Americans raised these questions, causing them to *miss* the correct answer. I believe they likely had no idea of the answer.

Good point. With a lot of true/false questions, you'd expect half the people with no clue to get the question correct...

... meaning only around 60% of people actually know the center of the Earth is hot, for example. Barely anyone knows about lasers, antibiotics, electrons, or when dinosaurs lived. So few that the few that did were gobbled up in the random variations of the clueless.

When you get percentages like 30% or 37%, it's because a significant number of people have some alternative belief than the correct one. They're learning incorrect information and the incorrect information is taking priority.

Only half of Americans know it takes a year for the Earth to travel around the Sun? sigh

 

[ZapperZ]

Just in case people missed it, there is a more extensive study reported in the 2010 Science and Engineering indicators about attitude and understanding of the General Public.

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/c7/c7h.htm

Zz.

 

[WWGD]

Good point. With a lot of true/false questions, you'd expect half the people with no clue to get the question correct...

... meaning only around 60% of people actually know the center of the Earth is hot, for example. Barely anyone knows about lasers, antibiotics, electrons, or when dinosaurs lived. So few that the few that did were gobbled up in the random variations of the clueless.

When you get percentages like 30% or 37%, it's because a significant number of people have some alternative belief than the correct one. They're learning incorrect information and the incorrect information is taking priority.

Only half of Americans know it takes a year for the Earth to travel around the Sun? sigh

You seem to be assuming that this test is a good representation of basic scientific knowledge, that the questions were phrased in an understandable way, etc.. I would have expected some basic math and a longer list of questions, at least 30. I did get 9/11 , but many things can happen in such a small sample ( I may have done worse/better in a larger one).

 

[collinsmark]

I think some of these questions encourage over-thinking. #5 has the problem mentioned. In #3, the electron wavefunction in atoms is what gives atoms their size - and can be larger than atoms in certain circumstances. #6 is better answered that plates, some of which are associated with continents, are what's moving. #8 could be considered false, given that birds are a subgroup of theropod dinosaurs.

All true, but I'd give #6 and #8 byes.

#6: Sure, continents are associated with plates and the plates are what are actually moving. But the continental centers have been moving relative to each other and continue to move relative to each other. That is true enough for me to give question #6 a "true." [Edit: by that I mean I agree with the official answer of "true" that continents have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move in the future.]

#8: Yes, modern birds are decedents of some dinosaurs, which is true.
But by the same logic you could also say that the ancestors of modern humans lived at the same time of the dinosaurs, which is also true! But those human ancestors weren't technically humans (certainly not homo-sapiens), they were some sort of pre-humans (or maybe better yet, pre-pre-humans). One could make the same argument about modern birds no longer being classified as dinosaurs. So I think #8 correctly deserves a "false." [Edit: by that I mean that I agree with the official answer of "false" for the statement "The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs." It's false because the human ancestors that lived at the time of the dinosaurs are not considered "human" (they were pre-pre-humans or some such) and modern birds are no longer considered dinosaurs (descended from dinosaurs yes, but not dinosaurs themselves).]

[Edited for clarifications.]

 

[Evo]

#6: Sure, some continents are on plates and the plates are what are actually moving. But the continental centers have been moving relative to each other and continue to move relative to each other. That is true enough for me to give question #6 a "true."

I think for the audience this is aimed at, we can at least hope they know what a continent is, many would have no idea what a tectonic plate was.

 

[Czcibor]

I get 11/11, but for my excuse, I was a bit tired and my degree is outside hard science thus I did not bother to find potential flaws in those questions :D

I had fun about such quizzes, until I saw that also my compatriots got abysmal results.

Maybe moderators should put something like this quiz as registration captcha equivalent? :D

 

[dipole]

This is something of a flaw in how the atomic model has been presented classically. Quantum mechanically, it isn't entirely correct to think of an electron as a point particle. It's defined by a wave function and can more correctly be thought of as "smeared out" around the nucleus. It can be modeled as a point particle, and very often is, but the reality is more complicated than that.

The electron is a point particle, in the sense that it has no internal structure. There are just three numbers needed to describe its position. If the electron were not a point particle, its position would be described by some position density function, and the wave function would be a functional of this position density function, rather than a function of the position.

The orbital wave functions of an atom represent the probability amplitudes for the position of the electron, but the position is still defined by a single point. It's not correct to say that the wave function somehow describes the spatial distribution of the electron - electrons are not clouds of charge.

 

[WWGD]

I think for the audience this is aimed at, we can at least hope they know what a continent is, many would have no idea what a tectonic plate was.

Right, when I told someone that a relative of mine was incontinent, that someone asked: really, what continent is he in?

 

[Vanadium 50]

and modern birds are no longer considered dinosaurs (descended from dinosaurs yes, but not dinosaurs themselves).]

That is not the modern view. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird, https://xkcd.com/1211, and http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html

 

[LFBP]

With regard to the Big Bang: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...uld-be-debunked-by-Large-Hadron-Collider.html

 

[2milehi]

11/11 - some of you are looking way too deep into this quiz.

 

[rootone]

10/11 - don't agree with 'huge explosion'

 

[tom aaron]

I think some of these questions encourage over-thinking. #5 has the problem mentioned. In #3, the electron wavefunction in atoms is what gives atoms their size - and can be larger than atoms in certain circumstances. #6 is better answered that plates, some of which are associated with continents, are what's moving. #8 could be considered false, given that birds are a subgroup of theropod dinosaurs.

As for #11, the fact that it has only one answer implies what the answer is, irrespective of the question.

True. I got them all but...being a geologist I paused at the one about moving continents. The answer is a dependent on definition of terms.

I also wondered about the 'explosion'...but answered what the authors thought was correct.

 

[dragoneyes001]

after reading the number of responses after the test I'm far more surprised by how many couldn't fathom how many blithering idiots there are in america.(i say america because this test refers to them specifically) society in most if not all countries is full of the uneducated or badly educated or even outright stupid people.

 

[tom aaron]

after reading the number of responses after the test I'm far more surprised by how many couldn't fathom how many blithering idiots there are in america.(i say america because this test refers to them specifically) society in most if not all countries is full of the uneducated or badly educated or even outright stupid people.

Not really. My friend might have gotten 7 or so right...today he was over and rewired my guitar. I was having a problem doing it. My girlfriend may have got 6 or 7 right...she speaks 3 languages fluently...can you? <insult removed>

I know that an atom is larger than an electron. Nice to know. Never used that knowledge in any practical way. A neighbour can fix just abut anything on most vehicles. Seems like a practical knowledge that is much more relevant to the average life in 2015.

No, you are not smarter than most people. You just have a more specified interest in some subjects. Not sure how many questions you would have gotten right on a basic quiz on how to grow a wheat crop or on how to trade on the stock market.

An aside. It's obvious that proper grammar, sentence structure and use of upper/lower case letters are not part of your definition of educated.

 

[QuantumCurt]

Not everyone has the scientific literacy of a science major. Many people learn about the simplified structure of an atom in their high school chemistry class, and then never have to use that information ever again. Many people are extremely knowledgeable of things like sociology, arts, the humanities, history, etc. but never need to use the ideas learned in hard science courses ever again. Someone is not unintelligent by default if they don't know that an electron is smaller than an atom. There are many kinds of intelligence in the world.

 

[dragoneyes001]

Not really. My friend might have gotten 7 or so right...today he was over and rewired my guitar. I was having a problem doing it. My girlfriend may have got 6 or 7 right...she speaks 3 languages fluently...can you? <insult removed>

I know that an atom is larger than an electron. Nice to know. Never used that knowledge in any practical way. A neighbour can fix just abut anything on most vehicles. Seems like a practical knowledge that is much more relevant to the average life in 2015.

No, you are not smarter than most people. You just have a more specified interest in some subjects. Not sure how many questions you would have gotten right on a basic quiz on how to grow a wheat crop or on how to trade on the stock market.

An aside. It's obvious that proper grammar, sentence structure and use of upper/lower case letters are not part of your definition of educated.

i do speak three languages considering English is my second language(so you pointing out less than stellar grammar means little to me) i can converse in a third and have basic conversation skills in three more what's your point?. also those questions should be pretty easy to the average grade school student adults should ace it minus one or two badly worded answers which could cause a miss. this quiz was anything but a real test of science knowledge or literacy.

now let's look at the rest of your "You must be stupid at other stuff" post :

lets see used to rebuild muscle cars can do most practical mechanics on V-8 and straight engines and drive trains and body work including spray paint finishes but i understood those questions too.
I used to drive combines and other farm vehicles on my family's farms so I actually do understand crops and livestock but again I understood the questions on the quiz.
lol stock exchange? that's supposed to be a skill? didn't know rushing to take advantage of a trend needed skill.unless you mean the skill to know people who give you info ahead of it happening.
30 years of construction and being a Master carpenter and at journeyman level in all the other trades doesn't make me a physics major yet I could understand those questions. so besides having bad grammar on my second language what's your point?

but i do have a point in what i said because there is relevant evidence to back it up like the HIGH percentage of high school students who graduate and are functionally illiterate, in the USA the percentage of students and adults who can't even name the two countries that border them in north america...etc... there is no shortage of evidence that a staggering percentage of people are in fact blithering idiots you want ample evidence spend a day on you tube there are millions of video's of just how stupid some people are.

 

[QuantumCurt]

i do speak three languages considering English is my second language(so you pointing out less than stellar grammar means little to me) i can converse in a third and have basic conversation skills in three more what's your point?. also those questions should be pretty easy to the average grade school student adults should ace it minus one or two badly worded answers which could cause a miss. this quiz was anything but a real test of science knowledge or literacy.

now let's look at the rest of your "You must be stupid at other stuff" post :

lets see used to rebuild muscle cars can do most practical mechanics on V-8 and straight engines and drive trains and body work including spray paint finishes but i understood those questions too.
I used to drive combines and other farm vehicles on my family's farms so I actually do understand crops and livestock but again I understood the questions on the quiz.
lol stock exchange? that's supposed to be a skill? didn't know rushing to take advantage of a trend needed skill.unless you mean the skill to know people who give you info ahead of it happening.
30 years of construction and being a Master carpenter and at journeyman level in all the other trades doesn't make me a physics major yet I could understand those questions. so besides having bad grammar on my second language what's your point?

but i do have a point in what i said because there is relevant evidence to back it up like the HIGH percentage of high school students who graduate and are functionally illiterate, in the USA the percentage of students and adults who can't even name the two countries that border them in north america...etc... there is no shortage of evidence that a staggering percentage of people are in fact blithering idiots you want ample evidence spend a day on you tube there are millions of video's of just how stupid some people are.

So are you the standard by which all people should be judged? Not all people have this diverse of a skill set. Some people graduate high school and then spend 40 years working in factories. They don't have a need to recall the information from high school science classes, so they don't. Getting a few questions wrong on an 11 question quiz on the internet does not make one a blithering idiot. There are certainly plenty of unintelligent folk in the world, but I don't think this quiz is the measure by which such things should be evaluated.

If I gave you individual quizzes on psychology, sociology, the fine arts, music theory, philosophy, agriculture, genetics, neuroscience, law, government, communications, or any other academic or professional topic...would you ace them all? I'm quite sure that you wouldn't.

Believe it or not, many people actually -don't enjoy- science. They don't spend much time thinking about the structure of the atom. They simply see it as that thing that they needed to know to pass their science class. The structure of the atom has virtually no application to everyday life for the vast majority of the population. Like it or not, the world does not consist of a homogeneous population of people with the same interests or same abilities. There are countless people in the world who are extremely intelligent that know relatively little about science. You're expressing a very close-minded worldview.

ETA - If you don't think that working in the stock market is a skill, then you must really not understand how the stock market works.

 

[dragoneyes001]

you know I'm not impressed that you will not admit that the percentage of people who are blithering idiots exists. so far you excuse stupidity with all sorts of social scenarios that covers some people who differ in education but none of that makes the reality that the idiots do in fact exist any less true.

 

[QuantumCurt]

I just said that there are indeed many blithering idiots in the world. However, a less than complete body of scientific literacy does not make one unintelligent. It simply is not relevant to the lives that most people live from day to day.

 

[dragoneyes001]

I just said that there are indeed many unintelligent folks in the world. However, a less than complete body of scientific literacy does not make one unintelligent.

and i did not say they were simply because they got answers wrong either.

 

[dragoneyes001]

ETA - If you don't think that working in the stock market is a skill, then you must really not understand how the stock market works.

the stock market can be simplified to : rushing into take advantage of a trend. paying attention to trends and using them to invest or pull out is about as skillful as slapping a mosquito. knowing what a bull or bear market are only means your playing the ups and downs it really is that simple trying to say its complicated only shows your the one who doesn't understand it. if it wasn't for insider trading most of the big shots in trading would have lost their shirts at it. because its a form of gambling and no one wins every bet.

 

[WWGD]

the stock market can be simplified to : rushing into take advantage of a trend. paying attention to trends and using them to invest or pull out is about as skillful as slapping a mosquito. knowing what a bull or bear market are only means your playing the ups and downs it really is that simple trying to say its complicated only shows your the one who doesn't understand it. if it wasn't for insider trading most of the big shots in trading would have lost their shirts at it. because its a form of gambling and no one wins every bet.

And there is the additional fact that most of these financial/market advisors do not beat the market. Flip a coin, or get a Ouija board to help you select your stock picks and you will, on average, fare as well as these stock market geniuses.

 

[mrnike992]

This has clearly gone farther than intended, and while we're all idiots, can a mod or somebody please close this thread? Thanks.

 

[Evo]

This thread is done. closed.