People not interested in science?

[collinsmark]

Fred loves his microscope. We can hardly separate him from it. He doesn't actually use it because he just sits there in his mason jar. But boy, he really loves that microscope.

[Edit: holy crap, I thought this was "Random Thoughts" when I posted. I'm sorry.]

 

[Enigman]

I'm sorry.

You should be. You never told me about that website. And I thought you were just kidding when you wrote the 'mad variety' as your favourite area of science...thanks for the nightmares.

 

[Tobias Funke]

I'll second the "why should they be?" sentiment. Math and science are taught terribly, by teachers who for the most part don't understand them. What they get in school isn't science. I knew a bunch of students who were memorizing what a beta biomite does when it attaches to a subdermal DNA receptor (of course I made that up...) to pass a test, yet couldn't tell me why the seasons change.

I also agree with WannabeNewton, as I do every time this subject comes up. I would prefer more people to know history than science myself. The occasional post by the "hard science" guy forced to take a humanities class taught by a radical communist revisionist professor who taught actual history (BRAINWASHING THE YOUTH!) is pretty depressing.

 

[AdrianHudson]

Fred loves his microscope. We can hardly separate him from it. He doesn't actually use it because he just sits there in his mason jar. But boy, he really loves that microscope.

[Edit: holy crap, I thought this was "Random Thoughts" when I posted. I'm sorry.]

W-w-what is that thing...

 

[lisab]

Everyday Math, like the new math curriculum they are teaching kids now. The distorted and disconnected view of math comprised of silly handouts without any unifying theme other than circle and block games that make some educational theorist feel warm and fuzzy.

My daughter had a class with a text called Everyday Math. Horrible, horrible stuff. I was raised on *real* "new math". I have no idea what that stuff in her book was .

 

[AdrianHudson]

My daughter had a class with a text called Everyday Math. Horrible, horrible stuff. I was raised on *real* "new math". I have no idea what that stuff in her book was .

Is this what you're talking about?

http://everydaymath.uchicago.edu

I live in the great white north so I haven't had an encounter with this "everyday math"

 

[Claude Bile]

I can tolerate people that have no interest in science (my wife for one .

It's those that openly slander scientists that I have a hard time dealing with. Especially in Australia, we seem to have a real anti-intellectual culture emerging in politics, where the more qualified you are, the less reliable your opinion seems to be (?!).

Claude.

 

[TheOldHag]

Especially in Australia, we seem to have a real anti-intellectual culture emerging in politics, where the more qualified you are, the less reliable your opinion seems to be (?!).

Your not alone. Here in America half the country regards ignorance as a virtue.

 

[Cyril141795]

I think that people hate math and science because they don't understand them and it's not easy to understand math and science. If one understands (doesn't simply know formulation) at least one significant theorem in math he can't hate math. The work which one has to do on the way to the truth will always interfere with understanding of beauty of science.

 

[Pythagorean]

If one understands [..] at least one significant theorem in math he can't hate math.

I disagree. Most people are weird and not everyone thinks like you. There are people who have gone through a math degree, understood a theorem, shrugged about it, eventually decided they didn't like math because they just want to work hard and make money and sail around the world in their own sailboat, so they became market analysts where they are daily reminded that they hate math, but at least they only have to do it 9-5 now and only for ten more years before they retire and start sailing.

 

[phinds]

I think that people hate math and science because they don't understand them and it's not easy to understand math and science. If one understands (doesn't simply know formulation) at least one significant theorem in math he can't hate math. The work which one has to do on the way to the truth will always interfere with understanding of beauty of science.

You must not have read the whole thread. Read post #37. It applies to what you have said.

 

[Cyril141795]

Most people are weird and not everyone thinks like you.

Nobody will argue against it.

There are people who have gone through a math degree, understood a theorem, shrugged about it, eventually decided they didn't like math because they just want to work hard and make money and sail around the world in their own sailboat, so they became market analysts where they are daily reminded that they hate math, but at least they only have to do it 9-5 now and only for ten more years before they retire and start sailing.

According to your words, I change my statement to "... he can't hate math unless he hasn't gone through a math degree", because if one doesn't hate math, he doesn't necessary like it so much to study it for four years and deal with it 8 hours a day for ten years. If I had to eat my favorite food for breakfast and dinner for 14 years I couldn't look at this food after these years of hell.

 

[Astronuc]

My daughter had a class with a text called Everyday Math. Horrible, horrible stuff. I was raised on *real* "new math". I have no idea what that stuff in her book was .

I too have struggled with the "new math", since it does not seem to represent the math I learned 40 to 50 years ago. It seems math and science education has been dumbed down to the least capable.

I tend to like the dry, black and white texts of the 50's, 60's and 70's. I don't get the technicolor textbooks used in modern education in high school or introductory college/university courses.


In my experience, a strong affinity/appreciation for math and science falls to a minority of the population - perhaps a few percent. Specialty disciplines in math and physics/science fall to an even smaller fraction of the population.

 

[Astronuc]

When I was little, I had a microscope, and a slide kit, I'd make my own slides. I had a telescope. I had erector sets and tinker toys and (little) chemistry sets, my mom wouldn't allow me the really cool BIG ones I begged for every Christmas, she said I'd blow up the house.

Heh, heh - I had much the same, except I got the bigger chemistry set. My brother and I did lot's of experiments and made various toxic concoctions.

I also had various electronic (100-in-1) sets in which one built a variety of useful electronic circuits. I actually built a short wave radio, among various projects.

My brother and I each had a Meccano set (when we lived in Australia). In the US, we had Erector sets, which are similar to Meccano. Despite what the Wikipedia article mentions, one can disassemble a Meccano structure and build something else. We often combined the sets, which was problematic given some dimensional difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meccano
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erector

http://www.erector.us/ - much more sophisticated than the set I had.

Erector was produced by A. C. Gilbert, which also made chemistry sets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.C._Gilbert_Company

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistry_set

Several authors have noted that from the 1980s on, concerns about illegal drug production, terrorism and legal liability have led to chemistry sets becoming increasing bland and unexciting.

I remember this vividly, especially when university libraries around the US started removing certain books from public access.

 

[mfb]

I disagree. Most people are weird and not everyone thinks like you. There are people who have gone through a math degree, understood a theorem, shrugged about it, eventually decided they didn't like math because they just want to work hard and make money and sail around the world in their own sailboat, so they became market analysts where they are daily reminded that they hate math, but at least they only have to do it 9-5 now and only for ten more years before they retire and start sailing.

9 AM to 5 AM?


"I am not interested in it / I hate it because I don't understand it" is certainly a relevant factor - or at least something I heard a lot.
"I am not interested in it and I understand it" happens as well, but less frequent I think (okay, there is an obvious connection between interest in science and future attempts to gain more understanding, so this doesn't say much).

I also had various electronic (100-in-1) sets in which one built a variety of useful electronic circuits. I actually built a short wave radio, among various projects.

Same here :).

 

[julcab12]

Preferences are subjective. Building interest and choices are non-linear. However, It can be manipulated by a whole lot of factors and stimulus but at the end of the day. It's all about viewpoints and decisions despite of how everyone is thinking. Besides 'why' always ends up as a personal preference and indefinite as supposed to 'how' (culture, upbringings and so on).

I tried ideas of religion, spirituality and ID. And It was helpful for a moment but none gave me the same satisfaction as scientific methodologies and math does.^^

 

[Jilang]

It's funny what can influence us when we are young. I had an art teacher who taught us how to make balsa wood aeroplanes and we had a competition flying them on the playing field. Jump forward 6 years and I was flying solo after gaining a local scholarship. I don't think it would have happened without that teacher!

 

[zoobyshoe]

It's funny what can influence us when we are young. I had an art teacher who taught us how to make balsa wood aeroplanes and we had a competition flying them on the playing field. Jump forward 6 years and I was flying solo after gaining a local scholarship. I don't think it would have happened without that teacher!

In the Renaissance there was no clear distinction between art and science. After the discovery of perspective everyone had to be conversant with geometry. That made artists eminently suitable for assignment to architectural projects. And architecture required mechanics.

 

[Jilang]

In the Renaissance there was no clear distinction between art and science. After the discovery of perspective everyone had to be conversant with geometry. That made artists eminently suitable for assignment to architectural projects. And architecture required mechanics.

Yep, he must have been a Renaissance man. He had us carving bars of soap too. I did a Kermit the Frog.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Yep, he must have been a Renaissance man. He had us carving bars of soap too. I did a Kermit the Frog.

So, you're now a pilot AND a herpetologist?

 

[Enigman]

So, you're now a pilot AND a herpetologist?

Now that shows some etymological promise...
Ah, yes:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=herpes
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=herpetology&searchmode=none

 

[Jilang]

So, you're now a pilot AND a herpetologist?

No, but I have a pond and MS Flight Simulator!

 

[HayleySarg]

On a more OT note, I just wanted to say, I personally had some issues understanding why people felt this way. What I found is that you can't sleuth out the good people simply with their levels of interest in the STEM fields. No, instead, surround yourself with critical thinkers who are passionate.

As much as I'd like them to, not everyone has a love for science and math. But people who are passionate about their interests, those are the really interesting types. The ones that think critically about how the world works, in their own unique way. Whether this expression come forth in writing, painting, acting, studying cultures, mathematics, etc-- is irrelevant.

A lack of wonder throughout is a big issue. People are just going through the motions of their day without anything to inspire them. That scares me.

 

[StatGuy2000]

On a more OT note, I just wanted to say, I personally had some issues understanding why people felt this way. What I found is that you can't sleuth out the good people simply with their levels of interest in the STEM fields. No, instead, surround yourself with critical thinkers who are passionate.

As much as I'd like them to, not everyone has a love for science and math. But people who are passionate about their interests, those are the really interesting types. The ones that think critically about how the world works, in their own unique way. Whether this expression come forth in writing, painting, acting, studying cultures, mathematics, etc-- is irrelevant.

A lack of wonder throughout is a big issue. People are just going through the motions of their day without anything to inspire them. That scares me.

I'm curious if the "lack of wonder" that you speak of may be in part due to the bruising economic climate since the financial crisis of 2008. After all, it is difficult to be inspired by anything if your primary focus is on whether you or your family can stay in their homes, get food on the table, or find any work to get by.

I am also curious if, at least in the US, there are any school subjects that are especially taught well (since the consensus seems to be that math and science are not taught well).

 

[HayleySarg]

Hmm, I can't say for sure. I'm just a kid myself, but I felt the economic crisis (I'm nearly 22). It definitely changed my perspective on life, when scholarship funding and loan availability just went out the window.

I think parents as a whole (not all, but some) feel as if it's a better thing to study what leads to money. This is a very realistic goal, of course. But they're not encouraging students to think realistically while still encompassing their "dream" goals. Say you want to be an actor-- well... how?

Obviously it's a very slim field, but if my future offspring had a very solid backup plan and 5 year plan-- I'd say go for it. If that's their passion, who am I to stop them. As long as they're being realistic about the job outlook and when they find themselves working in something completely aside from what they intended to, they aren't whining about it.

 

[mfb]

I'm curious if the "lack of wonder" that you speak of may be in part due to the bruising economic climate since the financial crisis of 2008. After all, it is difficult to be inspired by anything if your primary focus is on whether you or your family can stay in their homes, getting food on the table, or seeking to find any work to get by.

It does not help to worry about that the whole day. Do you get more food if you stop thinking about anything else?

Apart from that, the fraction of the population that actually has to worry about food (in the sense of "how do I buy it", not "how do I get rid of it afterwards") is small in industrialized countries.

 

[StatGuy2000]

It does not help to worry about that the whole day. Do you get more food if you stop thinking about anything else?

Apart from that, the fraction of the population that actually has to worry about food (in the sense of "how do I buy it", not "how do I get rid of it afterwards") is small in industrialized countries.

The point I was trying to make was whether or not inspiration to pursue the sciences (or the arts for that matter) may be impacted during periods of economic stress. And while you are correct that the percentage of the population that actually has to worry about food is small, there is still an overall climate of economic insecurity that has long-term impacts on the nation and its people.

On a different note, I still see no answer to my question on whether any school subject is taught particularly well in US schools (I live in Canada so my own views will not reflect the US reality).

 

[lisab]

The point I was trying to make was whether or not inspiration to pursue the sciences (or the arts for that matter) may be impacted during periods of economic stress. And while you are correct that the percentage of the population that actually has to worry about food is small, there is still an overall climate of economic insecurity that has long-term impacts on the nation and its people.

On a different note, I still see no answer to my question on whether any school subject is taught particularly well in US schools (I live in Canada so my own views will not reflect the US reality).

I agree, the recession made studying something just because you find it "beautiful and awe-inspiring" too much of a luxury.

With regard to your question about well-taught subjects, it's hard to answer because no subject is taught just one way. Even in the same school, the difference between Mr. Smith vs. Ms. Jones teaching the exact same class can be huge.

Add in the fact that schools are controlled by *local* school boards (and often funded locally) you can see why there is tremendous variability in the quality of education.