What can we do to improve Science Education?

[Chi Meson]

In my opinion the importance is not the level of education of the parent, but their level of expectation of and involvement, which is is most likely correlated to their education level. Neither of my parents finished college when they were young (My mother actually finished her bachelors the same semester I finished high school). But my mother, especially when we were young before she started working again, was very involved in our academic lives and very much on our cases to do well. And all of us did as a result.

Well yes, we agree on this point. The level of education of parents is the statistical indicator of sucess in education, but not itself the reason.

 

[Astronuc]

from AAAS
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2006/922/5?rss=1
By Jeffrey Mervis
ScienceNOW Daily News
22 September 2006

Children are capable of understanding more science than many educators give them credit for. But those same teachers may not know enough to help their students learn what they need to know to compete in a global economy. That message comes from a new assessment of U.S. science education in elementary and middle schools from the National Academies' National Research Council (NRC).

The report, Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8, says that U.S. students are continuing to fall behind their international counterparts despite 15 years of reform efforts. Part of the reason, according to the expert panel, is an overstuffed curricula taught by teachers who don't thoroughly understand the subject matter. Students are also stymied by "repeated, shallow coverage" that fails to give them a conceptual understanding of what it means to do science.

"With all the pressures facing teachers, that's just not on their radar," says panelist Daniel Levin, a former middle and high school science teacher in Montgomery County, Maryland, who is now pursuing his doctorate in science education. "Sure, there's an emphasis on teaching the components of the scientific method so that students can spit it back on a test. But they miss the bigger idea that science is a way of making an argument, of convincing someone based on the evidence."

The report notes that the debate between direct instruction and hands-on, inquiry-based learning has created a false dichotomy. It says both approaches should be used to help students become proficient in science and to understand scientific inquiry. The panel also laments the achievement gap between majority students and non-Asian minority and disadvantaged students, although it says that it was not able to come up with a solution during its 2-year study. Next spring, NRC plans to issue an easy-to-read version of its report for practitioners and the general public.

"This is an important report," says Gerry Wheeler, executive director of the National Science Teachers Association, "because it hits on two key points: the need to pare down the number of requirements in the current standards, and the need to offer better professional development to improve teacher content knowledge. We will be pushing it."

Taking Science to School:
Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8

Certainly teachers need to be taught how to teach effectively (sometimes I wonder based on what I hear first hand) and they need to master the subject. I think teachers are blamed far too much for the failures of politicians/school boards, students, parents and many adults in the community.

Then students need to work hard. My experience is that many students just don't want to work hard, and they avoid courses which require effort. I think most participants in PF do not fall in that category.

I think many parents do not provide proper support to their children, nor do they provide appropriate examples with respect to learning and hard work.

And finally, the adults in the community and the popular culture. When have you ever seen an effective mentor program? Probably never! Who are examples of successful people in the media? Atheletes, movies stars, politicians, business persons? How often are scientists presented as models of success and hard work, in comparison? Probably not often enough.

Popular culture needs to extol the virtues of hard work and learning. Instead we get mindless entertainment and over-emphasis of celebrity atheletes and entertainers, and in some cases politicians. Pretty sad.

One reaps what one sows.

 

[edward]

Astronuc. Interesting links.

Science and physics have to be an adventure. Students have to be almost obsessed with wanting to learn more. I think in many schools science has become more, "memorizing enough facts to pass the test", than an adventure.

 

[Astronuc]

I took courses in Chinese history and culture during early years of university, and one aspect that intrigued me was the Chinese practices of the "investigation of things" [gewu] and "exhaustively mastering principles" [qiongli]. It was intriguing because it was exactly my approach in life (being that I am inherently curious about all things and I am driven to understand the way(s) of all things), and at the time, I had not heard of such a concept in the west.

I would very much like to see this approach developed in US and Western nations.

On Their Own Terms
Science in China, 1550-1900
Benjamin A. Elman
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/ELMONT.html?show=contents

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/RethinkingSciCiv/etexts/Elman/Chinese_Sciences.html
"Chinese Sciences" and the "Triumph" of "Modern Science" in China

http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/2793/china.html

Extension of knowledge consists of the investigation of things as they really are.
When things are investigated, knowledge is extended.
When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere.
When the will is sincere, the mind is correct.
When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated.

It was this Confucius' humanistic insistence on the "investigation of things as they really are," that is, observing reality without the interference of religious dogma or one's presuppositions, that led to the great Chinese discoveries in science and technology. Confucius had provided not only the method for acquiring knowledge--"investigation of things as they really are"-- but also the purpose for which things were to be investigated--"humaneness"--(ren), that is, to create a humane society. Characteristically, Chinese scientific and technological advances were made, not to exploit human beings, but to enhance their quality of life by improving their living and working conditions. Chinese contributions to the West are indeed in the hundreds; however, for reasons of space, we shall mention here only the most important contributions of Chinese civilization to the West in the areas of science and technology.

From Confucian China, "The Way of Great Learning"
http://fireside.designcommunity.com/topic-8353.html

See also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Learning