Jack Randall was a science instructor for 25 years, including 14 years at Interlochen Arts Academy in Interlochen, MI. There he was notable for identifying the radioactive “Cheetos” isotope, endangering students’ lives as coach of varsity cafeteria-tray luge, and enriching them immeasurably as a teacher and a friend. He currently works for Vernier Software & Technology.
First, a brief word of introduction. Joey and I studied chemistry together in high school. On paper, Joey was the student and I was the teacher, but we both did a fair amount of learning and there were many instances of role reversal. Joey was a terrific student and, more importantly, a great person with whom it was my very good fortune to have worked. That was a number of years ago. I have since left the teaching profession, pursuing an alternate career in science. Joey is no longer a teenage kid who completed the massive load of homework I offered for her consideration.
In recent times we have kept in touch via e-mail. One of Joey’s many projects has afforded her the opportunity to give me a homework assignment. Joey and I looked at a few topics and we decided to tackle science education, in particular the notion that science education is poorly delivered in the United States. I’m not sure exactly how our discussion proceeded, but at one point I commented, off the cuff, that science education was not executed well in America. My assignment was to expound on my comment. Why wasn’t science education very good, what was wrong with it, how could it be improved?
The tables now having been turned, I humbly submit my completed assignment. Truth be told, it’s a bit late. But, I have good excuses. My computer lost one draft, other tasks had higher priority, I thought the deadline was next week, and I haven’t been feeling well lately (but I’m all right now).
I think that science education is poorly done because it seems that Americans know very little basic science. I’m not sure what a package labeled “Basic Science Information” would contain, but there are certain fundamental concepts of biology, chemistry, and physics we all need to know. Add to the package a healthy dose of common sense and we would all be wiser consumers, informed citizens, and skeptical readers and listeners. And we wouldn’t have to be science geeks to put this package of basic science information to good use.
Where does this notion of mine come from? It’s kind of backward logic, actually. Rankings of academic achievement in science worldwide normally place the U.S. in the lower half, if not the lower third, of the countries listed. University-level science professors chastise high school teachers for sending them ill-prepared students, high school teachers complain that little or no science is taught in the K-8 grades and the K-8 teachers may or may not respond with a justifiable shoulder shrugging.
Science education takes a drubbing from its own kind, which may be the strongest argument. In my field of study, chemistry, one can peruse the highly regarded Journal of Chemical Education and regularly come across articles decrying poor teaching practices and offering one type of improvement after another. The editorial in the October issue of Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, is entitled “Europe Rethinks Education.” The author, Pierre Lena, remarks that “Improving the quality of science education in primary and secondary schools is a challenge faced by nearly all countries.” Dr. Lena further comments about the “…disinterest of European youth in scientific careers and the public’s poor understanding of science….” His editorial describes programs in Europe to meet this challenge.
Thus, without a greater mass of evidence, here’s my thesis: science education has never been up to snuff. It’s not that once upon a time we got it right and somehow over the years we lost it. We’ve never, ever taught science properly, effectively, efficiently. We haven’t taken the time to figure out how to do it right, and now here we are, where we’ve always been, stumbling around taking stabs at teaching science and most of the time missing the mark.
How do we improve? Here are a few ideas. As Joey will attest (I hope) I like to toss out ideas, hear what others think, try some things, and see what happens. Subliminal scientific method, if you will.
JACK’S STEPS TO IMPROVING SCIENCE EDUCATION
