# Suggestions for science education reform.



## Nightriser (Nov 8, 2008)

I have a special type of procrastination in which I actually do something somewhat productive, as opposed to my regular variety of, say, doing random posts here on PC. When I'm bored with a problem, my attention sometimes turns to brainstorming creative solutions to various concrete problems, such as economic or education reform. (This has also happened spontaneously, not just when I'm bored.) 

Today, I started thinking about ways to change education. One of the criticisms of American education is that Chinese education places a great deal more emphasis on mathematical and scientific education, that American math and science education is ridiculously poor, in comparison to the rest of the developed nations. However, a few recent studies caught my attention. One pointed out that while American science majors have a far poorer grasp on scientific facts and concepts than Chinese science majors, both groups have similarly poor understanding of scientific _reasoning_. This must clearly be addressed, so a stronger emphasis on reasoning is obvious. 

However, I think that in the sciences (social, natural, and computer), encouraging keeping pace with current discoveries and events is important. This should illustrate the concreteness of scientific theories and promote application of theory to real-world phenomena, especially if a weekly discussion of some chosen current event in the relevant field is required. Students should learn the facts/definitions/concepts and be encouraged to contemplate these for homework, while tests will be based on reasoning--thinking critically about these concepts and theories and applying this reasoning to problem-solving. 

In addition, interdisciplinary thought and unity should be emphasized. Interdisciplinary application again points back to the need for reasoning in balance with understanding of facts and concepts. In applying mathematical concepts to physics or economics, understanding the reasoning of the model or theory is demanded. This should also increase an awareness of the vast implication of science, from social and artistic perspectives. In regards to unity, an article in Physics Today from a few years ago argued that one of the hurdles in physics education is illustrating the unity of physics to students. How does it all interrelate? What does momentum have to do with dipole moment or the motion of a frisbee? When presented as a decentralized study of physical phenomena, it's a rather disorganized presentation that will be stored similarly in the student's mind (unless the student has the initiative to seek the unity within a subject). Presenting physics as a unified study would probably be a better strategy due to memory chunking. When two items seem to be dissimilar, they will be stored as two "chunks" of memory, but if they are perceived to be related, they meld into a single chunk. The Wiki article defines a chunk as "a collection of elements having strong associations with one another, but weak associations with elements within other chunks". Once this short-term memory association is made, it can become long-term memory through rehearsal and "meaningful association." (Think of Pavlov's classical conditioning.) So I think that emphasizing the internal unity of a science and its relationship to external fields is important. With increasing specialization comes a danger of two fields growing distant until the two are as divorced from each other as the arts from the natural ("hard") sciences are now. 

Lastly, are you serious?! How many MIT students do not know how to light a bulb with just a battery and one wire? I hope that's an exaggeration. (Sorry, I don't remember where I read that. :dry 

Sources:

College Freshmen In US And China: Chinese Students Know More Science Facts But Neither Group Especially Skilled In Reasoning
Long-term memory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Chunking (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity | Video on TED.com


----------



## Happy (Oct 10, 2008)

Oh God. I don't think you were exaggerating when you used the light bulb example. Hahaha. I really never looked at this viewpoint before. I like how you basically said both China and the U.S have poor understanding of scientific reasoning. Just visualizes how no country has a perfect society. I have a question, which country do you think has the best scientific understanding of reasoning?


----------



## Nightriser (Nov 8, 2008)

I didn't just say it, I backed it up with an article describing the study. The link is at the bottom. About the light bulb example, I remember being surprised. It was a group of students from a top-notch engineering or physics school. The guy was making a point that current education is too abstract; physics and engineering students are too often given circuit diagrams to study in electronics, so due to how those diagrams are drawn, you have students from prestigious colleges and universities without a clue how to light up a light bulb with the listed materials only. And I would have thought it obvious. 

"Just visualizes how no country has a perfect society."
What do you mean by this? 

As for which country, I'm not sure. I'll have to look into that. I just happened to notice the article talking about comparative abilities in scientific reasoning and thought it was interesting.


----------



## Dr. Metallic (Nov 15, 2008)

I didn't know we were lacking in interdisciplinary thought. I have to associate any new knowledge with what I know. This way, I benefit in many facets.

Apparently most people don't do that.......


----------



## Nightriser (Nov 8, 2008)

It just seems that way to me. I find that I'm going out of my way, in quite a few classes, to connect, say, economics and biology. You have a good point, though, I don't know of any studies that say anything about interdisciplinary thought in education, whether it's beneficial or not, whether it's used extensively or only sparingly. I only have my own experience. 

What do you think of the other points?


----------



## Dr. Metallic (Nov 15, 2008)

I don't have problems with the other points. I do wish you would have worked around a single objective in your post. To me it looks all over the place.

I've not before heard of memory chunking, although I do it. If I have to keep up, I find myself "tucking things away" for later.


----------



## Nightriser (Nov 8, 2008)

Ah, yes, the rambling. I just wrote up some things that came to mind, and put a thin polish on it. 

I need to start the memory chunking, so I don't get so absentminded and forgetful. It's hideous, how often I forget things. If one didn't know me, they'd surely think me an imbecile. I have ransacked the house looking for something that was in my hand the entire time. What can I say, the absent-minded professor is the archetypal INTP.


----------

