Slashdot Mirror
Science 'Not for Normal People'
Ant writes "BBC News reports that teenagers 'value the role of science in society, but feel scientists are "brainy people not like them".' This was according to a recent study by The Science Learning Centre in London that asked 11,000 pupils for their views on science and scientists. From the article: 'They found around 80% of pupils thought scientists did "very important work" and 70% thought they worked "creatively and imaginatively". Only 40% said they agreed that scientists did "boring and repetitive work". Over three quarters of the respondents thought scientists were "really brainy people".'"
wtf are these little homepage teaser articles all about?
We should be teaching children that scientists are really brainy people, just like them.
Everyone who gave one of those three answers was right.
Is it really a problem that this student doesn't want to go into science? For some reason I doubt she was in line to cure cancer anyways...
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
After years of working in diagnostic labs (moderately interesting) I got my science degree, thought research was a good place to be and promptly got a job in a research lab. It is so boring. Months (and eventually years) to get a result. I got out and into web design.
:-)
I have nothing but respect for those who do research and do it well, but don't try and glam up research for the kids. It takes phlegmatic, methodical people to do it and stick to it. The flighty, can't-settle types should be in another field. Like web design
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
"Scientists ARE brainy people, right?"
Lemme guess, you watch The Simpsons! Try meeting a real scientist.
There are three types:
1) Those who are hard workers
2) Those who are brainy
3) Those who are both
Most scientists are simply hard workers who go through years of rigorous academics and hard work. This is why it's dangerous for youngsters to think scientists are simply brainy, it will cause them to shy away from science. When really, they could be the next generation of scientists.
Part of maturing is also realizing that people were full of crap when they wrote you off as a teenager. Sometimes a 6th grader actually has a deeper appreciation for ethics than his or her instructor, or is entitled to an opinion that the author was actually being sarcastic in this essay, or that Steinbeck really was actually not all that talented, or that spending a full year on trig is a waste of time.
Polling youths can tell us some valuable things about the coming perceptions of society. It is doing the world a disservice to exclude them from voicing their opinions and participating in debate. In this case, kids aren't identifying with scientists, and perhaps that is something worth examining.
Next they'll find out that the jocks are getting all the girls, too!
-- The reason it's called the right wing? Irony.
Don't get me wrong - I've met many fascinating, friendly, and sociable people in the various physical sciences. My old college roommate was a chemical engineering major who was the easiest guy to get along with and who explained many of the difficult concepts he learned in a way that a poor political science major, like myself, could understand. However, I'm sure many will agree, that a large portion of them are difficult to approach.
I don't chalk all of this up to their "superior intellect" as a few other posters have claimed. I consider myself to be a reasonably bright and sociable person. I think a great deal of it has to do with an inability to discuss topics of common interest outside of the sciences. Most people simply do not understand more advanced concepts in science, which is understandable - they have little incentive to. That said, most people don't understand the details and intricacies of other academic and professional disciplines. If I spent most of my time discussing the small differences between traditional realism and neo-realism, I wouldn't be a very interesting guy to hang out with, either.
The claims that people don't want to talk to scientists because they are "smarter" may reflect another problem - simple arrogance. In my experience this problem is, thankfully, limited to a small group. But it certainly can be a problem. No one wants to talk to someone who is secretly thinking, "I am so much smarter than this idiot who doesn't know the periodic table of elements backwards." I appreciate the contributions of those who work in the physical sciences, but for these reasons they can be a bit difficult to approach.
I think that the correlation between one and the other is rather false. Being smart does not exclude you from social interaction, sexual interaction, or relationships of any variety. Lacking in social graces does, and certainly some geeks do exhibit such traits, but I've never know somebody to be unpopular beyond say, high-school, just because he or she is following a geeky career.
:-)
Also, remember that there are both male and female geeks. For that geeky male scientist out there, perhaps an equally geeky female scientist, or vise-versa.
Of course, this way probably a joke anyhow, but really I find that the biggest problem many geeks have is that the tendency to have a superiority complex over their fellows.
Me, I'm a geek. I'm a smart, and skilled. I also associate with people from many walks of life, and won't jump to the conclusion that just because somebody went into massage-therapy, web-design, or plumbing that that person is any less valuable in life... well, except for maybe the web designers
There is a bit of humour to this all too, of course... but really in many ways geeks are receiving great recognition overall. From the lab types in CSI to the computer hackers... we've been made cool in many days. Get down off your pedestols and associate with your fellow humans, and you might find they don't have any problem associating with you.
"...after seeing beakers explode and million-dollar equipment destroyed by idiots, we've also come to the conclusion that normal people aren't for science, either."
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
I think a lot of this goes down to the rather brutal teenage subculture that actively demotes intellectual persuits and scientific ones in paticular.
No one wants to be that mythical "geeky" student who loves only science and has no friends. Even though such a creature rarely exists, a lot of students will shy away from science for fear of "becoming" such a wretch.
The article shows that lot of teenagers have a view that scientists, though it is awknowladged they do important work, are still are not respected by teenagers. They are unattrative, "not like them", a subculture. Almost another caste. This reflects the wide scale rejection of "geekery" by the mainstream teenage culture. So it's not too difficult to imagine that teenagers might thinl that scientists are a kind of alien caste in society.
It's like this. When you're 15 years old, and about to decide on your future career, having spent the last 3 years in a regressive subculture, you are much more likely to pick a career choice that would draw respect rather than derision from your peers.
May the Maths Be with you!
Who gives half a crap what teenagers think. Teenagers are powerless until they mature, and part of maturing is losing that teenage cluelessnes.
Except of course they are not completely powerless, as they have the power to choose their future career choices and hence influence the whole economy. What teenagers think about their careers is something everyone really should give a crap about.
May the Maths Be with you!
One particular mark about a (wo)man of science is that (s)he keeps wondering why things work.
Leonardo wondered what people were made of, and he came up with great tomes of anatomy (he wondered many other things, like why birds fly, etc., but you get the idea).
Newton wondered why things fell to the ground, so he came up with the law of gravity.
Einstein wondered why when falling one couldn't feel his own weight, and he came up with the theory of relativity.
Pasteur wondered why people got sick, and he came up with vaccines.
Scientists always find a question and search for the answer. Their curiosity never stops. This is why teaching science shouldn't be about giving kids information, but giving them questions. I remember professor Jaime Escalante (in the movie "Stand and Deliver") taught the students: "Negative times negative equals a positive". And then he punched them with the question: "Why?"
A great mistake of teaching science is that teachers don't let the students ask questions. If instead you give them interesting subjects (artificial intelligence, for example) and practical examples (build your own speech synthesis program with this toolkit - ok, that's more appropriate for college students but you get the idea), they'll progress.
If science appears boring, it's because all you see is someone thinking equations. But dig into his mind and visualize the data he's thinking about... that's another thing science is missing. Sometimes it's much easier to understand something if you can visualize. This is why astronomy is becoming more popular after the Hubble photos.
See, it's all about awakening the curiosity of your students. That's all they need.