Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education writes about problems faced by many science teachers:
Imagine you’re a middle-school science teacher, and you get to the section of the course where you’re to talk about climate change. You mention the “C” words, and two students walk out of the class.
Or you mention global warming and a hand shoots up.
“Mrs. Brown! My dad says global warming is a hoax!”
Or you come to school one morning and the principal wants to see you because a parent of one of your students has accused you of political bias because you taught what scientists agree about: that the Earth is getting warmer, and human actions have had an important role in this warming.
Or you pick up the newspaper and see that your state legislature is considering a bill that declares that accepted sciences like global warming (and evolution, of course) are “controversial issues” that require “alternatives” to be taught.
Incidents like these have happened in one or more states, and they are likely to continue to happen. Teachers are encountering pushback from many directions as they try to teach global warming and other climate science topics.
I guess that is problematic if you consider “science” to be the end product instead of “a method of acquiring knowledge” as I do. This is not a new issue and scientific study continually refines current knowledge. For instance, today’s science disputes the validity of the “Food Pyramid” that was taught for decades.
Give me science education that teaches analytical thinking any day over memorized thesis. Science changes everyday so why must we all think the same theories are indisputable? Studies and interpretations are subject to errors and manipulations just like anything else.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/09/himalayan-glaciers-have-lost-no-ice-in-past-10-years-new-study-reveals/?intcmp=features
Science is “a method of acquiring knowledge” using “analytical thinking.” Agreed. So why should we not act and teach based on the overwhelmingly agreed-upon outcomes of that process? Would you demand unanimity and infallibility? It’s hard to imagine any effective scientific education under those ground rules. But wait, your point is really that climate change is a conspiracy of the liberal scientific community and media, right? Never mind; reason doesn’t apply.
Flint- My point is: 1. It is not a new problem for teachers. 2. Teach analytical processes.
If we don’t, then any false thesis will never be found out. I don’t have a problem with teaching about climate but don’t denigrate a thought that is contrary to popular opinion.
According to a 2009 report by the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, of the 19 recognized subpopulations of polar bears, 8 are in decline, 1 is increasing, 3 are stable and 7 don’t have enough data to draw any conclusions. A large number of the big-white polars have drowned for lack of sea ice. Maybe we could contact the president of the Himalayas to see if he has room for the declining species.
for future reference, is there an emoticon for sarcasm?