You are on page 1of 14

University of Idaho

Changing the Way Students Are Taught Science:


Situational Analysis
April Greene

General Overview:
Science, as a broad category, changes every day. New discoveries are made, new hypotheses are
tested, and many ideas are rejected. Across different demographics, one would expect to find
highly varied knowledge and acceptance of science; in some cases, basic scientific concepts may
be unknown. Science is taught for most of a childs educational career as one broad topic, and it
is only when students reach high school that these ideas are broken down into different pieces:
Biology, Chemistry, and Physics, and Typical Course of Study High School Program states that
they are only required to take 3 credits of Science.
According to one study done by the Pew Research Center and Smithsonian magazine, almost
half of all Americans (46%) say that young people are pursuing STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Mathematics) degrees because they see the subjects as being too difficult. This is a
stereotype that could fade if science was presented to children from elementary school as the
ever changing tool of discovery that it is. As children grow, their knowledge of science would
follow them, becoming more refined and making the division of science into its various
subgroups seem less daunting.
The issue of having a rudimentary science background is an issue that affects every US citizen. A
limited scientific background affects a voters ability, for example, to know why it would be a
bad idea for a frack sand mining area to open up nearby, as only about half of the general public
knows what fracking really is (Pew, 2). By making sure citizens have a solid scientific
educational background, there is a better chance that the United States will not be left in the dust
in technological advances, which is key to the countrys economic success. Likewise, with
natural resources dwindling to the point that some countries are starting to be in crisis, a solid
scientific background would alert United States citizens to the need to take action to preserve
natural resources like water, lumber, and even oil.
Evolution vs. Creationism claims in some states, one of the big hurdles is science versus religious
teachings. One of the biggest misconceptions is that the people of faith believe is they cannot
work together, that a parishioner would have to choose between their faith and science like in the

case of teaching creationism versus evolution. This misconception has made it somewhat
controversial for Biology teachers to cover the topic of evolution, which is causing students to
lag behind those in other countries (Huffington Post, 1). They fear confrontation with parents
who are having the battle of following their faith or science, community members who do not
believe in evolution, and the school boards who wish to make everyone happy. It was found in
many cases that the Biology teachers themselves had very limited knowledge about evolution,
with approximately 60% only devoting 1-5 hours of class time on the subject.
The second hurdle is the language of science. The Pew Research Poll showed that education
level is the biggest predictor of scientific knowledge. The people they polled who had college
level exposure to science did much better on the questions asked in the poll than those who had
no college experience at all. A big factor is the use of language. The best way to look at this issue
is with the table provided by Phil Plait, in his Discovery article:

Clearly, there are differences between how the public hears what scientists are saying, and what
they are actually saying. Introducing children to scientific words and concepts early in their
educational careers would enable children to become used to thinking in terms of science, and be
more likely to be able figure out the correct usage of a given word based on what is being
presented to them. With this background, as adults they will be able to not only understand what
information is being presented to them, but also be able to think more critically.
The problem I propose to address is this: I would like to advocate for changes in minimum
science education requirements. Instead of mandating the certain number of classes, or hours that
need to be devoted to science education, I would like to convince state boards of education to
outline in detail how different scientific concepts are presented to children in each grade level.
While science education has come a long way from where science classrooms were 20 years ago,
if we wish to keep the future generations interested and literate in science, changes must be
constantly made as science changes.
Background:
Causes of the Problem
More and more every year, budget shortfalls are causing cuts are being made across the board to
education, with stiff cuts to arts and science programs. These changes are leaving teachers with
fewer and fewer resources to broaden their teaching efforts. Children learn in different ways, so
there are often children left behind because of the inability to teach as well as show science in
action to them.
The teachers themselves are also victims. There have been increased cuts to teachers salaries,
which has been affecting the quality of teachers that are produced. With there being no real
incentive other than altruistic reasons to become a teacher, more and more college graduates are
turning away from the idea of becoming teachers because of how hard it would be to support a
family with the long hours but little pay. That, along with the disdain for unions in politics, the

future of teachers looks more and more bleak. Getting college graduates interested in teaching,
let alone getting the proper background in the proper areas of study, would be much easier if
teachers were no longer seen as expendable.
The idea that religion, particularly Christianity, and science cannot work together is an idea that
needs to be dealt with before any curriculum changes can be made. Teaching the teachers how to
approach the topics that they are so afraid to speak about will provide them with the tools they
need to not only deal with students, parents, and communities, but also how to reconcile the two
ideologies in their own head. Science and religions show support for each other through various
programs like making churches and communities around them more sustainable and helping poor
third world countries with agricultural practices, both are moving forward and have positive
effects on one another.
Previous Efforts
The idea that has been previously suggested and subsequently rejected is the idea of raising the
property taxes to aid in school district budgets. But recently, looking at the amount of money that
goes into the United States prison system, I question why so much more is being spent per
prisoner than per child. Taxpayers spend more and more money each year on housing inmates
than teaching their own children. In California, approximately $27,000 per year is used to teach a
child, where they spend almost $60,000 on inmates (Education, 1).
The most recent effort to shed a light on science education problem has come from the internet
and television. With the increasing popularity of science on the internet in the form of Facebook
groups and podcasts, many members of the scientific community have come out in support of
increasing science education spending in any way possible, after seeing how fascinated the
public is with it. Thanks to the internet and television, people now know who Stephen Hawking
and Neil deGrasse Tyson are, and Bill Nye the Science Guy has made a comeback into the lives
that he attempted to reach with his public broadcasting show which ran from 1993-1998. With
their own twist, these science proponents have made science education fun while also filling the
gaps in knowledge that the schools seem to be leaving children.

Previous Successes
Shows like Mythbusters and more recently the reboot of Cosmos, have been making science
available to the whole family to highlight how important and how amazing science can be. These
shows present ideas and the scientific process in a new way that individuals of all ages and
education levels can understand. By using a similar model to promote science education funding,
we could see a turn-around in the way taxpayers allow their money to be spent.
Another success out of science utilizing social media is that it is able to reach a more broad range
of people. People are beginning to see how cool science is, and how it is very much a part of
their everyday lives. Social media is helping people to find the scientific curiosity they had as
children while also informing them. Science is sexy again!
Scope and Urgency:
Who is being affected?
By the time they are ready to go to college, young people often find that there are holes in their
science background that make undergraduate work difficult. As a result, when they step out into
the real world, these young people will not understand how their phones work, let alone be able
to understand more challenging concepts like climate change.
Who may be affected in the future?
The future generation that will be affected, and this affect will be passed on and on. As voters,
this future generation will make their decisions based on their own backgrounds and personal
beliefs as it is now, and if they lack the proper education, they will not be able to make informed
decisions about topics such as climate change. The need to fund alternative sources of energy
and the crisis that surrounds the clean water supply rely them to make changes. As parents, they
need to be able to teach their children about science. As consumers, they need to be able to tell

the difference between sound science and pseudoscience. And as employees or employers, they
will be well rounded education-wise to make sound decisions for their customers or clients and
bosses.
When a scientific topic is understood, then there is more support for it, as people are not likely to
support something they dont understand. For example, if more people understood climate
change, there would be more of a push to stop it than there is currently, and there would be fewer
people who deny it. All of this boils down to how a person was educated.
Likely Outcomes
If science education is not further addressed, and the curriculum does not change, there will be
fewer and fewer students finding their way into the STEM fields, which means fewer
technological advances, medical advances, and scientific discovery. While this may not seem like
that big of a deal, it affects the reputation of United States to other countries. If the US cannot
compete with other countries technology wise, then the smartest minds when it comes to
technology will leave to be supported by those other countries. If the scientific discoveries do not
keep up, then the US will lose scientists to other countries. Advances in medicine will cause all
of the doctors, then patients to look for care elsewhere. Clearly, this would hurt the economy of
the country.
Summary
While it would be easy to claim that more money should be dedicated to education, the science
curriculum is the one that suffers most because of its complexity. It is seen as being too difficult,
too controversial, and too expensive. However, if the money were put into the future of this
country by investing in education, we could be an economic powerhouse once again, rival other
developed countries with high student test scores, high percent that go to and graduate from
college. By putting money into the future of our country, we are making sure that there is a solid
base of which the country can grow even more in the STEM fields. More money in education as

a whole leads to a decrease of crime, a decrease in unemployment, and even better health
(Lochner, 66).
Target Population Data:
The first population to be targeted is the parents of children who are about to enter into school.
By helping the parents to begin thinking about how their childs education would benefit from
the change, the parents then could begin the conversations among each other. Giving them a list
of resources available to help them to get their voices heard will give them the weapon they need
for change.
The second population targeted will be those who do not have any children, ages 25-45. This is
an important group because they also have voting power. The people who do not have children
still pay property taxes and still vote on school referendums. Instead of treating them as if this
change would have no benefit for them, highlight the future benefits for the country and how
their daily lives benefit from scientific discoveries produced thus far.
Barriers to both populations would be the level of interest they have in the topic themselves. If
they believe science has no bearing on their lives, then they are not likely to be interested in
aiding the cause to change the curriculum. If they do not see how the current curriculum is
broken and very weak, they are more likely to ignore any sort of outreach attempts. Rather, they
would want to continue with the business as usual concept, thinking if it was fine before, it
should be fine now.
These people are chosen because they are where most of the influence comes from. They are the
targets that can make the most change happen, and they have the most to gain or lose. If parents
and future employers do not have properly educated children, their future retirement could be at
stake as this generation would be paying into social security as they are taking out. If there are no
decent paying jobs because of economic downturn, their retirement will suffer.
Available Resources:

Mass Media
The two most important media for the targets is social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, and
television because it is easiest to reach our target audiences using these two means. What makes
it easier is that there have already been science barriers broken down with television shows like
The Big Bang Theory to Planet Earth, and popular Facebook groups like The Planetary
Society and even NASA- National Aeronautics and Space Administration are helping to
spread the word of science to their over 24 million subscribers.
The social media sites are where people can be informed the easiest, as many schools have
Facebook pages that release school information for the parents, and with all of the different
scientists and science organizations that have Facebook pages, it is not hard to start spreading the
information. The key is to get these science proponent organizations to start working together for
a common cause, under the same banner, all with the same message: Science curriculum reform
is needed.
Television will obviously have a few areas where support could be found. First there is the
morning and evening news shows, which is the easiest way to reach our demographic through
their daily news stories. The need to make sure as many parents as possible are reached, then
there needs to be the support of the current shows being done by major science supporters. One
example would be to gain the support of Seth McFarlane, who was pivotal to the reboot of
Cosmos and its success. He has other programming that would be able to address this message.
The point is not to overwhelm the audience and not give them what they have taken time out of
their day to see, but rather have a commercial during a time slot or a message at the end of a
show explaining the need for science curriculum reform.
Important Opinions
Some of the most important opinions that should be considered when revising the science
curriculum are what is expected by college professors. They fill in the teaching gaps that

previous science education has left in order to ensure the students further success. They would
know the best as to what information a student would need to understand basic concepts of
science such as the scientific method and climate change, and also be able to aid in how to teach
critical thinking skills. By taking the professors opinions to the parents of future students, the
parents can then be able to see where the current curriculum is failing.
These college professors could also reach those who do not have children, especially those who
have been to the colleges at which they teach. Alumni are highly regarded and often looked upon
for donations of any kind, and would be a great source to help fund the efforts to update the
science curriculum. Even if this is not aiding in their colleges directly, the work of the alumni
and the professors make the college look so much better in the eyes of the parents who would
possibly be sending their children to those colleges.
Funding Sources:
Currently, there is no funding available for the exact purpose of changing the science curriculum,
which explains why this issue has not been seriously addressed in any major fashion. There are,
however, many different places where teachers and schools can find funding for their STEM
classrooms. These would be the biggest alliances who are already trying to address the issue of
science education being so underfunded.
The biggest is the National Science Foundation, which accepts proposals for grants that focus on
Informal STEM Learning. They fund programs like NOVA on public television and Neil
deGrasse Tysons podcast Star Talk Radio. But they are not the only ones. Below is a list of
places to find STEM grants:

http://ies.ed.gov/funding/
http://stemgrants.com/
http://www.fundforteachers.org/funding-opportunities/grants-science.php
http://www.cesa2.org/programs/stem/STEMgrants.cfm

Summary:

If this were a small scale problem, it would be far easier to fix, so starting in the state of
Wisconsin, where I am a resident, would be my first target. Alas, since there are so many varying
views on what children should be taught, children have been left in the dust as far as any sort of
curriculum reform for science in particular. This is a topic where parents need to be presented the
problem in a way that shows concern for their children and for their future. By putting more
time, effort and money into schools and their science curriculums, there will be more
opportunities for advancement not just for the children, but also for the country. The United
States currently experiencing a lot of fight against science progress from climate change deniers
to those who do not want to fund renewable energy sources. Those who try to say that science
and religion will never be able to agree can be shown differently. Science, government, and
religions could work together rather than against each other.
There are many organizations out there who want to start a movement to change science
education, but without the support of parents and other voters, there is really no chance that the
government will pay any attention to them. While this may be a major pitfall to some subject
areas, those in the STEM fields are used to working on shoe string budgets, as long as they have
the mind power. This is the major focus: To give the future generation the brain power to think
critically, and change the science curriculum standards to help that happen. When children are
given the right tools, they can go on to do amazing things, not only for themselves, but for the
whole world. With the mission to start spreading the information to parents and those whose
future depends on the future of the next generation of thinkers, an increase of awareness is just
the start that is needed to get people in motion. And as proven many times in the history of the
United States, people in motion can make changes happen, no matter how big or small.

Resources:

Baker, B. (2012, January 15). Does Money Matter in Education? Retrieved March 2,
2015, from
http://www.shankerinstitute.org/resource/does-money-matter

Cairns, J. (n.d.). Communicating the processes of science to the news media, politicians, and the public.
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 783-784.
Education vs prison costs. (n.d.). Retrieved March 4, 2015, from
http://money.cnn.com/infographic/economy/education-vs-prison-costs/
Evolution Vs. Creationism: Study Reveals Public School Science Lagging. (2011,
January 31). Huffington
Post. Retrieved March 4, 2015, from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/31/evolution-vs-creationism_n_815664.html
Levine, S. (2014, September 30). 'It's Not Worth It To Become A Teacher At This
Point,' Veteran Educator
Says. Retrieved March 1, 2015, from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/30/north-carolinaeducation_n_5909324.html
Lance, L. (2010, December 15). Non-Production Benefits of Education: Crime,
Health, and Good
citizenship. Retrieved March 4, 2015, from
http://www.nber.org/papers/w16722.pdf
Masci, D. (2014, February 3). Overview: The Conflict Between Religion and
Evolution. Retrieved March 8,
2015, from http://www.pewresearch.org/

McElroy, M. (2010, July 6). Scientific and Religious Communities Can Work
Cooperatively, Speakers Say.
Retrieved March 2, 2015, from http://www.aaas.org/4mS
Mitchell, M. (2014, October 29). States Should Spend Less on Prisons, More on
Schools. Retrieved March
1, 2015, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michaelmitchell/states-shouldspend-less_b_6071104.html
NCSE | National Center for Science Education - Defending the Teaching of Evolution
in Public Schools.
(2007, December 13). Retrieved March 5, 2015, from http://www.ncseweb.org
Plait, P. (2011, October 19). Scientists are from Mars, the public is from Earth - Bad
Astronomy.
Retrieved March 1, 2015, from
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/10/19/scientists-arefrom-mars-the-public-is-from-earth/#.VPxysvnF9vU
Public's Knowledge of Science and Technology. (2013, April 22). Retrieved February 10, 2015, from
http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/22/publics-knowledge-of-science-and-technology/
Research Areas. (n.d.). Retrieved March 5, 2015, from
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5361
Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding. (2004). In Science & engineering
indicators 2004 (Vol. 1, pp. 7-1-7-34). Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation. Retrieved
February 10, 2015 from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind04/pdf/c07.pdf
Spending cuts to education and nutrition will hurt kids. (2014, September 19).
Retrieved March 1, 2015,
from http://wtvr.com/2014/09/19/spending-cuts-to-education-and-nutritionwill-hurt-kids/

Typical Course of Study High School Program | Home Educators Association of


Virginia. (n.d.). Retrieved
March 31, 2015, from http://heav.org/typical-course-of-study-high-schoolprogram/
Tyson, N. D. (2014). Reporting on Science, Parts 1 & 2 [Radio series episode]. In Star Talk Radio. New
York: Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

You might also like