Comments on: What’s Wrong with U.S. Science Education?

By: Theodore Brown

Theodore Brown — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:40:04 +0000

I like what Chris has to say here. Many of those commenting have focused on issues that are certainly important, but the central issue that Chris points toward is really the place of science in modern American culture. Science is not in a good place. Furthermore, it is making slow progress in overcoming the many cultural forces with which it contests in its attempts to exercise authority, by which I mean the capacity to exercise influence in society’s affairs. As just one example of the slow progress being made, consider a recent paper by Louise Mead and Anton Makes (http://www.springerlink.com/content/9u0610162rn51432/fulltext.html), which deals with state standards for coverage of evolution in the schools. While there is weak evidence of progress, creationism seems to be making headway in many quarters as well. The report grades states on their coverage. Florida went from a previous grade of F to an A; presumably they came up from abysmal, but the report doesn’t say just why. But to cite another example, Arizona gets a B for guidelines that delay discussion of evolution until high school, and that don’t cover human evolution at all! This is typical of many states.
The forces that operate to limit science’s place in society are many, and the teaching of science in the schools, while very important, is just one peice of a complex topic. I’ve addressed these matters in a book newly out, Imperfect Oracle: The Epistemic and Moral Authority of Science.

By: Len Phillips

Len Phillips — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:46:12 +0000

Chris, I don’t know what part of the U.S. you’re talking about, but science content mastery is certainly part of the teacher certification process in Connecticut and Massachusetts. Although I’m not teaching any longer, my two degrees (in geology) and required concentration in education courses were prerequisites for certification here. Your fundamental points, however, are sound.

By: Margherita Davis

Margherita Davis — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:52:25 +0000

I have another culprit: school budgets. Many localities simply do not provide adequate funding for quality scientific education.

By: S. Davis

S. Davis — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:43:09 +0000

Dr Nelson writes: “The reality is that there is a profound talent glut which is exacerbated by immigration policies that import young technical professionals to permanently displace experienced (aka over-35) American citizen technical professionals. I recommend the PDF version of my 2007 investigative journalism article, “The Greedy Gates Immigration Gambit.” This article includes a table showing over 25 million visa admissions between FY 1975 and FY 2005 in just 5 high skill work visa programs.”

This has been a problem not only in S&E. Humanities and Arts studies have been doing the same thing, filling jobs that US-born citizens should have by importing work visa people from abroad, often to satisfy minority hiring quotas, or because they are erroneously perceived as more able or trendy than their US counterparts.

By: Dr. Gene Nelson

Dr. Gene Nelson — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:49:31 +0000

As a Ph.D. scientist, I agree with the concluding parts of Chris’s essay. However, I have big problems with where Chris starts from. The problem is that the “prominent international comparison” that Chris referenced was not a scientific comparison. It was agenda (rather than evidence) based. Foreign data was “cherry picked” to make them look better, while U.S. data came primarily from resource-starved inner-city schools. Google on the phrase “The First in the World Consortium” and “TIMSS” to learn more. Note particularly the criticisms of Gerald Bracey. The agenda was to continue the ongoing false claims by the economic and political elite that there is some kind of “looming shortage” of scientists and engineers in the U.S. Thus, the nation could continue to import large numbers of “techies.”

The reality is that there is a profound talent glut which is exacerbated by immigration policies that import young technical professionals to permanently displace experienced (aka over-35) American citizen technical professionals. I recommend the PDF version of my 2007 investigative journalism article, “The Greedy Gates Immigration Gambit.” This article includes a table showing over 25 million visa admissions between FY 1975 and FY 2005 in just 5 high skill work visa programs.

Annual domestic Bachelor of Science production during the past 3 decades in S&E fields has been between 300,000 to 400,000 per year according to the NSF. Douglas Braddock authored a February, 1992 paper in Monthly Labor Review that projected with a low real GDP model that net replacement and business growth requirements in S&E fields would be around 65,000/year between 1995 and 2005 (page 35). The supply – demand equation is far too tilted towards the supply side.

Authors like Caltech Vice-Provost David Goodstein and Maryland Science investigative reporter Daniel S. Greenberg have also written extensively regarding the glut of scientists and engineers.

By: EngiNERD

EngiNERD — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:24:55 +0000

Let me take exception with your statement – “What’s Wrong with U.S. Science Education?”

Yes some of our students are performing poorly but then you failed to noted racial, ethnic impacts. (OOOPS can’t do that NOT PC)

You might wish to read.
The Stupid American? Look again.
Psssst: Have you heard? We’ve lost our competitive edge.

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/051222_nd.htm

and as your science education, I’d point a finger at the media for it failure to properly cover science, technology and Engineering stories.

Have you heard of the Draper Prize???
If not then there’s the problem!

Let me direct you to

THE NOBEL PROFESSION
We Get No Recognition (paraphrase the late Rodney Dangerfield)

http://www.eiass.com/BobNobel.asp