College Students Lack Scientific Literacy 382
An anonymous reader writes with news of research into the scientific literacy of college biology students. Earlier studies found that students tended to "rely on mainly informal reasoning derived from their personal experiences," so the researchers derived a new instructional framework that explicitly taught principle-based reasoning. While the number of students who used this method did increase, more than half continued to use informal reasoning, which the researchers say points to a flaw in the way biology is taught (PDF). "Most college-level instruction presents students with complicated narratives about the details of key processes (e.g., cellular respiration), but does not explicitly reinforce the use of key principles to connect those processes. Therefore, students are understandably occupied with memorizing details of processes without focusing on the principles that govern and connect the processes. ... As a result, students may leave an introductory biology course with the ability to recite the reactions in the Calvin cycle but still believing that plants obtain most of their mass from the soil rather than from the atmosphere, that plants photosynthesize but do not respire, or that the mass of a decomposing organism will primarily return to the soil."
Math Illiteracy leads to science illiteracy (Score:5, Interesting)
You can find the answers to the above test in his blog article [blogspot.com].
Ignorance of the Philosophy of Science (Score:5, Interesting)
I would speculate that at a logical philosophical level, a large number of students are ignorant of what science actually is. Science is often taught as a series of completed results, as a series of facts to be memorized. While to some extent this is difficult to avoid when teaching base knowledge, I suspect many students concentrate on what "gets them the grade", which is demonstrated knowledge of specific material, often memorized. In most high school programs, students are not adequately taught the reasons for knowledge (the International Baccalaureate program is often an exception to this). They are not explicitly taught logic and reason. And since the root of science is logic and reason, I would argue that most students are hobbled in their studies.
Re:Early Development (Score:5, Interesting)
In a lot of other countries with a much better education system, teachers are recruited from the top of the graduating classes and are given incentives to go and teach. I wish that's something we could implement in the US for education reform rather than grading teachers on how effective they are at teaching their kids how to take a specific test.
Re:Interesting Litmus Test (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I think that the assertion that most of a plant's mass comes from the soil is correct.
The majority of plant species are mostly water by mass, and water enters a plant primarily through the roots.
They lack general literacy (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is that we've created a system that values a piece of paper that says you were in college for four years, even if those four years have absolutely nothing to do with the job position. There's nothing wrong with going to trade school, and in more than just a few trades you'll end up laughing all the way to the bank, making more money with your two year degree than a lot of people with a four year degree, all while paying a lot less for it.
Even many four year programs could be significantly shortened. A cousin of mine received a business degree from a program that crammed it all into one year. His job was school, his off-time was school, and they expected him to be there everyday in appropriate dress. They didn't fuck around and neither did he, and know he's out and being productive while a bunch of other kids are pissing away four years on classes they don't care about and keg parties.
Re:Logic Fail (Score:4, Interesting)
It points out the real problem with science education: we're not teaching the big facts and then delving into the intricacies, we're teaching the intricacies and hoping the big facts are obvious.
It's nothing about "informal" or "principle-based" reasoning, it's just inadequate communication.
Ugh. We should be teaching the intricacies and allow the students to derive the big facts. Doing otherwise reinforces memorization. If you do it your way then yes, they'd be able to tell you that plants get most of their mass from the atmosphere, but they still wouldn't understand it. They'd be reciting trivia.
The problem is that we don't teach people how to reason. Look at how MozeeToby explained the big fact. He used a number of intricacies, "farmers ship millions of tons of foodstuffs every year", "plants grow in soil only inches deep", "plants can grow in water more efficiently than in soil." From these tools, he's able to derive the "big fact." He's not reciting trivia, he's giving you small facts and demonstrating that he understands their significance.
Ideally, that's how science classes would be taught. You give the student the equations, you explain the theory. Then you don't ask them to recite them back to you on tests. You give them problems which force them to show understanding. Ask for the big fact in the test, "explain, and back up with reaction equations, where plants get most of their mass from. Explain how they acquire each chemical at every step of the process."
I used to have a professor while in college for an EE class that insisted in individual oral exams. The class was small enough, but it still took him about two weeks to go through everyone, each time. When you were taking the exam, he'd start by pointing you to the blackboard with a calculator and asking you a tremendously complicated question, which you could solve if you really understood the material. Most people couldn't, but that's ok: He would ask you a somewhat simpler question, which, if you could solve would lead you part of the way to the answer to the original question. If you couldn't solve that, he'd break it up into simpler questions. Eventually, he'd break it down far enough that everyone would have an a-ha moment, and he'd grade you based on just how much he had to help you before you got the answer. I swear I learned more in that one class than in any EE course I had taken before, and most of it was right there during the exam. I had equations memorized, but I didn't understand them until I was forced to think.
Re:Early Development (Score:5, Interesting)
In a lot of other countries with a much better education system, teachers are recruited from the top of the graduating classes and are given incentives to go and teach.
Which countries are these?
Finland is a good example and among the best in the world. Their teachers are one of their highest paid professions and are government jobs. Less than 3% of grade school students go to private school. All education is free right up through doctoral degrees and includes free meals and healthcare.
Many other countries are starting to use them as a model for changes to their own educational system, including China who has been taking great interest in reforming their education along those lines. I don't expect it to ever happen in the US though, we're a bit too isolationist and the majority opinion is that we're "better" at education and many other things despite objective evidence to the contrary.