Links for 2012-04-06

“So then I sent her a text saying I think I left my favorite sunglasses in the desk.”

So this whole “get back to doing science” kind of hits me where I live. I’ve seen budgetary fallout from recent events, and I know I’m not alone in that regard. But I also know that a tweet is not a substitute for actual action or activism. I’m a scientist. So I want to know: Do you have my back? Are you going to fund me? That is, do you recognize the value of research so that you won’t complain that some fraction of a penny from your tax dollar goes to funding science? And that scientists — not politicians, nor religious leaders, nor fat, lying and/or bald pundits, nor even the general public — decide what constitutes good science? You won’t sulk if the results aren’t what you or your ideology want them to be? You won’t pout when the bulk of basic research doesn’t pan out, because investigating the unknown means you — by definition — don’t know what you will find?

Science is often taught as a disjointed set of facts in traditional disciplines such as chemistry, biology, and physics without clear connections being made between the subjects. Today’s frontiers in science are often at the disciplinary edges. Aided by the explosion in technology and scientific discoveries, new fields are arising that were hardly imagined a generation ago like synthetic biology, digital organisms, and genomics. What we need is a radical overhaul of how science is taught- one that moves away from memorization of scientific facts to helping students develop a deeper understanding of science through questioning their observations, making connections, and seeing the relationship between natural phenomena.