There have been a couple of science funding items in Inside Higher Ed in the last few days, one suggestiong prizes to spur research, and the other reporting that most people aren’t convinced there’s a crisis:
Generally, the public appreciates some of the message of the reports going out — that the United States is likely to face heightened competition from other countries. And the public generally thinks those who do go into science and math deserve support and more scholarships. But as to whether more students should be encouraged to do so, and whether non-science students should graduate with more scientific knowledge, the public is ambivalent at best.
Noting the impact of Sputnik 50 years ago, David Ward, president of the ACE, said that “we need a better symbol or rallying cry” today. As of now, Americans aren’t sure they want to learn more science, which they think of as “difficult, uninteresting or poorly taught.”
I would tentatively submit that the idea that the funding issues can be circumvented with cash prizes is a symptom of this public ambivalence…
Of course, as you might expect of a publication aimed at academics, the most interesting material in the second piece has to do with the place of science in academia. It’s also kind of depressing to see what people think about education in general and science specifically:
Asked about the “ultimate goal” for a college education, here is the breakdown:
- To obtain a particular degree: 6 percent
- To become a more scholarly, educated individual: 14 percent
- To develop personal, social and life skills: 10 percent
- To enjoy the “college experience”: 3 percent
- To get a good job after graduation: 64 percent
and:
Asked to identify the main reasons students avoid math and science, here are the answers:
- They think it is too difficult: 44 percent
- They think it will hurt their grade-point average: 10 percent
- They find it uninteresting: 17 percent
- The subject material is not presented in an engaging way: 16 percent
- They don’t believe it will provide a good job after graduation: 10 percent
Those of us who care about science education have a lot of work to do.
Well, the problem is, a typical science course really is more difficult than the many ‘A is for attendance’ courses taught in the humanities, and our average grades are indeed lower. The problem is not with the sciences; the problem is that standards in the liberal arts are frequently non-existent, and the grading is ridiculously easy. We tried to correct this at my institution by simply publicizing the average GPA by Department, figuring we could shame some of them into toughening up. Instead, the administration decided such comparative data would no longer be released.
The 10% who think they won’t get a good job after graduation are nuts, and perhaps that could be corrected. They should compare the average starting salaries of English majors with those of Chemical Engineers.
College now is like high school was in the 50’s. Its becoming more of a trade school mentality, and also consumer driven (please the student, luxurious dorms, food, bandwidth, all lectures must be on the web in case they don’t feel like coming, etc…..). And everyone thinks they will soon be a boss of others earning great sums, and everything till then is just passing time.
AAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKFFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTTT
Yes, it is the last week of classes here and I’m frazzled.
As far as GPA inflation, our Education school has an AVERAGE of 3.4 or something. I mean, thats just wrong……
Well, the problem is, a typical science course really is more difficult than the many ‘A is for attendance’ courses taught in the humanities, and our average grades are indeed lower.
I don’t dispute either of those points. Science is hard, and science classes do have lower grades.
The problem isn’t with the humanities disciplines, though. The problem is that we’ve created a society in which college students think that those are good reasons not to take science classes, and in which everybody else thinks that’s ok.
Along those lines, let me point to an article linked from the sidebar of the second Inside Higher Ed article: “It’s Time to End ‘Physics for Poets'”.
That Higher Ed article is interesting, especially since it was written under a pseudonym.
I fundentally agree with the authors point and am not in the least bit amused in how the first humanities faculty member completely misses the point. If “user friendly” means no math, then so be it.