Transition Topic I: Education and Scientific Illiteracy

To compete in a technology-driven world, the United States must dramatically improve public education. Our children today test behind many Third World countries. Losing our technological lead threatens our national security, undermines our economy and prevents us from solving our most pressing environmental problems.

We must teach critical thinking from the beginning, and reconfigure our curricula to incorporate science and technology as fundamental rather than elective. Ignorance of scientific principles prevents the public from distinguishing the dangerous from the harmless and from preventing the abuse of science for malevolent purposes. On the basis of bad science, governments support costly efforts to enforce ill-conceived laws to protect consumers from nonexistent or negligible risk, while draining resources from areas of critical need.

Ignorance of science allows the public to be deceived by a barrage of dubious claims. The most recent is fear that the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva will create a black hole that will consume the earth when scientists there smash protons together to create energies first seen at the Big Bang. Even the most rudimentary familiarity with, not even understanding of, high energy physics would prevent such an absurd idea from flourishing.

The anti-vaccine movement is another classic case of dangerous scientific illiteracy. Vaccines are one of the greatest achievements of modern medicine, saving hundreds of millions of lives and improving the quality of life for countless others, but because of medical illiteracy and misplaced religious zeal, some parents are, in a display of colossal ignorance, forcing school boards across the country to accept students with no vaccination history.

The public is unable to filter exaggerated claims by some environmental groups, such as the fear of Alar in apples, from legitimate concerns like global warming. People opposed to irradiated food ignore the existence of more than 50 known strains of E. coli that can cause bloody diarrhea, kidney failure, and death. This is a typical case of poor risk-benefit analysis, another consequence of scientific illiteracy. People are duped by claims of harmful emissions from cell phones. Life-saving diagnostic x-rays are eschewed from fear of radiation, and vulnerable people are persuaded to rely on crystals and astrology for guidance. Without an ability to reason critically, people believe in weeping statues of the Virgin Mary, the existence of a carved face on Mars, out-of-body experiences, and Christ's image captured on the Shroud of Turin.

While we debate teaching creation science alongside evolution, the rest of the world is training the next generation to compete in the new global economy. We are the only industrialized nation that questions the proven ideas of evolution. We debate this issue, resolved 150 years ago, while China, Japan, Europe and Australia leave us in the dust. Those countries are actively funding stem cell research, which the United States has shunned on the basis of a narrow religious ideology.

We can be the country of the 20th century, a relic of the age of fossil fuels and polluting industries, left behind by the rest of the world adapting to a new age. Or, we can be the leader of the 21st century, blazing the trail to renewable energies, clean technologies and a green economy. The choice is ours. But such leadership demands a better system of education, based on rational thinking skills and knowledge of the basic principles of science. Without an educated populace, the United States will fall ever farther behind the Asian giants and a united Europe.

The first step is to remove from public education the influence of religion, bringing us back in line with other industrialized countries. Let us leave religious teachings to the church, synagogue and mosque. Let us teach religion in our homes, but not in our public schools. We cannot hope to teach lessons of the 21st century when we are fighting battles of the 15th. The next step is to integrate lessons from science and technology into every subject taught, from English to social studies to home economics. Finally, we need to revamp how we teach actual science courses, making the subject more accessible to a broader range of students, not just a few nerds interested in chemistry.

When properly taught, science is fun, exciting and interesting. No experience is quite like that light bulb going off when some aspect of the natural world suddenly becomes clear and understandable. Knowledge truly is power. The image of science should be the polar explorer or underwater adventurer, not the guy in the white coat with thick glasses standing in the lab with a beaker in hand. Scientists should be the rock stars of the future.

If we focus on the Three Es of Energy, Environment and Education, this country can once again reclaim its rightful position as a global leader and leading light in the centuries ahead. But we have to go back to basics and get our system of education back on track.

Comments

[Bethab]

As a math teacher, I would like to add that we need to place a greater emphasis on teaching the fundamentals of finance. No one should leave high school without an understanding of interest rates, mortgages, the perils of credit, credit scores, and the miracle of compound interest. In fact, if people believed in that miracle, rather than the miracle of an image of the Virgin Mary in a salt stain under a highway underpass, we would probably not be in the disastrous credit debacle we now find ourselves in. Math education should be retooled from Kindergarten through 12th grade to focus on financial education!

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

Bravo. Well said.

[lenzorizzo]

It's not the vaccines that parents object to; it's the preservatives that are added, such as thimerosal. Why would any conscientious person inject an infant with a mercury-based product?
I'm sure it makes it more profitable to mass-produce and distribute vaccines with a longer shelf-life, but at the expense of a child's brain development? I think not.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

The benefit of vaccines is beyond any doubt. Why would any conscientious person expose an infant to the ravages of terrible diseases that are completely preventable?

[odyssey58]

I have a BS in biology from a rigorous institution. I worked in medical research and for major pharmaceutical companies. I am now a nurse. It is BECAUSE of my scientific critical thinking skills that I chose not to vaccinate my child. For example , why does a baby need a hepatitis B vaccination immediately after being born? Babies aren't IV drug users and they aren't sexually active.
I believe that the push to vaccinate is driven by big pharma profits and the lost productivity of parents having to care for sick children.
I agree that we need better science education. We also need to teach the difference between good science and bad science Good science is open minded. Unfortunately, there is too much bad science that asks, "How can we prove that e.g. x causes y?" It's very easy to manipulate data to show what you want. People also need to know that science is based on measurement. If it can't be measured, then it can't be proved or disproved.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

If you have ever seen up close a child suffering the agaony of diptheria or typhus, or seen the ravages and devastation of poilo, the issue of whether vaccines are good science quickly becomes evident. The very success of vaccines in eliminating from our society the worst of communicable diseases gives you the luxury of thinking you can do without them -- until it is too late.

[Cheryl Lubin - Huffpost Blogger]

What an outstanding piece! Scientific rigor and educational standards can hopefully be preserved and heightened if such proposals as "Intelligent Design" are excised from public discourse and the school curriculum. The drama Inherit the Wind is a prime example of rationalism versus fanaticism set in a Tennessee town; I also had the privilege of seeing L.A. Theatreworks' production of The Great Tennessee Monkey Trial starring Ed Asner. The play brilliantly reconstructed the most public national trial of its time. That trial polarized the nation and presaged the dampening of critical thought that will keep us behind in the global scientific community unless we follow your advice.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the kind words. I am saddened by the continued "debate" about evolution, and the decline in our educational system. We should be so far beyond this now, but keep getting dragged back to the 14th century. Perhaps Obama's election will presage a new era of enlightenment.

[nikonguy]

All good points. One more is that parents MUST be involved and held responsible for educating their children. Kids can't come home from school, drop their books at the door, and sit in front of the tube or nintendo for the rest of the evening. A child that is read to at home from day 1 will be a lifelong reader. When the only book in the house is the phone book, there is a lower chance of any intellectual achievement.

Of course, the US spends a ton of money on education, but making families secure, safe streets, good libraries, support for the arts, affordable child care, and stable family structures are also important towards making an environment that encourages and facilitates learning. If both parents are working and are too tired/ not around/ etc. to help with homework and make sure junior shares the responsibility for schoolwork, then all the $ you throw at schools won't help. It starts at home.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

I agree completely; it starts at home. The government cannot and should not replace parents in instilling the importance of working hard at education. Doing homework is not fun, and will only take center stage with parental encouragement. But the government can do much more to improve the quality of education our children receive, when properly supported by parents.