Reaching out with science
We should do everything in our capacity to give our children the opportunity to be inspired by nature.
The writer is associate professor in the departments of Biomedical Engineering and Medicine at Boston University
Many of our current high value challenges, including energy, infrastructure, water, environment, health and food production require advancements in technology and improvement of our national technical workforce. It is not to say that technology alone can answer all of our national problems. Rather, technology has a role to play, just as better policy, social development and nation building.
In the realm of technology and science, we have to be honest with ourselves. Our fragmented education system forces our students to choose early on in their lives (sometimes as early as ninth grade), to decide whether they want a career in science or not. Secondly, we have created one-way bridges in our education system. If you do decide to pursue a non-science path, there is little you can do to change that. You are condemned for life to be a non-scientist. We create and reinforce the image that science is hard, it’s too difficult and it’s the domain of fuzzy equations that are reserved for the intellectually gifted but socially awkward group. But in my view, science literacy or science education is more than just about cementing the career of an engineer or a technology specialist; it is about understanding how nature works, how things come together in the universe and above all, the value of precision, rational thought and scientific reasoning.
So, how can we ensure that we continue to engage society at large, those who are forming their ideas and those who are eager to learn at any stage of their lives, in science? Firstly, we need to recognise the problem that we need better scientific literacy, even though the intent is not and should never be that everyone become a scientist. Secondly, the custodians of scientific research need to make this a priority. This is routinely done in the US and Europe with no additional costs. Whenever someone applies for a research grant, they need to describe a robust strategy outlining how they will take their research to the masses and how they will engage non-scientists, including young students, in their research. This outreach programme needs to be more than lip service and an integral part of all future grants. Some institutions such as the Lahore University of Management Sciences, in particular its physics department, have done a phenomenal job in this regard but these activities need to be promoted from the top and need to be a part of all grant applications. Thirdly, we need to air programmes on TV channels that engage audiences of all age groups and backgrounds with scientific content. We can do with fewer talk shows where our (un)educated politicians repeat the same things over and over again, each time with a louder voices and a weaker argument. Instead, a programme or two that engages the audience in intriguing scientific questions can work wonders.
The burden here lies on us, the scientists, to create programmes that are able to capture the audience and leave them wanting more. If we can create a market, the audience will keep coming back. This has been done successfully in many parts of the world, including Bill Nye, “The Science Guy”, in the US, who through his TV programme, has engaged millions over the years.
As a nation we love to divide ourselves. Religious, ethnic, cultural and linguistic barriers may be there, but we love to raise those walls to new heights. We also divide ourselves and worse, our children, into ‘science kids’ or ‘non-science kids’. We, or our children, may or may not decide to pursue science as a career, but we should do everything in our capacity to give them the opportunity to be inspired by nature and to be fascinated by its wonders. Those who we failed in providing any schooling, either through our incompetence or through our biases, have an equal right to learn about how beautiful our universe really is. Perhaps through a better understanding of everything around us, we as a society, will come to realise that there is a lot more common in all of us, biologically and socially, than we care to appreciate.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 18th, 2014.
In the realm of technology and science, we have to be honest with ourselves. Our fragmented education system forces our students to choose early on in their lives (sometimes as early as ninth grade), to decide whether they want a career in science or not. Secondly, we have created one-way bridges in our education system. If you do decide to pursue a non-science path, there is little you can do to change that. You are condemned for life to be a non-scientist. We create and reinforce the image that science is hard, it’s too difficult and it’s the domain of fuzzy equations that are reserved for the intellectually gifted but socially awkward group. But in my view, science literacy or science education is more than just about cementing the career of an engineer or a technology specialist; it is about understanding how nature works, how things come together in the universe and above all, the value of precision, rational thought and scientific reasoning.
So, how can we ensure that we continue to engage society at large, those who are forming their ideas and those who are eager to learn at any stage of their lives, in science? Firstly, we need to recognise the problem that we need better scientific literacy, even though the intent is not and should never be that everyone become a scientist. Secondly, the custodians of scientific research need to make this a priority. This is routinely done in the US and Europe with no additional costs. Whenever someone applies for a research grant, they need to describe a robust strategy outlining how they will take their research to the masses and how they will engage non-scientists, including young students, in their research. This outreach programme needs to be more than lip service and an integral part of all future grants. Some institutions such as the Lahore University of Management Sciences, in particular its physics department, have done a phenomenal job in this regard but these activities need to be promoted from the top and need to be a part of all grant applications. Thirdly, we need to air programmes on TV channels that engage audiences of all age groups and backgrounds with scientific content. We can do with fewer talk shows where our (un)educated politicians repeat the same things over and over again, each time with a louder voices and a weaker argument. Instead, a programme or two that engages the audience in intriguing scientific questions can work wonders.
The burden here lies on us, the scientists, to create programmes that are able to capture the audience and leave them wanting more. If we can create a market, the audience will keep coming back. This has been done successfully in many parts of the world, including Bill Nye, “The Science Guy”, in the US, who through his TV programme, has engaged millions over the years.
As a nation we love to divide ourselves. Religious, ethnic, cultural and linguistic barriers may be there, but we love to raise those walls to new heights. We also divide ourselves and worse, our children, into ‘science kids’ or ‘non-science kids’. We, or our children, may or may not decide to pursue science as a career, but we should do everything in our capacity to give them the opportunity to be inspired by nature and to be fascinated by its wonders. Those who we failed in providing any schooling, either through our incompetence or through our biases, have an equal right to learn about how beautiful our universe really is. Perhaps through a better understanding of everything around us, we as a society, will come to realise that there is a lot more common in all of us, biologically and socially, than we care to appreciate.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 18th, 2014.