Seabass wrote:Well, what do we mean by "science literacy"?
I would say, some knowledge of basic concepts, in the realm of minimal knowledge, in the way a person who can fill out application forms and read at the high school level, roughly, would be said to be basically literate in reading. That would be the minimum to be "literate" in science. Then from there it is relative, from the bare minimum of basic science literacy, to massive expertise.
Seabass wrote:
In my opinion, this quiz seems to put too heavy an emphasis on memory retention of factoids and definitions.
What would a quiz look like that did not put to heavy an emphasis on memory retention of factoids and definitions?
It seems to me that going beyond that would only make it harder. Instead of asking what planet Europa orbits, maybe they should have asked us about Europa's orbit, composition, and other details? I don't get it. You can't get more basic than "what planet does Europa orbit?" And, I have a real suspicion that if the test asked for calculations of the smeared out density of matter, or describe the mechanics of the interior of stars, that folks would have an even harder time.
Understanding a topic is even more difficult than just knowing factoids and definitions. Factoids and definitions are things that have to be learned to some extent first. Because the facts -- the names of things, and formulas, and such, have to be learned before you can really understand them.
Seabass wrote:
If we consider this:
According to the United States National Center for Education Statistics, "scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity".[1] A scientifically literate person is defined as one who has the capacity to:
understand experiment and reasoning as well as basic scientific facts and their meaning
A person who doesn't get a fair bit of the 50 question test correct would likely be shown to not know the basic scientific facts and their meaning, particular with all the hints and rhetorical cues given in the questions.
ask, find, or determine answers to questions derived from curiosity about everyday experiences
describe, explain, and predict natural phenomena
I highly doubt that people who can't do well on that 50 question quiz can explain and predict natural phenomena. If you don't know what "nimbus" means in connection with clouds, then I highly doubt one is out there explaining and predicting cloud-related weather phenomena. What are people doing? Saying - see that puffy rainy thing up there? Well, let me explain that to you...
Seabass wrote:
read with understanding articles about science in the popular press and to engage in social conversation about the validity of the conclusions
identify scientific issues underlying national and local decisions and express positions that are scientifically and technologically informed
evaluate the quality of scientific information on the basis of its source and the methods used to generate it
pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence and to apply conclusions from such arguments appropriately
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_literacy
the U.S. National Center for Education Statistics seems to consider "science literacy" as having more to do with broad understanding of scientific concepts and processes, rather than simple memory retention of factoids and definitions.[/quote]
But, the facts and definitions are subsumed within the US National Center for Education Statistic's definition. It seems as if that is part of it. And, a mere knowledge of factoids -- like rote memorization - is not enough, but if you don't even have that, then clearly the US NCES would find you scientifically illiterate.
Seabass wrote:
So, going by these criteria and my high school and college performance in science classes, I think it's fair to say that I am reasonably scientifically literate, yet I only scored 38 on this quiz because fuck if I can remember what a eukaryote is, or what the Greek symbol for friction is, fifteen years after college.
38 isn't that bad, though. It's a C - 75%, where the minimum expected by pure guessing is 25%. So, I think anyone who got a 38 would probably be fairly scientifically literate.
Seabass wrote:
Now, this is not say that knowing certain scientific facts isn't part of what it is to be scientifically literate, rather my point is that you aren't necessarily scientifically illiterate for not knowing what the blazes a "blastocyst" is in your forties.
One can say that about every single question. No one question, of course, tells us anything. But, the statistics do say something.
And, this is the thing that I used the analogy of history to illustrate. Look, sure, memorizing a timeline of names, dates and events doesn't make you a history expert, and the true test of historical expertise is in one's understanding, and ability to place events in context, and the ability to explain and recount events and explore motivations and causes and effects. Yes, that is what folks interested in history generally strive for. That being said- some good level of knowledge of the timeline, names and dates and events is absolutely necessary to get to that next level. Nobody can have a good understanding of history, and causes, effects, motivations, and personalities, and all those more complex things, the whys and wherefores and hows, without knowing the facts: the who what where and whens.
The same is true for science. You just can't have an ability to make predictions, explain scientific phenomena, and all the rest of the higher level functions without knowing the basic facts. You can't know about the sun and how it functions without knowing that it is called the sun and what its constituent parts are. Only then can you explain the phenomena.
