Scientific Literacy Seminar begins tenth year
The Scientific Literacy Seminar at Columbia University entered upon its tenth year with a presentation by Robert Pavlica on "Science Research Program in the High School" on 17 September 1997. Pavlica started this program eight years ago at Byram Hills High School in Armonk, NY, when he realized that he had more fun doing research at St. John's University than teaching at Byram Hills. Though his students learned what they were supposed to learn, they weren't learning science and they weren't happy.
Because all ninth graders at Byram Hills take English, and Pavlica doesn't want to exclude anyone, he extends the invitation to all ninth graders through their English classes to work on a topic of interest over three years and two summers. Students who accept this invitation begin in their sophomore year, after having sought ten articles on topics of interest during the preceding summer. Classes are held every other day, with periods on the intervening days devoted to one-on-one meetings with students (each is met individually every two weeks). During their sophomore year, students do a literature search on the topic they have decided to investigate and read ten articles. Pavlica then puts each student in contact with the author of one of these articles -- for the student to solicit for advice.
By the end of the sophomore year, a research proposal is finalized, and the following summer is spent beginning the research project, under the supervision of an Institutional Review Board. The junior year is dedicated to research, as is also the following summer. This research is accompanied by further journal reading -- twenty articles per year. Students must present their research results at the end of their senior year in a twelve minute presentation with Power Point or Harvard graphics. Sophomores and juniors present progress reports on their work in poster sessions. In addition to doing science research, students must also take regular courses in physics, biology, and chemistry.
Some students in Pavlica's program have developed their projects into award-winning Westinghouse projects (11 awards, 3 finalists), though this is not an emphasized goal. In fact, Pavlica said, it is not for the elite, though all of us are elite in our own way. With National Foundation Funding to teach other teachers to teach science research programs, Pavlica has now expanded his program to 74 New York State high schools (urban and rural as well as suburban).
Sam Devons, founder of the Seminar noted that Pavlica's experience shows that it's possible for students to do science. Though it's not necessary for scientific literacy, he said, it helps. And when students do science it becomes a reality rather than an abstraction.
The Scientific Literacy Seminar closed its ninth year with a presentation by Peter G. Brown on 30 April 1997. Speaking on "Science Literacy: Scholarly with a Literary Flair," the editor-in-chief of The Sciences, bimonthly journal of the New York Academy of Sciences observed that the total American circulation of science publications was about three million, slightly less than People or National Enquirer. Most of this is due to Popular Science (1.8 million, #44 in circulation among all magazines, between American Rifleman and The New York Times Magazine) and Discover 91.2 million), followed by Scientific American(638,000). Magazines like Astronomy and Sky and Telescope circulate between 100,000 and 200,000, and below this it's difficult to sell advertising.
Though science magazines reach only one of every hundred Americans, Brown noted that they reach far more lay persons than scientists (only 110,000 in the American Institute of Physics, 150,000 in the American Chemical Society) -- and even more watch science-oriented cable television, many following through on childhood interests in the natural world. Yet, Brown pointed out, they are not bound to follow science by professional obligation, and editors must tailor their products to keep readers reading them. Realizing that their readers are engaging in leisure rather than professional activity, editors cast articles into engaging prose to provide an immediate sense of the excitement of doing science. To illustrate this, Brown read excerpts from the original and final version of an article he published.
As Einstein told Infeld in writing The Evolution of Physics, good science writing should provide a "drama of ideas." In this sense, Brown noted, good science writing is no different from any other, telling as good a story as can be found anywhere else.
Home Fall 97 Full Screen
The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION