The main lecture
I went to this talk on 2009-02-11, and I really liked the talk. He mentioned many thought-provoking things, and I really enjoyed the lecture.
By high school, the deck is already loaded against the science teacher, and it is very hard to change students after that.
There are some important qualities that teacher should inculcate.
- Teacher credibility: open ended questioning.
- Don’t challenge beliefs, religious or otherwise. For example, he thinks about students: “I don’t want you to believe evolution, I just want you to understand it”.
Start simple. For example, “what evolves”? Don’t talk about science, but rather about culture: what evolves in the culture.
The teacher’s answers (to students’ questions) must be
- knowledgeable
- respectful
- honest and
- persuasive.
If you show that they are ignorant or stupid or both, you will lose them. Don’t hurt them. Rather, amaze them with your enthusiasm for the subject.
Teachers need to be better trained
- in science
- in logic,
- and importantly, in creationalists’ tactics.
Public and lawmakers need to be educated too.
It is important to realize that science starts with “being curious” and making an observation. (Versus walking in the park with electronic gadgets.) What creationists do to students is to destroy inquisitiveness and curiosity.
If you can inculcate just one quality in your students, let it be CURIOSITY. This makes things interesting, and this applies to teaching at any level. It isn’t faith that makes good science, it is curiosity.
Sometimes, faith dictates so many aspects such that it hampers curiosity (for sure about certain things and objects).
There are a few websites that talk about teaching science. NESC and Talk Origins are just a few.
Teaching advice: Know your stuff VERY WELL. This is very very important. One needs to know things well before one can start defending.
There was this thought that came to mind: Take kids to the nature just for observations. And give them less assignments. This way, they will become more curious. Museums are great for this purpose. Take them to many museums too.
Lukas said that I keep talking about “believing in what empowers me”, everything else being constant. On the same note, everything else remaining the same, it is much more powerful to be curious than having faith.
He suggested that we read Darwin’s diary.
Panel Discussion which followed the lecture
Question: How to deal with competition versus collaboration in a classroom setting.
The question of belief versus evidence.
One of the panelist said that scientist are supposed to dispassionate about interpreting data, not necessarily in their curiosity or passion for figuring things out, or ever in what they choose to look at.
That remembers me of Yee Jiun’s comment in 2005 (I think): “You are a scientist—make distinction between your beliefs and proofs!”
I realized during this panel discussion that I talk a lot about scientific method and all that, but don’t use much of the same. Very passionate about some things… which seems to cloud my understanding.
I asked a question: There are many things that get crystallized by the age of 12. Then how do you deal with religion, and what do you mean when you say “science and religion can coexists”? Does religion (as envisioned by orthodoxes) has any place in childhood? Religion is not just a compartment of life, it is a whole way of living and thinking. Also, how does one deal with the interaction of kids with these kinds of religious people, who might be in your church, and your kid might be taught to listen to them without much of thought.
David gave an example by picking a Christian devout person, and asking if he gave conclusive evidence that ____ never existed… what will be your reaction?
This lady answered (and I really liked the answer): I will be disappointed, but my faith will be unshaken.
And David pointed out that this is the difference between two ways of thinking.
Justin (elementary school teacher) also agreed that by the age of 10-11, the curiosity is already kicked out from many of his school kids.
Pose a question, and just follow the process naturally.
- No already existing terminology,
- and no pre-conception about things.
This is one wonderful way to develop curiosity in kids.
Justin mentioned that one of the problem is that many teachers themselves have never done scientific inquiry.
I thought about my Gymnastic teacher Laurie. She is such a wonderful teacher. She could take kids from various expertise level, and take them together, and teach all of them something. That is a great example of “teaching various skill level simultaneously”.
(The End)