Hello! This week in The Crowded Greenhouse we read an article titled "America's Science Problem." Basically, it discussed how America has become increasingly disenchanted with science, and even our leaders are not quite up-to-date on some of the most important scientific topics, mainly climate change. After reading the article, I was asked to write whether or not I thought that America had a science problem, if I am convinced that this is a topic for discussion and action, and what I thought could be done about it. This is what I said.
A link to the article will be found at the end.
After reading Scientific American’s article, “America’s Science Problem,” I am more convinced than ever that there is, indeed, a science problem with America. I already knew that in recent years the average scores for science and math in United States’ school have been dropping, and as a result some of our nation’s competitors, both economically and technologically, such have China have far exceeded the US’s “average” student. So, it wasn’t a surprise to read this in the article. What I was surprised, and frankly, a little alarmed, about was that both presidential candidates appeared to have a relatively superficial knowledge of environmental science. For several of the questions asked about science, neither Romney nor the President gave clear answers. For example, when asked how to combat climate change, President Obama merely restated the “modest efforts” that had been done before him, without presenting a solution to solve the issue worldwide, which is important since climate change affects the entire globe and not just the United States. On the other hand, Mitt Romney reverses and earlier statement and instead replaces it with an inaccurate one. I find this pretty pathetic that someone who thinks they can become the president doesn’t even have the right information about such a topic that is so crucial in all of our lives today. However, I think this particular lack of knowledge of Romney’s side partly stems from a “denial of science” that has traditionally risen from the Republican Party. The GOP has always been considered a more conservative party than the Democratic party, and its attitude towards science has tended to reflect this nature, in that many within the party don’t believe in science and instead attribute it to religion. For example, in the Scopes Monkey Trial, a teacher was arrested for teaching the theory of evolution instead of fundamentalism. The verdict was that he should be allowed to continue to teach about evolution, much to the dismay of the conservatives. This attitude has tended to stay the same over the years, in that many people simply choose to believe in faith over science. I don’t think that there is a way to change this for those who have already decided; however, I believe that if science where to be taught more and earlier in education, the next generation will believe in it as well. Also, if more rigorous science classes are taught in both public and private schools, then the next generation will surpass those before it, raising our nation’s math and science standards so that there will no longer be an “American Science Problem”.