Dissecting the Problem
When I was in 7th grade, I performed a dissection for the first time. I had just transferred from a relatively poor school district, so up until that moment I thought that “actual” experiments like dissections were strictly reserved for movies or rich white kids. I didn’t know that students actually got to work with such professional resources, so when I found out one day that we’d be dissecting a sheep’s eye in my science class, I couldn’t believe it.
I couldn’t wrap my head around the fact that my new school could afford materials like that, so I raised my hand and asked a question for the first time that school year (I used to be incredibly shy, so that was actually kind of a big deal, but that’s another story).
“Will we be dissecting real eyes?” I asked. I thought that we would just do a computer simulation, or even take apart a cheap plastic model. I was so excited, but I’d been disappointed so many times before; I wanted to be sure that my excitement was valid and I wouldn’t be let down when it came time for the actual experiment.
I was immediately ridiculed. My classmates had all grown up in a fairly affluent neighborhood funded by rich Asian parents determined to raise doctors. As a result, most of my classmates had already performed numerous dissections before and took it for granted. After growing up in a life of privilege, they never even considered the possibility that some school districts simply couldn’t afford the luxury of dead bodies. Not only that, but they didn’t understand why I was so excited about something that they believed to be mundane.
Fortunately, my teacher immediately recognized that I wasn’t being daft; he knew that I was asking a legitimate question and I was now embarrassed about my ignorance. My teacher chastised the class and explained that not everyone had the same opportunities as the rest of them, but I never forgot that moment.
To this day, I still get excited over even the simplest experiments. Even something as standard as a flame test in an introductory chemistry lab amazes me because of how easily we are able to access those resources. I now go to one of most well-funded (and most expensive) universities in the nation, but I still think about how there are so many other students who either don’t have access to the resources they need (like me) or have science shoved down their throats in the interest of well-meaning but forceful parents (like my classmates).
I understand that my classmates’ and my experiences are but a small speck in the grand scheme of things, but I believe that it is representative of the attitude that the United States has towards our education, specifically STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math). Students either don’t have access to strong science programs or are taught to hate it, and that is reflected in how we rank compared to the rest of the world in terms of education.
Students in the United States have consistently ranked lower in the STEMsubjects than students in Asia and Northern Europe for nearly the past decade. It’s shocking, considering how the United States is supposed to be one of the most advanced modern societies in the world. Then again, considering how more and more public schools are closing, overcrowding is becoming a growing issue, and diversity is essentially non-existent in some areas, maybe it’s not so surprising. The attitude we have towards our education, lack of funding, and poorly constructed science program all contribute towards scientific illiteracy as we know it today.
Last week, I discussed how the politicization of science is ridiculous in a well-educated society. One of the goals of teaching science in school is to help students think critically for themselves. In other words, one of the factors I believe to be representative of a successful scientific education is the ability to not be influenced by the agendas of political parties. In this endeavor, our education appears to have failed us.
Proper funding, curriculum, and culture all contribute towards a scientifically literate society. When we ask ourselves how climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers are able to believe such scientifically erroneous claims, the answer lies in our education. Neither students nor science receive the attention they require in order to flourish, and that is detrimental to society.
Nobody expects an elementary, middle, or high school student to come up with groundbreaking scientific discoveries, but it is still important to make sure they receive the education they deserve because it sets the foundation for the future. A proper education can inspire the next Marie Curie or Rosalind Franklin; it can also teach someone how to be a better consumer or a more critical thinker.
The point that I’m trying make is that our education system has numerous flaws that need to be addressed if we want to improve as a society. We need to make changes to the way we handle education if we want to combat the misrepresentation of data or even outright lies. At this point, we can’t afford to not care because investing in our children is investing in our future, and in that respect, the cost is too great to ignore.
