class 20: revision

Sarah started this class by writing up a blank timeline: 1985 at one end of the whiteboard, 2007 at the other. She asked the class to tell her where major developments in science communication would go within it. PUS, and events such as the Bodmer report ended up at one end, with PEST at the other. You might find the overview on this page a neat summary.

I then tried to synthesise some of the rest of term one in reference to a sightly 'sensational' story on bird flu. To quote Gregory and Miller on this topic:

sensationalism and gee-whizzary... [is] not a punishment inflicted on science stories by disdainful or malicious journalists. It arises in science journalism because of the rhetorical conventions of popularization (Gregory & Miller, 1998, 116-7)

This points us towards thinking about news values, and other contextual differences between the cultures producing news language and those constructing scientific discourse. It's also worth thinking about the specific context of the issue covered - are stories on MMR a different case from 'Climate Porn'?

In some ways linked to this, I also discussed questions around science and fiction. I went through the opinions of a variety of thinkers on the topic (e.g. Russell Stannard, Joan Solomon, Rosalind Haynes) and emphasised that students should take a developed approach to considering audience effects (an issue which is worth keeping in mind across the course)

Sarah then put some of term two together, by considering each of the specific media we've looked at.

• Museums
• The Internet
• Popular Science
• Documentary
• Education

She asked the class to list specific issues relating to these media, and what topics (such as boundary work, structure, interactivity, etc) might be an issue across them.

class 19: education

Firstly, thanks for all your essays - we'll get them back to you as soon as we can. I look forward to reading them.

This session acted partly as an introduction to the topic of school-science, but also as a revision of key issues in the history of thought on the Public Understanding of Science, which is important as we approach the exam.

We discussed the introduction of this new GCSE, and the general movement in school-science to build a curriculum based on what "everybody needs to know" rather than just what people training to be scientists should learn. A move away from training and towards PUS, or thinking about science "consumers" rather than the "producers". That last metaphor is from Martin Hollis at the QCA, see handout on WebCT for reference, please note he means engaged, 'empowered' consumers, not passive, manipulated ones. Specially, we were talking about English school-science, but the issues involved are applicable abroad.

We discussed how infrequently children are asked their own opinion as children, especially on science issues, but that the change in curriculum was going to involve bringing opinion into the classroom, moving to teach more about science than simply scientific content, training people up to be able to "engage" in all the PEST-based dialogue places such as the Dana centre run.

The second half of the class was an activity where groups in role as local business, the university sector, patents teachers or students considered what a change in school-science might involve. I asked each group whether they wanted to change or not, and although there were some very thoughtful pros and cons, overall you seemed against the change.

If anyone's interested in the interactions between stakeholders in education, it's worth looking at this report (n.b. links to pdf).

Popular Science magazine (online)

Image from here

The internet has revolutionised the way in which information is propagated to the mass audience, creating a communication web which encompasses the whole world. As a result, Newspapers, Magazines, Television Channels etc all have an associated website through which communication can continue, and Popular Science Magazine is no exception. I had a look through their website, to determine how effective and indeed engaging the site was.

My overall impression of the website was very positive, as it is well presented and entices you to have a look around. The home page includes their top articles from each of the different sections; How2.0, Science, Aviation and Space & Technology, as well as a PopSci blog section which instantly caught my eye. Navigation through the website is very simple, with the articles are clearly laid out in their respective categories. The articles themselves are from a varied range of topics, and in my opinion pitched at the right level for lay persons to understand. Links are available for further understanding on the topic.

I particularly liked the blog entry based on Laser tagging and graffiti technology (pictured), which enabled a building in Rotterdam to be used as a massive Etch-a-Sketch board.

Aminur Rahman