Educação e divulgação de ciências:
desafios e perspectivas
Science Education and Popularization:
challenges and perspectives
Prof. Dr. Marcelo Knobel
Instituto de Física Gleb Wataghin (IFGW) – UNICAMP
Pesquisador do Laboratório de Estudos Avançados em Jornalismo
(Labjor), Núcleo de Desenvolvimento da Criatividade (NUDECRI),
UNICAMP
Coordenador da NanoAventura – Museu Exploratório de Ciências UNICAMP
Pró-Reitor de Graduação - UNICAMP
Science’s top 125 include:
• What is the universe made of?
• What is the biological basis of
consciousness?
• How and where did life on earth
arise?
• What determines species diversity?
• What genetic changes made us
uniquely human?
• How are memories stored and
retrieved?
• How does Earth’s interior work?
• Are we alone in the Universe?
• How hot will the greenhouse world
be?
The Changing Climate For Science, Society and Public Policy
World Science Forum – November 11, 2005
3
What can we do?
“Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are
naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly
and logically  without learning how, or without
practicing. People with untrained minds should no
more expect to think clearly and logically than
people who have never learned and never practiced
can expect to find themselves good carpenters,
golfers, bridge players, or pianists.”
Alfred Mander, Logic for the Millions
The Decline of STEM Education in the U.S.
http://gettingsmart.com/blog/2012/04/infographic-the-decline-of-stem-education-in-the-u-s/
…the committee is deeply concerned
that the scientific and technical
building blocks of our economic
leadership are eroding at a time when
many other nations are gathering
strength….
Recommendations
The Changing Climate For Science, Society and Public Policy
World Science Forum – November 11, 2005
• Increase talent pool by
improving k-12 science
and math education
• Strengthen US
commitment to longterm basic research…to
maintain the flow of new
ideas that fuel the
economy, etc.
7
Shanghai-China
Finland
Korea
Hong Kong-China
Liechtenstein
Singapore
Macao-China
Canada
Japan
Estonia
Chinese Taipei
Netherlands
Switzerland
New Zealand
Australia
Iceland
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Belgium
United Kingdom
Slovenia
Poland
Ireland
Slovak Republic
Sweden
Hungary
Czech Republic
France
Latvia
Austria
United States
Portugal
Spain
Luxembourg
Italy
Lithuania
Russian Federation
Greece
Croatia
Dubai (UAE)
Israel
Serbia
Turkey
Azerbaijan
Romania
Bulgaria
Uruguay
Mexico
Chile
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Montenegro
Kazakhstan
Argentina
Jordan
Albania
Brazil
Colombia
Peru
Tunisia
Qatar
Indonesia
Panama
Kyrgyzstan
PISA 2009
Mathematics
Below Level 1
Students at Level 1
or below
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
In Brazil, this figure
represents only 150,000
students at level 5 or 6.
Students at Level 2
or above
100
80
60
40
20
0
%
20
40
60
80
100
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009/pisa20
09resultswhatstudentsknowandcandostudentperformanc
einreadingmathematicsandsciencevolumei.htm
PISA 2009
Science
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009/pisa20
09resultswhatstudentsknowandcandostudentperformanc
einreadingmathematicsandsciencevolumei.htm
Brazil
• Few initiatives specifically on
STEM:
• Fundação Vitae (discontinued in 2006) –
around 56 MUS$ (half in Science Education)
• Academia Brasileira de Ciências – ABC na
Educação Científica / Mão na Massa;
Reports on the status of Education and
Science Education
(http://www.abc.org.br/article.php3?id_arti
cle=199;
http://archive.org/details/AEducacaoEmCie
nciasNoBrasil)
• Smaller projects connected to NGOs, government, etc..
• Science popularization books (market still unexplored)
• Science Magazines: SBPC (Ciência Hoje, Ciência & Cultura),
FAPESP (Pesquisa FAPESP)
• Few Science Museums, planetariums, zoos, etc…, usually
underfunded.
Temas da Semana Nacional de CT 2004 - 2011
2005 - “Brasil, olhe para a água”.
2006 - “Criatividade e inovação”
2007 – “Terra”
2008 – “Evolução e diversidade”
2009 - “Ciência no Brasil”
2010 - “Ciência para o desenvolvimento
sustentável”
2011 - “Mudanças climáticas, desastres
naturais e prevenção de riscos”
SEMANA NACIONAL DE CIÊNCIA E TECNOLOGIA - PARTICIPAÇÃO
ANO
NÚMERO DE
MUNICÍPIOS
NÚMERO DE
ATIVIDADES
2004
252
1842
2005
332
6701
2006
370
8654
2007
390
9.700
2008
445
10.859
2009
492
14.978
2010
397
13.345
2011
654
16.110
Informal Learning
• Learning during the 92% of our
lives which we spend outside the
formal education system
• Also called “free choice learning,”
because learners set their own
agenda
• Pathways include museums, zoos,
botanic gardens, parks, visitor
centers, television, magazines,
books, libraries, the Internet, and
hobbies.
Alan J. Friedman
New York Hall of Science
Example: Science Museums, the Fastest
Growing Sector of the Museum World
• Several new “hands-on”
science museums open each
year
• 350 now in USA alone
• $1+ billion per year total
budgets
• 177 million visits per year in
USA
• about 60 million visitors on
school field trips
Alan J. Friedman
New York Hall of Science
Aspects of Scientific Culture
• To study the understanding, attitudes
and interest of the public regarding S&T.
• To establish a dialogue with society
through activities of science
popularization and education: science
journalism, science centers and
museums, science classes, schools,
public debates, magazines, books, etc...
Public Perception of
Science and Technology
The three dimensions of PUST
Understanding
Attitudes
Interest
USA: Public
assessment of
Scientific Research
National Science Board, Science and
Engineering Indicators – 2012
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c7/c7s3.htm
Public Assessment of Scientific Research
São Paulo - Brasil
Gráfico 12.3 Distribuição relativa das respostas à pergunta "Muitas pessoas acham
que o desenvolvimento da ciência traz problemas para a humanidade, você acha que
isso é verdade ", por nível de instrução
Percentual Relativo
100,0%
80,0%
43,7%
54,3%
60,1%
60,0%
Não
40,0%
Sim
53,3%
40,0%
20,0%
0,0%
3,0%
Colegial Com pleto
Nsd/ Nr
36,8%
3,1%
5,7%
Superior Incom pleto
Superior Com pleto
Escolaridade
Fonte: Pesquisa realizada em Cam pinas, São Paulo e
Ribeirão Preto.
Veja tabela 12.7
Indicadores de C&T&I em São Paulo2003/2004
Indicadores FAPESP http://www.fapesp.br/indicadores/
People yet respect S&T….
…. But not with the same intensity everywhere.
In Europe, the general vision has been
deteriorating :
• In 2005, 52% of the people thought that the
benefits overcame the risks, while this figure
was 61% in 1992.
– This is about 20% less than in the USA.
Eurobarometer 2005
Public Perception of Science
But the american situation is not as good it may seem
….
• 60% of Americans believe in extrasensory
perception
• 41% think astrology is somewhat scientific
• 47% still do not answer “true” to the
statement: “Human beings developed
from earlier species of animals”
Science and Engineering Indicators, 2004
New dimensions
• There is more tension in the relationship
science/society
– A new dimension was added to the vision
of the public and the behavior regarding
science
S&T are usually evaluated based on
costs/risks and benefits.
Now, and each day more, values (and
politics) have been also very important.
Creationism Trumps Evolution
• “God created humans in present form”
– 55%
• “Humans evolved, God guided the
process”
– 27%
• “Humans evolved, God did not guide the
process”
– 13%
• “Favor schools teaching creationism and
evolution”
– 65%
• “Teach creationism instead of evolution”
– 37%
The Evolving Context for
Science and Society
PCST-2005, June 22, 2005
CBSNEWS.com, November 2004
Values issues
• Cloning and stem cells
• Study of “personal” topics
– Sex
– Genetics of behavior
• Teaching of “Intelligent Design”
in Schools
“Alternative Therapies”
• Brazil:
– 50,000 alternative therapists
(number grows 20% /year).
– Market estimate of about 500
Mdollars /year. (USA: 30
billion dollars)
– There are, for example, 1.500
iridologists, and the same
number of floral therapists
than cardiologists.
– Easy career path…
Source: Ciências versus Pseudociências, Paulo Lee,
Editora do Chain, 2003. p. 118.
Causes of the “Great Division”
• Strength of value protection
• Misunderstanding of the
word “theory”
– It has different meaning for
scientists and public.
• Scientists usually believe
that the scientific illiteracy
is the greatest obstacle.
Deficit Model of the Public
Communication of Science
“The top-down approach … is no longer
appropriate to the wider agenda that the
science communication community is now
addressing”
COPUS, December 2002
Science
Communication
(with loss of
information)
Level of knowledge, literacy
Communication seen as a
translation, a top-down
transmission. Public seen as
homogeneous, passive, victim of a
cognitive/cultural deficit.
The Scientist cannot simply “educate” in their
own way
• The problem is not only the lack of
knowledge
– Usually people understand what scientists
say.
• But many times they simply
don´t like.
There is a conflict between their
deep values and their vision of
social benefits.
Changing the Strategy
Public Understanding
Public Engagement
Change the intention and stile of conversation;
Monologue
Dialogue
“Direct dialogue with the public should move from being an
optional add-on to science-based policy-making … and
should become a normal and integral part of the process”
Courtesy David Dickson
UK House of Lords, February 2002
Public Communication of Science
Science
communtication
B) Process of growing and “consolidation”
Effect of a
regional
network
A) Few isolated cases
A)
1987 = Brasil
1994 = Colombia 1997 = México
B)
2001 = México, Panamá, España
2002 = Portugal
2003 = México
2004 = Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela, España
2006 = Argentina, Brasil, Ecuador, Panamá, Venezuela, España
2007 = Chile, Uruguay [Cuba and República Dominicana, in process]
Information and
interest on S&T
Values and attitudes
towards S&T
Citizenship and public
policies of S&T
Social appropriation of
S&T
Science and Technology: perception of risks and benefits
Q9. The benefits of S&T outweigh the negative effects to humankind?
Stimulated, one response
46%
28%
13%
4%
More benefits
than risks
Only benefits
equal
proportions
more risks than
benefits
7%
1%
only negative
effects
1987
(Gallup/MCT):
More benefits: 36%
Only benefits: 11%
equal: 27%
More risksl: 6%
no one: 4%
Sample: 2004 interviews
Don´t
know/Don´t
answer
Spontaneous knowledge - Institutions
Brazil – MCT Survey
Q22. Do you know any
institution that makes scientific
research in our country?
Spontaneous, multiple responses
Yes
Sim
16%
No
Não
84%
Não s abe
1%
Q23a. Which ones?
Public sector
47%
Universities/Colleges/Schools 46%
Companies
23%
Hospitals
5%
Foundations/Private entities 3%
Other
11%
Sample: If “Yes” in Q22, 315 interviews
Sample: 2004 interviews
Iberoamerican Survey
(Cultura científica en Iberoamérica
Encuesta en grandes núcleos urbanos)
Bogotá (Colombia)
Buenos Aires (Argentina)
Caracas (Venezuela)
Madrid (Spain)
Ciudad de Panamá (Panama)
Age groups
16 -24
25 -34
35 -44
45 -54
55 -64
65 and older
São Paulo (Brazil)
Santiago (Chile)
error: 3%; confidence level: 95%.
Size: 1,100 interviews each city
Information and interest
Index of Information Consumption in S&T (Indicador de
consumo informativo en ciencia y tecnología - ICIC)
SAO PAULO
Null
Low
SANTIAGO
Mean
High
MADRID
CARACAS
BUENOS AIRES
BOGOTÁ
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Index of Information Consumption (ICIC)
•
The indicators that compose the index are: 1) “science and technology programs on TV”;
2) “reading news about science and technology in newspapers”; 3) “radio programs on
science and technology”; 4) “reading scientific popularization magazines”; 5) “reading
scientific popularization books”; 6) “use of Internet as source of information on scientific
topics”; 7) “visits to museums, centres and scientific exhibitions”; 8) “conversations with
friends about topics to do with science and technology”. Each indicator can take three
possible values: “Regularly”, “Occasionally” or “Never”. The answer “Regularly” gets one
point. The answer “Occasionally” equals 0.5 points; the answer “Never” doesn’t get
points; and finally “doesn’t know / doesn’t answer” is considered as a “Missing value”.
This approach makes the index show values that fluctuate between “0” and “8.0”.
• The ICIC estimation allows us to observe a very asymmetric distribution that
indicates the existence of a small segment of the population that is highly
informed about topics of science and technology. Certainly, this type of
distribution is also common in surveys that measure the level of political
information of the population; that is to say, a segment of a slightly informed
majority always exists, and then smaller segments showing greater information
levels.
Citizenship and public policies of S&T
Knowledge of Science Institutions
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BUENOS
AIRES
BOGOTÁ
CARACAS
MADRID
Knows at least one institution
SANTIAGO
SAO PAULO
Doesn´t know
Values and attitudes towards S&T
Evaluation of future benefits from the development of S&T
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
Muchos beneficios
BOGOTÁ
Bastantes beneficios
Pocos beneficios
BUENOS AIRES
Ningún beneficio
No sabe
No contesta
CARACAS
MADRID
SANTIAGO
SAO PAULO
São Paulo Survey 2008
Values and attitudes
• Regarding the level of admiration of the scientist, in a group of 14 professions, the result was
a level of 76.7% of a positive view towards the scientists.
Alguma
Someadmiração
admiration
Muita
admiração
Much
admiration
%
100
90
16,7
80
15,8
70
32,3
27,7
34,6
60
27,5
50
27,6
34,7
40
75,1
30,6
35,8
28,8
74,4
25,3
30
52,5
50,1
49,2
42,9
36,0
28,2
31,4
31,0
25,2
10
20,5
11,5
8,3
7,0
Curandeiros
Militares
Juízes
Artistas
Advogados
Empresários
Religiosos
Cientistas
Engenheiros
Esportistas
Jornalistas
Médicos
Professores
0
3,9
Políticos
20
Comments
• The emergence of networks in Iberoamerica support the view that a
new international agenda is needed, which should include was
database integration; the formulation of new indicators; fresh
interpretations of existing data; new conceptual developments, and
cross-fertilization between public perception, media and cultural
indicators.
• The iberoamerican survey indicates the existence of a globalized
substrate of scientific culture and images that show some
perceptions of S&T that seem to be shared by both rich and
developing countries.
• On the other hand, the data revealed some interesting features that
differentiate Iberoamerica from other regions, and also some
differences between the countries (such as Brazil and Colombia).
Concluding remarks
• These surveys are particularly important in developing countries
as they help to identify some of the main obstacles blocking the
development of a scientific culture.
• They can contribute to the design of more effective science
education and science communication strategies and programs.
• They can also provide useful information for improving social
inclusion and democratizing knowledge as they identify the
locations and types of people with the least access to scientific
information and cultural and scientific goods.
• The Brazilian public has witnessed in the last years various
government initiatives aimed at improving science
communication and at mapping out attitudes toward science.
Now it is time for a step forward.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-thePresident-at-the-National-Academy-of-Sciences-Annual-Meeting/
President Obama Speeches
“…
And I'm challenging states to dramatically improve achievement in math and
science by raising standards, modernizing science labs, upgrading curriculum,
and forging partnerships to improve the use of science and technology in our
classrooms. (Applause.) I'm challenging states, as well, to enhance teacher
preparation and training, and to attract new and qualified math and science
teachers to better engage students and reinvigorate those subjects in our
schools.
And in this endeavor, we will work to support inventive approaches. Let's
create systems that retain and reward effective teachers, and let's create new
pathways for experienced professionals to go into the classroom. There are,
right now, chemists who could teach chemistry, physicists who could teach
physics, statisticians who could teach mathematics. But we need to create a
way to bring the expertise and the enthusiasm of these folks –- folks like you
–- into the classroom.
…”
Challenges
Is it possible to improve the quality of Science Education when:
• The teachers of basic levels don´t know the scientific content or
practices that they are supposed to teach?
• The students don´t have the previous necessary knowledge on
reading, writing and math necessary to follow the Science classes?
• The Science Education programs are unstable, and not related to
the main activities of the Education Departments or Secretaries?
• There are not enough resources (either private or government) to
develop Science Education Environments (Science Museums, Zoos,
Aquariums, parks, etc…)?
• There are not programs to understand basic aspects of the Public
Perception of Science (surveys, study groups, researchers in the
field, etc…)
• When the basic education (including Science) is not really the top 1
priority?
Based on http://schwartzman.org.br/simon/abciencias_apres.pdf
Thank You!
[email protected]