GIGO

Being Aware

We all need to know about science and technology these days to improve our employment potential, to enhance our life style, and to develop as informed, thinking members of society.

Where do we get this knowledge? Our first exposure to science tends to be at school  in those heady days of rock pool studies and trips to the planetarium. Later, we explore the world on our own, through reading, watching television, and talking to people.

Part of the problem in keeping up with science is the sheer volume of information out there. This magazine, like many others, takes this into account. Our test issue's survey results showed that people were most interested in the Quick Dips section. Short items, right to the point. It's a delicate job getting the necessary information and the interesting information down within a few paragraphs.

There are many stories where that cannot be done because the concepts are too complex or there are too many conflicting points of view.

This issue's feature stories on the greenhouse effect and on Maori science education demonstrate this. Greenhouse coverage in the media has concentrated on the scare stories -- drowning Pacific islands and dustbowls in central Europe. The scientific values of caution and qualification have been overcome by dramatic headlines and glib generalities.

The danger is that if the greenhouse disaster scenario has been overplayed, as suggested in John Daly's article, we might one day end up dismissing all related research as hype. We shouldn't need cataclysmic scenarios to encourage the development of clean energy sources. By producing scare stories, the whole area might be tarred and feathered and run off the news pages and out of the minds of the people.

In addition, the sheer scale of the problem can lead to fatalistic attitudes. At one stage young people believed they'd die early from nuclear war. Now many of them feel that they're doomed by the greenhouse effect.

Other young people may also have a gloomy future if the more extreme plans for Maori education are widely adopted. There is no denying that Maori students are under-represented in science classes and that some action is necessary.

Efforts to make science more relevant to students are laudable. If it can be made more attractive by relating it to student experiences and cultural background, so much the better. The danger comes from assuming that this means cultural beliefs are as important as methodology and observation in scientific endeavour. It is frightening to see a lecture theatre of science teachers agreeing that myths (whether those of Maori or Pakeha) have a place in the science classroom.

If we are to assess the impact and value of scientific achievements, we must have a good grounding in science. Schools have the responsibility to begin this, but we all have the responsibility to carry it on.