I really don’t like to be the only one in class who never has anything insightful to offer in my responses or anything good to say about the reading. That being said, I just don’t really see the value in the strands. Once I deconstruct through the endless comma chains and polysyllabic terms and understand exactly what it is I’m reading, what I essentially get out of it is: “Get interested. Know some things. Do some things. Think about some things. Work together with other scientists in scientific ways. Develop scientific identities.” Most of that seems really…obvious? Well, except for the last one. Maybe I’d develop a scientific identity if I were really interested in engaging in scientist, but then again, I’m a stubborn piece of work. And I’m also not an elderly retired man in search of hobbies. Essentially what I’m getting at is that the strands seem like a pretty basic approach to scientific learning? I mean, that seems like how most science is taught. Granted, it’s not always successful in every respect (it’s not always possible to spark excitement in someone who isn’t willing to learn).

However, it’s very possible I may be misinterpreting what was written, or more so, I may be underestimating the depth of what was written in this chapter, and the actual educational and motivational power of the strands. Motivation seems like the key issue at hand, because without motivation, it doesn’t seem like there’s any foundation for the rest of the strands. I fear that those who are unmotivated at first will simply remain unmotivated. I’ve seen it happen many times, and I’m as guilty of it as anyone else. Perhaps it requires a latent, untapped motivation that needs to be dug out and set ablaze by a certain teacher or enthralling topic? Perhaps it requires the student to stop being so stubborn for once in his/her life? Perhaps.