This chapter introduces the strands system, which, quite ironically, has not yet been proven by empirical evidence.

Strand One: Sparking Interest & Excitement

Similar to the article from last week, Strand One discusses the importance of the learner’s interest in an area of science.  “Recent research shows that emotions associated with interest are a major factor in thinking and learning, helping people learn as well as helping them retain and remember” (p. 26).  If people are to engage in science on their own time, then it should interest them.  Interestingly enough, Strand One is not one of the strands used in formal learning environments, namely schools; hence, students would not be pursuing the topics or retaining the information they’ve learned in school if they are not personally invested.  If this Strand system is widely recognized, and if the strands are truly interdependent on each other, then it is a shame that widespread education policy does not relate classroom learning to students’ lives.

Strand Two: Understanding Scientific Content & Knowledge

This strand proposes that if one engages in science, they should comprehend the basic “language” or “culture of science” (p. 20) and use said knowledge to make connections and inferences from one area of study to another, similar area of study.  At first I thought this was a little silly, mostly because of the example of seeing a movie about natural selection and then thinking about natural selection with other animals in one’s environment.  I couldn’t picture such a moviegoer really thinking about the ancestry of squirrels and moths and house pets.  But applying it to my own experiences, the idea of applying scientific understanding to similar content makes sense.  For example, I’ve read a lot of informal feminist blog posts throughout the last year, and I’ve learned a lot of terms specific to feminism, such as “slut shaming” (judging a woman based on her promiscuous appearance or sex life).  After learning about slut shaming, I began to see it in the media without having a blogger point it out to me.  Similarly, an informal scientist can learn about scientific content and apply it to her life.

Strand Three: Engaging in Scientific Reasoning

This strand was also odd but very sensible.  Using scientific reasoning in everyday life – “[for example], looking at nutrition labels to decide which food items to purchase” (p. 28) – seems odd when exposed so blatantly; but upon further examination, it makes sense that by participating in more science-related activities, one will approach other activities with an analytical mindset.  In turn, when she resumes her science learning, her scientific-thinking is fresh and ready to analyze data.  Thinking scientifically becomes an ouroboros that enables the user to learn and apply said learning in her life.

Strand Four: Reflecting On Science

This strand is great to combat the stereotypes of current establish science being rigid and unchangeable.  For example, the reading mentions stories of past discoveries, such as Galileo Galilei, are a good way to show the ever-changing nature of science (p. 29).  Galileo is a wonderful reminder that at one point, the world was “flat”, but because Galilei explored other scientists’ findings and used them to fuel his own, he proclaimed that the Earth was round.  This step of reflection is important to show learners that they can contribute to the general body of knowledge if they follow scientific procedure and gather evidence, as well as reminding them that a “fact” they know today could be different in a few years.  (Oh, Pluto, how I miss thee.)  While the other strands are important to engage people in science, this strand prepares them for the future of science by exploring its nature.

Strand Five: Using Tools & Language of Science

As the saying goes, “Practice makes perfect,” and it applies to science learning as well.  In addition to Strand One, Strand Five seems to be the most obvious of the strands; if people participate in science activities that require them to know the tools and the lingo, they are more likely to retain that practical knowledge and use it in future endeavors or discussions.  Also, it is great to see that this step encourages team work, which makes science seem less “exclusive,” which could encourage people to further pursue their areas of interest.

Strand Six: Identifying With the Scientific Enterprise

Strand Six seems the least important.  While science learning does inspire people to pursue science-related careers or proclaim themselves as die-hard hobbyists of an area of science, identity is not as important to learning as the learning itself, especially for older people who are more likely to have solidified their identities and careers.  While there is nothing wrong with adding one’s love for science to her identity – whether it be through an engineering career, pyrotechnics hobby, or tweeting with #i<3physics on every post – it is equally fine to be the writer who’s enjoyment of casual science comes up in conversation, but not on her facebook profile or resumé.