One thing I learned from reading Chapter 2 of “Surrounded by Science” is that science isn’t only for scientists. Anyone and everyone is able to take part in science learning. In fact, different perspectives are very valuable in the scientific world since they are shaped by the “different cultural values scientists bring with them” (20). I really liked this idea of how easily accessible science is by anyone who is interested in it, especially because this ultimately promotes the symbiotic relationship between science and the individual. Science gives us the ability to learn something new, something perhaps we can relate to ourselves, or something we can relate to what we see, hear, taste, smell, or touch. Science is the explanation to our questions; it satisfies our curiosity and thirst for knowledge. On the other hand, by participating in science learning, we are able to contribute to science. Our observations and data help promote new discoveries and contribute to the better understanding of science itself. Project FeederWatch is an excellent example of how “citizen scientists” were able to participate in a scientific activity that they enjoyed—in this case, birdwatching—while collecting significant data about birds that was able to make contributions to the field of ornithology.

I could relate to every single strand that was discussed in this chapter. As a hopeful future doctor, I find myself applying all six strands both in formal and informal environments. Whether it’s studying the process of digestion or researching why sounds in the minor key make us sad and sounds in the major key make us happy, I’m going through the process of science learning.

“The 95 Percent Solution” was an eye-opening article because it further clarified what’s always sort of been in the back of my mind. Ever since I was a child, I knew there was a key difference between formally learning science in school and learning science in an informal environment. My mom would take me to places like the Museum of Natural History, the New York Aquarium, the Prospect Park Zoo, the Hall of Science, and never once did it occur to me that I was actually learning something about science. Although I have absolutely no complaints about my formal science education, I can’t help but remember how much more fun it was to learn about science in a place other than at school. And when I ask myself why I had more fun, I can only think of one thing: tests. As the article repeatedly states, free-choice learning was not a part of the formal eduction that school provided, at least for me. We all grew up in a society where you had to pass a certain exam to demonstrate that you could recall what you had learned in that class in order to move on to the next grade. But I feel like these tests were doing the exact opposite of what they were designed to do. Instead of actively learning and/or studying the material that was supposed to be on the exam, and actually retaining it even after the test was over, I found myself discarding the information as soon as I could. In fact, I am constantly hearing people complaining about a specific topic in a specific subject because it has no value in real life applications. I believe that our education system would definitely improve if people of the younger age groups had more reasons to learn, not just to pass a test and get it over with. On a side note, I found it pretty funny that, according to the article, people who pursued astronomy as a hobby were more knowledgeable about the subject than undergraduate astronomy majors. It only shows that you can’t force someone to do something unless they are truly interested in it.