What is a scientific community and scientific schools

Scientific community

Membership, status and interactions

Members of the same community do not need to work together. Communication between the members is established by disseminating research work and hypotheses through articles in peer review ed journals, or by attending conferences where new research is presented and ideas exchanged and discussed. There are also many informal methods of communication of scientific work and results as well. And many in a coherent community may actually «not» communicate all of their work with one another, for various professional reasons.

peaking for the scientific community

Political controversies

In the last decades or so, both global warming and stem cells have placed the opinions of the scientific community in the forefront of political debate.

See also

* Epistemology
* Objectivity (philosophy)
* Scientific consensus
* Cudos

References and external articles

olau/ir/archive/haa2.pdf Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination] «. International Organization, v. 46, n. 1, winter 1992, pp. 1-35. ( PDF )
* » [http://www.tasa.org.au/members/docs/2001_1/Glaser.pdf Producing Communities’ as a Theoretical Challenge] ; Social order in scientific communities». TASA 2001 Conference, The University of Sydney, 13-15 December 2001. ( PDF )

Look at other dictionaries:

Scientific community — Die Wissenschaftsgemeinde (engl. Scientific community) ist die Gesamtheit aller am internationalen Wissenschaftsbetrieb teilnehmenden Wissenschaftler. Der Lateinische Begriff res publica literaria wurde bis in das 18. Jahrhundert hinein verwendet … Deutsch Wikipedia

Scientific community metaphor — In computer science, the Scientific Community Metaphor is one way of understanding scientific communities. The first publications on the Scientific Community Metaphor (Bill Kornfeld and Carl Hewitt 1981, Kornfeld 1981, Kornfeld 1982) involved the … Wikipedia

Scientific consensus — is the collective judgement, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of science at a particular time. Scientific consensus is not, by itself, a scientific argument, and is not part of the scientific method;… … Wikipedia

Scientific data archiving — refers to the long term storage of scientific data and methods. The various scientific journals have differing policies regarding how much of their data and methods scientists are required to store in a public archive, and what is actually… … Wikipedia

Scientific racism — denotes the use of scientific, or ostensibly scientific, findings and methods to support or validate racist attitudes and worldviews. It is based on belief in the existence and significance of racial categories, but extends this into a hierarchy… … Wikipedia

Scientific imperialism — is a term that appears to have been coined by Dr Ellis T Powell when addressing the Commonwealth Club of Canada on 8 September 1920. Though he defined imperialism as the sense of arbitrary and capricious domination over the bodies and souls of… … Wikipedia

Scientific Integrity in Policymaking — Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the Bush Administration s Misuse of Science is the title of a report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists in February, 2004. The report was the culmination of an investigation… … Wikipedia

Scientific formalism — is a broad term for a family of approaches to the presentation of science. It is viewed as an important part of the scientific method, especially in the physical sciences.Levels of formalismThere are multiple levels of scientific formalism… … Wikipedia

community — ► NOUN (pl. communities) 1) a group of people living together in one place. 2) (the community) the people of an area or country considered collectively; society. 3) a group of people with a common religion, race, or profession: the scientific… … English terms dictionary

What is school science for? Who is it for?

Physics laboratory at a school in Leicester, England, c.1955. Photograph: Alamy Photograph: Alamy

Physics laboratory at a school in Leicester, England, c.1955. Photograph: Alamy Photograph: Alamy

What is school science for? It’s one of those philosophical sounding questions which can seem unhelpfully abstract. But it is worth asking because choices we make about school science reflect ideas about what we value in science, its relationship to non-scientists and what sort of future we want to build.

Fuel the economy

A simple way to consider what school science is for is to add an extra stage to the linear model of innovation. This model, loosely, imagines that if you make lots of scientists and engineers, they’ll produce innovations leading to economic growth. To extend this to education, we need lots of science lessons to fuel this process.

Except it’s more than just science and engineering which drives innovation, and technical skills are often at their most useful when they have a chance to play with others (the results of the recent Brighton Fuse project are interesting here). We might also question what we mean by growth exactly, and who it serves; what else might science grow, for whom? And it’s worth remembering science education can do a lot more than make scientific workers. School science doesn’t just have to be about learning how to serve a role in other people’s ideas of the future.

There is something about this model which feels a bit like farming people, inefficiently farming them at that. And yet it persists. Last month, I was part of a group invited to discuss women in science and engineering with Business secretary Vince Cable. He started by summarising what he felt was the central issue. We need to rebuild the economy and we need engineers to do this. Notably, his go-to example here was building pipes for the oil and gas industry. But we’re not tapping into the female half of the workforce so we need to get them interested in the subject.

Cable’s civil servants suggested engineering could be sold to young women by showing the links to chocolate, a tweetable dress and One Direction, and though they made a note to look up Engineers Without Borders, I left doubting they were ready to take young people very seriously.

Science for citizenship

Back in the 1970s, science teacher turned sociologist Michael D Young suggested a theme of social segregation runs throughout school science, as it continually sorts students into three groups: pure scientists, applied scientists and failures. Science and engineering education is often sold as a great route for social mobility – just look at the recent Education for Engineering report on opportunity and all its arrows upwards – but what about those such a model based on a metaphorical social ladder inevitably leaves behind?

But school science can offer more than ‘failure’ for those who don’t become scientists. It can be a worth in itself, and leave them with a better relationship to the scientific community to take into adult life. The non-scientists don’t simply have to sit as an under-educated ‘other’ for the successes to feel superior to. This is the attitude taken by the 21st Century Science curriculum, the influential Beyond 2000 report it was inspired by, and the longer and more international history of ‘science in a social context’ programmes. They all see school science as, at least in part, a key way of constructing citizens.

Geoffrey Thomas and John Durant’s 1987 taxonomy of reasons for the public understanding of science offers a good starting point for considering what science education for everyone might entail (see Gregory & Miller, 1998: 11-16). Alongside ideas that science education might serve science or the economy, they also note the possible intellectual and aesthetic benefits to recipients; science can be beautiful, exciting or might even make you a more rational person in some way. A bit ofscience can be good for the soul.

Historian IB Cohen had some fun with this sort of thinking back in 1953 with a set of ‘fallacies’ he saw repeated in calls for more science education including the fallacy that studying science makes you a more rational person. As Cohen dryly pointed out, this can easily be debunked ‘by examining carefully the lives of scientists outside of the laboratory’ (Gregory & Miller, 1998: 16-17). He has a point, though critical thinking skills can be at least offered in science lessons, which can also offer a lot of joy too, and it is worth remembering this whilst also remembering other subjects offer these, and more, too.

Thomas and Durant also stress the benefits of science education to a modern democratic society. This argument is persuasive; we live in a society which relies heavily on scientific understanding, so knowing some science will help us negotiate it.

A curriculum designed to help ‘citizen science’ will require more than just teaching science. We might, for example, expect students to learn ‘how science works’; ideas about the scientific method and other philosophy of science. We might offer ‘how science really works’ too, e.g. the norms and counter-norms of scientific work (i.e. that science is communal, except when it’s not, that it’s universal, except when its not, that its disinterested… you get the idea). More usefully, perhaps, we could teach something of how science is planned and managed, ethics, models for scientific advice and this weird thing we call peer review.

Our education system is still weighted to the teaching science end of things, with a bit of how science works thrown in for good measure. The science in a social context tradition and, more recently, 21st Century Science have tried to include some ‘how it really works’ too. They often take a lead from issues such as climate change or GMOs, rather than discrete scientific topics, requiring students to put several different areas of expertise together, sometimes uncomfortably, and with layers of social context and a heady dose of uncertainty to boot.

Constructing citizens, or consumers?

A classic criticism of a ‘school science for the people’ approach is that an issues-led approach loses ‘real’ science. This came up occasionally in the various spats over teaching climate change in schools, for example. Except is this thing we made up to organise learning about the world and called ‘chemistry’ really more real than the collection of phenomena and understandings of it we collect together under labels of ‘climate change’?

If a curriculum is an expression of what we in a society value as important enough to pass on to younger generations, do we really value something called physics above understanding climate change? It serves the Institute of Physics and RSC to maintain the idea of their subjects as so important they are studied in schools, but it remains unclear how well it serves science at large (geology, for example, not to mention many growing areas of interdisciplinary work) or the public, or industry. Or the young people themselves for that matter, a group who are rarely asked their view on educational matters (notable exception being the student review of the science curriculum, a decade ago).

I should stress that an issues-led science curriculum on, for example, climate change, would still include the study of physics, and maths, and medicine and literature and history and politics and much more. This approach is not about replacing science with sociology or philosophy, but rather mixing topics together for a fuller understanding. To some perspectives, this is more ‘scientific’. As I discovered when I piloted undergraduate courses on ‘global challenges’, students saw it as a way of making better scientists, as well as preparing them as citizens and workers.

A better critique of the science for citizenship approach to ask how much such approaches really live up to their aim of empowering their students in terms of their relationships to science and technology? Just as the Public Understanding of Science movement at large might be criticised for trying to produce a citizenry comfortable with buying into particular technologies, a school version can be less about challenging science as it is currently structured and more about learning to deal with what you are given.

Back in 2001 Martin Hollins, then Principal Officer for Science at the Qualifications and Curriculum Agency, described the school-science for public understanding approach as a shift from making the science ‘producers’ of tomorrow to preparing ‘consumers’. He may well see consumers here as critical and powerful. Still, it is not a view of non-scientists’ relationship with science everyone will agree with. Shouldn’t we all play a part in shaping science, in shaping our futures?

Another criticism is whether this is where we should do such political discussion of science and technology? Shouldn’t this all be in for citizenship? There is some debate over whether science teachers are best placed to teach such topics (this pdf of a report analysing post-16 education in the area is interesting) but it is still worth asking why should science lessons pick up slack for our underdeveloped political education?

What is school science for?

Try that play-fight for yourself. It should be done in more places than university seminar rooms. See what you come up with.

Alice Bell is a research fellow at the Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex. She has a load of 1970s science in a social context teaching resources on her desk if anyone wants a nose/ offer a grant to digitise them.

Importance of Science Education in Schools

Published On: September 08, 2017

Why is science education important in our schools? We are surrounded by technology and the products of science every day. Public policy decisions that affect every aspect of our lives are based in scientific evidence. And, of course, the immensely complex natural world that surrounds us illustrates infinite scientific concepts. As children grow up in an increasingly technologically and scientifically advanced world, they need to be scientifically literate to succeed.

Ideally, teaching the scientific method to students is teaching them how to think, learn, solve problems and make informed decisions. These skills are integral to every aspect of a student’s education and life, from school to career. With a graduate degree in science education such as the online Master of Education in Curriculum and Instruction in Science Education from the University of Texas at Arlington, teachers can use what they learn about science instruction techniques and curriculum design to advance science education and student learning as a whole.

How Is Science Involved in Students’ Everyday Lives?

Science is everywhere. A student rides to school on a bus, and in that instance alone, there are many examples of technology based on the scientific method. The school bus is a product of many areas of science and technology, including mechanical engineering and innovation. The systems of roads, lights, sidewalks and other infrastructure are carefully designed by civil engineers and planners. The smartphone in the student’s hand is a miracle of modern computer engineering.

Outside the window, trees turn sunlight into stored energy and create the oxygen we need to survive. Whether “natural” or human-derived, every aspect of a student’s life is filled with science — from their own internal biology to the flat-screen TV in the living room.

Scientific Inquiry and Scientific Method

Perhaps even more important than specific examples of science in our lives are the ways we use scientific thought, method and inquiry to come to our decisions. This is not necessarily a conscious thing. The human need to solve problems can arise from curiosity or from necessity. The process of inquiry is how we find answers and substantiate those answers.

In the fields of hard science, the process of inquiry is more direct and finite: Take a question; use evidence to form an explanation; connect that explanation to existing knowledge; and communicate that evidence-based explanation. Experimentation based on the scientific method follows a similar course: Combine a scientific question with research to construct a hypothesis; conduct experiments to test that hypothesis; evaluate the results to draw conclusions; and communicate those conclusions.

Critical Thinking

Although inquiry and the scientific method are integral to science education and practice, every decision we make is based on these processes. Natural human curiosity and necessity lead to asking questions (What is the problem?), constructing a hypothesis (How do I solve it?), testing it with evidence and evaluating the result (Did the solution work?), and making future decisions based on that result.

This is problem-solving: using critical thinking and evidence to create solutions and make decisions. Problem-solving and critical thinking are two of the most important skills students learn in school. They are essential to making good decisions that lead to achievement and success during and after school.

Yet, although they are nearly synonymous, scientific inquiry in schools is not always explicitly tied to problem-solving and critical thinking. The process students learn when creating, executing, evaluating and communicating the results of an experiment can be applied to any challenge they face in school, from proving a point in a persuasive essay to developing a photo in the darkroom. In this way, science is one of the most important subjects students study, because it gives them the critical thinking skills they need in every subject.

The Importance of Science in Early Education

Governmental guidelines and tests often focus on middle and high school-level STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education. Yet, many educators believe science education should begin much earlier. Not only does science education teach young learners problem-solving skills that will help them throughout their schooling, it also engages them in science from the start.

Kids usually form a basic opinion about the sciences shortly after beginning school. If this is a negative opinion, it can be hard to engage those students in science as they grow older. Engaging young students with exciting material and experiences motivates them to learn and pursue the sciences throughout school.

Science is one of the most important subjects in school due to its relevance to students’ lives and the universally applicable problem-solving and critical thinking skills it uses and develops. These are lifelong skills that allow students to generate ideas, weigh decisions intelligently and even understand the evidence behind public policymaking. Teaching technological literacy, critical thinking and problem-solving through science education gives students the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in school and beyond.

Have a question or concern about this article? Please contact us.

scientific community

1 scientific community

научное сообщество
—
[А.С.Гольдберг. Англо-русский энергетический словарь. 2006 г.]

Тематики

2 scientific community

3 scientific community

4 scientific community

5 scientific community

6 scientific community

7 scientific community

8 scientific community

9 scientific community

10 scientific community

11 scientific community

12 scientific community

13 Army scientific community

14 International Scientific Community

15 debate was prompted by disagreement among the scientific community on

16 international scientific community

17 the international scientific community

18 the scientific community

19 Army scientific community

20 community

См. также в других словарях:

Scientific community — The scientific community consists of the total body of scientists, its relationships and interactions. It is normally divided into sub communities each working on a particular field within science. Objectivity is expected to be achieved by the… … Wikipedia

Scientific community — Die Wissenschaftsgemeinde (engl. Scientific community) ist die Gesamtheit aller am internationalen Wissenschaftsbetrieb teilnehmenden Wissenschaftler. Der Lateinische Begriff res publica literaria wurde bis in das 18. Jahrhundert hinein verwendet … Deutsch Wikipedia

Scientific community metaphor — In computer science, the Scientific Community Metaphor is one way of understanding scientific communities. The first publications on the Scientific Community Metaphor (Bill Kornfeld and Carl Hewitt 1981, Kornfeld 1981, Kornfeld 1982) involved the … Wikipedia

Scientific consensus — is the collective judgement, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of science at a particular time. Scientific consensus is not, by itself, a scientific argument, and is not part of the scientific method;… … Wikipedia

Scientific data archiving — refers to the long term storage of scientific data and methods. The various scientific journals have differing policies regarding how much of their data and methods scientists are required to store in a public archive, and what is actually… … Wikipedia

Scientific racism — denotes the use of scientific, or ostensibly scientific, findings and methods to support or validate racist attitudes and worldviews. It is based on belief in the existence and significance of racial categories, but extends this into a hierarchy… … Wikipedia

Scientific imperialism — is a term that appears to have been coined by Dr Ellis T Powell when addressing the Commonwealth Club of Canada on 8 September 1920. Though he defined imperialism as the sense of arbitrary and capricious domination over the bodies and souls of… … Wikipedia

Scientific Integrity in Policymaking — Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the Bush Administration s Misuse of Science is the title of a report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists in February, 2004. The report was the culmination of an investigation… … Wikipedia

Scientific formalism — is a broad term for a family of approaches to the presentation of science. It is viewed as an important part of the scientific method, especially in the physical sciences.Levels of formalismThere are multiple levels of scientific formalism… … Wikipedia

community — ► NOUN (pl. communities) 1) a group of people living together in one place. 2) (the community) the people of an area or country considered collectively; society. 3) a group of people with a common religion, race, or profession: the scientific… … English terms dictionary

Science is a collective enterprise: its models are cumulative, interconnected and coherent

The stereotypical lone scientist, beavering away in his laboratory, is no longer with us.

This is one of ScienceOrNot’s Hallmarks of science. See them all here.

In short…

Every scientific model is built up through the collaboration of the scientific community. Those models which survive do so because they fit into and consolidate the fabric of scientific knowledge.

If I have seen farther, it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.

In what sense is science collective, cumulative, interconnected and coherent?

Scientific knowledge results from the contributions of large numbers of scientists from all over the world. Science builds on previous knowledge. Although there are sometimes abrupt changes in paradigms, scientists are normally expected to show how new results fit into existing models. As a result, the network of scientific models forms a relatively (but not perfectly) unified picture of nature.

How the interconnectedness works.

Scientists need to be construct new models in such a way that they fit into the fabric of existing scientific knowledge. There are usually different teams working on the testing of any model, and they need to communicate their findings through conferences and reports. Scientists are expected to publish the results of their research in scientific journals so that other scientists are informed and can give feedback. They need to cite previous research that is relevant to their study so that others can see how the work fits into the existing picture.

No single study should be viewed as the final word on any particular issue. Rather, it should be seen as a contribution to the discussion. Eventually, as a body of studies on a topic accumulates, the scientific community forms a consensus about the correct model. Some studies will have made significant contributions to the consensus, others only minor ones, and still others may have been totally wrong.

Occasionally, the links binding a model into the interconnected web of scientific knowledge begin to break down because new discoveries have weakened them. This is a sign that the model is in trouble. It may end up being replaced by a new model which meshes better.

Why interconnectedness is needed

An important principle in science is that models should be valid in all contexts in which they are relevant. This means that, irrespective of the scientific discipline, geographic location or culture they are used in, the same models apply. In other words, science is consistent and integrated. There are no areas of science whose models clash violently with the models in other areas.

For example, biology uses the same atomic model as chemistry and the models that explain gravity at any place on earth also explain the gravitational interactions between galaxies.

Bogus science often relies on models which clash with those of real science, and in some cases, there are even internal inconsistencies within a branch of bogus science itself.

Examples

Further reading

Isaac Newton’s quote is from a letter to Robert Hooke.
The Fields of Science graphic is by Image Editor on Flickr.

This is one of ScienceOrNot’s Hallmarks of science. See them all here.

This page reviewed: 2013/09/17