Re: science fair petition?

[Joel Rauber <Joel_Rauber@SDSTATE.EDU>]

William J. Beaty wrote in part:

He asked for comments, I can't resist:
>     By requiring that our children distort their science projects to
>     follow a stereotyped charicature of science, we convince them that
>     Science is excruciating, straight-jacketed stuff.

essentially agree

> We
> hide from them
>     the entire reason why scientists do Science in the first place: it
>     is a joyful exploration of totally fascinating topics.

This isn't the entire reason scientists do science.  Some (many) are driven
by more base motivations.

> It is playing
>     with cool equipment.  It is dancing with the universe and
> learning to
>     see in new ways.  Yes, sometimes scientists propose and test
>     hypotheses, but usually only AFTER they have explored
> nature and made
>     interesting discoveries.
>
>     Please end the "Hypothesis/Experiment/Results"
> requirement in science
>     fairs.

sort of agree, there should still be an "experiment" requirement.

> While numerous methods exist for doing science,
> there is no
>     single "Scientific Method."
>
> Comments?
>
> I intentionally avoided supplying any "methods of science" in
> the above.
> If we knock "the scientific method" off its pedestal, then freedom is
> promoted and the science fair rules become less narrow and
> rigid.  Is this


> enough?  The science fairs still need rules, but I fear that we might
> replace one overly-narrow requirement with another.

They still need rules, I think this proposed statement should have
guidelines as to rules.  Bill, what rules do you think are needed?

Very little in the above statement prevents a project comparing the poetry
of Lord Byron to that of Tennyson.  (Which I think is an entirely worthwhile
intellectual endeavor).

Joel Rauber