Re: A. Einstein and science-fairs

[Joel Rauber <Joel_Rauber@SDSTATE.EDU>]

Michael wrote in part:

> I apologize if my ranting and raving has drawn readers to
> conclude that
> I don't value teaching students good analysis/process skills.

Let me add a note of apology as well for some of the shrillness of this
thread; I'm mostly trying to spark some debate, because I see much that I
don't like in the whole science fair project milieu.

> What I am doing is lamenting about several things I have noticed:
>
> (1) Science fair organizers (many teachers in general) tend to believe
> there is a rigidly defined "scientific process."
> (2) Many don't accept projects outside that narrow definition.
> (3) Scientific process is pushed so hard that science content hardly
> matters any more.
> (4) My memory (which may be fallible) is that this is a
> change from the
> way science fairs worked 30 years ago.

I agree with statements 1-3  (although I may want a narrower definition than
Michael, but current practice is certainly too narrow).  I can't agree with
(4), because I don't have direct experience with science fairs of 30 years
ago; I'm old enough but avoided the high school teachers that required doing
such a project.

> As a parting shot, let me say that I don't especially feel
> that science
> necessarily deserves credit for, nor should be the primary champion of
> "the scientific method," if what is meant by this is doing well
> designed studies, taking good notes, and drawing conclusions supported
> by the data.  Economists, artists, lawyers, etc. (you name it) all
> ought to work this way.  I would rather call this "critical thinking
> skills" or "analysis skills" or something like that.

Agreed, and I wish more economists, artists, lawyers, doctors worked this
way; perhaps if more had had to enter projects in "analysis fairs" . . .

> My point, then, is that today's "science fairs" might as well
> be called
> "analysis fairs."  Certainly the bulk of what I have seen as a judge
> would fall into the category of "consumer analysis" or
> "psycho-behavioral analysis."

Agreed, but "science fair" is a much more sexy moniker.

> Heaven's, I've even seen acceptable
> projects in astrology... acceptable because the student defined the
> study well, interviewed sufficient people of various zodiacal signs to
> make the teacher happy, and concluded that Aries people are more
> aggressive than Virgo people.

Oops, some disagreement; I wouldn't mind these projects of the study is done
well; and it would presumably show that there was no such effect.  The
sceptical enquirer does analysis of these topics all the time, in, to coin a
phrase, "a scientific manner".

> I'm so tired of that, and have
> complained so much to my wife, that when I come home from judging a
> fair she has the habit of preempting my impending tirade by asking...
> "Well, did you get to judge any REAL science projects today?"

Your spouse sounds like a true gem.

cheers

Joel Rauber