Science for Citizens: A Plan with a Purpose John 0. Hosteitler San Jose State University
San Jose. CA 95192
I keep six honest sewing men. They taught me all I know. Their names are what and why and when and how and where and who. . . ..Rudyard Kipling
This symposium is concerned with "Chemistry for Citizens." and its title asks the oraematic uuestions. "What to pres&t?" and "How to ii?'?"~ uwhy t do wk present i t a t all? Perhaps we should pause for a moment to consider the purpose of "Chemistry for Citizens." And while we are asking questions, we should not overlook other relevant ones like "for whom?" and "where?" and "when?" In Search ot a Purpose
For Whom? In the minds of many of us "Chemistry for Citizens" means chemistry for nonscientists. But we are all citizens-scientists and nonscientists alike. We should keep this simple fact in mind. h narrower perspective will pervert our purpose and render our plan ineffecti\.e. Wh+ The rhetoric to iustifv "Chemistrv for Citizens" activities often invokes phrases like "making better citizens," "awareness of science-society issues," and "scientific literacy." But are these adequate or even appropriate goals for us to pursue? consider "awareness of science-society issues.'' While i t is better to be aware than totally ignorant, is this enough? Will awareness alone insure clean air and water, safe food and drugs, ample resources, and world peace? Or is awareness justa simple (and relatively easy) first step in a journey of a thousand miles? Perhans the Durnose of "Chemistrv for Citizens" should go heyond "social awareness" to "scientific literacy." But is "scientific literacv" realistic? Can we honestlv exoect each citizen to read ( a i d know and use) all the science relevant to nuclear weapons, strategic metals, synfuels, world hunger, medical care, radwastes, and acid rain? Surely this is too much. If "awareness" is not enough and "scientific literacy" is too much, what should we aim for? Ultimately, we hope for solutions to important social problems. These solutions will require adequate and appropriate science and technolow, sound opinions, wise d&ions, and the blessing of the masses. None of this will happen unless we as citizensscientists and nonscientists alike-understand science and its relationship to the rest of society. It seems to me that this understanding of science and its social aspects is the purpose we seek. In particular, our students should understand:
" .
&
.
1) Science per se
the knowledge of science-how it is organized into facts, concepts, laws, and theories and the distinctions between these; its sense and beauty; the major ideas and enough specifics to make these ideas real; and its limits (what we cannot know scientificallyand the tentative nature of what we do know). the methods ofscience-the nature and purpose of hypothesis and experimentation; the critical evaluation of results; the diversity of styles and the very human qualities of the pursuit of scientific knowledge; the periods of normal science and of scientific revolutions. 2) The Social Aspects of Science the utilitarian role ofscience-the use of science t o provide a decent standard of living; the urgency and complexity of social problems that threaten our standard of living: the contributions of science and technoloev to these ~ r o k e m s and their solutions: the differences &ween science and rechnologv and brtueen terhnirnl and social roniidrratiuns: the hnris nnd impact uf puldrr upinion: rhe narJrr of drrision making. ~
Journal of Chemical Education
~~~
~~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
~
the cultural role of scienee-the relationship of science to cultural values ( I ) and the relevance of these values to social problems and their solutions ( Z ) , the intellectual pleasure of science (how, like art, it can enrich the mind and spirit). the support of science-the financial and moral support required by science to fulfill its social roles (stable science policies, freedom to do basic research, and a reasonable level of prestige). That is a lot to understand. I t carries us heyond "Chemistry for Citizens" to "Science for Citizens," beyond chemistry courses to a science curriculum, heyond chemical education to science education. Can we accomplish a purpose of such scope? Where? And When? A Plan wlth a Purpose
Where? Traditional science courses have been directed toward a relatively specific and detailed understanding of the knowledge and methods of a particular science (e.e.. chemistry or-physics). In science c6urses for scientists t i i s may he the only practical goal. In the nonscientists' courses, however, I think we can (and should) pay some attention to science's utiliarian role as well. I t must he admitted, however, that the more social aspects of science cannot be very fully developed in traditional science courses. Nor is a verv " eeneral (historical and nhiloso~hical) understanding of science per se achieved in such courses. I think we need new courses to carry this burden. The new courses I have in mind are of two types: (1) science-humanities and (2) social science of science. The science-humanities courses would aspire to a general understanding of scientific knowledge and methods with a special emphasis on the cultural role of science (e.g., "The Ascent of Man" course; (see ref. (3)).The social science of science courses would focus on science's utilitarian role, social support for science, and the institutions and behavior of the scientific community (see ref. (4)). Both scientists and nonscientists would enroll in these new courses. When? If this e x ~ a n d e dscience curriculum is to he effective, one course should build on another leading students from what they alreadv understand to less familiar eround. Scientists s h o d d start with science courses and t h i n progress to science-humanities and finally social science of science courses. The sequence would he reversed for nonscientists. This curriculum is the best answer I can make to the questions "Why?", "For Whom?", "Where?", and "When?" I would like to turn now to the chemistry for nonscientists course and the questions "What?" and "How?"
-
Chemlstry for Nonsclenilsts
Evolution of the Course. The first really serious attempts at chemistry for nonscientists were made in the early seventies. In 1971 Kieffer published "Chemistry: A Cultural Approach" (5), which blended some philosophy of science with history of chemistry to make points regarding the knowledge, methods, and cultural role of science. In 1972 Hill's "Chemistry for Changing Times" (6) appeared, very much in tune with the times, with,the euvironment front and center. And as the times changed, so did chemistrv for nonscientists. We had courses on environmental chemistry; energy and resources; food, drugs, and health; consumer chemistrv. The -goal of such courses seemed to he social awareness. Chemistry in the Community (CHEMCOM') is a n NSFfunded project which is currently developing materials for a high school chemistry for nonscientists course (7). CHEMCOM is breaking new ground. It concentrates on afew major science-society issues (like food, water, and energy) and the chemical science relevant to these issues. I t uses case studies to teach decision making, and its professed goal is scientific
