Ask A Scientist© General Science Archive

name         Savitha M.
status       student
age          30s

Question -   I am investigating the history and the meanings of terms
"scientific literacy", and "literacy", and how these meanings have
evolved over time. It seems to me that the people who talk about
literacy, i.e., the 'language' people, and the people who talk about
'scientific literacy', i.e.' the science people, often seem to be talking
at each other and not really listening. What are some of the things I
should consider when I try to integrate these two terms and how they have
come to mean what they have?
-----------------------------
Savitha,

"Language" folks are characterized more by their capacity to embrace and use
vocabulary -- rather more like being a walking dictionary underpinned by an
understanding of history and literature. On the other hand, "science" folks
place more weight on analytical skills, objectivity, and curiosity -- all
supported on a good technical vocabulary as their base.

Absent, scientific literacy, the average person can be easily misled by
politics and appeals to emotion. Analytical skill and objectivity seem to be a
critical differences between scientists and non-scientists. If the "two
cultures" are to communicate effectively, these differences underscore the
pressing need for scientists who can present their technical points of view
with a lucidity that will be found appealing to the general public.

Regards,
ProfHoff 333
=========================================================
I do not see these terms as being so different. Literacy refers to the ability
to read and understand the language. Scientific literacy, to me at least,
means the ability to read and understand basic scientific concepts. In
wanting our students to be scientifically literate, we hope that they will be
able to make sense of the science stories they read about in the news, be
able to form well-reasoned opinions on basic issues in science that affect
their lives, have enough scientific grounding so that they can detect
pseudoscientific claims, and so on.
Paul Mahoney, Ph.D.
=========================================================
You raise a valid linguistic problem. I agree that the term "literacy" in
the sense of language means the ability to read/write a language with
sufficient skill to communicate in that language. "Scientific literacy" uses
the same word "literacy" in a different sense (a habit not unusual in the
English language):

Scientific literacy, defined as "the knowledge and understanding of
scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making,
participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity"
(National Science Education Standards, National Academy of Sciences).

You can find a good starting point on the site:
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/html/2.html#perspectives

lots of citations etc. A search of the term "scientific literacy" on the
search engine
www.google.com give many other relevant sites on the subject. I'd suggest
contacting some of these organizations to track down the history of the
term. I am not sure where it first appeared in the "literature".

Vince Calder
========================================================
Being literate comes, I believe, in different levels and forms. Overall
literacy is the ability to communicate in different media effectively...That
is to give and receive information coherently. This would involve all
means...foreign languages, mathematics, sign language etc.  Science literacy
would be a form of literacy which concerns itself with understanding and
communicating to others ideas that would fall in the various sciences.  One
can be a scientist and not be very literate and one can be somewhat literate
and have scant understanding of science, but to be highly literate would
demand that one could understand and communicate in many of the science to
at least a general degree.  Many of the best scientists have been quite
literate...speaking various languages including, of course Latin and Greek,
as well as a good working knowledge of mathematics. Francis Bacon is a good
example of a highly literate scientist OR, if you will, a scientifically,
well-honed, literate, lay person.



Peter Faletra Ph.D.
Office of Science
Department of Energy
========================================================
You have raised an interesting point.  I have been teaching high school for
more than 15 years and have yet to understand exactly how these two concepts
are related.  I suspect the connotations surrounding the "literacy level" of
a given population was the impetus to use the word "literacy" when describing
the level of conceptual understanding an educated person should acquire in
order to be functional in the society of the highly developed nations.  Most
of these developed countries boast a high "literacy" level among their
populations, meaning 90% or more of the people can read and write at least at
a survival level.  Institutions which promote teacher education, along with
the professional organizations supporting science teachers, seemed to have
copied the "literacy" idea for science education.  As far as I can tell,
"scientific literacy" and general "literacy" both are concerned with the
level of achievement which allows the individual to be comfortable and
functional in today's society. Among many possibilities, that could be in
assessing the value of a political editorial about cloning, in understanding
the information a doctor is relating about an illness, or in productive
usage of Internet capabilities.  I started out as a humanities teacher and
later took an advanced degree in molecular biology.  I try to combine the two
ideas during the year when I assign germinal readings outside of the biology
class work to discuss and relate to both the studies and the students' 
lives.
Good luck in your search for the answer.
Cherie Breffeilh
=========================================================