My latest blog post over at Science Progress is a reaction to the NSF’s new Science and Engineering Indicators 2010 report, and in particular, to its famous Chapter 7, which deals with science and the public.
In essence, the new Chapter 7 gives you the choice of whether to view the glass as half full, or half empty, when it comes to the U.S. public and its relationship to the world of science. I personally lean toward “half empty,” but here’s the pro/con breakdown:
On the positive side…the report consistently shows that Americans are not so scientifically benighted as one might think, at least in comparison with the rest of the world. We go to science museums more frequently. We claim a higher level of interest in “new scientific discoveries” than citizens in South Korea, China, and many parts of Europe. And in terms of sheer factual knowledge, we perform pretty much on par with Europe, and ahead of other countries like Japan, China, and Russia.
Through such international comparisons, the latest NSF report suggests that if your preferred standard for judging a nation’s engagement with science is to see how it stacks up next to other comparable (e.g., developed) countries, then the United States really doesn’t fare so poorly. Furthermore, NSF emphasizes that Americans profess to have very positive views about science. They overwhelmingly think science makes our lives better and that it deserves federal funding. And they have an apparently abiding trust in the leaders of the scientific community.
That’s the good side. But here’s the reason I still feel pretty negative in outlook:
As Science and Engineering Indicators 2010 itself admits, seeing how the country fares on science in comparison with other nations isn’t the only possible means of judgment. If one’s standard is more ambitious—emphasizing, in the latest report’s words, “what a technologically advanced society requires (either today or in the future) to compete in the world economy and enable its citizens to better take advantage of science progress in their own lives”—then it is very hard to feel good about the current state of affairs in the United States.
For instance, just 13 percent of the public now claims to follow science and technology news “very closely,” and this number has been on a downward trend for the past decade, ending with the current low. So while Americans may profess great admiration for science in the abstract, they hardly feel compelled to pay it much attention.
Similarly, there has been little apparent improvement over time in Americans’ basic ability to answer factual questions about science correctly. Moreover, the vast majority of our citizens have scant familiarity with key emerging scientific fields that will dramatically shape the future, such as nanotechnology and biotechnology—and it is important to note that these are the only such fields that the NSF report focuses in on. Ask Americans about other coming scientific technologies or quandaries—say, geoengineering, or synthetic biology—and I imagine the responses would be even more dismal.
Anyway, there’s much more to the column, so check it out here–and decide for yourself whether, when it comes to science and the American public, you’re an optimist or pessimist.
After being on the road for over two weeks, it’s good to be home. I met so many passionate scientists, students, and science advocates along the way that it brought me a sense of great hope for what’s to come. A highlight was the past weekend stopover in North Carolina for ScienceOnline2010 where I was delighted to meet dozens of interesting science writers and new media folks in person while getting the opportunity to spend time with my favorite science bloggers from around the world. It was a lot of fun to share a panel on fact-checking with Rebecca Skloot and David Dobbs–and if you haven’t already picked up the most recent issue of O Magazine, make sure you do! Rebecca has a fascinating excerpt from her upcoming book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks inside! I also had the pleasure of participating in a second session with Isis and Janet; two women who constantly amaze me both in and out of the blogosphere. Our session on civility got a bit too uncivil at times, but it also brought up very important discussion points that I’d like to see explored more online.
I had my two favorite allies by my side most of the meeting–CM and Vanessa Woods. I am also pleased to report back that Ed Yong is just as awesome in person as at Not Exactly Rocket Science. Bora, Anton, and David did a terrific job pulling the conference together and it was fantastic to see so many friends who inhabit the blogosphere from Sci to Brian, Greg to Carl, Darlene to Dave, Miriam to Kevin, Arikia to Nate, Eric and Eric and on and on… I could not begin to list everyone, so instead, I will just say this: Everyday it is a delight, privilege, and honor to share the science blogosphere with the incredible, inspiring, and wonderful individuals that participate here. I am already looking forward to next year’s event!