[Paleopsych] NYT: Scientific Savvy? In U.S., Not Much

[Premise Checker]

Scientific Savvy? In U.S., Not Much
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html

[International comparisons, please! The U.S., I think, will fall close to the 
regression line on I.Q. It's way above it in per capita income. It would be fun 
to regress per capita income against both I.Q. and scientific literacy. My bet 
it that the addition to the coefficient of correlation will be very slight.]

    By [3]CORNELIA DEAN

    CHICAGO - When Jon D. Miller looks out across America, which he can
    almost do from his 18th-floor office at Northwestern University
    Medical School in Chicago, he sees a landscape of haves and have-nots
    - in terms not of money, but of knowledge.

    Dr. Miller, 63, a political scientist who directs the Center for
    Biomedical Communications at the medical school, studies how much
    Americans know about science and what they think about it. His
    findings are not encouraging.

    While scientific literacy has doubled over the past two decades, only
    20 to 25 percent of Americans are "scientifically savvy and alert," he
    said in an interview. Most of the rest "don't have a clue." At a time
    when science permeates debates on everything from global warming to
    stem cell research, he said, people's inability to understand basic
    scientific concepts undermines their ability to take part in the
    democratic process.

    Over the last three decades, Dr. Miller has regularly surveyed his
    fellow citizens for clients as diverse as the National Science
    Foundation, European government agencies and the Lance Armstrong
    Foundation. People who track Americans' attitudes toward science
    routinely cite his deep knowledge and long track record.

    "I think we should pay attention to him," said Eugenie Scott, director
    of the National Center for Science Education, who cites Dr. Miller's
    work in her efforts to advance the cause of evolution in the
    classroom. "We ignore public understanding of science at our peril."

    Rolf F. Lehming, who directs the science foundation's surveys on
    understanding of science, calls him "absolutely authoritative."

    Dr. Miller's data reveal some yawning gaps in basic knowledge.
    American adults in general do not understand what molecules are (other
    than that they are really small). Fewer than a third can identify DNA
    as a key to heredity. Only about 10 percent know what radiation is.
    One adult American in five thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth,
    an idea science had abandoned by the 17th century.

    At one time, this kind of ignorance may not have meant much for the
    nation's public life. Dr. Miller, who has delved into 18th-century
    records of New England town meetings, said that back then, it was
    enough "if you knew where the bridge should be built, if you knew
    where the fence should be built."

    "Even if you could not read and write, and most New England residents
    could not read or write," he went on, "you could still be a pretty
    effective citizen."

    No more. "Acid rain, nuclear power, infectious diseases - the world is
    a little different," he said.

    It was the nuclear power issue that first got him interested in public
    knowledge of science, when he was a graduate student in the 1960's.
    "The issue then was nuclear power," he said. "I used to play tennis
    with some engineers who were very pro-nuclear, and I was dating a
    person who was very anti-nuclear. I started doing some reading and
    discovered that if you don't know a little science it was hard to
    follow these debates. A lot of journalism would not make sense to
    you."

    Devising good tests to measure scientific knowledge is not simple.
    Questions about values and attitudes can be asked again and again over
    the years because they will be understood the same way by everyone who
    hears them; for example, Dr. Miller's surveys regularly ask people
    whether they agree that science and technology make life change too
    fast (for years, about half of Americans have answered yes) or whether
    Americans depend too much on science and not enough on faith (ditto).

    But assessing actual knowledge, over time, "is something of an art,"
    he said. He varies his questions, as topics come and go in the news,
    but devises the surveys so overall results can be compared from survey
    to survey, just as SAT scores can be compared even though questions on
    the test change.

    For example, he said, in the era of nuclear tests he asked people
    whether they knew about strontium 90, a component of fallout. Today,
    he asks about topics like the workings of DNA in the cell because "if
    you don't know what a cell is, you can't make sense of stem cell
    research."

    Dr. Miller, who was raised in Portsmouth, Ohio, when it was a dying
    steel town, attributes much of the nation's collective scientific
    ignorance to poor education, particularly in high schools. Many
    colleges require every student to take some science, but most
    Americans do not graduate from college. And science education in high
    school can be spotty, he said.

    "Our best university graduates are world-class by any definition," he
    said. "But the second half of our high school population - it's an
    embarrassment. We have left behind a lot of people."

    He had firsthand experience with local school issues in the 1980's,
    when he was a young father living in DeKalb, Ill., and teaching at
    Northern Illinois University. The local school board was considering
    closing his children's school, and he attended some board meetings to
    get an idea of members' reasoning. It turned out they were spending
    far more time on issues like the cost of football tickets than they
    were on the budget and other classroom matters. "It was shocking," he
    said.

    So he and some like-minded people ran successfully for the board and,
    once in office, tried to raise taxes to provide more money for the
    classroom. They initiated three referendums; all failed. Eventually,
    he gave up, and his family moved away.

    "This country cannot finance good school systems on property taxes,"
    he said. "We don't get the best people for teaching because we pay so
    little. For people in the sciences particularly, if you have some
    skill, the job market is so good that teaching is not competitive."

    Dr. Miller was recruited to Northwestern Medical School in 1999 by
    administrators who knew of his work and wanted him to study attitudes
    and knowledge of science in light of the huge changes expected from
    the genomic revolution.

    He also has financing - and wears a yellow plastic bracelet - from the
    Lance Armstrong Foundation, for a project to research people's
    knowledge of clinical trials. Many research organizations want to know
    what encourages people to participate in a trial and what discourages
    them. But Dr. Miller said, "It's more interesting to ask if they know
    what a clinical trial is, do they know what a placebo is."

    The National Science Foundation is recasting its survey operations, so
    Dr. Miller is continuing surveys for other clients. One involves
    following people over time, tracing their knowledge and beliefs about
    science from childhood to adulthood, to track the way advantages and
    disadvantages in education are compounded over time and to test his
    theory that people don't wait until they are adults to start forming
    opinions about the world.

    Lately, people who advocate the teaching of evolution have been citing
    Dr. Miller's ideas on what factors are correlated with adherence to
    creationism and rejection of Darwinian theories. In general, he says,
    these fundamentalist views are most common among people who are not
    well educated and who "work in jobs that are evaporating fast with
    competition around the world."

    But not everyone is happy when he says things like that. Every time he
    goes on the radio to talk about his findings, he said, "I get people
    sending me cards saying they will pray for me a lot."