Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Scientific narratives encounter resistance from many sources on religious
grounds. Others see science as the tool of economic imperialism, as in, for ex-
ample, the ongoing arguments about the patenting of seeds and the genetic
engineering of foods. Resistance also comes from fear of change and the un-
known. When science explains something that was heretofore mysterious and
for which “folk” or religious explanations had been employed, many resist what
they see as an assault on their beliefs. And yet, as science proceeds, the realm of
Mystery is not reduced but redefined.
Many forget that the history of science shows that scientific findings and
theories change as more is known and better tools are invented. An interest-
ing difference between scientific and other kinds of narratives, as Karl Popper
pointed out (Popper 1992), is that scientific narratives are disprovable. While
the narrative of an almighty God or the existence of Faeries underground can-
not be disproved, scientific findings can be - and often are. Disproving an an-
tiquated scientific narrative (like geocentricism or the idea that the continents
have always been where they are now) might be a very good way to engage
students in the process and epistemology of science.
Scientists are explorers. Some go down 5,000 feet in bathyspheres to see
things that have heretofore been unseen, and they come back and report to us.
Others walk on the moon. My reason for placing scientific stories among the
other forms I treat in this chapter is that I believe that they are powerful tools,
and they present fundamentally different ways of knowing than other kinds
of stories.
Perhaps the greatest obstacle to acceptance of scientific narratives is the
language in which they are cast. One must understand scientific language to
some degree to interpret the raw narratives of science - that is, the research
papers, books, and specialized periodicals in which scientific narratives appear.
Both scientific journalism and scientific educational materials attempt to make
science accessible to the general public. Sometimes this works. But generally,
one might say that journalistic reports often err on the side of sensationalism,
while science textbooks fail to establish personal relevance. In some ways, in-
teractive simulation as a form of scientific narrative can reduce or eliminate
these pitfalls.
The response of many K-12 students to science teaching is, “why should
I care?” Every teacher of science must be prepared to tell stories that answer
this fundamental question. In educational and popular contexts, scientific in-
formation needs to be supported by particular attention to personal relevance.
For example, in 2000-2001, my first-year graduate students in Media Design
at Art Center College of Design devoted themselves to helping teens under-
