Skip to main content

Blog Article

Science and Citizenship: ‘A Matter of Trust’

Public trust in science is an issue as old as time, but experts are proposing new methods and approaches aim to change this.

Published January 1, 2003

By Jennifer Tang
Academy Contributors

Image courtesy of RomanR via stock.adobe.com.

Scientists and policymakers now insist that the public must understand science if people are to be useful citizens – capable of functioning as workers, community members and informed citizens in a technological age.

But what does public understanding mean? And what can we do to prepare the public, and particularly the young, for lives of citizenship and social responsibility – as well as success in workplaces that are increasingly shaped by science and technology?

These issues were the focus of the Willard Jacobson Lecture recently given by Dr. Judith A. Ramaley, assistant director, Education & Human Resources, National Science Foundation. Ramaley, the winner of this year’s Jacobson Award, was honored for her work in mathematics and science education projects.

Public Understanding?

How much do our citizens really “know” about science? According to Ramaley, approximately 20 percent of American adults think they are well informed about new scientific discoveries and technologies, while 25 percent say they understand enough about scientific inquiry to make informed judgments about scientific research reported in the media. About 14 percent admit they pay attention to science and technology policy issues only when a crisis compels their attention.

Ramaley defined what a public understanding of science would encompass: it means paying careful and thoughtful attention to science and technology issues while also recognizing the strengths and limitations of these fields. Scientific literacy involves understanding scientific and technical concepts and vocabulary as well as the use of various sources of such information.

But how well prepared is the public to distinguish valid sources of information from useless or even dangerous misrepresentations?

Developing Public Trust

Dr. Judith A. Ramaley

Surveys show that public trust in science and scientists is highest in times of peace, Ramaley noted. This confidence can waver, however, when a crisis emerges over such controversial subjects as nuclear power, genetic engineering or space exploration.

“People who think that science is a product rather than a messy process of inquiry can become profoundly uncomfortable when they are brought face-to-face with the uncertainties and arguments at the frontiers of science,” she observed. “When people are fearful, they want simple answers to emotionally laden questions, preferring the opinions of their friends or trusted advisors over the information provided by scientists.”

How, then, can we increase the public’s trust in the scientific community? The UK’s public outreach effort was cited as a model. The Citizen Foresight project, launched by the London Centre for Governance, Innovation and Science, offered citizens an opportunity to meet with scientists. British citizens, selected at random, met every week to explore not only the “facts,” but also the deeper ethical and emotional issues associated with questions about food supplies and agricultural technologies.

“The British have learned that public trust and confidence cannot be gained simply through providing information about science, but by direct dialogue and discussion about the issues,” she observed. “Scientific knowledge must be grounded in a moral and ethical foundation that is seen as legitimate by the public and is accepted as responsive to their needs and interests.”

Science for Everyone

How science is taught in the schools also is vital to promoting a public understanding of science. “Students can best learn how science is done by doing genuine scientific inquiry,” she said.

Science also can be made appealing to students if they view science as being connected to their own lives and interests. “When science is meaningfully connected to things that young people care about, it becomes an experience rather than a product to be memorized,” she added.

In addition, schools should integrate scientific exploration with other disciplines so that students can see how science contributes to understanding in any field, and how other fields contribute to science. “Science is for everybody,” Ramaley said. She recommends a curriculum in which disciplines that foster creative and critical thinking – such as language and literature, history, the arts and foreign languages – predominate.

Understanding science, however, poses a mental challenge. “New knowledge can only be absorbed and put in context if the participant can uncover older, ‘untrue,’ knowledge and discard it,” she said. “If during our education, we are never required to examine those deeper assumptions, acquired early and applied without thought to the challenges of daily life, we will not be responsive to the insights and knowledge generated by any discipline, including the sciences and mathematics.”

Also read: Building Trust Through Transparency in Biorisk Management


Author

Image
Contributing Author