You raise some very big points w/r/t the undervaluing of earth science in society. What’s the saying — ‘we learn geology the day after the earthquake’

Recently, I have had the opportunity to teach education students at the graduate level and in continuing education units. This has generally been very rewarding, as most teachers that enroll in these programs are eager learners, but even here some carry an obstinate science phobia. Nonetheless, I do feel that I am helping to make a difference by teaching these classes. I’m actually a co-investigator on a grant funded through ESSEA to teach classes for in-service grade school teachers. This semester I taught a one month unit on Global Climate Change and next spring I’ll be teaching a full semester course with three units dealing with hurricanes and volcanoes. In past summers I’ve actually taught continuing education workshops that were funded through NCLB, so even though I recognize the problems associated with its standardized testing regimen I can’t say it’s been a completely negative program.

Still, the issues raised here are bigger than all of this. I think that our society fundamentally undervalues geoscience education, especially at the secondary level, with serious repercussions for collegiate geoscience departments and broader implications for democratic decision making on issues of public policy that ought to be informed by scientific studies. This is not a problem that is likely to be fixed quickly, despite our best intentions and efforts. I think that addressing the shortcomings of the education system is just part of the cure. A larger goal is to increase the societal understanding of geology and the sciences and their impact on our standard of living. This is one of the areas that I believe that blogging can be helpful and I think that ChrisR is onto something in suggesting that we perhaps take this issue up in one of our future Accretionary Wedge installments.

Agreed. But, if we were to all sit down and agree what the big issues are regarding curricula, and then agree what ideally needs to happen, what are the steps towards implementing them?

http://www.pscubed.org/

http://www.baesi.org/

They are able to function because scientists are willing to lend their time and expertise to the cause. Science museums also typically hold summer/weekend teacher workshops. I encourage you to seek out organizations in your area; its amazing what’s already out there.

There is also quite a bit of NSF money available for people at the university level that want to work on K-12 programs. These are in the form of both grants for specific teacher professional development projects and outreach components to major scientific research grants.

Yes, the stats are abysmal. Yes, you can do something about it. I’ve seen 1st grade teachers go from zero confidence to “I can’t wait to get back to my classroom and share my new knowledge with my students” in one week.

Yami says: “…teaching the teachers, or helping to write curriculum”
It seems like this approach will get more traction as time goes on. Especially if there are people willing to put the effort into making it their career. It seems logical to me…we can’t expect elementary school teachers to not only be fluent across the whole of science, but also keep up with new goings-on in research. Why not have programs that teach teachers?

Yami also says: “getting rid of NCLB”
You’ll notice in that SF Chronicle article that NCLB was cited as one of the big problems by at least one educator.

You wouldn’t want me in an elementary school classroom (see: horrible person – I need an age group capable of appreciating sarcasm) but I’ve been sort of half-assedly looking into ways to get paid for teaching the teachers, or helping to write curriculum. Haven’t turned up much, other than the vague sense that doing what I want would require an awful lot of entrepreneurial grant-writing. It’s also hard to establish credibility with teachers if you don’t have classroom experience – sure, I can make lofty pronouncements about how science should be taught, but would my lesson plans actually work?

It’s easy to stand and yell “more science! MOAR!1!” – but I don’t know what I would take out to make room, other than getting rid of NCLB (and other high-stakes testing) so that schools/teachers have more freedom to follow their students’ interests and needs.

But not surprising.

My Earth Systems Science class is one – just one – of the options for the elementary education major here. One semester to take the students from a phobia of science to the ability to teach it with creativity and passion. It is not enough time, not nearly enough time to make a real difference, regardless of how well I teach.

A few years ago, one of the geology majors decided that she wanted to be an elementary teacher. She had to nearly start over – very few of her science classes fit into the requirements of the major.

And then continuing education credits are required to be at the graduate level… when the teachers would be well served by taking, say, Historical Geology or Paleontology or Geomorphology or Plate Tectonics. Do we give graduate credit for undergraduate-level classes? I think, somehow, we need to, because we’ve got to help the teachers get more comfortable with science.