Skip to main content

Science and I

Science and I did not start off so great. I went to an elementary school that decided putting social studies and language arts in one group and science and math into another group was a good idea. So when third grade came around and it was time to learn those infamous multiplication tables. My teacher told me I would have to memorize them or I would never excel in science. I am sure most people participated in the "get all these right within a certain time limit and win your next sundae topping." I was that kid with just a bowl and a scoop of ice cream, thank God they gave you the spoon. It wasn't until fifth grade that I realized how much of an idiot my third grade teacher was. (she was also very mean) Fifth grade was a year filled with learning about cloud formation, weather, plants. the water cycle, the effects the BP oil spill had on the environment, and so much more. My point is I did not need to spit out what seven times six was to my teacher. As time progressed and I went on to middle school science became way more interesting to me, topics were very broad and watered down but I was fascinated with all of it. At a very young age I would tell everyone I wanted to be vet and as I got older science class enforced that passion even more. In high school there were so many different science classes and I basically tried to take them all. I became very interested in human anatomy and health science and it was around freshmen year that I decided I would sell my soul and try go to medical school. Shoot for the moon am I right? And don't get me wrong I have to use math in science but I have a calculator or my fingers. Science and I manage to get along now and I am usually excited to go to class and continue learning.

Comments

  1. I think that it is really cool that as you got older that science became more interesting to you. When someone experiences a negative experience at a young age it tends to stay that way through out thier life. I liked how you made your post more like a story than just information. I really liked how the post was really informal and it just seemed like you talking to a friend. Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This definitely sheds light on the major flaw the stem fields have in primary schools. The school systems lack a system that stimulates the learner to create natural curiosity. Without this, it's just another task we have to do that we don't want to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree. It's so sad how many kids love science (and math) early on and it's basically beat out of them by teachers who lack an understanding deep enough in the topic to make it interesting and teach outside the box, states with very stringent standards, and systems that value test scores more than inquiry and creativity.

      Delete
  3. Looking great so far Madilyn, a thoughtful first post. I'm so glad you had a great teacher in 5th Grade who helped you recover your passion for science. Taking as many different science classes as possible in high school was a good idea to keep your options open. There are some math classes in college that are going to be extremely difficult, but you'll figure out a way! Use all the support available to you (peer study, tutoring, office hours, etc). It's going to be so worth it in the end when you are able to wake up every morning excited to go to work and do something you love.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If I'm being honest, I'm still not sure I've memorized all of my multiplication tables. It was the same in my school, but with candy. I've never been good with time constraints, so as everyone of my peers passed, I was still stuck on my threes. I feel as if I only got to my fours by the time we ended multiplication, because I just got so nervous during timed tests. Reading everyone's comments and your post, I was shocked to see that this was common in other schools: I thought it was kind of cruel.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Engaging Scientist in the Public Discourse

Source: picture was taken after the interview with my phone          William Armstrong is an Earth Scientist who studies glaciology and is a new member to the App State team when he joined back in the fall of 2017. He received his PhD in Geological Sciences at the University of Colorado at Boulder and BS of environmental Geoscience at the Boston College.          So before going into this interview we first read one of Dr. Armstrong’s publications, “Spatial Patterns of Summer Speedup on South Central Alaska Glaciers,” and we went in with general questions on the article and on himself.          We first asked how he would describe his own article to someone without a science background. His answer was very interesting, instead of spitting out more confusion, he really reached to explain it to us as a true educator. He began by explaining that glaciers move in two different ways, the first is by flowing with a thick fluid and the second is by sliding and or slipping on top of th

Helping People Understand Science

Figure 1,  PEW Research Center          Science can be a very broad topic under a huge umbrella but, is very important to understand when applying it to today’s society. Often the significance of science is underrated and overlooked. We should ask ourselves why this is a popular phenomenon, is there a lack of education? Is science too difficult to understand? Does society not care enough? Or is it a combination of all these things.  When we look at the data from the Pew Research Center in Figure 1, specifically on climate change, there is a huge gap in the U.S. adults and AAAS scientists who think climate change is mostly due to human activity. This data is alarming considering there is so much accessible evidence on this topic. Scientist are considered more knowledgeable on the subject, however, their views seem to hold no important significance. Why is this when there are resources out there that reach to the public and explain our global issues efficiently.  Figure 2,

Climate change

Climate change is a pretty popular topic and is often misrepresented or construed to fit the biased of the author. To the untrained eye this graph can look accurate, however, once you dive deeper into it a lot of problems arise.  This ad supposedly came from the National Climatic Data center and is claiming 2012 has been the hottest year on record. First of all lets talk about the x-axis, that is not even labeled and the years have no order to them. The y-axis is not labeled as well and offers no units of measurements. Is it Fahrenheit? Celsius? Kelvin? No one knows and we can only assume it might be Fahrenheit because the graph insinuates this data is from the U.S. Also why does this only include U.S. data? Now are we the only ones experiencing climate change? In this graph it is also clear to see the authors viewpoint by skewing data in that direction and making the data for the year of 2012 red and appear significantly larger than the rest.With climate change being a pretty majo