Let's Redirect Teachers' Zeal for Science To Our Pedagogy
**Author's note: This is an opinion piece. I invite discussion, questions, counter-examples, etc. I can think of no better way to support collegial academia than to invite your differing or extended thoughts!**
"We are all hypocrites, but not all hypocrites are the same. Some are complacent, curmudgeon, and constant. Others are teachable, humble, and repentant. I hope I'm the latter type." --Dave Davidson
Teachers, I'm worried about our image and integrity; I'm worried about our students. I'm worried that too many of us have forgottten what it means to believe in #science regarding our classroom pedagogy while students and our public image are paying the price. In short, I think we need to collectively be more zealous about expecting ourselves and our colleagues to use thoroughly researched based pedagogy in the classroom and maybe a little less zealous in throwing around the #science hashtag regarding ever-changing COVID research and recommendations until we do. Our kids deserve our best, and people are watching and hearing our inconsistency.
I believe most reasonable and educated folks would agree that science is a process. The ideas that result from scientific methodologies are theories, un-disproven, that work as an acting guide for behaviors, beliefs, and policies. We believe A today. Further evidence may lead us towards B at some future point, and we should adjust our norms accordingly. Without devolving into semantics, I believe it's reasonable to say that over time and after iteration and replication of testing, theories that continue to be un-disproven are generally accepted as "facts" or "laws," for all practical purposes. However, in the back of the classically liberal mind, rooted in genuine scientific methodology is the lingering possibility that the un-disproved theory may still yet be untrue! It is this idea, humble in nature, which helps separate scientific epistemology from more dogmatic, autocratic authority and is essential to classic, liberal education.
A brief timeline of inconsistencies between the CDC, WHO, media, and national figures is below in the **appendix** below. I'll offer one link here from May 29 when the CDC and WHO were in direct opposition in their messaging about masks. (We now know that the WHO message was NOT science driven, rather politically driven to preserve masks. So where are we getting our "science" information?) Also, enjoy this thread from UNC professor and Atlantic contributor Zeynep Tufekci on media disinformation on the virus regarding indoor vs. outdoor crowding. In short, the science has been developing, sometimes not prioritized even by scientists, with a media sharing inaccurate messaging on the science. How can any of us be sure of what "science" says, let alone judge and shame others for their actions consistent with other "science" sources?
To me, this should allow for two well-informed, well-meaning people to follow different practices. Yet, so many teachers saying "I believe in science" and "follow the science" apparently know more than the scientists and have adopted the practice of Jacobin dogma in judging and shaming, directly in contrast to classically liberal values. When so many in our ranks speak in terms of absolutes while the situation changes, we diminish our own credibility not just as subject authorities but as educators in general. We need to be better than this. We need to respect the humble practice of science and specifically the context of COVID science which continues to evolve.
But zeal for science can be good! Let's embrace it and pivot inwardly to our profession. What does science say about the practice of teaching and learning? Much. Yet except among a few but growing number of practitioners, it is often dismissed or rationalized as not applicable in various settings/subjects or "not how I was taught which obviously worked just fine." How can we as an industry claim the banner of #science and still marginalize pedagogical practices with far greater research and consensus than demonstrated thus far about COVID? I'll give a few specifics:
**APPENDIX**
As we take a brief, incomplete look at the evolving messaging of COVID science, remember that the purpose is to caution us about either 1) the certainty of the science at any given time and 2) having empathy for people who are either a week behind on the news or reading/viewing sources giving different and equally valid messaging as far as anyone can honestly tell.
"We are all hypocrites, but not all hypocrites are the same. Some are complacent, curmudgeon, and constant. Others are teachable, humble, and repentant. I hope I'm the latter type." --Dave Davidson
Teachers, I'm worried about our image and integrity; I'm worried about our students. I'm worried that too many of us have forgottten what it means to believe in #science regarding our classroom pedagogy while students and our public image are paying the price. In short, I think we need to collectively be more zealous about expecting ourselves and our colleagues to use thoroughly researched based pedagogy in the classroom and maybe a little less zealous in throwing around the #science hashtag regarding ever-changing COVID research and recommendations until we do. Our kids deserve our best, and people are watching and hearing our inconsistency.
I believe most reasonable and educated folks would agree that science is a process. The ideas that result from scientific methodologies are theories, un-disproven, that work as an acting guide for behaviors, beliefs, and policies. We believe A today. Further evidence may lead us towards B at some future point, and we should adjust our norms accordingly. Without devolving into semantics, I believe it's reasonable to say that over time and after iteration and replication of testing, theories that continue to be un-disproven are generally accepted as "facts" or "laws," for all practical purposes. However, in the back of the classically liberal mind, rooted in genuine scientific methodology is the lingering possibility that the un-disproved theory may still yet be untrue! It is this idea, humble in nature, which helps separate scientific epistemology from more dogmatic, autocratic authority and is essential to classic, liberal education.
A brief timeline of inconsistencies between the CDC, WHO, media, and national figures is below in the **appendix** below. I'll offer one link here from May 29 when the CDC and WHO were in direct opposition in their messaging about masks. (We now know that the WHO message was NOT science driven, rather politically driven to preserve masks. So where are we getting our "science" information?) Also, enjoy this thread from UNC professor and Atlantic contributor Zeynep Tufekci on media disinformation on the virus regarding indoor vs. outdoor crowding. In short, the science has been developing, sometimes not prioritized even by scientists, with a media sharing inaccurate messaging on the science. How can any of us be sure of what "science" says, let alone judge and shame others for their actions consistent with other "science" sources?
To me, this should allow for two well-informed, well-meaning people to follow different practices. Yet, so many teachers saying "I believe in science" and "follow the science" apparently know more than the scientists and have adopted the practice of Jacobin dogma in judging and shaming, directly in contrast to classically liberal values. When so many in our ranks speak in terms of absolutes while the situation changes, we diminish our own credibility not just as subject authorities but as educators in general. We need to be better than this. We need to respect the humble practice of science and specifically the context of COVID science which continues to evolve.
But zeal for science can be good! Let's embrace it and pivot inwardly to our profession. What does science say about the practice of teaching and learning? Much. Yet except among a few but growing number of practitioners, it is often dismissed or rationalized as not applicable in various settings/subjects or "not how I was taught which obviously worked just fine." How can we as an industry claim the banner of #science and still marginalize pedagogical practices with far greater research and consensus than demonstrated thus far about COVID? I'll give a few specifics:
- Give feedback in the form of comments before and separate from giving a grade. Dylan Wiliam's research is not disputed an gives a solid effect size. Students with constant access to their grades and who receive their grade and feedback together show no improvement as a result of the feedback. The recommended pedagogy: for formative assessments, give comments and a chance to re-submit or re-demonstrate learning before giving or revealing a final grade. Yes, this can be more work for you...or perhaps merely "different" work. Wiliam also says that feedback should be more work for the recipient than the giver. This research is tested and undisputed in the field.
- Spaced, interleaved practice yields far better long term learning than massed practice. Mark McDaniel and the team behind "Make It Stick" provide extensive research on this idea. It is undisputed although how it applies in various disciplines can certainly be debated. But defering to the massed practice methods provided by most textbooks is not ok if we are going to claim that we "believe in #science" and value genuine, long-term learning or short term regurgitative performance. Again, this is one of the most researched and supported theories in educational science.
- Teens need 9+ hours of sleep and naturally don't fall asleep until after 11pm. This is a bullet point for administrators and school leaders. If you are not doing everything in your power to change when school starts, you are not prioritizing the health and wellness of students, supported by #science, over whatever social structures are inhibiting your action. If there are different scientific views on this, I've not found them.
These are just a few. There are many more. If we as teachers are going to throw around "#science" and "I believe in science," we need to walk the walk when it comes to our own professional practices and we need to be as zealous in promoting applied science to our colleagues as we are in confronting our ideological adversaries. To paraphrase the biblical saying, we need to check the log in our own professional, collective eyes and maybe calm down about the splinter in the eyes of others.
**APPENDIX**
As we take a brief, incomplete look at the evolving messaging of COVID science, remember that the purpose is to caution us about either 1) the certainty of the science at any given time and 2) having empathy for people who are either a week behind on the news or reading/viewing sources giving different and equally valid messaging as far as anyone can honestly tell.
- 2/3: WHO says travel bans are not necessary. Many suggest travel bans are xenophobic.
- 2/29. CNN's Sanjay Gupta saying that surgical masks and N95 masks are unnecessary.
- 3/15: CDC recommends cancelling events with 50+ people.
- 3/30: CDC and WHO continue to suggest masks are not necessary or effective.
- 4/10: Man dragged off of Philly bus by police for NOT wearing a mask.
- 4/28: CDC recommends avoiding international travel and limiting non-essential travel.
- 5/22: The Lancet (a medical journal website) publishes study against hydroxychloroquine.
- 5/29: CDC and WHO give conflicting recommendations on face masks.
- 6/3: The Lancet retracts the study on hydroxychloroquine as not up to scientific standard.
- 6/4: Many health officials support engaging in public protests.
- 7/7: CDC lists events with ppl traveling from far and spacing less than 6 ft apart as "high risk".
- etc.....
Comments
Post a Comment