Scientific illiteracy is a major problem for American policymakers and citizens. One only has to look at Sen. Tom Coburn’s (R-Okla.) recent statements about climate change to understand this issue.
“I am a global warming denier,” Coburn said in an August speech to the Tulsa Regional Chamber of Commerce. “I don’t deny that.” During the speech, Coburn referred to himself as a “man of science.” Coburn’s denial of global warming and his claim to be a believer in the sciences are incompatible and reflect the extent to which people who write scientific policy are scientifically illiterate.
Coburn isn’t the only one. Ken Cuccinelli nearly won the recent gubernatorial election. In 2010, Cuccinelli launched a massive anti-climate science attack on former University climate scientist Michael Mann, attempting to discredit Mann’s research as fraud against state taxpayers and costing the University hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In 2003, Senator Jim Inhofe, another Republican from Oklahoma, delivered a speech on the Senate floor in which he dismissed anthropogenic climate change.
“I have offered compelling evidence that catastrophic global warming is a hoax….supported by the painstaking work of the nation’s top climate scientists,” Inhofe said.
Policymakers such as Coburn, Cuccinelli and Inhofe — in addition to the more than 40 percent of Americans who deny anthropogenic climate change — don’t understand that there is a clear consensus regarding human-induced climate change in the international scientific community. A study led by John Cook at the University of Queensland found that, in the past 21 years, 97 percent of peer-reviewed papers that took a position on the cause of global warming supported the consensus that anthropogenic climate change exists.
Here’s my point: people who write policy about science should understand science. And citizens who vote on scientific policy decisions should also understand science.
The University must assume a greater responsibility in educating a scientifically informed citizenry. Mathematics and sciences departments at the University should offer more popular courses for students with superficial science and mathematics backgrounds. Currently, the physics department offers “How Things Work,” a legendary course taken by more than 200 non-science majors each semester that explores concepts of physics and scientific inquiry in everyday life. The biology department offers “Genetics for an Informed Citizen,” a popular course designed to help non-science majors “evaluate the science behind many [genetics and genomics] issues both public and private.”
Even so, the number of accessible science courses for humanities majors is small compared to the number of humanities courses available for science majors. As someone aiming to study statistics and chemistry, I still have the opportunity to take humanities electives that interest me such as “Introduction to Gender Studies” and “Dracula.” But humanities majors are largely limited to science courses designed specifically for them.
Mathematics and science departments must aim to offer more courses that non-science majors can take. The mathematics department can create general problem-solving courses for the humanities student. The physics department can offer an elective course in nuclear science for the non-science student who will ultimately make policy decisions regarding nuclear energy. The biology department can create a course about gene therapy and stem cell research for the humanities student with a superficial biology background.
I don’t want to see mathematics and sciences at the University devolve into popular science. However, there’s no reason that mathematics and sciences departments at the University cannot offer more general courses aimed at students with only minimal knowledge of science. Students who will become policymakers and informed citizens should have access to such courses before leaving the University.
Nazar Aljassar is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. His columns run Fridays.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | 6 days agoIn addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
EDITORIAL: Pedestrian safety is an institutional imperative
By Editorial Board | April 15, 2024Amid a national crisis of pedestrian safety, Charlottesville and the University are also struggling to properly maintain pedestrian safety.
