|
Science Education: The Need for a Long-Term Basic Science Research Policy in America
2008 September 13
© 2008, Libertiny Financial LLC
I've been following the Large Hadron Collide (LHC) project at CERN for years now. Since Bill Clinton made the colossal mistake of assisting in the cancellation of our Superconducting Super Collider in Texas, I've been focusing on it even closer. That error was yet another example of how short-sighted he was as president.
As an engineer, I can appreciate people's concerns over the project
since experimental science and engineering can never predicate with
100% certainty what will and will not happen. Instead, we're left
with statistical probability. Ironically, it looks like our universe
may be built upon statistical probability, or vice versa, at least at
the subatomic scale. Hopefully the LHC facility will answer some of
these questions while raising a whole new set of questions. I can't
wait!
Historically, we've had other scientific and engineering endeavors
that have caused similar concern. Development of the atomic bomb
comes to mind. I've read with interest of the great concern prior to
testing our first nuclear bombs during the Manhattan Project: Once an explosion occurred in our atmosphere, would it be self perpetuating? Although this concern was proven ahead of time to be mathematically unlikely, there was still a level of uncertainty.
The fact that the average American doesn't understand the basics of
statistical mathematics is the real concern. We're slowly sliding
backwards in basic science, engineering and mathematics compared to other nations in the world. And it becomes noticeable when our
students are around age 12. We're not promoting science education as we once did. Also, massive technical projects like the NASA moon
landing program encouraged whole generations of kids like me to make science and engineering a career. America no longer supports these types of Grand Challenges.
The LHC will undoubtedly help students in Europe rediscover the fun of science and engineering education. But America has been sitting out on investing in these large projects because it takes 30 to 40 years to see a return on our investment--an investment that our increasingly short-sighted leadership doesn't have the courage to embrace. Perhaps it's because they don't have the high-school math and science education needed to understand?
Hopefully this year's crop of presidential candidates (2008) will learn from the LHC project and will agree to fund long-term research-based
science and engineering projects as well as K-12 science education
initiatives so that we can again be in the forefront of new discoveries. I agree that we have other issues to take care of in
America, but basic research and science education has to be one of our top priorities as well.
|
