Skeptical Books for Children -- Part One and Skeptical Books for Children -- Part Two and Skeptical Books for Children -- Part Three and Skeptical Books for Children -- Part Four -- An ongoing 
series for parents, educators, authors and those enthusiastic about outreach to the younger years.
*****
Yes, the series is ongoing! Today I got an email from a fellow researcher for skeptical interviews and rather than end up writing my usual ‘novel-length’ response to a fantastic topic, I thought I’d blog it and get it out of the way. Besides, the response might help me organise my thoughts about the other research I’m doing.
Their question was a two-parter and I have a few more recommendations for them at the end of this post, relating to other elements of reading and skepticism, which you might like to check out too.
“What’s the consensus on the intersection of science fiction and skepticism/science? What’s the research on the impact of science fiction films and biotechology?“
(N.B -- fiction and its contribution to science understandings in general is something I’ve touched upon in many previous posts on this site -- Science In Literature; The Specialness Of Species; Nothing In the ‘Verse Can Stop Me; A Girl Called Ellie and my all-time fave title -- and blog anthology entry winner -- Smart Bitches, Not Meerly Sex.)
Firstly, here’s a government report on the influence of science fiction on science and technology education levels and attentiveness. From the USA’s Science and Engineering Indicators of 2002 -- Science Fiction and Pseudoscience:
Thirty percent of those participating in the 2001 NSF survey said that they read science fiction books or magazines. (See appendix table 7-51.) The positive relationships that exist between reading science fiction and level of education, number of math and science courses completed, and attentiveness to science and technology are interesting, yet predictable. However, another finding is contrary to conventional wisdom. That is, there does not seem to be a gender gap: nearly equal percentages of men (31 percent) and women (28 percent) report that they read science fiction books or magazines. (See appendix table 7-51.)
Yes, there are 2006 indicators -- I’ll refer to them for the next question, however.
The consensus about science fiction and skepticism/science, in my opinion, is that it also depends on the diverse experiences of the person in question (level of education, socio-economic standing, isolation, so forth) and whether you are getting scaffolding, support, opportunities to question and ongoing interaction -- NOT just ‘communication of an idea’ through one lecture, text, what-have-you. To paraphrase Dr Ben Goldacre (on another topic, mind) - ‘it’s more complicated than that…’
There’s a difference between interfering and supporting through provision of resources, role-modelling, opportunities for discussion and so forth. Yes, people (and children, of course) will greatly differ in their levels of ability -- we all learn differently, for a start and will tend towards certain ways of picking ideas up. Therefore, the opportunity for a range of experiences, which will reflect the diversity of the audience, is important.
I am reminded of an interview I did with Mike McRae, science communicator:
Competitions and resources such as worksheets, videos and books are fantastic, however if they don’t work with a [science] curriculum or have small pedagogical value due to the way they are constructed or implemented, then there is little hope a teacher will make use of them. In Australia especially, there has been a trend to create more consistent national frameworks across states when it comes to curricula. For any group interested in the education of youth in this country it is essential that they have some grasp of the cultural dynamics at work regarding this.
For example, the very worse advice I’ve seen given in regards to ‘techniques that will encourage skepticism and or scientific literacy in children’ was “do nothing“.
On the other extreme, I should point out one teacher’s concern that to pick-apart the science in science fiction movies might lead to viewers being overly skeptical about any beneficial content in science fiction films at all and the importance of selecting your films well!
But you don’t have to listen to just my view on that -- because this kind of question (on my side of the planet!) led me to interview the likes of Professor Leonie Rennie (episode #42 of the Skeptic Zone podcast) in order to get some views regarding the influence of entertainment-based activities (museums, science movie festivals, teaching of science via traditional and non-traditional means) on the understanding of science.
We also shouldn’t forget that it’s not JUST science concepts that are being taught through science fiction. Ethics, diplomacy, history, conflict resolution -- I am reminded of Star Trek: Next Generation, with its exploration of cultural relativism, duty vs motive, a great many philosophical concepts that were even drawn upon for a high-school course in my state. There’s quite a few science bloggers, from the Bad Astronomer to this Q&A on Neurotopia over on Science Blogs (‘Scientists, Science Fiction, and the people who love them both’), who talk about the love they have for science fiction and what it meant for them as scientists.
Institutions like ANU’s Center for the Public Awareness of Science exist, in order to investigate the intersection of science and societal interpretation of it. You’ll find people have written dissertations on topics that look at the intersection of ‘fiction’ and science literacy, scientific understandings, enthusiasm towards science, and so forth. Some examples of their research include:
What work does ‘Doctor Who’ do to promote the democratisation of science? Lindy Orthia is researching how the relationships between scientist and non-scientist characters are represented in the BBC television series Doctor Who.
The interest in this topic has historical precedence -- A Study of the Effect of Science Fiction on Science Attitude of High School Science Students -- Leroy Lindquist, 1977 and more recently, Freudenrich (2000) discussed how science fiction novels, TV programs and films were used in his physics classes. Brake and Thornton (2003) created a science and science fiction degree course at a Welsh university as ‘a way of examining the relationship between science, technology and society’ (p.37). Critics suggest that for the sake of drama, fact and fiction become blurred in such programs and it’s not made clear which is which (McKie, 2001). There may be missed opportunities to show how science deals with uncertainties (Rose, 2001), and yet analysing the science from the fiction in not only science but classes in other subjects (like English or studies of society), is a popular cross-curricular activity that should be supported (Allday, 2003).
For me, this led to the interview with Jennifer Ouellette (episode #35 of the Skeptic Zone podcast), where you’ll learn how the National Academy of Sciences has even dispatched emissaries to Hollywood “to help bring the reality of cutting-edge science to creative and engaging storylines”, which one imagines should include all those science fiction programs that get us all bothered when they completely screw up basic physics and play fast and loose with computer science.
In the meantime, the likes of Richard Dawkins have started producing texts as well in response to what they see as a greater need for popular texts to investigate science accurately -- I’ve mentioned previously how Stephen Hawkings has written a children’s book. From The Guardian:
The well-known scientist and atheist has struck a book deal for his first title for young adults, which will look to explode myths and legends about the natural world with science. Due out in autumn 2011, What is a Rainbow, Really? will take on topics including who the first man and first woman were, why there are seasons, what the sun is, how old the world is and why there are so many animals, first answering the questions with myth and legend, and then with “lucid scientific explanations”.
You may notice that some of the comments for that video include grumbles about how “I thought it was totally absurd that he used the phrase “brought up to believe” concerning Harry Potter and mythical fantasy books. Religion is taught to children as being true. They are told this is how the world works. Harry Potter is taught as being entertainment. They are brought up to believe it is not true. No adverse effect. Kind of like how Dawkins advocates teaching the Bible in schools (as fiction) to? understand allusions in Western literature.”
I guess my question is -- is this going to be that much different to many of the other pro-science, non-fiction books out there? Just because Dawkins has written it? I’ll reserve my comments until I’ve actually read it, mind!
In the meantime, I’m still a little concerned about how few new books are coming to the attention of people interested in promoting critical thinking in general. Daniel Loxton alerted me to how Secular Homeschooling with “Too Many Books Are Never Enough Books for Critical Thinkers“, has promoted the Junior Skeptic insert in Skeptic Magazine:
“Each JS is a themed piece — a thoughtful, informative, and deeply entertaining essay, broken up into bite-sized pieces for ease of reading but still a cohesive whole. The writing is age-appropriate without ever slipping into condescension. The authors assume, rightly, that simple and direct language is the best way to communicate with readers of any age.”
However, the other books on their list hail from the 1990s… which is a great pity. There’s many other 
recommendations that I’ve made in the earlier blog entries in this series -- a few new ones on the literature front, which particularly relate to teenage girls and have a pro-science bent:
‘Loving Richard Feynman’ by Penny Tangey -- I really enjoyed this! Australian book, some rather well-expressed mathematical concepts and a modern tale of a fifteen-year old finding the trials of her life can be supported by embracing her enthusiasm of science.
I would also suggest that you don’t judge a book by its ‘blurb’ -- the novel ‘Vibes’ by Amy Kathleen Ryan has its main character thinking that she’s psychic… however, her experiences then go onto demonstrate that her apparent ability may not be as paranormally-based as she thought!
There’s still plenty (as you can see from the pictures) of great new non-fiction general texts coming out -- I recently won a copy of ‘Science: The Definitive Visual Guide‘ with many thanks to Science Punk; there’s also National Geographic’s The Knowledge Book that features in the first picture. All part of providing a range of stimuli, for what I see as a broader issue of general literacy for young people.
*****
Secondly…yes, there’s a secondly; this is only what I consider a rather brief investigation of the first part of what I was asked.
What’s the research on the impact of science fiction films and biotechology?
Public attitudes towards science related issues, in the 2006 Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding chapter, from the US government Science and Engineering Indicators of 2006:
Most Americans know little about genetically modified food and related issues. Although attitudes are divided, opposition to introducing genetically modified food into the U.S. food supply declined between 2001 and 2004. However, the vast majority of Americans (and others) believe that genetically modified food should be labeled.
Opposition to medical research that uses stem cells from human embryos has declined. In 2004, 36% of those surveyed said they were opposed to this type of research, down from 51% in 2002.
Most people have never heard of nanotechnology. Americans are somewhat concerned about the risks, but most believe the benefits will outweigh the risks. The biggest concern is loss of privacy from tiny new surveillance devices.
…The Internet is the preferred source when people are seeking information about specific scientific issues. In 2004, 52% of National Science Foundation survey respondents named the Internet as the place they would go to learn more about a scientific issue such as global warming or biotechnology, up from 44% in 2001.
In Australia, I wrote about this in a blogpost called “Silver Screen Science Slip-Ups“:
Having taught GATTACA for several years, I was keen to attend a lecture held by Biotechnology Australia last year, at the Science and Technology Education World conference:
… how well are the science and social issues of cloning portrayed in box office hits such as The Island, Multiplicity, Star Wars: Attack of the Clones and Jurassic Park? These movies have enormous reach and undoubted influence, and are therefore worth analyzing in some detail.
This study looks at 33 movies made between 1971 and 2005 that address human reproductive cloning and it categorises the films based on their genre and potential influence.
The movies were rated for scientific accuracy and their “key message” -- whether the science or scientists are evil and the social implications of the cloning. Not surprisingly, they found that the most common message in the movies is that “corporations or scientists operate in their own interests and outside of regulation, and are willing to kill to cover up what they’ve done.” Cloning is portrayed as unnatural, with the moral “mess with nature and it will mess with you.”
Biotechnology Australia followed up with a second report, “Biotechnology at the Movies“, which looks at a wider range of movies, from The Andromeda Strain (1971) to Children of Men (2006). If you’d like to read the whole PDF, it’s really quite enjoyable to check out -- their conclusion?
“The study concluded that the science was, for the most part, seriously flawed, and that while the films may raise awareness, the quality of public debate on biotechnology is not generally enhanced by its depiction in films.”
That particular blog-post also extends my answer to the first question, with more links on the influence of science fiction films on science understanding -- including this discussion by Dr Brian Cox:
Enjoy… and feel free to keep asking me questions!
Select Bibliography
Freudenrich, C. C. (2000). Sci-Fi science: Using science fiction to set context for learning science.
Science Teacher, 67 (8), 42-45.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Recently I found a way to use a sci fi movie in a class on science. I was running a unit on space in a grade 4 class that was equipped with an interactive whiteboard. I had set the children the task to research particular topics and then present their findings to a grade 2 class who were also studying space. One student gave a talk on asteroids, so to introduce his talk I played the Millenium Falcon asteroid chase scene from Stars Wars V on the big screen, to help make the point that our asteroid belt is not as crowded as they make it to be in the movies. I can also vividly remember when I was ten my cousin pointing out to me the fallacy of the hearing sounds of the spaceships flying around in Star Wars. I think that, for children, discovering that a movie is wrong can help them discover and remember that which is correct.
I feel like I was just visited by the research fairy. And instead of the expected “quarter under the pillow”, she left me the code for the bank vault.
Brilliant post, fantastic information. Thanks so much!
This is a lot of information on what I thought was a fairly straight-forward topic. So, there’s still no real judgment on whether sci fi is detrimental to education? I knew that there was studies on how Dungeons and Dragons weren’t as bad as people thought, but was fairly under the impression that most sci fi was just entertainment alone with the occasional science topic thrown in by the few who care about accuracy. Thanks for the links!
Sci Fi, in my opinion? Not that dissimilar to any other fictional text. There are plenty of fiction texts with dodgy use of not only science, but history, economics, arts, et al. The fact that it’s still labelled ‘fiction’ should be a good indicator to us all. What’s more important? Encouraging literacy in general and supporting via scaffolding what good science there is – or burning books with a ‘OMFG TWILIGHT IS SOOOOO BAD FOR THE YUNG-UNS [....but didn't you collect Virginia Andrews books when you were younger??]‘ attitude.
You must log in to post a comment.