Blurts

Tomorrow students around the world will strike and begin a week of focus on human responsibility for the deterioration of the global climate. Student interest makes a lot of sense if you understand they will experiences consequences beyond those we adults will experience and, I hope, because students are learning about the scientific basis for the concern for our climate and because they take this knowledge and responsibility seriously.

I write about climate change from time to time. I blame the political and educational institutions for the indifference that now seems so obvious. Somehow, educators have failed because we (and I do mean we) have failed to embed an appreciation for scientific consensus as reflecting reality. I know the topic was covered even when I was being educated, but why do so many adults discount what they should know to be true. I blame politicians because they seem to lack the leadership necessary to address the reality of climate science placing more emphasis on more immediate and easy issues. Leadership often requires taking the more difficult path.

I had decided I would write about climate change tomorrow (Sept. 20) to make a contribution to the general effort to raise awareness. It occurred to me learning and writing about the climate crisis would be a great focus for K12 students this coming week. I am guessing that many schools will shy away from the notion of a strike and refuse to endorse student participation. However, declaring a focus on climate issues for the week would be a perfect way to stay within the educational mission and to address an issue of great importance. I would love to read from students what they have learned and feel important to share.

I am active discussing political issues on Facebook. I started using Facebook after the election of 2016 and I do confront others who offer political views that differ from my own. I try to do this in a fact based and respectful manner, but I refuse to back away from engaging others when I believe their arguments are flawed and inaccurate.

Some of my core believes involve issues such as gun control. This often comes down to the interpretation of a short segment in the constitution that mentions the maintenance of a militia and the right to keep arms. My objection to military weapons is often at the crux of these arguments. Obviously, the constitution was written at a time when arms meant muzzle loaders and militias were locally supported. There is clearly nothing in the constitution about specifics such as AR15s and AKs or what a militia would imply today. The Supreme Court interprets the constitution, but the bases of these interpretations vary and are clearly politically linked.

What to do as an individual?

In response to a Facebook comment I received (Read the constitution), I have decided to offer this suggestion. I have actually recently read parts of the constitution that bear on recent political issues. The individual engaged in a discussion with me was not accurate in this attack. My openness to information actually leaves me more frustrated that informed. I have concluded that this is a political issue at heart and to argue otherwise is misguided. However, being informed at least allows we as individuals to think through the issues.

A decent source should one want to explore the depths of constitutional issues is the Interactive Constitution. You will not find clear answers to any question of depth you have, but the site does offer useful presentations of competing ideas.

I learned of this site while listening to someone respond to the question of what educators can do in responding to the types of political questions students are now likely to raise. Kids must receive an educated perspective on important issues and this was the expert’s recommendation.

This is a book review (Everyday chaos ), but you get the gist of David Weinberger’s main thesis – understanding causality can be very difficult – from this interview with Weinberger.

Weinberger suggests that it may not always be necessary or even most productive to wait until it is understood how things work. As the basis for this position, he points to the effectiveness of atheoretical A|B testing (let’s try this alternative and see what happens) and how AI can identify patterns that predict behavior and the mechanism responsible may not be obvious.

My initial reaction probably based in my training as a scientist was to label this as crazy talk. Much of science is about attempting to determine causal variables and manipulate or at least demonstrate how a causal variable leads to predictable consequences. However, as I thought about Weinberger’s position, I realized that there was some degree of commonality with my own thinking. When I taught the Introduction to Psychology course and talked about research in the field, I would sometimes make the claim that the scientists working in the physical sciences had it easy. This was partly to see if I would get a reaction. I argued that to understand the process of chemistry or physics, the researcher could manipulate something and did not have to worry about how the materials to which this treatment was applied interpreted this treatment or how they felt about reacting. Things are far more complex with human behavior in that the participant has a will and motives and history and these variables can moderate what happens. Using Weinberger’s concept, physical scientists have less chaos to contend with. With human behavior it is difficult to assure a given variable will act in isolation. 

My own research interests as an educational psychologist were more focused on applied research than the more basic science of many of my colleagues. I always thought that the basic scientists were kind of the “glamour boys/girls” of the field. They did the work that attempted to identify core scientific principles. We did the practical work of seeing if we could use these principles to generate outcomes that improved the human experience. I would argue that the transition from the lab to the classroom can be difficult. This may be reflected in the pattern of failed applications that advocates see as based on a logical basic principle. The repeated efforts to implement inquiry-based or learner centered tactics may represent examples. The philosophy proposing these ideas seems to gain traction every couple of decades and comparisons with direct instruction tend not to support these innovations. Maybe the issue is the inability to control how other variables interact with the core variables that are manipulated in applied settings. 

At some point, it may be possible to identify and control important variables that moderate the differences advocates focus on. However, without further insight and demonstrations based on these insights, implementations based on ideas rather than outcomes seem ill advised.

We just returned from a Smithsonian organized tour of Southern Africa. The expertise Smithsonian makes available during these outings is well worth the price.

One of the experts who traveled with us was Dr. Don Wilson. In addition to accompanying us on jeep drives through several parks and reserves, Don offered lectures on geology, animals, and bats (his specific expertise). One of my favorite memories was from a presentation he gave on animal classification. He was describing the identification of new species and the process of determining how new finds would be classified. A woman in our group asked who made the decision to determine that a new distinct category had been identified (I have a biology major, but I cannot remember at what level of the phylogenetic tree he was describing.). Don paused a minute and then replied “I do”. She seemed think he was joking. He wasn’t.

In a private conversation, I asked him how the Smithsonian was addressing the controversy over whether or not the climate was changing as a consequence of human behavior. He said that the scientists were concerned with the findings that were being generated and by the political indifference that some leaders were promoting. All the Smithsonian can do is offer resources that we hope can inform the public.

I wanted to investigate what the Smithsonian might have available when I got home and I found the Smithsonian Learning Lab I thought might be of value to the educators who follow my posts. As often as I look for online resources for educators, I admit I had to considered seeing what the Smithsonian makes available. The Smithsonian offers a huge volume of content it has collected and offers suggestions for activities.