Does science fiction help kids learn to like science?

[Cathy]

I work with kids who are public schooled, and almost all the high school students I work with say that they hate math and science. When I hear such global statements, I try to understand what the students mean. For example, I might ask someone, "Don't you just mean that you dislike a particular science CLASS?" In most of these encounters, students assure me that they really mean that they hate math and science.

I know that a lot of little kids (up to pre-teens) gravitate toward science topics and also enjoy a highly informal version of the scientific method (in other words, exploring and messing around with stuff). Where do all those good feelings about science disappear to?

One thing I've been wondering about is the possible relation of enjoyment of science fiction to interest in science fact. I have a gut feeling that kids who read and like science-y science fiction (as opposed to magical/fantasy-flavored sci fi, or horror-flavored SF) tend to be more positive toward science, and especially scientific exploration and experimentation, than those who do not.

I also wonder if there is a correlation between a diet of science fiction that has a upbeat feel and a positive attitude toward science. I have noticed that a lot of the children's science fiction or speculative fiction that's been published in the last ten years is either dystopian or lightweight and humorous. I am certainly not against people writing, publishing, reading, and enjoying these two types of science fiction, but I have a hunch that a steady diet of dystopian fare can make kids shudder away from the future and technological and scientific innovation.

I'd definitely like to get beyond the wondering, gut feelings, and hunches! Does anyone know of any studies about science fiction and attitudes about science? I've done some searching on the Internet but haven't turned up a study so far.

 

[rjh01]

Or is it the other way round? People who like science will also read science fiction. Giving other people science fiction stuff to read may not increase their interest?

 

[Cathy]

"The other way round" is certainly possible, but it didn't happen that way for me. I read science fiction because my older brother kept passing his books on to me with encouraging noises. Eventually I started nabbing his science FACT books, too...

(Anecdotal evidence, survey size: one.)

 

[Kittyclaws]

I so enjoyed science fiction that I wanted to know how much of the speculation could be/come true. That led me to science but as an adult. I am 46 so my sci-fi favs were the classics, authors who lean heavily toward "hard science" fiction.

Just getting kids to read anything is going to help. In this day of wii, xbox, dvd players, and computers to keep children passively entertained, the activity of reading and imagining for themselves would/could encourage interest in the wider world.

My opinion. Your mileage may vary.

 

[fuelair]

I work with kids who are public schooled, and almost all the high school students I work with say that they hate math and science. When I hear such global statements, I try to understand what the students mean. For example, I might ask someone, "Don't you just mean that you dislike a particular science CLASS?" In most of these encounters, students assure me that they really mean that they hate math and science.

I know that a lot of little kids (up to pre-teens) gravitate toward science topics and also enjoy a highly informal version of the scientific method (in other words, exploring and messing around with stuff). Where do all those good feelings about science disappear to?

One thing I've been wondering about is the possible relation of enjoyment of science fiction to interest in science fact. I have a gut feeling that kids who read and like science-y science fiction (as opposed to magical/fantasy-flavored sci fi, or horror-flavored SF) tend to be more positive toward science, and especially scientific exploration and experimentation, than those who do not.

I also wonder if there is a correlation between a diet of science fiction that has a upbeat feel and a positive attitude toward science. I have noticed that a lot of the children's science fiction or speculative fiction that's been published in the last ten years is either dystopian or lightweight and humorous. I am certainly not against people writing, publishing, reading, and enjoying these two types of science fiction, but I have a hunch that a steady diet of dystopian fare can make kids shudder away from the future and technological and scientific innovation.

I'd definitely like to get beyond the wondering, gut feelings, and hunches! Does anyone know of any studies about science fiction and attitudes about science? I've done some searching on the Internet but haven't turned up a study so far.

It's actually (as a long ago student and from working with middle-school/high school students in science classes over the last 20+year) most students really are not interested in science - done properly it requires them to do heavy mental work. Even many who "like science" really only put in any effort for specific things they are interested in (horses, forces on things in sports, explosives, incendiaries, adhesives, things involving propulsive weapons, things involving quarks and oddities of chemistry/nuclear physics(not a student of mine, but likes to bounce ideas off me) - are all ones popular with students I have had.). Less than 1% are actually interested in SCIENCE overall. I suspect no more than 8% will wind up in science-related careers. At this point - two weeks into the school year - I am very certain that by the end of the year I will have maybe 9 students with A' - of which 2 will have some actual interest in science and the rest are overachievers/parent controlled and probably 7 B/Cers who will do the necessary to pass except when something is on their specific interest (most B/Cers will not be interested but will do the work to get their GPA safe.

I have been a science fiction/fantasy/myths&legends fan since before I started school but heavilly by the third grade ca. 1954 - and I originally had specific areas I was interested in and others I paid little attention to.

 

[stevea]

Interesting topic, but I can only offer personal insight.

There does (or did) seem to be a relation between science and sci-fi. My suspicion is that sci-fi appeals(ed) to students really interested in science. My first undergrad degree was from a science institute with about 1000 undergrads (attached but fairly separate from a larger university). At that time (1970s) sci-fi was very popular. Of course in that era Asimov (who actually had degrees in science) was among the most popular sci-fi author and other authors often made questions of science pivotal in their story-lines. I stopped reading sci-fi when the myth/fantasy/magic genre embedded itself - I just don't find that interesting at all. Also many recent sci-fi stories are just conventional stories set in space or in the future - and science has little or no part in the story line. I sincerely think that there isn't much good sci-fi writing around any longer. Phiilip K.Dick was about the last author I seriously followed. His Bladerunner ("Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep") is a good example of story where science was key to the plot. Another popular movie Herbert's "Dune" is an example of a sci-fi story which could have been re-set in the middle ages with a little re-write. Mostly a political intrigue story.

Prior to any interest in sci-fi was very interested in logic, reason and how machines work, electronics. Good at math and sci in highschool. In those days there was very little science in taught gradeschool and that's a shame.

My overall impression is that there was a sense in that era that science was a real solution to mankinds problems and that studying science, math, engineering was a productive and useful way of life. In the mid-1990s I worked for a large company that employed a lot of electrical engineers. I could sense that they had a lot of the same interest and science and technology as I, but some of the more vocal ones stated clearly that they would not encourage they children to become engineers or scientists. I think in that time the MBA was the preferred direction. Engineers and many scientists felt that, even at an enlightened company where a technical career path was available, this this seriously capped ones career prospects.

Starting at about that time or a little earlier the H1B visa system in the US seriously undercut wages and job opportunities for technical employees. Software developers were/are hit hardest, but also other fields.

As much as I think creating a next generation of scientists is important to the nation, I also feel that the possibility of them being well rewarded and having a satisfying career is fairly limited by national policy. Someone with the level of intelligence needed to get an advanced degree in math/phys/chem would undoubtedly do better in other fields and have more control of their careers.
Perhaps a few specialized areas - genetics, bioinformatics would fair \better - can't say.
--
Sorry to have veered off topic.

 

[Cathy]

No -- I think society's attitudes about science and science careers is pretty much on topic, because I think that, if you're right, my students would have picked up on that attitude.

Thanks to everyone who has replied so far. Any other stories about your own interest in science fiction and/or science fact?

 

[Fiona]

Well I don't know about any studies or anything. I always liked both SF and fantasy: but although I got good grades in physics and chemistry I really did not like those subjects. And I am just not able to do maths at all, so that meant that I dropped science as early as I could. No point in it if you can't do maths, but in any case I didn't enjoy it.

I think it was the way I was taught. I did not understand the problems, so I had no interest in how to find the answer. What I now think is that it would have been helpful to be taught it as a sort of history. I mean if the class could reproduce a position in which a real problem had to be solved and the solution conveyed the method and content of the science which answered it. Maybe that is not good for everyone, or even anyone: but it seems to relate to fuelair's point because I suspect the students he talks about are interested in problems they can see as problems. In fact I think a lot of school suffers from the same difficulty. In the uk hardly anybody can speak a second language though most folk do study another language at least for a time at school. Doesn't take. Yet mainland europeans can and do learn. Maybe they are taught differently or maybe there is something they actually want to know which a second language will help with: I do not know. But I do think that people can learn much better when they actually want to find something out, if that makes sense

 

[fuelair]

But I do think that people can learn much better when they actually want to find something out, if that makes sense

The key to both our posts!!!

 

[AgeGap]

As a young boy I remember the space race. This led me down the path of reading sci-fi. Reading sci-fi gave me a love of science.
So science, help kids learn to like science fiction, help kids learn to like science.

 

[Cathy]

Originally Posted by Fiona
But I do think that people can learn much better when they actually want to find something out, if that makes sense

Originally Posted by Fuelair
The key to both our posts!!!

I agree completely with both of you. I homeschooled my own kids, and they learned in hands-on, interest-based ways, which meant tons of Geology in elementary grades, for one kid, and several year's worth of oceanography in middle school, for another, with projects and field trips and experiments galore.

But now that my kids are grown and I'm working (as a tutor and writing teacher) with public-schooled kids, I'm looking for a way to change their negative attitudes toward science without having to overhaul the entire public school system...

Originally Posted by AgeGap
So science helps kids learn to like science fiction, [which] helps kids learn to like science.

This makes sense, too...

 

[dann]

I know that there is a big difference between reading and being a fan, but still ...

Fandom in science fantasy and science fiction

1. "Now there is a difference between the reader and the fan. The fan wants his writers to be faces and personalities, someone they can touch, someone they can talk to. Sometimes they ask you the most ridiculous questions, but you know it's because they want to say something to you, they want a give-and-take relationship between reader and writer, which is unusual in science fiction. I don't think they have that in any other field. (...) It's just one of the more unusual facets of science fiction and fantasy that you do have this feedback, this dialogue between reader and writer." (Anne McCaffrey)

2. "For some of my fans science fiction has become an alternative world. The world has become a place they would rather live in. This can be dangerous. I stress to these people that Pern doesn't exist except in my imagination and in my books. And yet I can't help ... I'm complimented that it's my world they want to live in. But I also worry that they are so willing to escape reality that they need some place else to go. Not with today's world that I blame them. I just don't want to be responsible for - how do I say it - well, responsible for this rejection of where they actually have to live." (Anne McCaffrey)

3. "My friend here is a fire lizard. He thinks he's as good as a dragon, but he's really a fire lizard. In a sense Pern (McCaffrey's imaginary planet) is very real for me. It has brought me wonderful friends and brought me out of my shell. It has been very, very good for me." (McCaffrey fan)

4. "This world can be real to me if I want it to be, if I'm so in the mood. But I like her world better, it just holds more fascination for me. It's just more interesting to me. Maybe it has more of a strife in it or less in it; maybe it's a more simple world, maybe that's what it is. We get up every day and we fight to live, I don't know. But her world is more real, this is why I like it." (Another fan)

5. "You open up a book and go on vacation to this other world where you can do other things, be other people, and you're not limited. In this world I'm limited to me. I'm limited in what I can do, how I can look, how I can act, by the customs of my people. And I can become something else, and her characters and her stories in her books are real enough that I can become ..., I can live in that world, I can do those things. (Smiles) And it's great. I love it!" (Third fan)

6. "I wasn't very happy with life as a kid and I liked the idea that there might be someplace else where things were different. I didn't look for it on this planet. I figured it was elsewhere. I used to sit there in the Bronx, looking up at the stars, hoping that a UFO would come and get me. Of course, it would never land in the Bronx, but I still had my hopes." (Lynne, Star Trek fan)

7. "I always wanted to be like Spock. I suppose I was like him - an outsider. He was an alien in the ship and I was an outsider in my town. I grew up there, but didn't belong. He was in science and things like that. He would investigate things. He would solve all the problems. He was someone I looked up to at the time ... I think that being in internal conflict with yourself about being outwardly emotional is something that is common to many people in science and technology and especially something I have experienced." (John, MIT student and Star Trek fan)

Quotations 1-5 are from the series "Women Writers"
Quotations 6-7 are from Tulloch/Jenkins' "Science Fiction Audiences - Watching Doctor Who and Star Trek" (Routledge 1995)

 

[GreyICE]

Survey size: Small
Selection Criteria: Heavily biased
Context provided: None
Followup interviews: None
Conclusions drawn: No qualifiers on them

Speaking of Science Fiction I think certain people could benefit from a little more critical thinking and a little less 'I support my own worldview.'

 

[The Man]

In a way I would have to say that it did help me. My parents were always into science fiction, “Analong Science Fact & Fiction” was one of several periodicals they regularly received as well as a large collection of paper backs. Unfortunately I can not say that I shared my parent’s interest in literature, science fiction or otherwise, I did however read the articles on “science fact”. We did share an interest in science fiction TV and movies, which is what hooked me. I had always been interested and involved in model building so special effects for TV and movies seemed like the best way to make use of that interest. To do this I knew that I had to study electronics and mechanical engineering as well as gain some photographic experience. As I grew older I of course realized that getting into special effects was probably just a pipe dream, but somehow the interest in electronics, mechanical engineering and photography remained. Eventual I obtained degrees in Electro Mechanical as well as Electrical Technologies, working much of my career in an engineering laboratory and as a Mechanical Engineer. So unfortunately I can not say that it was the fiction aspect of science fiction that did it for me but the practical aspect of creating the illusion of science fiction that brought me into the reality of science.

 

[I Ratant]

I've had subscriptions to F&SF, Analog (from when it was Astounding), Asimov's, Sci-Am... ever since I discovered them way way back when. (55 years for Sci-Am)
The first sci-fi story I can recall was one of Heinlein's, in "Boy's Life", about 1947, which was when I was finishing up reading the entire Encyclopedia Britannica.
Exposing kids to alternative thinking can't be bad, my parents raised three high IQ kids (all aerospace retirees now) by nor restricting our interests.

 

[I Ratant]

I know that there is a big difference between reading and being a fan, but still ...
<snip>

.
From what I've seen and read of sci-fi fans, the more enthusiastic appear to be somewhat off-plumb. As are any "fans" of any interest, to the extent they must identify with the authors of their interest.. sports fans as well.
It's good to have favorites, who you know will deliver a good story, or a winning chukkar in the match, but obsessing to the point of needing to touch-feel-talk to, that's both immature and somewhat disturbing.
Any interest which draws dedicated enthusiasts.. car clubs, gun clubs... seem to devolve into "us vs them" quite frequently.

 

[Cathy]

I especially run into girls who say that they hate science, and also, by the way, they hate science fiction. Have they ever read science fiction? No, of course not. Why would they read it? They hate it!

I have had some success with luring girls to break out of that particular box, but not a LOT of success. Not that I imagine that it is soooooo super important that everyone like science fiction, but I hate to see intelligent girls who LOVE to read who won't even try a wide and varied chunk of literature because the word "SCIENCE" is printed very small on the cover (as in "Science Fiction").

Stephanie Meyers, well known by female teens for her vampire love stories known as the Twilight series, wrote a science fiction book called The Host. A couple of Meyers fans I know, who swore they'd never read SF, finally did try it -- and they liked it. I'm not saying it's the greatest book of all time -- I'm sure just mentioning it might bring down heaps of scorn on my head -- but I'm glad that a few girls tried something out of their comfort zone...

 

[Cuddles]

I know that a lot of little kids (up to pre-teens) gravitate toward science topics and also enjoy a highly informal version of the scientific method (in other words, exploring and messing around with stuff). Where do all those good feelings about science disappear to?

I think the problem comes here:

done properly it requires them to do heavy mental work.

Most people are interested in science to a certain degree. If you talk about things in fluffy, easily understood terms, people almost always show some interest in things like particle colliders, cosmology, quantum physics and so on. The problem is that to get past that stage and to get any real understanding requires a lot of maths, often quite complex, and many people really struggle with that. In addition, most of it is really just fairly boring office work. Talking about smashing particles apart and big explosions in space is fun, spening weeks learning the equations that govern them is less so.

I think the reason many children like science up until a certain age is that that is where the transition from stories to real science comes. I don't know whether they tend to dislike it because the impression they'd built up of science is destroyed or simply that they'd have found it boring from the start if they'd known what it's like, but there can be little doubt that most people find the actual practice of science much less interesting than just hearing about the results in a simplified way.

To be honest, I'm not sure science fiction can really help this. No matter how realistic it is, science fiction is necessarily stories. It therefore has the same problem as above - people find the stories interesting, but still find the actual practice of science boring. If anything, they will like science less because they have certain expectations from the stories, and therefore are more disappointed with reality that they would have been without the stories.

 

[Cathy]

Cuddles said:

I think the reason many children like science up until a certain age is that that is where the transition from stories to real science comes....To be honest, I'm not sure science fiction can really help this. No matter how realistic it is, science fiction is necessarily stories. It therefore has the same problem as above - people find the stories interesting, but still find the actual practice of science boring.

You may be right, Cuddles but those of us who aren't professional scientists but who like (or even love) science enjoy all the continuing stories: stories of how we got here, what the universe is like, how we operate, and so forth. It is not at all difficult to watch and enjoy a TV show like the History Channel's show "Evolve" or to read a science blog like "Bad Astronomy." And by enjoying the stories of science, I believe we become much better citizens of whatever nation we live in and of the world.

In contrast, SO many teens of my acquaintance have a knee-jerk negative response to even easily enjoyable things such as TV shows and blogs IF they (the students) label them as science. They aren't just rejecting the math, hard work, and boring paperwork aspects of science, many of them are also rejecting the stories of science and, saddest of all, the process and viewpoint of science.

Perhaps it is just the age. I suppose lots of adults recover the ability to dabble, at least, in "the stories" of science, even if they don't get into the mathematical or paperwork aspects of what you call "real science."

 

[fagin]

I've had subscriptions to F&SF, Analog (from when it was Astounding), Asimov's, Sci-Am... ever since I discovered them way way back when. (55 years for Sci-Am)
The first sci-fi story I can recall was one of Heinlein's, in "Boy's Life", about 1947, which was when I was finishing up reading the entire Encyclopedia Britannica.
Exposing kids to alternative thinking can't be bad, my parents raised three high IQ kids (all aerospace retirees now) by nor restricting our interests.

A bit of a coincedence, but the first SF story I remember reading was Starman Jones by Heinlein, in 'The Sabre Boys Story Annual' no idea of the publishing date but quite a long time ago. (1954 I think)
I have always had an interest in how things work, but reading that story opened up a whole new realm of possibilities as it felt so real, as opposed to fairy stories, which was all the 'fantasy' I'd read until then, but I was only about 6 or 7 at the time.
My son is fascinated by technology, but loves to read fantasy and horror. I am however working on expanding his horisons, and he is now an Arthur Clarke fan. Still some work to do though.
I think this is a bit of a chicken and egg situation, but can't see any harm in trying to develop an interest in science through SF, as long as you can get them to read, which I understand is a bit of a problem these days.
(Not for me - I started reading him stories at a few months old, and now he loves reading and writing.)