Making the Grade Initiative. How might change happen when the problem appears invisible?
Constructing engineering expertise in high school robotics and college design Tonso, K. Staying below the radar: Collaboration in interdisciplinary design teamwork Tonso, K.
Developing engineering expertise in a design course sequence Tonso, K. Patients' decision-making for non-emergent use of the emergency department Krishnan, A. Ethnography and explanatory power: Building in rigor through research practice Tonso, K. Framing women's identities as engineers Pawley, A. En sus voces [In their voices]: Focusing on gender in and of engineering, not on women: A novel way to develop an interactive undergraduate course Yaprak, E.
En sus voces [in their voices]: Masculinities, femininities, engineering expertise: On the outskirts of engineering: Engineering education and reform: Theorizing identity in engineering learning settings: Caught in a policy crossfire: Student engineers and identity: Engineering practices in student teams: Where the girls aren't: Engineering identity In Press Tonso, K. Making women engineers' identities via newspapers and magazines Pawley, A.
Violent masculinities as tropes for school shooters: Partisan and ideological differences were found in views about the contribution of scientists and engineers but not in views about medical doctors. These modest changes over time have occurred among both Republicans including independents who lean Republican as well as Democrats including independents who lean Democratic. A detailed look at attitudes about science and technology topics by political groups is forthcoming later this year. A majority of the public sees societal benefit from government investment in science and engineering research.
Positive views about the value of government investment in each area is about the same as in , though negative views that such spending is not worth it have ticked up 5 points for engineering and technology research and 6 points for basic science research.
The modest difference over time stems from more expressing an opinion today than did so five years ago. Perceptions of where the scientific community stands on both climate change and evolution tend to be associated with individual views on the issue. Scientists are more positive, by comparison, when it comes to the state of their scientific specialty.
But here, too, scientists are less rosy in their assessments than five years ago: Scientists are largely pessimistic that the best information guides regulations when it comes to clean air and water regulations or land use regulations: By comparison, those who say the best science guides land use regulations only some of the time or never are less positive.
The same pattern holds for each of the four types of regulations considered in the survey. Scientists who perceive a more frequent influence of the best science on regulations are also more likely to say this is a good time for science compared with scientists who see less frequent impact of the best scientific information on policy rules.
Founded in , AAAS publishes Science, one of the most widely-circulated peer-reviewed scientific journals in the world. Chapter 1 briefly outlines related Pew Research Center studies and reviews some of the key caveats and concerns in conducting research in this area. Chapter 2 looks at overall views about science and society, the image of the U. Chapter 3 covers attitudes and beliefs about a range of biomedical and physical science topics. It focuses on comparisons between the public and AAAS scientists and also covers public attitudes on access to experimental drugs, bioengineering of artificial organs, genetic modifications and perceptions of scientific consensus.
Chapter 4 examines the views of AAAS scientists about the scientific enterprise, issues and concerns facing the scientific community, and issues for those newly entering careers in science.
Science education from people for people: taking a standpoint When I was in my first year of teaching science I recall a lesson in an. Science education from people for people: taking a standpoint People also read. Article. Science education for students with special needs.
It also includes the experiences and background characteristics of the AAAS scientists in the survey. Appendices provide a detailed report on the methodology used in each survey as well as the full question wording and frequency results for each question in this report.
It looks at the views of the general public and scientists about the place of science in American culture, their views about major science-related issues, and the role of science in public policy. This is the first of several reports analyzing the data from this pair of surveys. This report focuses on a comparison of the views of the general public and those of AAAS scientists as a whole.
Follow up reports planned for later this year will analyze views of the general public in more detail, especially by demographic, religious, and political subgroups. And, some results from the survey of AAAS scientists will be presented in a follow-up report in mid-February. All other costs of conducting the pair of surveys were covered by the Pew Research Center. Pew Research bears all responsibility for the content, design and analysis of both the AAAS member survey and the survey of the general public.
We are also grateful to the team at Princeton Survey Research International who led the data collection efforts for the two surveys. About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world.
It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts. This report highlights these major findings: Science holds an esteemed place among citizens and professionals. Americans recognize the accomplishments of scientists in key fields and, despite considerable dispute about the role of government in other realms, there is broad public support for government investment in scientific research.
At the same time, both the public and scientists are critical of the quality of science, technology, engineering, and math STEM subjects in grades K STEM education for grades K as above average or the best in the world. Despite broadly similar views about the overall place of science in America, citizens and scientists often see science-related issues through different sets of eyes.
There are large differences in their views across a host of issues. The gap between citizens and scientists in seeing GM foods as safe is 51 percentage points. This is the largest opinion difference between the public and scientists.
Citizens are closely divided over animal research: The difference in the share favoring such research is 42 percentage points. In some areas, like energy, the differences between the groups do not follow a single direction — they can vary depending on the specific issue. The gap in support of offshore drilling is 20 percentage points.
But when it comes to nuclear power, the gap runs in the opposite direction. The only one of 13 issues compared where the differences between the two groups are especially modest is the space station. Compared with five years ago, both citizens and scientists are less upbeat about the scientific enterprise. Citizens are still broadly positive about the place of U. And, while a majority of scientists think it is a good time for science, they are less upbeat than they were five years ago.
Most scientists believe that policy regulations on land use and clean air and water are not often guided by the best science.