Alex Senneville

Dr. Malcolm Campbell

UWRT 1104

2018/4/15

Scientific Literacy: Politics Greatest Resource

Scientific literacy is the basic understanding of scientific concepts and ideas that allow

for an individual to take part in formal discussion over the topic of science and its impact on the

world (Blake). This definition seems complicated to some but it really boils down to “Do you

understand science?” This is a question that may seem simple to answer at first but is much more

complicated than it seems. Some people might answer this question with a “Yes” or a “No”

which should be the only two responses for this question, but there is a third option, “I don’t

know”. All three of these answers have a fault, scientific literacy is not based on yes or no it is

based on a scale. Like all forms of literacy there are degrees to how literate someone is. With

reading literacy someone may be able to read at an eighth-grade level and be considered literate.

However, someone who can read at a twelfth-grade level is also literate. Both people are literate

yet one is more proficient at reading than another. The same problem is present in scientific

literacy. There are degrees of understanding and knowledge.

The first and potentially most dangerous degree of understanding is little to no

understanding. We call this scientific illiteracy. Scientific illiteracy is a massive problem

throughout the entire world. It allows people to derail the progress of scientific advancement

either because they fear science or do not understand it. Take for example someone who does not

believe in climate change. Many people do not believe in climate change and write it off as a
hoax of some sort. This would not be a problem if these people simply did not believe in climate

change. The problem is that people act based on their beliefs. The man one is voting. Voting

plays a pivotal role in how the United States creates or changes policies. Someone who does not

believe in climate change will more than likely vote against reforms that tighten pollution

loopholes or reduce car emissions. Since climate change is a provable statistic that has very real

and very damaging side effects, this is not a proactive stance to take. Someone who possesses

little to no scientific literacy may not realize this and will vote accordingly. At this level of

understanding it may not be a malicious action, it may be that they simply do not know. Science

permeates everything that we as citizens do in the United States. It affects our food, our water,

our technology and how we use all of this in conjunction with our lives. It encompasses so much

of our daily lives that many people don’t even realize it. We have in our pockets at all times, a

computer that is more powerful than the computers used to send people to the moon and we

complain because it is too slow. Science is making so many innovations and advancements that it

is hard to keep up without actively having a role in these advancements or reading about them

every day. . That is not a realistic expectation of the American people. It is important nonetheless

to understand the very real impacts that science makes on our society. Someone who does not

understand scientific literacy to the degree where they can even learn about climate change or

GMO’s cannot be expected to learn on their own. It may be that these individuals never had a

proper scientific education.

Let’s say we take an area such as Mississippi which has the lowest scored science

performance for the 8th grade according to the Nations Report Card (3). The state voted primarily

Republican for the 2012 presidential election (Maps). Now take a state like New Hampshire who

scored amongst the highest state in 8th grade science performance (3). New Hampshire voted
primarily democrat for the 2012 election (Maps). Does this mean that those students in

Mississippi are somehow worse than those in New Hampshire? No, of course not, it may just be

a simple case of how certain states value scientific education over others. Regardless, these

correlations between scientific performance and voter trends are nothing to sneeze at. They paint

the picture for how voters tend to vote based on their level of scientific and academic

performance. However, these trends are nothing new. Sociologists and political analysts have

known for years, but the importance of these trends in a world that relies on science more than

ever is the key.

Does this data mean that everyone who is scientifically literate votes democrat? No, not

at all and it should be said that this is just one data sample and outliers are always something to

keep in mind while looking at statistical data. The importance of these trends is to show that

scientific literacy has a substantial role in how voters tend to vote. In a fair and equal democracy

such as how the United States strives to be, there needs to be active and informed voters. Based

on personal accounts people that I know tend to vote for very simple reasons, they have voted a

certain way since they could vote and they stick to that party no matter what. Others vote a

certain way because their parents vote a certain way, and some still vote because of who they

think the most persuasive or suave candidate is. These are all terrible ways to pick a

representative. A voter needs to be aware of the issues that their representative will be voting for,

how they will be voting for them, and how that affects the constituent.

Increasing the population’s understanding of science may be the first step to creating

more informed voters. There is a massive problem with this idea however, it requires for people

to change. Individuals must be willing and able to learn a substantial amount of scientific

knowledge. That is the hardest part when it comes to making a reform like this. The people of
the United States need to want to make this change. Attempting to create more active and

informed voters is already an issue that the government must face. Only around 40 percent of

registered voters aged 18 to 29 voted in the 2016 presidential elections. That is a terrible sign

considering in 2008 the same demographic had a voter turnout rate of almost 50 percent

(Mcdonald). Voter apathy is a hard problem to combat since making voting legally required

would infringe on a person’s right to abstain from voting. The good news is that as the data

suggests, the older someone is the more likely they are to vote as indicated by higher turnout

rates. But this is still a massive problem.

Creating active voters is challenging but what about more informed voters? Luckily the

scientific community has already been doing so with outreach programs for kids and science

based summer camps to get children excited or at least interested in science. This community

outreach may have the potential to help guide children and teenagers to be more scientifically

literate, regardless of their home school district. The department of energy is also providing

community outreach through its “STEM outreach and engagement” program (6) The STEM

program itself is an option that many students have when selecting a high school. These schools

offer a focus on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics that other schools do not.

They help to engage more students in these science based fields and it is a great start to a reform

project to help increase scientific literacy in the community. These are all fantastic starts and I

am sure that they are creating real impact in the world of science education. Perhaps a more

direct solution that could impact more students would be a helpful solution. Something as drastic

as reforming the American school system would help immensely with bringing about changes in

the way that students view science. More after school clubs could also help to spur on the interest
in learning about science. Perhaps something such as more field trips to biodiesel plants or

universities that focus on science could help.

Although scientific literacy is not the most pressing issue in America it needs to be

discussed. Although there are far more important issues to take care of first, it is a very important

topic that needs to be discussed publicly. The best way to create public exposure to any topic is

to portray it in the media. I wanted to look at how scientific literacy was portrayed in large,

credible news outlets. The first thing that I noticed when doing so was the lack of exposure that

this topic received. The news was not focusing much on scientific literacy which was the first

bad sign. The second came when I did find an article written by the BBC under the title “On the

merits of Scientific Literacy” written by Alice Bell (2). It looks promising until you start reading

and realize that Bell is not a scientist or anyone who knows the intricacies of scientific literacy

but is instead a journalist. Bell gives an apt description of scientific literacy and its potential

effects on the public. This is all good until you realize that no real expert opinion was given. It

was more of an opinion piece. Ordinarily this would not be so bad, but it fails to give any

scientific view or outside opinion by an expert in the field and is written by someone who openly

claims to not really know what the concept is and was written six years ago. This is not a good

sign. Without proper media coverage how are people supposed to know about the issue at all? I

looked for other articles that give any mention of scientific literacy and the results are bleak.

While I did find articles that talked about scientific literacy they were not from any widespread

news publication. When searching Fox News, I only found six articles in the search results. None

of them had anything to do with scientific literacy. The articles that I did find where not much

better. The most promising piece I found was a press release from the department of energy. I do

not know anybody who uses the United States department of energy as a news source.
 There is one thing that I failed to mention until now, and that is the After School Satan

club. The name is a bit misleading as to what the organization represents. It is a non-profit after

school club that focuses on science education and community outreach (After ). This seems like

a very out of place topic to discuss but they do something that not a lot of outreach programs do.

They are featured in the media. Most outreach programs are only really known to those in their

involvement. This club however saw massive media involvement for being such a small and

controversial group. This is a massive step forward. Even though they are controversial and they

do identify as Satanists they are providing community outreach on science based education to

schools for free. It is this controversy that led them to the media spotlight. Perhaps it is not the

most formal way about bringing change to the school system but it is effective in getting people

to talk about science education. Let me paint you a picture. Imagine sitting at home with your

kids and you see a flyer for the after school Satan club in your mailbox. This may be a cause for

alarm to some people, in fact most people might have an opinion on this flyer. You read the flyer

and see that the club is trying to teach science to your children in an optional after school club.

Some people might oppose this idea and try and get the club shutdown or banned from the

school. Regardless of your reaction you are having a reaction, you are actively doing something

about a potential problem or, in some people’s case, you are trying to get involved in the club.

These reactions from individuals, students, and communities is what makes this program so

brilliant. It sheds light on the problem of how do we teach students science. This generates more

press coverage than if the club was called something more tame like “After school science club”.

Regardless of how you feel about the club or its involvement in schools it generates media buzz

and gets people to talk about the subject of science education.

 What does have to do with voting? People will vote based on what they believe and what

they hear. This is the reason why slander campaigns exist. If no one is hearing about the topic. If

no one is discussing the topic openly then the average citizen has no real reason to care about it.

You can propose any solution to any problem in the world. Take for example starvation in

Africa. If you give a perfect solution to the problem it does not matter if no one hears about it.

That is the real flaw to scientific literacy. It is a solution that many people would benefit

immensely from and yet no one has ever heard about it. I am not saying that Satanism is the way

to go but I am saying that people need to know about this problem. The more people hear about a

potential problem or reform the stronger their opinion on the matter becomes. The more likely

they are to actively vote and seek change. People should care about the future. Everyone has a

grand vision of what the future may hold. Flying cars, and holograms come to mind when I

picture the future, yet people rarely talk about how we are going to get there. We get there by

creating change in the way we think or the way we feel about certain topics and issues. Flying

cars will never become a commonplace item if people are scared by them. Already, self driving

cars are under scrutiny because the majority of people do not understand how they work. They

are scared of them and the decisions they may make. The reaction that people have to flying cars

may have been the same reaction that people had about the printing press or the wheel. It is

something that people don’t understand and that is the greatest contributor to fear, not knowing.

A lack of knowledge or information is scary. However, increasing the level of scientific literacy

in the world may be the first step to overcoming these fears. It has the potential to create more

active and more informed voters that would be prepared to make decisions on policy changes

that deal with the increasing complexity of scientific advancement.

 Although scientific literacy may seem like a small speck of things to reform in the United

States, its impact on how we vote and what we vote for is crucial. It can be the tipping point for

many areas that are unaware of the scientific world and it has the potential to create more

educated voters that hopefully will vote based on how the candidate will affect them. This has

been a core issue for years but the increase in the way that science affects the average American

has made it a more pressing issue. This is not to say that scientific literacy is the only way that

the American public can become more active in their voting yet it is an important issue that must

be discussed in the public eye. More people need to know about this if they are to discuss it. I

believe that more involvement in the media and more active community outreach will push this

topic to the public image and perhaps even enact a change in the way we deal with science

education.
Works Cited:

Afterschoolsatan.com, The Satanic Temple, afterschoolsatan.com/.

Bell , Alice. “On the Merits of Science Literacy.” BBC News, BBC, 4 July 2012,

www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-18709587.

Blake , Caitrin. “Professional Resources.” Concordia Nebraska Online, Concordia University of

Nebraska , 20 Apr. 2017, online.cune.edu/defining-scientific-literacy/.

The Nations Report Card. “State Profile.” The Nation's Report Card, 2015,

www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile?chort=2&sub=SCI&sj=&

sfj=NP&st=MN&year=2015R3.

Miller, Jon D. Civic Scientific Literacy in the United States in 2016. Institute for Social

Research, 2016, Civic Scientific Literacy in the United States in 2016,

home.isr.umich.edu/files/2016/10/NASA-CSL-in-2016-Report.pdf.

Maps, Political. “2016.” Political Maps, 2016, politicalmaps.org/category/year/2016/.

Mcdonald, Michael P. “Voter Turnout Demographics.” United States Elections Project,

2016, www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics.

“STEM Outreach and Engagement.” Department of Energy, Department of Energy,

www.energy.gov/diversity/services/stem-education.