Dr Carol Oliver
Science communication specialist
Contact Details: Phone: +61 (0)417 477 612 Email: carol.oliver@unsw.edu.au Opinion: The importance of evidence |
|
My background
My doctoral thesis concerns the public understanding of astrobiology. I also have a research Masters in science communication from Central Queensland University. I am the supervisor for an ACA PhD student in the same area, Jenny Fergusson. Such studies have application across the sciences.
In addition, the ACA has, from its inception, fully integrated education, media, and public outreach into its research programs. This has provided an excellent platform to take my lifetime's experience in journalism and science journalism together with experience of education and outreach in the university environment to begin to understand what works and what does not, and why. There is an increasing demand for data-driven research on the public understanding of science. In addition, I have a expert role in developing virtual worlds with the NASA Astrobiology Institute team led by Arizona State University.
I am also involved with Australia's efforts in space exploration. I am the Public Outreach Working Group Chair on the Australian Decadal Space Plan Steering Committee of the Australian Academy of Science National Committee on Space Science. In addition, I am active in international space exploration as a full member of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA). My roles include secretary of the IAA SETI Permanent Study Group, and Deputy Chair of its Post Detection Taskgroup. I also represented Australia at the International Astronautical Congress in Valencia, 2006, for a meeting of 14 space agencies, including NASA and the European Space Agency. The meeting was one of a series in 2006 and 2007 to develop a global space exploration strategy document.
A resume, including publications and international conference papers, can be found here.
Doctoral executive summary
The majority of adults in the US and in Europe appear to be scientifically illiterate. This has not changed in more than half a century. It is unknown whether the Australian public is also scientifically illiterate because no similar testing is done here. Public scientific illiteracy remains in spite of improvements in science education, innovative approaches to public outreach, the encouraging of science communication via the mass media, and the advent of the Internet. Why is it that there has been so little change? Is school science education inadequate? Does something happen between leaving high school education and becoming an adult? Does Australia suffer from the same apparent malady?
The pilot study at the heart of this thesis tests a total of 692 Year Ten (16-year-old) Australian students across ten high schools and a first year university class in 2005 and 2006, using measures applied to adults. Twenty-six percent of those tested participated in a related scientific literacy project utilising in-person visits to Macquarie University in both years. A small group of the students (64) tested in 2005 were considered the best science students in seven of the ten high schools. Results indicate that no more than 20% of even the best high school science students, on the point of being able to end their formal science education, are scientifically literate if measured by adult standards. The pilot test among 150 first year university students supports that indication. This compares to a scientific literacy rate of 28% for the US public.
This thesis finds that the scientific literacy enterprise – in all its forms – fails scrutiny. Either we believe our best science students are leaving high school scientifically illiterate or there is something fundamentally wrong in our perceptions of public scientific illiteracy. This pilot study indicates we cannot rely on our current perceptions of a scientifically illiterate public. It demonstrates that a paradigm shift in our thinking is required about what scientific literacy is and in our expectations of a scientifically literate adult public. In the worst case scenario, governments are pouring millions of dollars into science education and public outreach with little or no basis for understanding whether either is effective. That is illogical, even irresponsible. It also impacts on the way astrobiology – or any science – is communicated in public.
Science Communication Workshop