A day of running 2 different science programmes online has fueled my non-enthusiasm towards them.
The inability to run actual physical activities for a science programme that is non-abstract is a real sticking point for me.
I get that schools are apprehensive about running full-scale programmes, and I appreciate the comparative simplicity of teaching life skills and even coding skills through a virtual format.
But physical sciences require physical activities to learn them properly.
Virtual labs are alright at a pinch, but there were so many incidents during the programmes when I was thinking,
"This would have been so much more impactful and enjoyable if we were doing the real thing".
Again, I understand the situation that we are in, but it's really not doing the students any favours.
Have You Been In My Classroom? You May Have Been the Subject of an Experiment.
Despite having been an educator for such a long time, I still test out new methods and information whenever I get the opportunity.
Which means that, if you've ever been in my classroom, lecture theatre, webinar, or similar setting, there's a very high probability that I conducted some kind of experiment on you.
Don't worry, you weren't being bombarded with gamma rays or breathing in odourless chemicals I infused into the air.
It was more likely a test to see how you would react to a certain way of delivery, a new activity, or a new way of conducting an established activity.
I approach it the way a stand-up comedian approaches new material that he/she has written - basically, test it until you know whether to keep it or dump it.
And I've dumped a whole lot more material than I've kept.
So, this is to say thank you for allowing me to test them out on you, and for participating (albeit mostly unknowingly - oops!) in my experiments. ;)
Science and Research Have Trends Too. I Think It's Problematic. This is Why.
In view of the current pandemic, I imagined that there would be a surge of interest in the fields of microbiology and immunology.
And there was. To a certain extent.
Unfortunately, unlike about 15 years ago, biology and biotechnology are no longer ‘trendy’.
It’s most visible in the way the term STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) is used by schools (in Singapore) today.
Today, it is almost always used to refer to AI, programming, and robotics.
And if this is what the students grow up with, they will continue to automatically associate STEM with these areas.
There is no doubt that these are important fields to advance in and educate the next generation in.
At the same time, I wonder why there is so much focus on them and so few resources dedicated to other areas of STEM - chemical sciences, biological sciences, etc.
And then, I heard a comment on a program on TV that mentioned that science, like all other fields, goes through trends. And this happens because the scientific landscape is heavily influenced by the mighty dollar.
Whatever makes money becomes what the scientific community is pushed towards.
This is why I have great respect for scientists who work in fields that are “non-money-making”.
Think scientists deep in the rainforests collecting and cataloguing beetles, or out for weeks at a time on research vessels peering at fuzzy screens for signs of elusive denizens of the deep, or maintaining and attempting to grow endangered plants.
They may be poking into the quantum mysteries of the universe, tinkering with substances to come up with better insulating material for jackets, even testing new ways of preparing bouncy, sustainable fishballs.
Some research seems mundane, others feel incomprehensible.
Whatever the case, I feel that science should really be less about money and more about exploration and testing.
Yes, by all means bolster efforts to advance in the "current" things, but give some coverage and attention to the other areas of science as well.
There are so many, you'll never run out of things to be awed by and fascinated with.
Autonomy in the Classroom Case Study: Forgery and Financial Crime
One of the modules I teach my students covers lessons on Forgery and Financial Crime.
One of the activities involves my students examining currency notes from different countries around the world, as well as bank cheques.
They perform the examinations with UV lights and a digital microscope. Of course, I show them what safety features to look out for before they go at it.
Here’s the thing:
I’ve had teachers from the schools I teach at expressing concern over the fact that I’m “distributing money” and worrying that I won’t get it back.
I tell them that I’ve done this for years and I’ve never lost a single currency note or any apparatus used for this activity.
All I do at the start of the activity is tell my students matter-of-factly that I want my currency notes and bank cheques back at the end of the session.
I don’t mention this again until it’s time to return everything.
There have been multiple cases of students trying to raise a reaction in me by playfully threatening to walk off with the currency notes. I simply smile (now quite hard to see, because I’m wearing a mask) and tell them that, when they’re done, they can put it back on my table.
The point is this: Students will test boundaries and they will test you. They often do this in order to feel you out - to see whether they can look up to you, treat you as a friend, or to see if they should avoid you.
It is up to you as a teacher to set those boundaries and stick to them. It is also up to you to express confidence in your students and their moral values - that they will do the right thing, given the opportunity.
Students don’t need to be nagged or coddled. They are fully capable of doing the right thing at the right time in the right way. Give them the space to do so.
To help your confidence, I haven’t lost a single currency note.
