Avoiding Flawed
Demonstrations:
Greenhouse Effect
Intro/Index
Faulty Demos
Errors, Misconceptions
Testing, Lab Results
Scientifically Strong
Resources
Rebuttals
Acknowledgements
Contact
This web portal
is a resource within
America's online library
for Education &
Research
in Science,
Technology,
Engineering,
Mathematics:
|
 |
Rebuttals Welcome
Sponsor-promoters of the demonstrations reviewed in this section are welcome to respond.
If you believe that your demonstration, experiment or lab does
represent quality science education,
or feel we have been inaccurate or unfair in our comments, we are happy to post your responses here.
Rebuttal statements can be sent here.
|
Rebuttals Received to Date:
None. This section has only recently been published, so it is to be expected that none have come in to date.
|
Programs that are making corrections, replacing faulty demos with scientifically sound materials:
There are quite a number of science education and science communication programs that are currently recommending or promoting flawed climate science demos.
Faulty demos are now being widely promoted, with considerable backing.
For over a decade, the use of scientifically sound hands-on materials on climate change had been actively discouraged by many major sponsors in the U.S.
More recently, hands-on materials have begun to appear in major education resources, where they had previously been missing.
This is largely in response to strong vocal demands of teachers, parents and students.
Teachers, naturally, are looking for the demonstrations and experiments to use.
How can one genuinely be teaching science if nothing is hands-on learning?
Educators, by necessity, often follow what comes down to them from above. Most are not even aware of scientifically strong demos.
Many are doing their best, working to teach science honestly, not aware of the errors and gaps in the materials being recommended to them.
Further, for those that are aware of the choices, it is still difficult to receive funding if one goes against the recommendations of the biggest sponsors.
If an educator prefers not to teach using deficient materials, sponsors can always find another program that is willing.
Which education programs get funding? Which teachers risk loosing their livelihood?
When colleagues have made honest errors in choices of hands-on materials, but are taking strong action to correct these errors,
we feel that is deserving of applause.
Educators who do teach great hands-on science related to climate change are absolute heroes.
It is so hard to do, given today's atmosphere and opposition. Know that you do have colleagues ready to stand with you.
As appropriate, and in consultation with you, we can note what you are doing to improve your materials: in this section and/or on other pages on this site.
We have been in communication with many programs before publication of this review section.
After discussion, many fine programs quickly realized how demos like these are flawed.
They retracted their recommendation of the flawed demos, being sure to recommend demos that do in fact represent climate science well.
We all make errors in science education, as errors are made in any field.
It is important that we look out for each other -- pointing out mistakes to one another is essential in our being able to stay on track.
The goal of this web section is to encourage mutual assistance among science educations.
What we teach, what we promote must first and foremost be sound scientifically.
|
|
