SHORTCOMINGS
OF “ALTERNATIVES”
LIVE
ANIMALS--A person who drives a car but doesn't know
what is under the hood or how it operates cannot repair
it, doesn't know why it needs oil, gas, and air, and
doesn't comprehend why certain operations or usages
are harmful. The general acceptance that mere observation
of external anatomy and behavior can provide an adequate
experience base for understanding functional anatomy,
diversity, evolution, and science process is a sad commentary
on the current state of science literacy in the general
public and the science education community endorsing
this view.
PICTURES--This
medium does not lay down any memory of sound, taste,
smell, or touch; it provides a one dimensional “perfect”
visual image; and does not interact, test true, or provide
real consequences.
MODELS--Imitation
models (not made from real taxidermy, etc.) improve
on pictures by providing a three dimensional or stereoscopic
input, but do not usually test true to touch--and otherwise
have the same limitations as pictures. Real specimens
mounted in museum displays are at a higher level because
they are test truthful for surface features (although
there are usually restrictions to touch). The public
does not have an appreciation for museum and school
collections as genuine objects with irreplaceable research
and educational value. Hopefully, most people will gain
an understanding of how animals are essential in biomedical
research because most of us have empathy for accident
and disease victims. But the critical educational function
of genuine specimens in museums and classrooms is far
less obvious. Each teacher and museum educator must
be able to explain why real artifacts and three-dimensional
displays perform an educational function that could
not be served by models and audiovisuals.
COMPUTER
SIMULATION AND “HYPERTEXT”–Despite the media hype, these
experiences are not truly interactive, nor test truthful,
nor do they provide real consequences. The National
Advisory Group of Sigma Xi, the Science Research Society,
recently provided this sober appraisal of such educational
technology in its report "An Exploration of the
Nature and Quality of Undergraduate Education in Science,
Mathematics and Engineering (1989)":
“Two
examples of the constructive use of computer simulations
are: 1) to provide students with mock experiences with
complex equipment in the laboratory in order to dissipate
student anxiety, save time and protect the equipment,
and 2) to display graphically changes in numerical values
as predicted by a specific model, in response to variations
of the parameters in the model . . . The National Advisory
Group supports appropriate uses of computer simulations
but takes a very strong position against their use to
replace laboratory hands-on experience. Students need
to learn to critically assess computer simulations,
to question the models on which they are based, and
to recognize that simulations are not true science or
engineering investigations.
DEMONSTRATIONS
– This is a good learning experience (hopefully a
review) for the teacher. However, it attenuates
the sensory input for students as more distant observers
and eliminates direct interaction for the student.
TV monitoring of demonstrations greatly improves the
experience, but still denies interaction to the majority
of students.
PALPATION
is the technique a physician uses to diagnose by feel.
The liver feels different from the stomach. Press
on a pelvic organ; if the fingerprint remains, it
is the colon with moldable feces; if firm and rubbery,
it is the uterus. This is a refined skill for doctors,
but we all use it in everyday life. When a child asks
"Let me see that," he holds out his
hand (and gets angry if you only let him see
it). What we gain from touch is desperately overlooked
or undervalued in education.
