- Although it has not been a good year for the sciences in
the state of Kansas, a KU task force is seeking to improve science
education both at the university and throughout the state in
general.
The Kansas State Board of Education's decision to remove evolution
from its required teaching sparked countless heated debates and
put the state's education standards under the scrutiny of an
international spotlight. Noted scientists like Stephen Jay Gould
made passionate appeals for Kansans to vote out the board of
education members who felt that evolution was not a necessary
component in the teaching of science. Meanwhile, scientists around
the world used Kansas as an example to argue the merits of Darwinian
evolution versus intelligent design.
Caught in the middle of all of this-but far from silent on the
subject-was the University of Kansas.
In his convocation speech to the faculty last September, KU Chancellor
Robert E. Hemenway called for the establishment of a Science
Education Task Force to improve the understanding and teaching
of science.
However, the task force was more than just a reactionary measure.
Hemenway clearly stated that he wanted to position the university
as a national leader in science education. Using the board of
education's controversial decision as a springboard, Hemenway
challenged his faculty to develop new ways of improving science
literacy not only among KU students, but among the general public
as well.
The 16-member task force, which includes some of the most influential
scientists on campus, was given a deadline of May 1 to report
its recommendations to the chancellor. Although still weeks away
from delivering its findings, it has met several times throughout
the year and has already developed several key suggestions.
Perhaps the most exciting of these suggestions calls for a closer
look into the construction of a new undergraduate natural sciences
laboratory learning center. The building was proposed several
years ago, long before the establishment of the task force. However,
the goal of improving science education has focused more attention
on the project.
The proposed six-level building would be situated behind Wescoe
Hall, just east of Malott Hall. The unofficial cost estimate
for the building is about $60 million, and the task force is
still looking into possible methods of funding this project,
said Sally Frost Mason, dean of liberal arts and sciences, and
member of the task force.
"We desperately need the building-there's no doubt about
that," Frost Mason said. "It has become a top priority,
but the hard part is trying to comprehend where we will come
up with $60 million all at once. And as time goes by and inflation
increases, that price goes up every year."
The proposed building would feature state-of-the-art laboratories
for all of the undergraduate sciences courses. It also would
include office space, storage, a planetarium, computer labs and
commons areas for students. Moreover, the building would free
up space in other science buildings on campus for use in higher
level research.
With more than 1,200 undergraduate students at KU majoring in
biology, and hundreds more in the other sciences, an undergraduate
science building is becoming more and more of a necessity.
"Virtually every student at KU takes courses that would
be taught in this building," Frost Mason said.
But perhaps even more important, she said, the building would
help advance the teaching of science, not just to KU students,
but across the state of Kansas, as well.
"Clearly what we want to do is emphasize that KU intends
to be a major player in the state when it comes to science education,"
Frost Mason said.
While the proposed building is generating a lot of excitement
among the science community on this campus, its construction
is by no means the only recommendation to come out of the task
force.
Joe Heppert, associate professor of chemistry and vice-chair
of the task force, said four subcommittees had been formed to
address various aspects of the task force's goals.
The undergraduate science building primarily falls under the
jurisdiction of the subcommittee on establishing a center for
science education. However, Heppert said, this subcommittee also
is dealing with ways to create an interdisciplinary center that
would include a variety of liberal arts, engineering and other
departments in the science learning process.
Another subcommittee, meanwhile, has been examining the science
education standards for undergraduate students here at KU. This
group has been looking into ways to prepare all students-not
just science majors-to better understand the sciences.
The third subcommittee has been examining the current infrastructure
for supporting math and science programs on campus. This ranges
from developing teaching techniques to determining whether or
not existing resources are being used properly.
Finally, the fourth subcommittee has been working on developing
methods for KU faculty and students to help elementary through
high-school teachers better teach math and sciences. With that
in mind, the subcommittee applied for the Centers for Teaching
and Learning Initiative, a five-year, $15 million grant from
the National Science Foundation. The grant requires universities
to apply their research about science education in the development
of practical methods for improving science education for primary
and secondary teachers.
Although KU may not be able to reverse the board of education's
decision to remove evolution overnight, Heppert said that all
of this attention on the science programs at KU could only help
for the future.
"Most of the students coming out of KU are not scientists
and won't be scientists," he said. "But it's important
that they have an understanding of what science is and how it
is done because, ultimately, they establish the public opinions
that directly influence science education."
And while KU works diligently to position itself as a national
leader in science education, Heppert said he did not think the
goal was too far off.
"I'm looking at this as an opportunity to take something
that is already very good and focus some energy to improve it,
making science education at KU world-class," Heppert said.
|
|
