The results from the Scientific Reasoning Series, although limited, suggest development of far more material of this kind. Vast sums of money are being spent to improve science education, with little effect. Almost none of this is going toward extensive development of technology-based learning units. The use of a highly interactive well-designed computer-based learning material could have a major impact in improving science education. Several factors are important to consider.
As scientists, we should always admit that an approach to learning may not be effective. We do not have a good empirical base in learning, and we do not have completely adequate theories on how people learn.
This is an important point stressed in this paper. But there is much additional evidence also.
If one introduces any new learning technology as only a minor adjunct, the course from the student viewpoint is almost unchanged. In a traditional course, most of the student time is still spent with lectures and books. Small changes usually lead to small differences.
We can only realize the full potential of the new interactive learning technologies if we rebuild our courses, assuming the use of technology from the beginning. Entirely new course structures are now possible, very different that existing courses.
We need a scientific approach to learning science. We need to do careful professional evaluation of new approaches, with large numbers of students, comparing them to older approaches.
The approaches suggested are not now being followed.
We would not claim that we have fully demonstrated the effectiveness of the Scientific Reasoning Series. That would take full summative evaluation. Far more extensive development and testing is necessary to fully demonstrate its potential.
Yet even on present evidence the potential for improving science education is much greater than any other activities going on now. The sizable expenditures at present are not improving science education. It is reasonable to try this new approach. The costs are no greater with interactive technology than for other approaches to improving learning. The prospects for this direction are reasonable. I see no other approach that would, on a national basis, provide this level of improvement. We should investigate the possibilities with further empirical studies.
I plan to continue discussion of these issues in another paper.