Tricotomania and more

The opening of the Creation Museum (no, I am not going to link to it) has generated considerable discussion about "belief" in science, a concept that I find somewhat odd, to say the least. Becky has a good post with lots of good science and museum links, and the Carnival that has resulted seems to have a lot of interesting discussion contained within it.

I discovered an article today that adds some interesting scientific research to the question of why people are resistant to particular types of scientific knowledge. Why Do Some People Resist Science?, by Paul Bloom and Deena Skolnick Weisberg, reviews the developmental psychology evidence as it sheds light on this debate.

In sum, the
developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in
children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive
expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the
scientific claims are contested within a society, and will be
especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative that is
rooted in common sense and championed by people who are taken as
reliable and trustworthy. This is the current situation in the United
States with regard to the central tenets of neuroscience and of
evolutionary biology.

The whole article is worth a read. It is a revised version (presumably for a broader, non-scientific audience) of a paper published in Science (a very well regarded, peer-reviewed scientific journal). And it gives us a sense of how we might concretely develop in our children an ability to appreciate the claims of scientists.

For example, the authors discuss this study of mis-perceptions of physical science persisting into adulthood:

In some
cases, there is such resistance to science education that it never
entirely sticks, and foundational biases persist into adulthood. A
classic study by Michael McCloskey and his colleagues tested college
undergraduates’ intuitions about basic physical motions, such as the
path that a ball will take when released from a curved tube. Many of
the undergraduates retained a common-sense Aristotelian theory of
object motion; they predicted that the ball would continue to move in a
curved motion, choosing B over A below.

         
       

An
interesting addendum is that while education does not shake this bias,
real-world experience can suffice. In another study, undergraduates
were asked about the path that water would take out of a curved hose.
This corresponds to an event that most people have seen, and few
believed that the water would take a curved path.
            

That last bit suggests that developing habits of observation AND providing children with lots of opportunities to observe a range of phenomena, will enable them to engage with scientific theories in ways that are likely to reinforce their trust in scientific explanations, an approach completely consistent with Charlotte Mason and other common approaches used by homeschoolers. Providing an opportunity to connect their observations to scientific theories would do an even better job, I suspect.

Of course evolution is harder to observe, but not impossible. I highly recommend an essay by Barbara Kingsolver "A Fist in the Eye of God" in her collection Small Wonder. This was published in 2002 but I’ve only been reading it lately. In addition to good scientific information, her writing is absolutely amazing. You could learn a lot about how to write well by reading Kingsolver. You might not be able to read this with your children (especially if they are young), but reading it yourself will give you a good sense of how to explain these concepts to your children. And it might give you some inspiration for choosing observational activities that would develop their understanding of evolutionary principles.

I think that there are bigger issues at stake in this whole debate (issues which the article above raises in its concluding sentence but doesn’t provide solutions for). Authority is the elephant in the room. For secularists, this is often seen as a question of the authority of science vs. the authority of the bible. But even among Christians, there are serious debates about what the authority of the bible consists of. Clearly the difference between young earth creationists, old earth creationists, and those Christians who don’t think the age of the earth/literal truth of Genesis is a key issue for their faith is huge. And for those of us involved in the worldwide Anglican communion (for better or for worse) the authority of the bible is central to current debates. But I’m not getting into that. Suffice to say, that if that is not a central question for your homeschool, all you need to do is make your children aware that it is important to some people. We don’t have to then grant that their views are equally valid, but it would give us a better sense of why they argue the things that they do.

I know that I’ve been quite lately and I might get back to blogging more regularly soon (I’d like to put something into at least one of Unschooling Voices or the Country Fair, for example). In the meantime, I thought I’d make a note of two articles about history that I’ve come across today.

The first is about public history in relation to academic history by Maureen Ogle. She has recently written a history of American beer that some readers might be interested in. She also hits on some of those big historical concepts I talked about in a recent post. Things like historical significance.

The second is about amateur history and reminds us that much history is still conducted by amateurs as well as giving some insight into how that is done.

For those working with high school age children, I also note that BraveWriter is offering some resources on using primary sources this summer.

Call for submissions is here.

I finally got the shawl blocked and took some photos.

The pattern will be available from Wild Geese Fibres in a few days.

The shawl is a faroese style, knit from the neck down. The front edging is knit as you go along and the bottom edging is a continuation of that knit across the live stitches at the bottom. This means that there is no cast on or cast off edge. The lace pattern is a garter stitch base so you don’t have to worry about the direction your decreases lean. It is based on a pretty easy diamond motif, but the overall pattern uses variations on that with patches of plain garter stitch to add interest and emphasize the unique elements of a faroese style shawl. 

I knit this using 90% alpaca/10% Shetland lace-weight that I got from Wild Geese Fibres. It took less than 600 yards. The stitch definition is really nice and the yarn is very soft. Barb may be putting together kits of yarn and pattern and could certainly advise on what yarn would work well from her current stock.

I really like the Faroese style shawl because the shape stays on the shoulders nicely. But I have made no attempt to design an authentic version. In fact, the authentic versions are usually very plain knit from thicker yarns because they are meant for everyday wear. My version was designed as a special occasion shawl. It was also designed for a child, a child who is now 4′6" but a child nevertheless. It would make a nice shoulder shawl for an adult women, particularly someone who is in a smaller size range. It might also be good for a teen’s graduation.

I hope you like it. I welcome any comments on the pattern and would love to see pictures of it if you choose to knit it.

I went to Chicago for a fundraising party and board meeting of the Alternatives to Marriage Project and decided to add a couple of days either side to see the city while I was there. I stayed in a very nice B&B on the north side of the city, close to my meeting. The neighbourhood was really nice. Folks said “Hi.” as they passed on the street. There were nice restauarants and shops nearby.

I took the El into the city and saw some of what’s to see in Chicago. I spent most of the day on Saturday in the Art Institute of Chicago and saw some miniscule portion of what they have in there. Since we have been learning about Impressionist and Post-Impressionist art, I spent time in their impressive collection. I also considered going to the special exhibition, “From Cezanne to Picasso”, but the time spent lining up to get in seemed like a waste. Instead, I looked at some of the 20th century American art.

I’ve never been good at art galleries, never having learned much about art. I have had to figure out how to be in an art gallery; what I am looking at and why. I think I’m catching on. I really enjoyed many of the paintings and was able to determine what I liked about some over others. For example, the Georgia O’Keefe paintings I enjoy the most use a very limited pallette of colours. I am impressed by what she can do within those limits that she has set herself. When I am with Tigger, we often bring pastels and a sketch pad. I had forgotten to pack these supplies but I think that would have added something to the visit. Of course if you spend time really looking at some of the work, you don’t see as many things. But what you see, you see in more depth.

While I was waiting to get into the Art Institute, I bought the local street paper from a vendor. I was pleasantly surprised to find out from it that an exhibition of Niki de Saint Phalle sculptures had opened the previous day in the Garfield Park Conservatory. I had discovered de Saint Phalle about 10 years ago at an exhibition in Glasgow and really love her work. These sculptures are amazing and joyful and suit this setting very well. I urge any of you who are in Chicago (or planning a visit there while the exhibition is on) to go and have a look. They are also very kid friendly as many can be touched or even climbed on. For jazz lovers, there will be a concert in the park on July 20th.

Needless to say, to make up for having seen all these things on my own, I spent a bit of money on books so that Tigger could share at least some of the wonder at these art works from home.

The other thing Chicago is known for is architecture. Even someone who knows as little about architecture as I do is aware of that in some vague sense. Well, thankfully, they also have the Chicago Architecture Foundation. These folks train volunteer docents in the architectural history of the city and then provide tours for those of us who are interested but not so knowledgeable. There was quite a menu to choose from but I only really had time for one so I did a walking tour of Historic Skyscrapers. Very interesting and informative.

As I was looking for those links, I came across this curriculum resource for grades K-8. If I lived in Chicago, I might be tempted to take a closer look at that.

I also walked around the downtown a bit and looked at some of the public art, including a sculpture by Picasso, another by Miro, and a mosaic by Chagall. There is lots more. I only saw a few. This city clearly values things like public art.

But it wasn’t all high culture and tourism. I also met up with the lovely Kim and her family for dinner and a very funny play. It is always a bit strange meeting someone in person who you only know on line. But my experiences to date have all be positive. We had a fun evening. I got her daughter to recommend books that she liked so I could recommend them to Tigger. We chatted and ate good food and generally had a great time. (Thanks, Kim.)

Oh, and I knit. Socks. On the train (and bus) mostly. I had barely started the toe of the second sock when I got there and am now a couple of inches up the leg. It was about 30 minutes on the train into downtown from where I was staying.

Thanks for the birthday wishes. I did have a good day with 2 dinner invitations (one a noon and one for supper). I was absolutely stuffed by the end of the day but it was good to spend it in good company.

I’m still in that recovering from being away mode and trying to work out what I should be doing or what we are doing or something. I’ll get back to posting soon. Possibly with knitting news.