Keeping children interested in science is a question of language
As children age, their understanding of science and being a scientist changes. The words that adults use are an essential element to keep them engaged in discovery
One of the most fun parts to be a parent must be to watch the children discover the world around them. After all, children are infinitely curious, and part of the pleasure is to see the wonder on the faces of children while they even discover simple objects and ideas.
“What’s in your hand?” Is it – a ball? Do you think it will drive on this hill? You could say to your toddler, then enjoy the cries of joy as they just explore that.
It is science in action – make an observation, test an idea, see what is happening and then ask the following question.
On the support of scientific journalism
If you appreciate this article, plan to support our award -winning journalism by subscription. By buying a subscription, you help to ensure the future of striking stories about discoveries and ideas that shape our world today.
However, over time, parents can see that their child could be less interested in exploring the world around them and less likely to explore the underlying “why”. In other words, children seem less interested in science. Why does it happen?
Of course, there are a number of different factors at stake, but in research, my colleagues and I have done, which could surprise certain people, is that this loss of interest can come from the subtle language indices that children hear. And linguistic clues do not come from parents only; They can also come via the media they consume or to school that treat science as an identity rather than a process. All children can do science, but over time, they start to think be Asianist as something reserved only for certain types of children.
Here is what we have learned, and here are a few steps that you can take to maintain living curiosity and flowing science.
The typical language that many adults use with children Could be to say: “Let’s be scientists today!” (to promote curiosity) or “You are such a good scientist!” (to rent their child). But this type of language which focuses on science as an identity, rather than a set of activities and actions that people do, can demotivate. For example, Girls (but not boys) as young as four persisted longer When they are written to participate in scientific activities by saying: “Let’s do science” rather than “let’s be scientists”.
The idea here is that By thinking of a scientist, children could think of a man (white). So, if they do not correspond to these identities, they could disengage from an activity designed “for scientists”. Likewise, children might believe that being scientific requires special intellectual capacities –Those they believe that certain groups like men (white) havebut no others.
These stereotypical beliefs according to which science is reserved for certain types of people surprisingly emerges early. In the first year, Girls say they are less interested in computer science and engineering. Perhaps more on the nose, when asked to draw what a scientist looks like, Children tend to attract men, although it has improved over time. These stereotypes have a cumulative effect, so that by high school, girls who are in the 80th centile of scientific capacity (an index of standardized test scores and GPA STEM of the Lycée) equally likely to specialize in some Stem majors As boys in the lowest centile.
The good news is that these subtle linguistic indices can also be used to promote engagement with science in a surprisingly powerful way. Cutting science as actions that we do, for example, protect the interest and motivation of children to engage with science over time. Even Outside the more controlled laboratory parametersStudents whose teachers use more language focusing on action (for example, let’s do science) persistent longer in a new science game compared to students whose teachers used more language focused on identity.
So now you may think: “Great, I’m just going to focus on science and the actions that make up the scientific process!” And this is certainly likely to be effective while children spend childhood in adolescence and the beginning of adulthood. But it is also true that, around adolescence, your children actively try and ultimately form different identities for themselves. Thus, while the language focused on science identity could be demotivating for young children, the language focused on identity can help adolescents remain interested in science. For example, Cueing a future identity (for example, scientist, doctor) which is based on college students motivated by the sciences to do more homeworkand was associated with higher notes. It is perhaps because if adolescents consider themselves scientists, then They are ready to do what it takes to be who they want to become.
In the end, parents want their children to like to learn, explore and understand things for themselves. These activities also happen to be critical elements of the scientific process. Underline these actions when the children are younger could help them persist in tasks or hard lessons. But as children age, acquire experience in these activities and start to train ideas they want to become, emphasizing future identities that depend on science could also be useful for maintaining an interest in science.
The way in which these two versions of the subtle linguistic clues could operate together (or not) is still to be tested, but it may be a science to be done by your future scientist.
This is an article of opinion and analysis, and the points of view expressed by the author or the authors are not necessarily those of American scientific.