Taking stock of young people's outlook on science and technology

Earlier this month the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and l’Association canadienne-française pour l’avancement des sciences (ACFAS) convened a national conversation to discuss the results of a survey of young people’s attitudes toward science. The on-line event examined the general findings, then broke the discussion into three distinct streams, which considered science literacy and scientific culture, scientific communication and public trust, and science and technology skills.

“We thought that we would look, not just back at what we’ve done, but ahead, at what the next generation will do and will need to do, and the challenges they face,” said CFI President and CEO Roseann O’Reilly Runte.

She introduced the survey, which was conducted in October 2021, when the polling firm Ipsos Canada contacted 1,500 individuals across the country between the ages of 18 and 24. Ipsos Senior Vice-President Sebastien Dallaire outlined the findings, which organized respondents into five distinct segments, based on their attitudes toward science. These attitudes ranged from an enthusiastic promotion of science, along with defending its principles at every opportunity, to ignoring or even mistrusting science, with little attendant interest in what science can mean to our lives. Each of these categories was matched with a recommendation for science-oriented organizations such as CFI or ACFAS, which would indicate the best way to reach out to members of each segment to build a positive outlook on their work.

A ”messy environment”

Dallaire underscored the significance of social media, whose influence on young people’s outlooks overshadowed any other form of communication. Almost three-quarters of the group used social media daily and more than half of those spent at least four hours interacting with these platforms, especially Instagram and YouTube. The profound influence of social media would echo throughout the proceedings, which considered how individuals less familiar with these communication platforms could nevertheless use them to reach younger audiences.

Eric Meslin, President and CEO of the Council of Canadian Academies, dwelt on this “huge and obvious point”, which defines Canadian youth as a different community than older parts of the population. They were, he argued, “raised on the Internet” and “born with a tablet in their hand”. And the extraordinarily varied information landscape of social media should be a constant reminder of how this generation regards facts and knowledge. “It’s quite a messy environment,” he concluded.

Breakout sessions grappled with that messiness. Anna Blakeney, Assistant Professor, Michael Smith Laboratories and School of Biomedical Engineering, University of British Columbia, described her own use of social media to engage young people in discussions of the scientific topics that make up her work. Few of her colleagues do likewise, she pointed out, since it can be daunting to think of how amateurish and foolish one’s efforts might appear on-line. At the same time, she insisted, taking that risk conveys as sense of vulnerability and authenticity that can win over social media users.

Overcoming misinformation and mistrust

Others regarded such an on-line presence as essential to building the trust necessary to educate students about the value of science or convey its impact on our society, politics, or economy. Timothy Caulfield, Professor, Health Law Institute, University of Alberta, noted that the lack of such trust has seriously destabilized the public life of entire countries, most notably the United States.

“Misinformation is killing people,” he said, speaking literally about how the resulting mistrust of American health authorities is actually eroding life expectancy in that country. “It is having an incredibly adverse impact on public discourse and our democracy.”

Social media is not entirely responsible for this problem, he added, where individuals find themselves gravitating to “echo chambers” that cater to a narrow range of information and opinions. He suggested that critical thinking skills could counter this tendency and recommended that these be taught to students as part of a dedicated educational initiative.

“There are some jurisdictions, Scandinavian countries, that do this very early, as early as kindergarten,” he said. “This is not, as I’m sure critics will say, ideologically motivated. This is teaching neutral thinking skills that can be deployed throughout a lifetime, and that is becoming so essential in our current information environment.”

As the deliberations of the break-out sessions were being presented at a final plenary, Runte returned to the original challenge, which she maintained had less to do with technology than with the way people interact with technology. By way of example, she pointed to the ever-changing suite of technical skills that young people are asked to acquire for various jobs.

“No matter what those skills end up being, we are moving increasingly, in order to be successful, to a model where educators and employers and governments need to work collaboratively,” she said. “And collaboration is hard work.”

Nor should those skills remain in academic settings, such as university laboratories. John Munro, President of the BC Association of Science Teachers, maintained that young people should appreciate the potential of science and technology to improve the lives of all Canadians.

“We want them to think about what really matters,” he concluded. “Science can be a pathway to fixing real things. I don’t want it to stop at plants and caterpillars.”

Calls to Action

The National Conversation on Youth and Science arrived at the following series of calls to action, based on the exchanges in the event’s break-out sessions.

On science literacy and education:

• Adapt curricula to included “open-ended” activities, such as experiments that do not have predictable outcomes, which force teachers and students to engage in the challenging task of interpreting less-than-perfect results.
• Present science as a way of actively engaging with the world — solving practical problems in our day-to-day lives — as opposed to a more academic pursuit that merely observes what is happening around us.
• Interested parties in the public and private sector should become allied with teachers, rather than simply off-loading high expectations on these individuals and expecting them to act alone.

On science communication:

• On controversial matters such as climate change, reach out to audiences in ways that promote empathy and dialogue, rather than simply throwing more information at them to defend a particular perspective.
• Members of the scientific community should not be afraid of appearing vulnerable, perhaps by acknowledging the limits of their understanding of complex topics, as a way of building trust with audiences.
• Look beyond the narrow cultural lens promoted by Western, English-language media, to consider a wider array of viewpoints.

On science and technology skills:

• Experiential learning is essential, both for individuals seeking to acquire new skills as well as organizations that want to integrate the contributions of those individuals.
• Make STEM attractive as a fully fledged career path, not just as an educational ambition.
• Highlight diversity within STEM, as a way of encouraging individuals from diverse backgrounds to enter these fields.

 R$