1. T h i n k i n g o f S c i e n c e … P a g e | 1
“SPOCK” Science Education
“SPOCK” Science Education
- Paul J. Croft
Since the advent of modern social media – specifically in its present virtual and electronic forms – it is
quite evident that the very manner, delivery, assessment, and role of Science Education have changed.
To be sure this has been beneficial. Yet does it do justice to the process of learning? Does it provide the
deep learning essential to understanding Science? Does it serve society? Because of these changes the
education process in Science itself has continued to quickly morph into one that fully encompasses and
incorporates with the “basics” all of the Societal, Political, Operational, and Clinical aspects of our
media-driven culture that literally present us with a Kaleidoscope of information, knowledge,
perspectives, and interpretations (or a “SPOCK-like” perspective) on any subject matter of interest –
including Science.
While the modern social media represents an exciting opportunity, it is clear that there are a variety of
perils associated with the social media revolution when applied to Science and to Science Education. In
the best case, there are contradictory answers and dilemmas amid myriad facts and figures; in the worst
case Science is considered to be mere conjecture or theory that changes with each news cycle or some
specific insight or new study that goes viral (e.g., "eggs or coffee or some other item are good, they are
bad, they are good again but it depends on the details"). In these types of circumstances the online
media presence of scientific information and pseudo-scientific information can act to dissuade teachers
from being true practitioners of Science and can create a culture of Science that is driven by consensus
opinion or simply suspicion of Science itself.

2. T h i n k i n g o f S c i e n c e … P a g e | 2
“SPOCK” Science Education
In the “Star Trek” Universe these situations would likely lead the character of Spock to question human
emotions and motives relative to the logic of the situation and the established facts and measurements.
He would see this as a counterproductive struggle in space and time that was unnecessary – one driven
by identifying only differences and discontinuities rather than inter-dependencies, diversity, and
interaction. By extension, it suggests that a population of learners may see the need to pay for or to
know or learn Science – particularly when it is available at the click of an icon – as unnecessary. Who
needs to know Science when a futuristic “tricorder” scan, or contemporary cell phone query, or any
other black-box device or information source can provide all the answers without the need for real or
detailed understanding?
Yet to suggest that this is simply be a matter of relativism or ‘bad karma’ would be both restrictive and
unfair to both sides of the Science Education Paradigm. Indeed, such an approach when applied across
the globe might for instance suggest that the study of climate and climate change is merely a philosophy
or a personal belief system rather than something postulated, tested, and examined with analytic
techniques to make deductions, and a few conclusions, in order to determine appropriate courses of
action or inaction.
Fundamentally this has been
the case for several decades
with regard to global change
such that considerable public
debate continues. But Science
Education is not merely about a
collection of facts and figures, is
it? If it is, then is not the study
of history reduced to mere
dates and names or certain
events in time?
Certainly not…even Spock
knew the significance of
historical perspective and
metadata related to the
present moment – and when
using Science – in order to craft
appropriate as well as robust
answers and solutions…
How then is Science Education renewed or strengthened in the modern social media climate? If we
embrace the process of Science Education from a “SPOCK-like perspective” we provide a more fluid and
meaningful Science Education experience with global, if not universal, appeal and benefits. Such an
approach does not negate the Scientific Process nor does it condone Science as a “belief” system; it
manages data and information as it relates to society and asks questions that cross the thresholds of
each. It is not merely a battle between pure logic and our emotions or desires, it is more correctly an

3. T h i n k i n g o f S c i e n c e … P a g e | 3
“SPOCK” Science Education
understanding of our desire and capacity to learn from Science, apply it to address our needs and the
advantages it can provide; and to offer benefits to society with limited costs and drawbacks – even if our
understanding is limited by nature or a lack of Science Education.
Indeed in a digital online world that Spock would have “loved”; one driven by both instantaneous
communications and access to data and a multiple spectra of answers (e.g., some biased, some in error,
and others a matter of perspective or preference), it is
more difficult to provide definitive or robust solutions
that are ‘acceptable’ to the public. In this sort of
scenario it is often posited that the answers will always
be completely unique and fully dependent upon the
conditions measured (or metadata observed; similar to
arguments regarding circumstantial evidence in a court
of law) and thus do not allow any of the
conceptualization that is necessary to establish basic
rules and premises (or semantics) for the subject
matter at-hand. In fact, such an argument denies the
relevance of historical information in any discipline and
its relevance to society. Would a medical doctor ignore
your past or most recent medical history when treating
you? There is both worth and something to be said
about context, no?
Science and Science Education are about quantification and logic – the numbers, the averages and the
extremes of a set of data – and how these allow for the portrayal of physical processes, relationships,
and the very mechanisms that drive the world around us in a fairly logical manner according to basic
deterministic laws. In the context above, numbers would be reduced to merely “old information” with
little or no relationship to the present system or process of interest.
Although it may sound absurd, this loss of such historical context suggests a brand-new and unique
event every time – and that represents a dead-end in terms of Science and logic in the Science
Education universe. It is like “bad journalism” that reports without context, background, or
consideration of what may be considered normal versus unusual and rare (and thus makes it
impossible to consider the role of chaos and non-linear behaviors in specific or unique circumstances,
especially when all events are then deemed to be chaotic and unusual or rare). This metadata allows
building not strictly of consensus, but building of connections and pathways for deeper and new
knowledge and applications.
The solution therefore is not merely to impose clinical data sets that purport to be a series of rules to
apply to select situations; the answer is to take advantage of both as Spock would in the “Star Trek”
Universe in order to distinguish the interactions and relationships between complex and seemingly
competing (or in some cases seemingly unrelated) interests to devise appropriate and timely solutions
to real-time problems – or future scenarios. In fact, they are not competing interests at all – they are
interdependent systems that merge our capacity to learn and use Science through exploration with a
detailed care and nurturing that considers societal synergies, restrictions, and expectations – for these
too are part of Science and our learning experience.

4. T h i n k i n g o f S c i e n c e … P a g e | 4
“SPOCK” Science Education
This approach allows Science Education and application to be well-informed and to be more meaningful
to students with a logic and compatibility related to economic and resource pressures that can include
parity for societal, political, and operational points of view without being too clinical – or too inhuman.
Perhaps it is not unlike being half-Human and half-Vulcan. Used in a globally diverse framework, such a
perspective takes the Kaleidoscope of information, knowledge, perspectives, and interpretations (the
“SPOCK-like perspective” of Science Education) for any subject matter. It evolves forward by taking
advantage of the rich cultural and scientific diversity that is available from around the world – virtual or
not – from our natural world and the world that is driven by socioeconomic and political gyrations.
This balances Science with an inherently emotional world to provide for the best practical answers to be
applied in a flawed human world so that we may actually “live long and prosper” through meaningful
and “living” Science Education. Logic does not have to be “a wreath of
pretty flowers that smell bad” and we should not consider Science as
something in which we have to make a “choice not to feel” or which
may seem to be a matter of us “not caring” when we engage in the
world through Science.
There’s nothing wrong with balancing drawn-out academic debates
and databases with shouted wants and desires. It is about the reality
of the present and future moments that require our SPOCK-like
approach and perspective. Spock would approve, don’t you think?
Affirmative.