216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part I)

MIT Technology Review by David Ewing Duncan | Feb. 22, 2007 (Special Report)
The good news: America's science literacy rate is up from a pathetic 10 percent in 1988. The bad news: it's still only 28 percent.

Okay, now let's talk (dare I say rant?) about the 200 million Americans out there who cannot read a simple story in, say, Technology Review or the New York Times science section and understand even the basics of DNA or microchips or global warming.

This level of science illiteracy may explain why over 40 percent of Americans do not believe in evolution and about 20 percent, when asked if the earth orbits the sun or vice versa, say it's the sun ... Full Story »

Posted by Kaizar Campwala

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: Sci/Tech, Education
Topics: Science, Lifelong Learning
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Kaizar Campwala - Feb 22, 2007 - 9:24 AM PST
Reviewed by: Kaizar Campwala (review), Scott McGraw (review), Paul-André Raymond (review), CJ Livingston (review)
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Kaizar Campwala - Feb 22, 2007 - 10:03 AM PST

Reviews

Show All Comments
Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Paul-André Raymond
2.9
 by Paul-André Raymond - Oct. 1, 2008

I have an uneasy feeling about this story. The numbers do not seem right to me. It is hard to tell if I misunderstand what the mesures are or if they are from a bad source. For instance, a jump from 10 to 28 percent seems ENORMOUS to me and would diserve a better explanation than what the author gives. The comment that European and Japanese rate lower is also a surprise to me given the multiple stories I have read in the past that gives them high scores in math (but is Math science?). Also, the author fails to put this in context of what we can expect people to be capable of in general, only 28 percent can read a science story and understand, but how many can read any news paper story and understand.... I think that number is ... More »

See Full Review » (13 answers)
CJ Livingston
3.0
 by CJ Livingston - Oct. 1, 2008
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Kaizar Campwala
4.5
 by Kaizar Campwala - Oct. 1, 2008
Kaizar posted this story.
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Scott McGraw
4.0
 by Scott McGraw - Oct. 1, 2008
See Full Review » (1 answer)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.9

Average
from 4 reviews (40% confidence)
Quality
2.8
Facts
2.0
Fairness
3.0
Information
3.0
Sourcing
3.0
Style
3.0
Accuracy
3.0
Balance
2.0
Context
3.0
Popularity
3.6
Recommendation
3.5
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
3.4
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!