Freshmen entering the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
campus this year were asked to track how many times in 24 hours
they turned on something electrical or electronic — switched on a
light, made a phone call or turned on the TV, radio, iPod, computer
or some other gadget.
Then they were asked to think about how their lives would be
changed by a one-day, three-day or week-long power outage and how
they would cope if the outage went on for a year or more. How would
you cope in that situation?
Some people around here could say: “Oh, I’d be OK. I have my own
well, septic system, propane and generator.” Very good, but does
your well and furnace work without electricity and what if gasoline
and propane become unavailable? Does your septic system work if you
can’t flush the toilet?
One point of the exercise was to get young people to think
outside the technological box we’ve built for ourselves. Not such a
bad idea for the rest of us either.
Students also were asked to think about how new technology
affects older Americans. Do their grandparents need cell phones
with all the bells and whistles or do they just want to stay in
touch? If the phone comes with 300 pages of instructions and a
magnifying glass to see the buttons, how comfortable will they be
using it?
According to U.S. Census Bureau projections, by 2010 almost 40
percent of the population will be 45 or older. Presbyopia sets in
at about age 40-45. That’s when we start to need bifocals. Also,
generally, our best earning years are between ages 35-55 so it
makes sense for young entrepreneurs, scientists and engineers to
think about the buyers with the most money.
There is a saying that necessity is the mother of invention. If
that’s so, then Mom looks to science for the answers, especially
when it comes to sustainable technologies.
There is an organization called the Program for International
Scholastic Assessment which tests 15 year olds in the United States
and other countries, 57 countries in 2006, on science, math and
reading. There were tests in 2000, 2003 and 2006, each of which has
shown that U.S. students are falling behind students in other
countries.
What’s funny about the test results is that, while American 15
year olds are not scoring as high as many of their international
peers in most subjects, they make up for it in confidence.
It’s a good thing that American children are confident in their
academic abilities. Who wants to quash that? However, maybe if they
and their parents had a more realistic idea of where they stand
among their peers they might work harder to halt the academic
plunge and maybe even reverse it.
The test also found that, while most American children are more
concerned about the environment than other kids, they are less
likely “to have a sense of personal responsibility for sustainable
development.” Also, in almost every country tested, the more kids
know about science the less optimistic they are that it will be
able to solve environmental issues within the next 20 years.
One other thing about science — 90 percent of American kids
agree that science helps them understand the world they live in and
about 70 percent like to learn new things about science. But when
it comes to making science a career, only 45 percent have given it
even a fleeting thought.
Some of us grew up with Sputnik and the Apollo lunar program. If
nothing else, that achievement allows us to say, “If we can put a
man on the moon, why can’t we get our kids interested in
science.”
The students mentioned at the top of this column are the ones
who will be answering to necessity. Just think, maybe the kid we
encourage to go into science will think of a way to get rid of
bifocals that doesn’t involve lasers or lenses.