Being a Science and Global Change Scholar has done much more than help me plan for resilience in a future of global change. It has given me many new sets of tools to be able to fend for myself in an age filled with pseudoscience and political turmoil. But, I digress…
I had to employ the hypothetico-deductive method of science in nearly all my classes, but I will talk about one specific class for now. In my animal behavior class, we had to really adhere to the scientific study of animals rather than making assumptions because animals cannot tell us why they are doing certain things and for what reason. In one example, we observed that meerkats perform a sentinel behavior. That got us thinking and we posed the question: Why do they take turns? We submitted three hypotheses: (1) it saves family members, (2) reciprocal altruism, (3) egoism. The professor then asked us how we could potentially design experiments to test these hypotheses. Being equipped with knowing how to properly use the scientific method from SGC, not only could I easily think of experiments, but I could recognize that these were actually falsifiable and testable hypotheses. For the first hypothesis, it was found that if you observed which members of the group stand guard and when, immigrants and members with relatives nearby are equally likely to act as sentinels. This means that we reject the first hypothesis. For the second hypothesis, our experiment was to observe whether there is a regular rotation and if cheaters are punished. What was found is actually that if some members reduce their guarding time, then others increase their own contributions. This falsifies the second hypothesis. To test the third hypothesis, we observe if sentinel behavior increases the personal safety and that having a warning call is not costly. The finds are: no sentinels are attacked or killed, solitary animals also stand guard, animals are more likely to stand after eating, and animals are more likely to go on guard duty if there is no other guard. As a result, we fail to reject the third hypothesis. Some others in the class had a hard time coming up with valid experiments, which made me realize how valuable it is to have SGC strongly emphasize using the hypothetico-deductive method. Plus, it's a lot of fun imagining your own experiments.
In terms of me encountering failures of critical thinking skills as a college student, so far there have been numerous examples. One example would be in the discussion section of my philosophy class. Each week we are supposed to think about a possible real world solution or intervention to the problem we discussed in class. I quickly realized that everything I said would be torn apart and scrutinized. In discussion I was asked questions about the assumptions I made. In my papers, the professor pointed out every line that lacked evidence supporting it. I suppose this would be very similar to how a scientist feels when their paper goes under peer review. It turns out that it is much more difficult to recognize my own failures of critical thinking skill as opposed to recognizing it in others--a problem of self-introspection, as my philosophy professor would have said.
My supporting classes for the program did not focus much on global change, but it did continue to demonstrate the importance of the scientific method and how it led to things that we now cannot live without. In BSCI170, I was reminded that making observations and testing hypotheses after seeing a lack of bacteria around mold in a petri dish led to the development of penicillin, an antibiotic that forever changed the medical field. In PSYC200 we learned statistics and ways that the media manipulates them to convey the things that they want to. For example, if there is already a great drug that is used to treat an illness, then a drug being developed should not be better than a placebo, but it should be tested to see if it is better than the current drug on the market!
Because my freshman year was online due to COVID-19, I did not interact as much with my fellow SGC Scholars as I would have liked. We only have a limited time in class, and it was pretty difficult to meet up with each other outside of class. When I was accepted into the scholars program, the community was what excited me the most. However, circumstances greatly hindered this living-learning community. With the interaction that I had in class, I did have a lot of fun, especially with those who were very engaged in the class. I wish I was better friends with some of my fellow Scholars. Our interactions aided in learning since we could bounce ideas off of each other. I personally felt like everyone around me was extra valuable to my learning experience because most Scholars seem to be STEM majors, whereas I am a humanities major. Being around these people helped me get a variety of perspectives.
With respect to our in class activities and assignments, I contributed a lot. Especially in the first semester, I was awed by the connections that the SGC program made with my other classes. I was curious and asked a lot of questions and I enjoyed participating in class. Lecture content was on such novel, yet relevant topics. I was hooked. (Also Dr. Holtz and Dr. Merck are very kind and charismatic.) Again, due to the pandemic, I was unable to immerse myself in more on-site activities. I really wished that I could have gone on more field trips and really gotten more personal with my fellow Scholars and also with my professors. However, I did sign up for the Arizona trip, which I am crossing my fingers for, in hopes that it does not get canceled. I am really excited for that and I am envious of past scholars who had a bunch more field trip opportunities than me.
Being in Scholars did not bring into contact people or concepts that challenged my previous beliefs or opinions, per say, but rather increased my awareness of these phenomena that were already occurring. Content-wise, I got a much better grasp at what climate change really means on a historical, global, and anthropogenic level. It is not just having weird temperatures in Maryland, but a much more complex global security issue that should be seriously considered in policy making. A change that I see in myself is that because I am equipped with ample knowledge on this topic, I feel an urge of wanting to educate others about this problem. Most people do not recognize the true consequences behind a few degrees of temperature. I feel like I can make the most impact by teaching the laypeople (AKA my friends and family) about the real problems we can end up in. This is a serious issue!!
The most valuable lesson that I got from my Scholars experience is that in the future, I really must be skeptical and know how to do my own research. In class, I was often reminded that most people are not equipped with an arsenal of knowledge as college students are. When I interacted with people outside of the college campus, or sometimes even with non-students on campus, I realized that many MANY people fail to think logically and make extremely faulty arguments. Before and during the first year of this program, I was always frustrated with these people. I blamed them for being “stupid” and I hated when I felt like they were arguing against me and could not see sense. A few months back, at around the beginning of my sophomore semester, I realized that these people are not being difficult on purpose. Instead, I am lucky to be educated enough that I can make informed decisions and truly understand what I want to believe in. Most people lack this skill and it is actually very sad that they can be easily brainwashed. This is particularly troublesome in our current state of affairs with political, religious, and numerous other agendas constantly being thrown in our faces. I am extremely grateful that I was made aware of this explicitly and given tools to combat misinformation and pseudoscience. I must carry this scientific skepticism to inform all walks of my future.