Understanding education by experience. Teachers explain what they think is important.
- How many could pass the exam last year?
- it is made of the old school but with a computer.
|
often are cautioned rightly against the familiar syndrome of "boiled frog" (or "nothing happens"), we does remain insensitive to apparent "small changes" ... that accumulate to create a serious situation of irreversible collapse if we do not react in time. The fight against climate change climate and, more generally, against the current situation of planetary emergency, in this syndrome is one of the worst obstacles, it is therefore necessary to insist again and again against the liability arising.
spoken much less, however, another syndrome of opposite but equally negative effects. could call the syndrome of "no use" or, worse, "can not do anything" . It's a feeling that we are assaulted each time addressing the serious problems facing humanity, our actions, our efforts do not give the desired result. We are mobilized in 2009, for example, pressure on political leaders in order to reach the necessary Copenhagen fair and binding agreement to reduce greenhouse gases and the result was disappointing. No wonder many bitterly exclaim "can not do anything." And the small steps, such as those achieved in Cancun next year, are as far as necessary, re-affirm "no avail".
Is it really so? Do not be happening as in the case of the boiled frog syndrome, but in reverse? Did not work with an insistent, unavailable to the "no good" that generated repeated failures, as was finally the ban on Freon destroying the ozone layer? One suspects that we are underestimating the "small" advances rather than continue to insist until achieving the required cumulative effect. Both
thinking here "nothing happens", as believing that the situation is so bad that "you can not do anything," lead to passivity and we can condemn the social and environmental collapse. Both syndromes have to be fought. But what does this have to do with the International Year of Chemistry? Some history, ie some perspective, will help us understand.
year 2005, launched the Decade of Education for a future and so stenible was also the International Year of Physics (IDA) , coinciding with the centennial of the call "Annus Mirabilis" in which Albert Einstein published several works that have profoundly influenced modern physics. The fundamental objective of the IDA was "bring science to society and motivate young people to build the next generation scientists ". Neither in its call or its development was reference to the decade or socio-environmental problems and the need and possibility of the contribution of physics to solve them.
Now six years after the convening of the International Year Chemistry (AIQ) , coinciding with the centenary of the Nobel Prize awarded to Marie Curie for their contributions to chemistry, has very different characteristics. It's not just a matter of "increasing public appreciation of chemistry as a key tool to meet the needs of society, to promote interest in chemistry among young people, and generate enthusiasm by the creative future of chemistry ". The commemoration is intended to "emphasize the chemical contribution to sustainability", ie "to solving global problems and essential humanity, such as climate change, food, water, health, energy transportation. "
|
Moreover, the call has been an occasion for self reflection, to appeal to the scientific community to an assumption of ethical responsibility involved in research, innovation and education in the field of chemistry. As stated Irina Bokova, Director General of UNESCO, "The responsible development and rational use of chemistry are essential to meet the challenges of today: how to feed a population which increases each year, how to improve your health and how to develop sustainably. The International Year of Chemistry should provide us an opportunity to reflect deeply on these issues, "adding: " We have to relearn how to responsibly use the immense possibilities offered by the chemistry with the aim of preserving and life-changing for the common good. "
As we see, the differences between the International Year of Physics (2005) and the Chemistry (2011) reflect a significant change in the scientific community in regard to the focus on the emergency planet. This evolution is reflected in all the proposed green chemistry as a contribution to a truly sustainable development, a Green Economy , Ban Ki-Moon, UN Secretary General has described as "The Great Machine green jobs boost is necessary and possible. Nothing
allow us then to continue saying "no good, you can not do anything." On the contrary, a minimal approach shows the validity of informed activism and the need to continue efforts as scientists, educators and citizens. The International Year of Chemistry " incorporate deserves the title of "Green." It deserves to culminate next December with the signing of the protocol in Durban for the reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases already foreshadowed in Cancun. If we break with ignorance and indifference ("nothing happens") and discouragement ("no good") together we can achieve.
.
Educators for sustainability
Bulletin No. 61, February 24, 2011
http://www.oei.es/decada/boletin061.php
Article published by Miguel Angel Alario by the chemical Mexico Prize for Science and Technology 2009 "Knowledge and research provide a self-sufficient nations to add value in different areas which contribute to their social, cultural and economic." in the La Jornada, January 24, 2011.
C ity of Mexico. A country supporting science is able to obtain economic gains of up to a kilo of sand. The development of knowledge and research to provide self-sufficient nations to add value in different areas which contribute to their social, cultural and economic.
English scientist and Miguel Angel Alario Franco, professor Faculty of Chemistry, University Complutense of Madrid, for whom education and science must be a State policy irrespective of parties, personalities and ideologies that rule. A country without science is a country without influence, synthesizes.
On 14 January, Franco Alario and Mexico was awarded the Science and Technology 2009, that gave the Mexican government for his contributions in the chemistry world.
Based on an example relating to discipline, argues that its premise: "All nations of the world are rich in silicon, there is one that does not have because this element is in the earth beneath our feet. If you go to camp and get a kilo of sand, it does not cost anything. However, if the process to obtain pure, crystalline silicon, necessary for the operation of transistors and circuits, a kilo of this material can cost up to $ 50 000. That's added value. "
In an interview with La Jornada says that it is incredible that Mexico exports oil and import gasoline: Your country should be exporting the fuel, he said. Counterpart located in Brazil as an example to follow in Latin America in promoting scientific and technological research.
Current president of the Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain, and Franco Alario is a global pioneer in the study of solid state chemistry and development of new superconducting materials synthesized under high temperatures and pressures.
His work has been widely recognized, among others received the 1984 Prize of the Royal Academy of Sciences of his native country and in 1996 the Medal of Honor of the English Royal Society of Chemistry.
The researcher believes that a scientific societies should also be recognized a pop singer or a football player. And even goes further by asserting that social scientists should know that Antoine Lavoisier is the father of modern chemistry and the hard scientists know that Miguel de Cervantes is the author of Don Quixote.
- Why do scientists insist so much on economic investment in science?
-is essential. Must be a State policy. This is not a project of a political party, left or right. When a ruler the drives, and then ends his term, he relieve him to continue treatment because there is no development without science.
advanced countries, which form the first dozen, have enormous scientific development that then used. Some believe that there are two types of science: pure and applied. I would not define it as applied science and have not applied because they end up applying. Any scientific discovery eventually used, although we now realize. The development of a country is measured by the value added generated from knowledge.
- Do you see interest among governments to support these items?
-Japan, U.S., Germany, South Korea, Singapore, Finland, do research, apply and gain added value. Their policy is fully supported.
"But when I speak of a state strategy I refer to two sectors: the public and business. The first consists of universities and research centers and the support they should receive from the government. Although it can not cover everything, is also investing in roads and social programs.
So you have to specify in the private sector because science companies benefit. A crucial step for a country to be advanced is that entrepreneurs make real investments in this area and these are not a disguise to evade taxes.
- What work has to play the State to encourage entrepreneurs to invest in science?
"In principle taught in basic education. From an early age that has clear relevance to the development of the nation.
must also have a major public research system and favor companies that produce knowledge and hire scientists. But it takes seriously: if a company that manufactures screws, his research should be directed to solving problems related to this product is not put scientists to do math.
Latin America should follow in the footsteps of Brazil
Franco Alario and states that it is difficult for small and medium enterprises have to install credit research. It therefore proposes that a number of working collaboratively to achieve funding scientific research to help them resolve problems connected with their production.
- What are the emerging nations that stand out internationally in scientific development?
-India is impressive and, of course, China. In 10 years we will go to the street and almost all development and technology will be Chinese. In Latin America, Brazil is the head, rapid development has been enormous, is betting on research and has a long way to go. That is the way forward in the region.
- What is the difference between Brazil and the rest of the region?
-Its rulers. The two former presidents, Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, believed and invested in science, development and distribution of wealth. The latter can not be solely in the hands of four, although there are four rich people can not have both and the rest of the population has nothing. This distribution is important social and economic development of nations.
- How should a country spend on science and technology?
"The figure varies from nation to nation. But at least 2 percent of GDP, divided equally between government and business. In Mexico is much lower, barely 0.5 percent of this indicator, in Spain are at 1.2 and complain, Japan reaches 3 percent.
- What is the perception from Europe Mexican science?
"That is very good research groups, but insufficient. Some even at levels similar to European and U.S. scientists.
-In 2011 marks the International Year of Chemistry. What relevance does this have for the advancement of the discipline so often stigmatized?
-The relevance of see the end of the year. It is important to the idea of \u200b\u200bUNESCO. There has been international years of physics, mathematics or astronomy. It is good that the company sees that a year is devoted to discipline, but from my perspective I think it would be better than all the years devoted to each subject a little.
http://www.vanguardia.com.mx/unpaissinciencianopuedeserinfluyentemiguelangelalario-638030.html