Synthesis Essay
Despite the long-time existence and development of science, a large proportion of the world population discredits scientific concepts and proof of life (Simis, Haley Madden, Michael, and Sara 401). Based on the deficit model, scientific knowledge remains inadequate in the society of non-believers. Seemingly, public ignorance towards technology and science results in the knowledge gap witnessed in prior and contemporary communities. However, attempts deployed to energize the adoption of science in the lives of people remain ineffective to date. It is relevant to unravel the impediments incurred by the scientist community that degrades science in society.
My social movement integrates the scientific explanation of the existence of the natural phenomenon in the world with societal, cultural beliefs. Most of the social movements devise techniques of social relationships to engage human understanding in society (Epstein 409). By endorsing the traditional models on the knowledge that relates to science in the communities, an elaborate and simple understanding ensues. My essay demonstrates why the deficit model is an inadequate concept for explaining public skepticism and hostility towards science in the context of a social movement.
Summary of the deficit model
The deficit model demonstrates inadequate information within the society as a motivating factor for the negative attitude build by the public towards science (Simis et al. 401). The shortfall of the concepts implies misunderstandings, controversies, and lack of interest by a large percentage of the world population. However, the theory recommends information transfer from the professionals to the public through science communication. Through the concept delivery approach, it is easy to teach scientific knowledge and lure people’s attention toward science-based courses. Science communication posits that misconception of scientific ideologies in the public domain leads to the underdevelopment of the science sector.
Three factors the deficit model fails to account when communicating scientific knowledge
- Irrational thinking in society
In addressing the inadequate experience in the public domain, science communication assumes the existence of different credibility for the scientific concepts (Simis et al. 401). According to the rational theory applied by scientists, the human population has the same reasoning for scientific knowledge. The basis of knowledge acquisition and transfer is, therefore, objective and ignorant of the changes realized during experimental approaches. As a result, science experts fail to explain to the public the contemporary questions that arise from the community. It is impossible to introduce scientific concepts to the public with suspicion of the intended knowledge mastery. Therefore, the public continues to hold mistrust and inadequate scientific explanation on the real science concepts, as illustrated below.
AIDs activists successfully engage the public in understanding the scientific concepts by modifying the underlying experimental approaches to accommodate society (Epstein 409). Notably, the social movement strives to bridge the knowledge difference between the non-believers and the experts in the department. Irrespective of the professional norms, the campaign involves the community in the clinical and study procedures to affirm the underlying medical concepts. It is irrelevant to proclaim the efficiency of scientific knowledge in the absence of evidence. Knowledge communication should divert its understanding from the preexisting community theories and application before incorporating the factual concepts. As a result, AIDS activism brings the public close and lures them towards understanding.
According to the behaviour of the scientist within the laboratory framework, all experts should possess the same line of thinking. The procedures remain functional from the initial to the final steps. Scientists ignore the controversial observation and result gathered from research institutes across the globe. The notion of rational thinking reduces the population of followers and experts with injunctions towards scientific concepts.
- Formal communication
Even though scientists receive a variety of knowledge on the scientific approaches, inadequate communication skills dominate their procedures and interaction with the public (Simis et al. 403). The professionals practice subjective reasoning while communicating with other groups of participants in the field, a condition that eliminates diversity in the research findings. Surprisingly, the laboratory procedures are preformatted to affirm an underlying scientific knowledge that would otherwise not require experimentation. Seemingly, the experts do not receive formal learning and communication skills necessary for the development of scientific knowledge. Therefore, resolving public ignorance and skepticism on scientific knowledge through science communication proves inappropriate in society. The following examples demonstrate the informal communication factor.
First, leakage of information transferred among scientific climate researchers demonstrates subjective reasoning in generating data (Ryghaug & Skjølsvold 288). Even though the incidence remains unethical, most of the data disbursed to the public social media do not reflect the experimental construction of information. According to social activists, the data indicates an alteration criterion endorsed by the experts to suit the anticipated climatic pattern. However, the conversations should capture the techniques and the procedures for determining the change of climatic aspects in the space. Furthermore, research institutes and laboratories rely on subjective processes with preformed findings that ignore other relevant evidence-based versions.
Second, a study that involved physicists captures predefined knowledge instead of public information that appears in the findings (Ryghaug & Skjølsvold 290). It is unproductive for a scientist to sideline the concepts and results from another researcher in anticipation of quality findings. Ignorance of similar but slightly different findings negates the scientific role of investigation. Ineffective communication criteria to engage proper understanding of scientific concepts scares away public trust and involvement in science.
- Exclusion of the other research bodies by scientist communities
Surprisingly, scientists reject and even remain silent on the information relayed in public by non-scientist communities (Simis et al. 405). Scientists possess a general understanding of the public as a clueless body of individuals under the title ‘others.’ Insignificantly, the researchers believe in the public awareness of meaningful scientific concepts across different disciplines. Based on exclusivity notion, a large population of individuals with segments of scientific knowledge ignores science forums. Integration of the society-based ideas and informed scientific knowledge provides a broad base for the growth and development of science. The approach fails in enticing the public towards science, as demonstrated below.
In the first example, Ufologists notion on the existence of objects from the space penetrate society with no effort from the scientists to clarify (Eghigian 613). According to activists, the professionals discredit the unique-masses claims as non-evidential suggestions with no scientific proof. However, the experts isolate themselves from the public understanding leaving the task to others in society. The deal seems influential on the side of ufologists to carry on with the gospel to the entire human population. Surprisingly, the social movement has excellently reached the public domain through social media awareness strategies as opposed to the academicians.
Second, women’s movement activists considered carrying out research ignored by the medicine manufacturers and the state authorities to understand the women (Tuana 4). According to Arditti, scientists have ignored the effect and impact of contraceptives on the male population. However, making a rational decision calls for experimentation on either side of sex. It is irrelevant to draw biased conclusions on the importance of artificial birth controls with innovations on the women alone. The claims that arise from the females could substantially reduce by embracing alternatives. Though not successful, the intervention policy projected by the social activist demonstrates why the deficit model fails to enjoin science in society.
In summary, the deficit model fails to address the adoption of science in the world population despite the existence and development of science from the previous centuries. The introduction of science communication does not bear significant changes in the understanding of scientific knowledge and information. Through the social movements, several shortcomings of social interaction suffice in the contemporary world. Ignorance or irrational thinking within the world population by scientists prove detrimental in knowledge acquisition. However, the mode of communication that could internalize the scientific concepts to the public remains informal for the scientists. Besides, the professionals consider themselves unique from the rest of society, a condition that’s keeps away parties with scientific ideas.