The answer to the title’s question is yes. Normally, textbooks usually connect things that are not too abstract and that have connection with the real world, from childish or primary, with the water cycle, with drought or agriculture, etc., to all types of energy that there are, for example in secondary school. In science textbooks there is almost always a section that is usually called science and society and that is like an addition at the end of each chapter in which that connection with the context is made, with the real world. But I would also tell you that the unique solution for the improvement in science teaching, nor demonize them, should not be sought in textbooks. Textbooks are a resource and, as we all discover during the pandemic, they are a resource to use them teachers and students. That is, they are not to follow them to the letter and that this is the improvement of scientific education. If that were how simple, we would create those books, we would patent them and everyone would have a higher quality scientific education. More information that you should understand is the importance of the intermediary that, in this case, are the teachers. They and they are responsible for connecting the world with the thought of students. There are two things that are important in teachers so that sciences explain well in the classroom. The first is that they do not make spoiler, that is, not tell them the film before any doubt has arisen. I give you an example with which you are going to understand what I mean. If you are explaining what a living being is in the classroom, you can say that a living being is the one that does the vital functions, it is born, grows, reproduces and dies. Or you can say that it is born and feeds. Or something similar. Or you can start with a question that is the trigger for all the doubts that students have: a chickpea just taken from the supermarket bag, is it a living being at that time? That already forces students and students to build the idea of being alive they have. If you ask them the question that you know you will conflict your ideas, you get the trigger to think and interrogate. Then, in the case of chickpea, you can encourage what they consider to be a living being. From there you have to check it. What can be seen? Well, for example, that a living being is one that breathes. And, simply, putting the chickpeas of the bag in co₂ and oxygen sensors, it is proven that, indeed, they breathe. With that they are not going to forget that the criterion of breathing is specific to living beings. And this not only in biology or natural sciences, it is a formula that works in the teaching of all sciences. What happens with textbooks is that, although this appears in the way in which I have told you, if the teacher does not make their students express their ideas, if it does not verify it in the classroom and look for an explanation, it will not get science to reach them. Your students to investigate, get your students to do science. Those of us who dedicate ourselves to science because we loved it, we discover that it is an exciting and fun job because it puts you in contradiction with the ideas you had, it is a collaborative company because you alone or alone cannot do research and, in addition, the communication process is very important. To be a good science professor, students must experience that. Science ‘and Bristol Myers Squibb, who answers readers’ doubts about science and technology. They are scientists and technologists, members of AMIT (Association of Women Researchers and Technologies), who answer those doubts. Send your questions to us, we answer@gmail.com or by x #nos we answer. (Tagstotranslate) Women Science
Do current textbooks include examples of applied science in the real world? | The scientists respond | Science
