Reply to comment

The author of this article, Brian Greene, refers to science as "a language of hope and inspiration." Unfortunately, as Greene mentions, many science classes get caught up in the technicalities and unrelated particulars of the subject and thus end up with a disconnected stream of facts. Like Greene, I would encourage classes to focus more on the "language" of science. Literature classes do not focus solely on parts of speech, but rather look at the text as a whole. This gives the reading meaning (past the sentence structure) and makes it an individual and unique piece. Similarly, science teachers must try to get their students to see the larger picture and appreciate the meaning of science as a language of life and discovery. To return to the language metaphor, it is necessary to learn the basics of a language-- subject, action, and basic grammatical structure-- before reading the works of Shakespeare. However, once the foundations are laid, students are encouraged to read and write and explore the English language. Similarly, it is crucial that students in science classes learn basic elements such as the scientific process, but afterward, they must be allowed to branch out and explore what science has to offer. If students grasp the importance of science, they should be able to apply their new-found language to situations inside and outside of the classroom. Hopefully the student's bilingualism (of English and science) would accomplish what many science teachers have failed to achieve-- a conduit and a tool for looking at the world with a more critical eye.