SUMMING UP: CREATING A SCIENTIFIC TEMPERFOR THE WORLD

A Speech by Bruce Alberts, PresidentNational Academy of Sciences

Presented at the Academy’s 142nd Annual MeetingMay 2, 2005

ome of you may remember that it wasonly with great reluctance that Iagreed to give up my wonderful life ofS

research and teaching at the University ofCalifornia, San Francisco (UCSF), and moveto Washington in 1993 to become yourpresident. I have never regretted that decision,because I have learned a great deal about bothscience and the world over the course of thelast 12 years. Most importantly, I have discov-ered that this institution plays a much moreimportant role in the future of our planet thanI had ever imagined. This importance puts agreat weight of responsibility in the hands ofthe Academy president, a challenge that Iknow Ralph Cicerone, my successor on July1, is admirably prepared to meet.

Let me briefly mention just a few of ourmost recent accomplishments:

Last November, we released our thirdpost-election report designed to advise thenew administration on making the best sci-ence and technology appointments (Figure 1).This time around, a committee chaired byformer Republican Congressman John Portercovered not only the most important presi-dential appointments, but also appointmentsto federal scientific advisory committees. Thisreport has been much discussed around Wash-ington, and it is having a positive effect.

Other reports were much in the news thispast year, such as our Assessment of Options forExtending the Life of the Hubble Space Telescope,a report on the hydrogen economy, a reporton weighing bullet lead evidence in forensicanalysis, a report on air quality management inthe United States, and a report from theInstitute of Medicine on preventing child-hood obesity. These are only a small sample ofthe more than 200 reports that we release andpost on our Web site each year.

In our increasingly competitive world, theAcademy must alsomake sure that thenation is doing every-thing it can to maxi-mize the effectivenessof the science andtechnology enterprisein the United States.In part, this meansensuring that theresources provided bythe U.S. governmentfor research are dis-tributed appropri-ately, with the moneygoing to the mostinnovative and produc-tive scientists. In a

Bruce Alberts, president,

National Academy of Sciences

2

FIGURE 1

recent report, titled Bridges to Independence:Fostering the Independence of New Investigators inBiomedical Research (Figure 1), a committeechaired by Nobelist Tom Cech has made aseries of bold recommendations aimed atreversing a dramatic increase in the age of theindependent investigators supported by theNational Institutes of Health. It turns out thatthe average age for investigators receivingfirst-time independent grants is now 42 years.

This report is only the latest in a seriesof hard-hitting efforts that have helped tokeep the nation moving in the right direction.These include reports on reshaping graduateeducation, on enhancing the postdoctoralexperience, and on facilitating interdiscipli-nary research — not to mention many disci-pline-specific efforts that outline the majorresearch opportunities in a particular field,such as physics.

Science is crucial for policy-making.

The benefits that are derived from scienceextend far beyond the obvious ones —

such as improved medical care, labor-savingmachinery, and our rapidly increasing abilityto store and access knowledge and to commu-nicate with each other. Modern science hasalso provided us with such a deep understand-ing of the natural world that we can oftenpredict what is likely to happen in the future.This predictive ability is what makes scienceso important for policy-makers, and it iscentral to most of our reports.

Why does our system for providing adviceto policy-makers work as well as it does? First,unlike the situation in some other parts of theworld, everyone in the U.S. government, onboth sides of any argument, believes in sci-ence. Second, the press pays close attention toour work. We are often front-page news(Figure 2), as we were on April 27 with ourreport on Guidelines for Human Embryonic StemCell Research. This helps to guarantee that ouradvice has a major impact.

In addition, our review processes removeall non-scientifically based conclusions andrecommendations from our reports, so we

cannot be discredited for goingbeyond the science. I like to useour reports, Climate Change Scienceand Arsenic in Drinking Water, bothpublished in 2001, to make animportant general point. Thesereports do not tell our governmentexactly what it should do aboutcarbon-dioxide emissions or aboutestablishing appropriate limits onarsenic levels. Instead, what we sayto the government is, “If youdecide to allow arsenic concentra-tions of five, 10, or 20 parts perbillion, these are the effects thatyou are likely to see decades fromnow.” We take pride in simplytelling the truth — the scientific

3 FIGURE 2

truth — to power. Finding a balance amongthe many competing needs in our complexsociety is the expertise of policy-makers, andnot ours.

It is irrational for a government anywhereto make decisions without sound scientificadvice. This fact motivates our new 10-yeareffort, funded by the Gates Foundation, tostrengthen academies of science in Africa asproviders of national science policy advice.Initially, our effort will be focused onUganda, Nigeria, and South Africa — withother nations to be added later.

But what about the 50 states of our na-tion? Many of them would seem to be nobetter off than developing nations in theirability to harness science advice. From time totime, the National Academies have beencommissioned by a particular state or city toprovide needed science advice. For example,at the request of New York City, we pro-vided important advice on that city’s watersupply. And in response to a request from thegovernor of Alaska, we produced a well-accepted report on their wolf and bear popu-lations.

But many states will require their ownorganization to provide the local scienceadvice that they need. For this reason, wehave begun an experiment designed to helpstrengthen a state analogue to the NationalAcademies, the California Council on Sci-ence and Technology. We also have beenforging closer ties with the National Associa-tion of Academies of Science, representingthe 43 state and regional academies in theUnited States.

Whether here or elsewhere, it is notenough to produce timely reports withsound recommendations — it is also crucialthat there be trusted public servants in thegovernment who are sufficiently scientificallyand technologically adept to interpret ouradvice for the political establishment. Theseindividuals provide invaluable links betweenthe government and the scientific commu-nity. Acting as the “translators” between twovery different cultures, they are often theinitial audience for our many policy reports(Figure 3). It is hard to imagine how theU.S. government could function withoutthem.

4

The American Association for the Ad-vancement of Science (AAAS) deservesspecial recognition for its fellowship pro-grams, which for 30 years have brought largenumbers of outstanding scientists and engi-neers to Washington to serve for a year inthe federal government. Many of thesepeople decide to stay, and they have made abig difference by populating our govern-ment (and the National Academies) withcritically important scientific expertise andtalent. In recent years, we have providedhelp for this important effort by establishingour own Christine Mirzayan Science andTechnology Policy Graduate FellowshipProgram. This program brings about 80young scientists and engineers to the Acad-emies each year to work on policy issues(Figure 4). The young people are definitelyinterested: Our program currently has 10times as many applicants as there are posi-tions to fill!

As we work to extend the NationalAcademies model at home and abroad, we

encounter a major problem. Most U.S. statelegislatures — and many foreign govern-ments — lack the scientifically trained staffso indispensable here in Washington. Wetherefore hope to introduce AAAS-typefellowship programs in both California andAfrica, to improve the access to science bytheir governments.

But none of this is enough to ensure thatscience — and scientific judgments — willcreate a more prosperous and rational world.Because the pace of scientific discovery con-tinues to accelerate, the scientific and techno-logical advances in this century will almostcertainly exceed those of the past 100 years.Already, there are clear signs that our societiesare ill-prepared for such changes. Witness, forexample, the overwhelmingly negative reac-tion in Europe to genetically engineeredimprovements in agricultural crops — a senti-ment that threatens to block the use of thistechnology to help poor farmers in Africa.And in the United States, far too many peopleare susceptible to dogmatic talk-radio hostswho promulgate simplistic solutions to com-plex problems. There is also a growing back-lash against vaccination, and we currently facechallenges to the teaching of evolution in 40of our 50 states.

Much of today’s anti-science sentimentstems, I believe, from fear that is fired byhonest confusion on the part of the public.According to a recent poll, for example, alarge fraction of Europeans believe that “onlygenetically modified plants contain genes.”Most people have never encountered a work-ing scientist, nor do they understand howscience works or why it has been so success-ful. Far too many think that we are weirdgeniuses, when in fact the vast majority of usare neither.

FIGURE 3

Strong interactions betweenindividuals with a science

or engineering background

Congress orgovernment

agency

Scientificcommunity

5

FIGURE 4

Urgently needed are hundreds of thou-sands of “citizen scientists” who devote partof each week to spreading an understandingof science, its methods, and its values to non-scientists. And, if we are to have any chanceof success, our university science departmentsmust change their mission: Rather than focus-ing solely on training future research scien-tists, they must also openly encourage — anddesign programs for — science students at alllevels who want to pursue a variety of othercareers where their skills are badly needed.

One of my favorite authors is DanielBoorstin, who wrote so beautifully about theprofound ways that new discoveries havechanged the course of human history. Insumming up, he said:

In my book, ‘The Discoverers,’ one ofmy themes was that the great obstacleto progress is not ignorance, but theillusion of knowledge… There’s amystery in the works of creation anddiscovery. And I think that to graspthat mystery, to be prepared for theunexpected, is the task of those of uswho are helping others learn about theworld.

As I will discuss next, I am absolutelyconvinced that the scientific community willneed to devote much more energy and atten-tion to the critical issue of educating everyonein science, starting in kindergarten, if we areto have any hope of preparing our societiesfor the unexpected, as will be required tospread the benefits of science throughoutour nation and the world.

Science education can be exciting and empow-ering for everyone.

I came to Washington in 1993 intending tobe an “education president.” As thingsturned out, I spent an enormous amount oftime in my first two years at the Academiesworking on the National Science EducationStandards. This was a great learning experi-ence for all those who participated, includingsome 40 members of our Academy, becauseit forced us to collaborate closely with out-standing teachers and other professionalscience educators. For the first time, I cameto recognize just how difficult it is to teachwell. Never again will I equate good teach-ing simply with good lecturing, as I did inmy first 25 years at universities.

The type of science teaching called for inthe Standards emphasizes logical, hands-onproblem solving, and it insists on havingevidence for claims that can be confirmed byothers. It requires work in cooperativegroups, where those with different types of

Bruce Alberts, Harvey Fineberg, and Bill Wulf(front row, left to right) with the interns from theChristine Mirzayan Fellowship Program.

6

talents can discover them — developing self-confidence and an ability to communicateeffectively with others. But this so-calledteaching of “science as inquiry” demands arevolution in science teaching at all levels.

A brief anecdote may help. A few yearsago, my daughter was distressed when her sonreached the second grade without any signthat science would ever be part of his curricu-lum. She therefore volunteered to teach a fewhands-on science lessons to the class. On thefirst day, she gave each child a hand lens andthree different types of soil, and she askedthem to describe what they observed in eachsample. To her dismay, the class soon becameparalyzed, with no one willing to write therequested descriptions. Why? She discoveredthat, after two and a half years of formalschooling, these 7-year-old students hadconcluded that the entire point of educationwas to learn and regurgitate the “correctanswers.” A fear of making a mistake pre-vented them from writing anything.

An education that aims to fill the heads ofstudents with correct answers is a disaster formany reasons. For one, different cultures willhave different answers, and our diverse societ-ies will suffer greatly from intolerance. In-stead, all students must learn how to learn, sothat they can solve new problems and over-come the many challenges that they willencounter in their adult lives.

Some of you may be unfamiliar with thetype of science education I am promoting. Acartoon may perhaps be worth a thousandwords (Figure 5).

The good news is that a science educationof the type we want meets major practicalneeds of modern societies. First, properlydelivered, it can provide a nation with thetype of work force that business and industrysay they need: that is, workers with inquisi-tive, “can do” attitudes; the ability to uselogic and experimental manipulations to solveproblems; and the ability to function in col-laborative work-groups. Second, by giving allyoung people the chance to function like ascientist, this type of education should enablea nation to do a much better job of encourag-ing and creating its next generation of scien-tists and engineers — people who will beabsolutely essential for the nation to prosper inthe global economy.

Science education can also help build a saferworld.

More than a hundred years ago, John Deweywrote, “One of the only two articles thatremain in my creed of life is that the future ofour civilization depends upon the wideningspread, and deepening hold, of the scientifichabit of mind; and that the problem ofproblems in our education is therefore to

FIGURE 5 Credit: Carlton Stoiber

7

discover how to mature and make effectivethis scientific habit.”

Dewey could not have known that sci-ence and technology would soon lead to thecreation of nuclear weapons, or that a massmovement promoting suicidal terrorismwould arise in the 21st century. As our distin-guished foreign associate Georges Charpak hasemphasized in his latest book, we now face adesperate situation. Unless we can greatlyreduce the dogmatism that infects our world,the eventual spread of knowledge will inevita-bly put nuclear technology into the hands ofpeople who are eager to blow themselves up,along with hundreds of thousands of innocentcivilians. These people will be motivated,supported, and then celebrated for this hei-nous crime against humanity by a large groupof true believers.

This is why our Academy has put such ahigh priority on working closely with ourcolleagues in the Russian Academy of Sci-ences to prevent the proliferation of nuclearmaterials. And it is also why scientists allaround the world must now band together tohelp create more rational, scientifically basedsocieties that find dogmatism intolerable.More than 50 years ago, Prime MinisterNehru emphasized the importance of what hecalled a “scientific temper” for his new nation,India. By this he presumably meant a societythat exhibits the creativity, openness, andtolerance that are inherent to science — arequirement for his diverse nation.

Well, the world has been getting smallerand smaller, so much so that it is now clearthat we will need a “scientific temper” forevery nation, if the wonderful diversity of our

world is not to end up destroying civilizationas we know it.

David Hamburg, one of our distin-guished Public Welfare Medalists, has longstressed the worldwide need for educationsystems that create tolerance and reduceconflict, most recently in a book he wrotewith his wife Betty called Learning to LiveTogether: Preventing Hatred and Violence inChild and Adolescent Development. In myopinion, teaching science to children in themanner called for in the National ScienceEducation Standards, with its focus on sci-ence as inquiry starting at age 5, provides thebest platform we know for this purpose.Fortunately the world’s scientists agree thatgood science education in France, Sweden,India, China, Pakistan, or Chile is goodscience education anywhere. As a result, thescience academies of the world have begunto work together very effectively on thisproblem of such crucial importance to us all.

To quote Bentley Glass, a distinguishedAcademy member who died a few monthsago,

It is not safe for apes to play withatoms… For the scientific society to bedemocratic and to remain democratic,the people themselves must understandthe nature of the scientific forces andproblems that dominate their lives. Forus who are teachers, this is our task andour commitment. …All levels of scienceinstruction must change. The task willbe costly and hard; but the end is noteven the advancement of science, thoughthat will accrue. The true end is quiteliterally the salvation of man.

8FIGURE 6

THE CRITICAL ROLE OF THE NATIONAL

ACADEMIES

Despite the great advantages of the type ofscience education I have been advocating —the promulgation of rationality and tolerance,the preparation of a competitive work force,and the production of the best possible scien-tists and engineers — only an estimated 15percent of the students in the United Statesare currently learning science in this way. Wehave been making progress, but it is slow.Unfortunately, most of our schools still focuson having students learn what science hasalready discovered, rather than having themtake part in the process of discovery so thatthey can understand science as a special way ofknowing about the world.

What are the Academies doing to keep usmoving in the right direction?

1) Stimulating Better ResearchIt takes much more energy to prepare andsupport teachers to teach science as inquirythan it does to prepare them to teach scienceas memorizing “facts” from a textbook. We

therefore have to demonstrate the addedvalue of inquiry-based approaches to scienceeducation with hard evidence, of the kindwe get from science itself.

Based on one of our reports, the Acad-emies have recently helped to establish a newnonprofit organization, known as SERP, theStrategic Education Research Partnership,which aims to create highly collaborativenetworks to carry out this type of work.Without efforts of this kind, I fear that ournation’s schools will continue to flounder.

The National Academies’ first majorattempt to “make a science out of education”was a very popular book, How People Learn,which has recently been supplemented with aset of books for teachers on How StudentsLearn (Figure 6). Here our committees tookwhat has been gained from research on humanlearning over the last 30 years and explored itsimplications for our schools. In a programsponsored by the InterAcademy Panel, we arenow planning a multinational research col-laboration on inquiry-based science educa-tion, in order to generate an objectiveanalysis of what works and why.

2) Improving Science TestsIn this era of increased testing andaccountability, it is critical that wedevelop and apply the right kind ofscience tests. We must test studentsfor science understanding rather thanmere knowledge of scientific facts.Science education should not beabout memorizing the parts of acell and then taking a multiplechoice exam to test scientific vo-cabulary. Producing good tests forscience is challenging and expen-sive. But the wrong kinds of testswill trivialize science teaching by

9

sending the wrong message about what kindof teaching and learning are valued — driv-ing even more students away from bothscience and scientific careers. Within thenext few months, we will release a majorreport designed to help guide each of our 50states, as they prepare to meet the require-ments of the No Child Left Behind programfor testing in science by 2007.

3) Collaborating with Industry LeadersIn general, U.S. industry doesn’t adequatelyrecognize the fit between the type of scienceeducation that is envisioned in the NationalScience Education Standards and the workforce that industry needs. In collaborationwith several leading CEOs — including CraigBarrett of Intel, who currently serves as thechair of our sister academy, the NationalAcademy of Engineering — the NationalAcademies are reaching out to the majorindustry CEOs directly, so that they canbecome better advocates for their own long-term interests.

4) Giving a Voice to Our Best TeachersU.S. school systems generally pay little or noattention to the wisdom of the most impor-tant people in their schools — that is, to theiroutstanding teachers and principals. Nor isthere a strong-enough voice for our bestteachers when federal and state educationpolicies are being designed. Three years ago,the National Academies established a TeacherAdvisory Council (TAC), in an attempt to seta different example. This group of 12 carefullyselected science, math, and technology class-room teachers — from elementary throughhigh school — has been meeting three times ayear, advising our staff on our educationwork and contributing directly to studies,projects, and reviews of products. They havealso added individual teacher affiliates from

nearly every state, and they are now helpingto catalyze the establishment of similar state-based TACs — with the first one recentlyestablished in California, and a second cur-rently in the planning stages for the state ofWashington.

5) Improving the Teaching of Science byUniversity FacultyA major cause of inadequate science teachingat lower levels is our own system of highereducation. Our teachers can’t be expected toteach what they don’t know. And the knowl-edge needed extends beyond disciplinarycontent. Most of today’s teachers of science— whether at the elementary, middle, or highschool level — have never experienced in-quiry-based science education themselves.

If we really care about creating a “scien-tific temper” for the United States, we willneed to completely rethink most of our intro-ductory college courses — both to make themmore inquiry based and to focus them on thegoal of conveying an understanding andappreciation of science, and its relation tosociety, to all students. The Academy is theobvious place to catalyze such an effort, andled by Nobelist Carl Wieman, we have beenincreasingly active in stimulating change. I callon all of our members to support this effort atyour own universities.

Unfortunately, my time is nearly up.Before closing, let me say what a privilege ithas been to have had the opportunity to guidethis ship for the past 12 years. But with greatopportunity comes great responsibility, andwhat makes this job so difficult — keeping meup most nights — is the many opportunitiesthat I know I will have missed, and the tasksremaining on my long to-do list, when Ipass the baton to my successor in a fewmonths.

10

Nevertheless, much has occurred in thepast decade: the construction of the KeckCenter of the National Academies and ourwonderful Marian Koshland Science Museum(Figure 7); the formation of two critical inter-national organizations — the InterAcademyPanel and the InterAcademy Council; thecompletion of the National Science EducationStandards; thestrengthening ofour scienceeducation part-nership with theSmithsonianInstitutionthrough theNational ScienceResources Cen-ter; the publica-tion of a largenumber of land-mark reports(Figure 8) —including Allocat-ing Federal Funds

for Science and Technology; Our Common Jour-ney: A Transition Toward Sustainability; TheEvaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence; TeachingAbout Evolution and the Nature of Science;Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average FuelEconomy (CAFE) Standards; Reducing UnderageDrinking: A Collective Responsibility; the Insti-tute of Medicine classic To Err Is Human:Building a Safer Health System; and the out-standing guidance of the nation’s transporta-tion efforts by our Transportation ResearchBoard.

And last but not least, there is our tre-mendous success in making all of this infor-mation freely available on one of the world’sbest Web sites.

None of this could have been accom-plished without the fantastically skilled anddedicated staff who come to work at theNational Academies every day, some 1,100employees. Nor could it have been donewithout our 6,000 committee members whowork pro bono each year, as a tremendousservice to science, our nation, and the world.I am also grateful for having such talented

FIGURE 7 An exhibit on “Putting DNA to Work” ondisplay at the Marian Koshland ScienceMuseum

FIGURE 8

11

NOTE: The text of this speech, with direct links tothe full text of cited reports, is available on theAcademy’s Web site at <www.nasonline.org/2005address>.

colleagues and partners in Bill Wulf, theNational Academy of Engineering’s presi-dent, and Harvey Fineberg, the Institute ofMedicine’s president. I want to thank yourofficers: Vice President Jim Langer, HomeSecretary John Brauman, Treasurer RonGraham, and Foreign Secretary Mike Cleggfor their tremendous leadership. And ofcourse I need to acknowledge the greatpatience and support of my wife Betty, whohas been promised many things by me thatwere not delivered over the course of thepast 45 years, including our return to SanFrancisco in 1999, after my first term.

Science, a Noble Adventure

Science is a great, noble adventure — anunending frontier in the long struggle ofhuman beings to understand the world thatsurrounds us. Scientists tend to be optimists,because each of us has witnessed a remarkableparting of the curtain of ignorance that onceenshrouded each of our scientific fields — as Ihave in cell and molecular biology. All of uswho were graduate students 40 years agowould have laughed at anyone who dared topredict the spectacular increase in our under-standing of the chemistry of life that has sinceoccurred. As illustrated by the Academy’sBeyond Discovery essays, science is a marvelouscommunity endeavor, one that enables newknowledge to be built upon old knowledge inunpredictable ways — ways that have en-abled us to understand and manipulate thisworld to produce great benefits for human-ity.

FIGURE 9Bruce Alberts and child, learning aboutscience.

Armed with the confidence that comesfrom this success, we can now face the nextseemingly impossible challenge, as we devoteourselves to the ambitious but critical task ofcreating a scientific temper for the world(Figure 9).

It has been a great privilege for me to haveserved as your president for the past 12 years.Thank you.