Therefore science undergoes a drawback of lacking proper explanations. There are hardly any doctor who take the time and pain for explaining the factors leading tot he disease of a patient and making him understand how the body functions under the disease. This often gives rise to beliefs, which are based on superstitious beliefs or political influence. Most of the times the educators of science and engineering do not understand the need to become better communicators and the necessity of attending proper training. Language is also a major issue and scientists need to use decipherable and lay language for communication. However science is not subject to lack of interest from the people even though most of them might not understand it. Around 80 percent Americans were estimated to be interested (highly or fairly) in discoveries related to science. People have much greater faith in doctors, teachers, and scientists compared to journalists. This needs to be exploited through establishment of a culture of reasoning and explanation of science. Yet they mostly find themselves too busy to involve in such explanations.
The article is interesting to read owing to the fact that it effectively highlights certain rare issues and insights. First, the explanation of students adhering mainly to bookish knowledge instead to trying to be innovative and communicate their ideas to the common people might be explained by the lack of explanations they were entitled to during their academic career. So the science educators need to learn the art of communication. Secondly, the article has a lot of policy implications and provides ample scope to devise new methods for training. Thirdly it supports the claims by appropriate evidence and empirical results, which are not only interesting, but also stresses further on the need for a culture of explanation in the field of science.
Apart from the good sides the