2. 职称英语
  3. A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological

A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological

游客2024-03-07  3
问题     A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological process behind viruses and the human body in a tweet and was immediately criticized for a mistake in his information. He then issued an apology and deleted his erroneous tweet.
    Communicating science beyond the academic bubble is necessary to augmenting public understanding of health and environmental issues and helping individuals make well-informed personal decisions.
    However, scientists who engage in science communication must acknowledge that even in their area, their expertise is deep but narrow. They need to recognize the constraints in their own knowledge. That is not to suggest that they only write or present on their own research, but rather, that they consult with an expert if the topic is outside of their discipline. Fact-checking with a scientist who works in the specialty will prevent the unintentional spread of misinformation, and the process of doing so may yield tiny pieces of interesting new information that can be incorporated.
    Some have argued that the public is not educated enough to understand scientific information, especially for any complex phenomena, but this is absurd. Science instruction can be found at all levels of public education with most secondary schools offering classes on biology, physics, and chemistry. If anything, social media has shown that the public craves knowledge based on a solid scientific foundation. Even the public discourse that follows most scientific articles shows that online readers can understand even the most baffling of scientific principles.
    It is equally imperative to emphasize that being an expert on a topic does not automatically make a scholar qualified to communicate it to a nonscientific audience. A number of scientists recently have been offering public-aimed explanations of scientific phenomena. Even though they have appropriate credentials, they often do very little in the way of explaining. One biologist shared an intricate analogy involving a library, books, paper, a recipe, ingredients, and a cake to explain the process behind vaccines. Any explanation that requires a written key to keep track of what each item represents is not a clear example for public consumption.
    Science communication is a science in and of itself. It requires rigorous training and instruction. A scientist should take communication courses that can teach a person how to identify and eliminate jargon and how to develop effective analogies to explain complex concepts. One cannot assume communication expertise-imagine if someone just decided that they were a physicist and started trying to contribute to the field without the necessary background. Doing a poor job communicating science to the public will only create confusion and widen the gap between science and society, a gap that scientists are trying to close. [br] What does the example of the biologist who shared an intricate analogy show?
选项 A、It is helpful to use illustrations in explaining scientific phenomena.
B、It is imperative to have appropriate titles to explain scientific issues.
C、A learned scholar is not necessarily a qualified science communicator.
D、A nonscientific audience cannot duly understand principles of science.
答案 C
解析 由题干中的the biologist 和shared a intricate analogy 定位到第五段倒数第二句。推理判断题。定位句提到，一位生物学家分享了一个复杂的类比，涉及图书馆、书籍、纸张、食谱、配料和蛋糕，来解释疫苗背后的过程。而作者在随后一句评论说，任何解释，如果需要书面图例来记录每个条目所代表的内容，那就不是适合公众了解的清晰范例，可见作者认为这位生物学家的方式是不恰当的，他并不是一位合格的科学传播者，这呼应了定位句所在段落开头提出的观点，故答案为C。第五段最后一句中提到了a written key（书面图例），但指的是用书面图例来记录每个条目所代表的内容，这种解释科学现象的方法并不可取，A与原文意思不一致，故排除；B项误读了定位段最后一句，该句的本意是作者认为那位生物学家的方法太过复杂，指出如果类比的方式还需要使用书面图例来记录每个条目所代表的内容，那这个方法并不可取，而未强调标题的适用性，故排除B项；D项所述恰与第四段最后一句内容相悖，作者认为科学界之外的读者有能力正确理解一些复杂的科学原理，故排除D。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3513096.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)