The Big Green Book of the Big Blue Sea

 Posted by Helaine Becker

We know the ocean is at risk. Rising global temperatures, deoxygenation, and increasing acidity are all serious threats to marine ecosystems. Knowing these facts, it’s easy to fall victim to despair.

But there is reason to hope – lots of it. And that’s one of the inspirations for why I wrote The Big Green Book of the Big Blue Sea, my new book from Kids Can Press.

It’s an experiment-based science book that teaches kids through first-hand exploration how different aspects of the marine system work – why ice floats, how currents form, how fish swim. It also gives kids a chance to explore environmental issues, like the enormous garbage island in the middle of the Pacific, or how an oil boom works.

But The Big Green Book of the Big Blue Sea is more than an experiment book. It’s also a primer on the threats facing the ocean. And most importantly, it’s a serious discussion of what people today, all over the world, are doing to protect the sea and minimize the impacts of human activity.

We all know that the media focuses on negative stories. They are immediate adrenalin-boosters, and feed into the human need to constantly scan the horizon for danger. But that focus on risk means we don’t really hear the other half of the story – we don't hear about the car that didn’t crash or the lost wallet that was retrieved.

This is true when discussing environmental issues too. We hear about the coral dying, the sharks being finned, and the Dead Zones expanding. But few ordinary people realize that Dead Zones have also disappeared. That corals can be regrown. And that new laws across North America are in place that will help protect our seas well into the future.

The Big Green Book of the Big Blue Sea presents it all: the facts, the risks, and the heartening stories of recovery.

Some of the facts may surprise you –like learning pearls are NOT caused by bits of grit that get caught in the oyster’s shell!). Some may delight you – like discovering how the beluga whales of the St. Lawrence River are no longer in danger of extinction, thanks to a concerted effort by Quebec’s citizens and business community. Some may even astound you. But in the end, you (and your students) will discover the ocean is larger, more complex, and more diverse than anything you could have ever imagined.

The truth is the ocean is under serious threat. We can’t be Pollyannas, pretending there are no problems. But we also can’t be Eeyores, seeing nothing but doom in our future. The reality is more nuanced. There are many reasons for optimism.

Optimism, I think, is a requirement for children’s non-fiction. To tell young people, “all is lost” is counter-productive. It negates them, and their future. It  also, plainly, is false; it's unsubstantiated opinion.

The facts point in the other direction. Where there is life, there is hope. And there’s lots of life in the ocean: More, in fact, than anywhere else on the planet.  Resilient, adaptaive, wildly creative life.

Shouldn’t that fact alone give us reason to hope?

Planetary Stew

serves 4 © Judy Wearing

Usually, the main ingredients in a casserole are cut the same approximate size. Not so in this dish – each of the round ingredients in this rich, continental-style stew represents one of the planets, and the planets differ tremendously in size. Just how different will become obvious when you sit down with space on your plate.

Ingredients

1 tbsp peppercorns

1 tbsp mustard seed

1 tsp paprika

1 cup sweet baby peas

8 potatoes, as round as possible with a 3 inch diameter

4 onions, round as possible with a 2 ½ inch diameter

1 tbsp vegetable oil

For the Meatballs:

1 lb lean hamburger meat

1 cup breadcrumbs

1 egg

For the dumplings:

1 ½ cups flour

½ tsp baking powder

2 egg yolks

½ cup milk

Salt to taste

For the sauce:

3 tbsp butter

3 tbsp flour

1 tbsp tomato paste

2 1/2 cups beef bouillon

1 cup sour cream

What to do:

Begin by preparing the largest of the planets, Jupiter. Peel the potatoes and shape them into round balls. Peel the onions of Saturn, the next largest planet. Lay the potatoes and onions on a baking tray, brush with oil to coat, and roast in a 450 ° F oven, turning occasionally, until they are golden brown. This will take 45 minutes to an hour.

While Jupiter and Saturn are coming into being, mix together the hamburger meat, breadcrumbs and egg in a large bowl. Form the mixture into proto-Uranus balls slightly larger than 1 inch in diameter. This will allow for shrinking in cooking; cooked, the 1-inch meatballs will be the perfect Uranus proportions. Brown the meatballs in a nonstick pan and set them aside until the rest of the solar system is complete.

In another bowl, mix together the dumpling ingredients – flour, egg yolks, milk, and salt and pepper to form a stiff, Neptune dough. Add more milk if necessary. Form 1 inch diameter balls, and set them aside too, covered with a tea towel, ready to put into the solar system sauce.

To make the sauce, melt the butter over medium heat in a large, thick bottomed saucepan or high-sided frying pan. Add the flour and stir, letting it cook for a minute or two. Gradually add the bouillon a little at a time, stirring constantly. Add the tomato paste, peppercorns, Mars, and mustard seeds of Mercury. When the full two cups of bouillon are added, and the sauce is simmering, gently drop Neptune dumplings in, one-by-one, with a spoon. When the dumplings float to the top, they are done. Add the green peas, the larger ones representing green Earth and the smaller ones, cloudy Venus. Add Jupiter potatoes, Saturn onions, and Uranus meatballs, and gently stir in the sour cream.

Serve the stew with two potatoes and an onion per person. To finish, sprinkle each plate with paprika – each tiny speck is the relative size of Pluto – clearly a solar system garnish rather than a main ingredient.

The Science

Space is vast. This is something we understand when we gaze at the layer upon layer of stars in the night sky. Just how tiny we are compared to the rest of the universe can be brought home – literally – by using a scaled model, such as this stew. In this case, the ingredients representing the planets are scaled down by a factor of 46 397, with the largest planet Jupiter represented by a potato. According to this scale, the Sun is the width of a typical family dinner table.

Size in the Solar System
The diameter, in km, of the:
Sun	1391900	Jupiter	139516
Mercury	4866	Saturn	116438
Venus	12106	Uranus	46940
Earth	12756	Neptune	45432
Mars	6 788	Pluto	2360

We can think of these celestial bodies as fitting into four different categories. First, there’s the Sun – a star like countless others; a big ball of fire which comprises 99.86% of all the mass in the entire solar system. Then there are several smallish, dense planets. These are Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars - five times more dense than the outer planets. The big gaseous entities we call Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune come next. Pluto and its fellow dwarf planets is small in comparison, and icy, perhaps not even particularly round. The Sun is so far away it appears as a pinpoint, like all the other stars.

There are nine different objects floating in this stew, and there used to be nine planets in our solar system. The discovery in 2003 of another object circling our Sun which is bigger than Pluto threw into question the definition of the word planet. Traditionally, a planet is a large object that orbits a star. The problem with this definition is that there are many large objects orbiting our Sun in the space beyond Pluto – by some estimates, tens of thousands more. Some think the title of planet ought to be limited to only very large objects, say bigger than 3000 km in diameter. That would discount Pluto, but it would mean that our own Moon should be classified as a planet too. Others argue that tradition should rule in cases such as this – and we should stick with nine planets for cultural reasons, and not make Holst’s symphony obsolete. Whether Pluto is a main ingredient or a garnish makes little difference to our planetary stew. It is delicious regardless.

A planet stew gives us no idea of the distances between them. You could try going for an walk with your bowl, and eat your way through the solar system. With your dining table as the Sun, a Mercury peppercorn should be consumed 32 metres away, followed by a Venus mustard seed at 59 metres, peas for Earth and Mars at 82 and 125 metres, and a Jupiter potato at 426 metres. If you live in the city you will likely be a block away from your house by now. Saturn’s onion is at 780 metres, a Uranus dumpling at 1, 571 metres, and a Neptune meatball at 2 464 metres - about an hour and a half’s walk. To place Pluto’s paprika fleck you might as well get in the car and drive to the 3 237 metre mark or you’ll be up very late.

On second thought, it might be a lot easier to stay home for dinner tonight, and have space on your plate instead.

Learning more about the brain

By Marie Powell

Learning about the brain might seem like something that's only interesting for neuro-scientists (photo by Dendroica cerulea via Flickr Creative Commons).

But the more we find out about the brain, the better off we are - or that's what Dr. Bruce Perry seems to say. I was lucky enough to attend one of his workshops recently, and he made it easy to understand how the brain works, and how we learn.

The workshop was geared to child trauma, but I think some understanding of the way the brain works can help in many other contexts. Perry's diagram of an inverted triangle divided into four parts is easy to understand: the bottom of the cone is the brainstem, and the top is the neocortex.

I'm simplifying it of course, but essentially, Perry reminded us that it's important not to ignore the lower areas of the brain (brainstem, diencephalon, and limbic), while we try to communicate through the higher levels (neocortex). For example, any time we learn something new, we go through stress, he says. Our ability to self-regulate, or pay attention, is affected by the lower areas of the brain. Demanding attention - through the neocortex - won't be as effective as planning to engage it from the bottom up.

Planning regulatory breaks in the day, for instance, will help us to pay attention more effectively all day long. Perry suggests rhythmic activities like dancing or music-and-movement. These activities work on the lower brain to help relieve feelings of stress. (I found a good example in getting up to walk to my car to plug the parking meter, and those "regulatory breaks" may explain why I got so much out of this workshop!)

Perry's theories make sense. We expect young children to move from one activity to another within any given hour. We build rhymes and rhythm and movement into great preschool programming like Mainly Mother Goose and Toddler Time to help them learn. Why do we forget the importance of these regulatory breaks as children grow older? Or even as we grow older?

There was a lot more to this workshop, of course. Some of this material can be found on the Child Trauma website Perry founded, at www.ChildTrauma.org. Scholastic also provides a section about him that will prove useful to teachers: http://teacher.scholastic.com/professional/bruceperry/.

Learning more about the brain can help us understand how best to approach and positively influence others, and I believe it's especially important for those of us who work with and write for children.

It's useful to think about how we learn, and visual images like the ones Perry uses can help make it easier to understand. Here's another image of brain mapping called "Knowledge Management," provided courtesy of Harold Jarche.


Marie Powell is the author of Dragonflies are Amazing! (Scholastic Canada, Grade Two Guided Reading, 2007).

Your Daily Dose of Science - Now With Bonus Cute

How do scientists learn about animal behavior? Sometimes animals are outfitted with collars that allow scientists to track the animals in order to learn about their daily life, the food they eat, hunting, nest building and much more.

In this wonderful video, Rick Mercer accompanies park wardens as they tag new born bear cubs in the wilderness of northern Ontario.

The Tangliest of Food Webs

The idea of food chains and food webs is one of the first ecological concepts that children often learn. (I'm sure most of us have played a version of a food web game, where, in the end, everyone is connected to everyone else, if a few trophic levels away.) But at last weeks' AAAS conference I saw food webs in a new light. And learned just how very, very complex they can be.

Research by the Santa Fe Institute's Jennifer Dunne added human hunter-gathers to marine food webs. To do this, she synthesized 5000 years of biological, archaeology, ethnographic and other data from marine systems in the northeast Pacific. Her results showed that the Aleuts of Sanak Island, Alaska were "super-generalist" predators and they ate foods from a wide spectrum of sources. Dunne said that this flexibility "likely helped stabilize the entire ecosystem." In essence, when one food source became low, they moved to another giving species time to recover.

This flexible grazing (or, "prey switching") method is in stark contrast to the modern-day economics-driven pressures that can destabilize food webs. As Dunne explained in a briefing note, "[Switching prey when a population is low] is natural behaviour for predators. It's stabilizing for the system because it allows populations to recover." This is in stark contrast to modern economic systems. Again Dunne explains using blue-fin tuna as an example, "As the premium sushi tuna gets scarcer, its value goes up, and fishing becomes more profitable, leading to more, rather than less, pressure on tuna populations. This 'increased rarity-higher value-more harvesting,' cycle tends to drive species toward extinction and introduces dynamics that might destabilize the whole food web."

Remarkably, this is one of the first studies of food webs that includes humans. In the end, the very tangled food web had more than 6000 feeding links. Dunne's research found that the humans in her study fed on 50 of the 171 taxa available to them. And they lived on Sanak Island for thousands of years without other species going extinct.

How to get a children's book published

On Feb 19, 2012, I sat on a panel with the amazing Jude Isabella, the entertaining Claire Eamer and the incomparable Jim Becker. Together we presented: Keep Out! Kids Only: How To Morph Your Science into a Whiz-Bang Book for Kids .

We had a respectable number of attendees (probably around 60), all of whom were interested in how to write for the children's market.

Jude explained the magazine side of the business, while Claire covered the information/research portion of the panel. Jim, the genius behind the Smart Lab brand of toys and the best-selling book/kits you often find at Costco, walked the scientists/journalists through what makes a successful product.  I spoke about the business end of publishing and things you need to know when trying to get a book to market.

Below is the text and some of the slides from my portion of the presentation.
Enjoy.

My name is Shar Levine and I write hands-on science books for children.  My writing partner Leslie Johnstone and I have together written over 60 books, so it’s fair to say that we have some experience in creating books that publishers want to buy and that kids want to read.

If you are interested you can check out our web site: www.sciencelady.com for a listing of books.

 

It is extremely difficult to sell a book, especially these days.  Publishers are looking for something unique.

Here are some simple steps to follow if you want to write a science book for children.

1.  Who will buy this book?

It is really important to know who your book will appeal to. If the topic is focussed on something very esoteric, chances are the publisher won’t be interested in the book.

Ideas that sell- fills gap in curriculum  - anniversary of da vinci’s birthday

Ideas that won’t sell – sun spots

2.  What is the market for the book?

Is this book only for kids who live on the east coast of the United States or can the book be used by children in Canada, the US, Europe and Australia?

Idea what works- Snowy Science

Idea that won’t work- Science of Sand

 

3.  Who publishes this kind of book?

Approaching a publisher who specializes in Picture Books and not information books is a waste of everyone’s time.  Do your research and check out standard guides like Children’s Writer’s and Illustrator’s Market.

4.  What is the competition for this book?

Again, do your research. Go on Amazon and see what similar books have been published.  God forbid- go to a library.  Talk to a teacher and ask what science book needs to be written.  And if you want to write a book on a subject that has a ton of books i.e. Magnets, then you have to find a different spin.

 

5.   Why are you the person to write this book?

Just because you are a notable scientist or a well known journalist, doesn’t mean you know how to write a kid’s book.  Remember you will be using little words for big concepts and you may only have 100 of those words /page to get this information across to the reader.  The trick is to tell the child just enough facts that won’t confuse them or conflict with the science they will learn in high school.

Example-

Which is easier for a child to understand?

In order to maintain the shape of a flexible membrane within a rigid plastic container you must first increase air pressure within the membrane while simultaneously allowing air to leave the rigid container. When the rigid container is sealed this produces a partial vacuum inside the plastic container. The shape of the membrane is retained due to the higher external air pressure relative to the vacuum inside the plastic container as long as there is a sufficient difference between the pressure within the membrane and that within the container

Or this?
How can you blow up a balloon, leave the mouth of the balloon open, and not have the balloo deflate? Try this!

6.  What do you have that other writers don’t have?

Publishers don’t like to spend money. The more you can offer by way of images the more appealing your proposal might be to them. For example: we’ve done 10 books on microscopy and 3-d electron microscopy because we have access to microscopes.

 

7.  Do you know the rules for hands-on children’s science books?

Let’s start with something simple: which of the following cannot be used in an experiment for children:

1. Rubbing Alcohol

2. Eggs

3. Matches

4.  Microwave oven

The answer: all of the above.

Writing for children is completely different than writing for an adult market. There are rules here that you need to follow, no matter how absurd you may think they are.  It doesn’t matter that your child gets eggs from the fridge, can use a knife to cut a piece of bread or can nuke popcorn.  In writing a science book for young children- 6-12 you have to be extra cautious with all materials and instructions. You need to be aware of things you can and cannot do and if your list of “do’s and don’ts” looks like something created by a litigation lawyer, you know you have a problem.

NOTE: Just because something is really cool in a lab setting does not mean you can do this at home.

The case in point: The Electric Pickle.  This activity is amazing in a controlled lab setting and when it is performed by someone who knows what to do. At home you might kill yourself if you do this incorrectly.

8.  What are the concepts, vocabulary and materials appropriate for the grade level?

Let’s take acid rain as an example. I had a terrible time with a group of grade 4 students when they were examining acid rain. They asked what would happen if they got caught in an acid rain storm. I told them they would get wet. They presumed all “acid” would burn your flesh off.  Too many sci fi movies.  So I had to explain “acid” which then led to pH and the science of acid and bases, which was way above their grade level.

9.  What other things do you need to consider when pitching or writing a book?

Generally you have to use things that are universally available around the world, but you cannot call them by their trade name.  So Saran Wrap, is plastic wrap, Kleenex is facial tissue, Joy is dishwashing liquid.  If you are photographing these for an activity you must block off all identifiable logos and markings.

You will need to write short sentences, with exact word counts.  If you publisher says you have 200 words / chapter with a DYK or sidebar of 20 words, that’s what you need to submit.

Try not to date the book. A great example of this is one chapter in Science Around the World, where we said that someday flat screen tvs would be everywhere.  If you are sending photos for a book, no T-shirts with logos or writing.  No slang.

Always have an equal number of girls to boys and make sure the girls are active and not passive in photographs or illustrations.  Also include children of different ethnic backgrounds and if possible a child with a visible handicap.

When adding sidebars, try to find as many examples of women scientists as possible.  Also cite research from universities for leading edge sidebars. A great source of information is New Scientist or ScienceDaily.

10. Swallow your pride or stand your ground?

One publisher we worked for created books for Sam’s Club and Walmart.  In the Southern US, they didn’t like “evolution”.  So the agreed to term was, “over time”.  Sometimes you suck it up and cash the check.

11.  How do you woo a publisher?

In the case of pitching to someone like Jim, find an add-on that can come with the book.  We did that with the Ice cream maker, the microscope, and the 3-D books becker. For Wild Planet we created all the science activities to be used with the Mega Dome. And the Summerville House, I designed WormWorld and the Papermaker.

12.  What is the best advice?

Be ahead of the curve.  Don’t pitch a book that is a spin-off of a highly successful one, do something new.  You can also partner with an established author. This is something we’ve done several times and it has been a fabulous experience for everyone.

We just finished our first enhanced Ebook that included video and audio and we have two more in development.  Again, come complete with a very comprehensive outline, a sample chapter, a pithy pitch and a compelling reason why you should write this book.

Good luck!

                                   

Thoughts on WiFi, Science and Science Reporting

Posted by Gillian O’Reilly

Recently, the Ontario English Catholic Teacher's Association called for an end to new WiFi setups in the province's 1,400-plus Catholic schools, saying computers in new schools should be hardwired instead. The union – which represents 45,000 teachers – cites research by the World Health Organization and said the “safety of this technology has not thoroughly been researched and therefore the precautionary principle and prudent avoidance of exposure should be practised.”

Here are two stories on it:

 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/tech-news/ontario-catholic-teachers-union-urges-ban-on-classroom-wifi/article2336605/

http://toronto.openfile.ca/blog/curator-blog/curated-news/2012/oecta-releases-policy-wi-fi-schools-complete-alarmism-and-sketch

I must admit that I have a little trouble with the WiFi topic because I know someone whose family seems to have been affected by WiFi (grown child with seizures, a grandparent with other issues) and who is very concerned by it.

I am basically agnostic/skeptic on this issue. The only detailed media I have heard about it was a CBC Sunday Edition program that was not very scientifically presented – lots of personal anecdotes from thoughtful and sincere people who have had dramatic encounters with WiFi, one scientist who has talked a lot about this issue and, it seemed, a lack of probing into the scientific details (more the fault of the journalists than the fault of the people concerned about the issue).

On the opposite side, all I have heard are health bodies who say there is no problem. Any one with a memory knows that there have been lots of times that we've been told something was no problem when in fact it was -- but that's history, not science. Again, no real science reporting on how they arrived at that conclusion.

As someone who comes to science from an arts background, my general approach to science is that "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy." There are all sorts of new and interesting things being discovered all the time (like a sea sponge that makes a structure of glass! cool, eh?) and scientific thinking changes all the time. The point is to try to be intelligent about it, whether or not one has a science background oneself.

For instance, and to take a dramatic example, it wouldn’t have taken a scientist to ask a few questions to the now-disgraced anti-vaccine campaigner Andrew Wakefield; it would only take a logical, intelligent thinker. How big was your sample, Dr. Wakefield? (Twelve.) Is that a useful sample? (No.) Do you have any conflicts of interest in this matter? (Yes.) You wouldn’t even have to ask, Is it possible you falsified the data? (Yes.) It’s a pity the editors of The Lancet, a peer-reviewed medical journal, didn’t ask these questions before they published his report.

So I'm quite prepared to believe that WiFi is a problem and I'm quite prepared to believe that it isn't – as long as I'm told something about the science behind it. I don't want to be told (like my friend) that if I'm concerned, I should go out and get a tinfoil hat. I don't want to be mollified by an official "there is no problem." And I don’t want people feeding me quotes that they haven’t sourced properly.

I simply want science reporters and institutions like OECTA to do what they are supposed to do – ask the tough, logical, scientifically literate questions these issues demand and present the answers to those questions to me clearly. That way I, and the folks making policy decisions on these topics, can do some intelligent informed thinking, whether we are scientists or not.