Interesting Story out of Florida.
Kiera Wilmot – High school student, bright scholar, and no prior conflicts of disruption (other than this experimental situation), is now this generations first “Academic Scientific Pioneer”.
As the rest of the world goes on to debate whether or not this situation is a matter of vandalism, chaos, or reckless motive, this society can now open the scientific doors of knowledge and curiosity for being applied in the actual area where this behavior is really designed and marketed to have take place – on the grounds of the learning facility known as “school”. The curiosity of science, practice and wonder should begin in the classroom of learning, and applied in and outside of it, not the other way around (taking ideas from home, then experimenting with the idea in the classroom without supervision. Regardless of the experiment, location of the experiment, materials for experiments, and overall experiment in general, supervision should be applied for all scientific endeavors – safety first)
There are many wonders and questions that can arise from this ASP student’s “independent study”; I just wonder how our society will take it, on the grounds of wonder, curiosity, and applying knowledge to a subject.
The criminal charges I am really unsure about, all in the light of fire alarm pullers and phone-call threats to an institution. I am not sure how things are working today, but when I was in High school, if a person made a “call” or pulled an alarm, the resource official was always involved. Then from here I imagine that police and city members are involved. As for campus regulations and safety satire code of the high school, the lack of supervision and element of uncertainty (IF the bottle would have became a projectile, bursting and harming the associate with Miss Wilmot or herself) was detrimental and high for being unsupervised, and the expulsion program is fair.
I am interested to see how America academic institutions view this. Is this a matter of crying for help from students that want to explore and seek out detailed analysis from actual practice of scientific curiosity? Are new roads going to be paved with brighter techniques for student collaborations for more physical means of understanding the sciences better? Or does this red flag our progress into creative ways to evolve the instruction of scientific wonder? (I hope not)