I am slowly finding a little more on teaching the Nature of Science. The source I have most recently found has proven to be a good one. It describes the nature of science as "key principles and ideas which provide a description of science as a way of knowing, as well as characteristics of scientific knowledge." I think this is a great way to put it. It doesn't make science out as a set in stone step-by-step process. This way it seems inviting. Often times this aspect gets lost in a classroom and teachers resort to the step-by-step procedures of science. It is great that the education world is finally leaving the chains of the scientific method behind. "Scientific knowledge is tentative." This simple sentence is breaking the mold for science education. If scientific knowledge itself is tentative, then the process in which we gain the knowledge is also tentative.
The first thing many of us learned in science was the scientific method. This is how science works, right? WRONG. "The danger in this approach is not only that learning the scientific method is a bummer to students, but that it is also quite restrictive in its scope. Scientists usually do not walk through the method sequentially. They often bounce around, perhaps forming a new hypothesis during experimentation. Studies in which no experimentation is performed are also valid scientific studies, but do not follow the scientific method." This quote put it all into perspective for me, and its so true. What is being taught to kids in most science classrooms is not what science is like in the real world. Students are getting only a very standard, and incorrect view of science when they are seeing it through the lenses of the scientific method.
For the source of the quotations and additional information, Click Here.
I enjoyed reading the link you used as the focus of your post. The author wrote it very clear and organized, which makes it a good tool for teachers to have and for older students to have access to as well.
ReplyDeleteI liked the section in the link that talked about students writing in their journal during and after experimentation. They suggested students to write uncertainties and observations in their journal during. I find this a great way for kids to question, discuss, and reflect on their work. After experimentation they encouraged having students de-bunk the scientific method by trying to fit their experiences into the method order. It wouldn't take more than 1 time for most students to see that science is not a step by step procedure!
You do a fine job of reinforcing the point that the nature of science does not include the "scientific method" or procedural steps to solving a problem. Over time I am making connections to what I am learning in my math methods course at Drake. We discuss in my math methods course that often students can't describe their thinking or reasoning behind solving a problem because students have solely learned algorithms for solving the problems without really thinking what the process means. Current reforms in math teaching (like science) encourage students to seek out their own tools and ways to look at problems rather than providing the students with step-by-step processes and the resources.
ReplyDelete