Professor Oreskes states that real science ultimately depends on "consensus" and an "appeal to authority," despite the fact that arguments based on consensus and authority are commonly dismissed as being logically unsound. To mix things up yet again, tell the students they will now have a spontaneous, graded strictly timed (20 minute), writing assignment, with a 400 word count maximum. (2008) Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Depending on how far others have already gone in this sequence (and always keep in mind, you must give them complete credit), you may enter it in any point along the way. Use the result to press on to new questions, new systems. Design the experiment so that no matter what the result, the answer to the question will be convincing. Love the details, the feel of all of them, for their own sake. Become thoroughly familiar with the details―no better, become obsessed―with the system. When you finally hit a soft spot, search for the model system―say a controlled emission in particle physics or a fast breeding organism in genetics―on which decisive experiments can be most easily conducted. If too many conceptual difficulties are encountered, back off. Phrase them so that a reasonable amount of evidence makes a clear-cut choice possible. Think out alternative conceivable answers. Break the question down and visualize all the elements and questions it implies. Well before initial class discussion fizzles out, project this graphic. The lab did not work or you got meaningless results. You really could not predict what would happen in advance and obtained some interesting results.ģ. Lab worked well and you more or less knew the result in advance and got the data you expected.Ģ. Provide a real-life example of a lab you have actually done for each of the following criteria:ġ. To what extent does this align with what you already know about the scientific method? Jot down in order the various subheadings you have actually used when writing up a lab report. In your IB science classes, are you doing any real science? Here are some questions to jump start whole class discussion: Students obtain further glimpses into what it means to dwell (cognitively) at the boundaries of Knowledge and Ignorance -ĬLASS ACTIVITY I: ARE YOU DOING ANY REAL SCIENCE? The intention has been to foster a critical, yet eyes-wide-open, confidence in the robustness of the scientific enterprise and its ongoing achievements. Theory of Ignorance combined with this unit, will leave the students with a sense of both the Capability and Fallibility of the Natural Sciences.
SCIENTIFIC METHOD MAP SERIES
Through a series of generative meta-questions this unit allows students to explore and critique sometimes counterintuitive nuances of methodology in the Natural Sciences. In its detail and specificity, it provides a benchmark for exploring all the other Areas of Knowledge. This unit of inquiry is first on the list in the Areas of Knowledge section for good reason.
0 kommentar(er)
