Sci-epol344 Course Notes - Science Curriculum Study

8/9/2019 Sci-epol344 Course Notes - Science Curriculum Study

1/106


2/106


3/106


4/106

CONTENTS 3

Modules 2-1,2A Model Lesson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

A Model for Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Forum 2-2. Planning Management Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Studio 2.1Planning Learning Outcomes and Success Criteria . . . . 44

3 Module 3Use of Assessment 46

Module 3-1Scientific Concepts and Teaching of Science . . . . . . . . . . 46

Module 23-2Making Use of Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

ParkinsonMaking Use of Information from Assessment . . . . . . . 51

GunstoneConstructivist Learning and the Teaching of Science . . . 52

Module 3-3Senior Curriculum and Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Module 3-4Constructivism and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Module 3-5Concept Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

4 Module 4Teaching Experience 57

Module 4-1Teaching Experience Debrief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Impact of the Knowledge Explosion in Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Module 4-2Science in Everyday Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Module 4-3Science in a Hangi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Hangi Science Concept Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Maori Achievement Programmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Four Lessons on Genetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

5 Constructivism and Group Learning 74

Teaching Science Constructively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Cooperative Group Work in Science Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

6 Epol-344 Exam Preparation 86

Review: Theoretical Underpinnings of Learning in Science . . . . . . . . . 86


5/106

CONTENTS 4

Review: A frame for learning by doing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Review: Teaching in context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90Review: Assessing student learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Review: Managing teaching in a laboratory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Reflection Journal 99

Reflections on Each Week of Epol-344 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Personal Philosophy of the Nature of Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Reflections on the Curriculum Treasure Hunt . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Teaching Acids and BasesBlog Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Reflection on Fads and Trends in Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

Final Reflections for Epol-344 104

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105


6/106


7/106

CONTENTS 6

theory because it includes the fossil record evidence and molecular genetics andother explicitly described mechanisms of evolution that can in principle be falsified

as explanations of evolution. The theory of evolution is however not a completetheory, since it is constantly undergoing modification. The same is true for almostall scientific theories. Some scientific theories are however so mature that they havehardly changed in many centuries. Newtonian classical mechanics is an example ofa very mature theory, though it is also supplemented slightly from time to time asnew results are provenso we can say that we do not fully understand Newtonianmechanics1.

Science has traditionally advanced by virtue of our (human civilizations) beliefin the objective reality of the physical world. So how can the modern constructivistparadigm be correct? It is worth noting that the constructivist paradigm of scienceis not a theory. It is a philosophical position that informs some scientific practice andeducation and sociological theory. It can be viewed not as a rival to Poppers viewsbut as complementary. Popper inserted the important element of uncertainty intosociological views of science. The idea that scientific theories should be falsifiablemeans that we cannot really ever have 100% certainty about the accuracy andcompleteness of any given well-formed scientific theory. This is quite different to thesituation in mathematics.

Mathematics is a logical edifice built upon reasoned axioms and proven theorems.Mathematics involves numerical experimentation as well, and therefore incorporates

elements of falsifiability, but this is of an entirely different character to scientific ex-perimentation. In mathematics Godels incompleteness theorems can be interpretedas providing a never-ending role for numerical experimentation and guess work inmathematical progress, but once a mathematician chooses a particular set of axiomsthen that is it! One can then either prove theorems within the consistent axiomaticsystem, or if the system is inconsistent then it is useless and cannot be mathematics,and if the consistent axioms are powerful enough then there will be theorems thatcannot be either proven nor dis-proven using the system. Science is not like this.

Mathematics is nevertheless intimately linked with scienceit is a universal lan-guage for formulating scientific theories. This is because in reality science is based

upon an objective universe of presumed unchanging laws. The problem is that thelaws of nature are unknown to any scientist. Furthermore, scientists do not have theluxury of mathematicians in choosing a set of axioms to investigate. The postulatesof science must result in accurate predictions within given specified uncertainties,otherwise one is not doing science. Scientific predictions are arrived at my modelling

1The uniqueness of solutions to the classical fluid dynamics equationsthe Navier-Stokesequationshas not to this day been rigorously proven. In fact a solution is worth a milliondollar prize, see the Clay Maths Institute


8/106

CONTENTS 7

scientific theories. So if a theory is a close approximation to objective laws of naturethen the theory will be deemed good for certain practical purposes. Any theory

so conceived by human minds is nothing but a mental construct. Constructivistphilosophers would say that the theory is socially constructed, and hence is a sub-jective element of knowledge. This is true to some extent, but the purpose of anyscientific theory is to closely model objective reality. How then are we to reconcilethe objective purpose of science with the subjective way in which we construct the-ories from imperfect observations? What then are the implications for teaching ofscience?

A partial answer to the first question is to keep a clear distinction between theobjective content of science and the subjective interpretations that our minds con-ceive. The extreme subjectivist constructivist view might be that there is no objec-tive content to science. This however ignores the fact that science seems to workphenomenally well in making predictions about physical reality, and this would beimpossible our subjectively derived theories approximate in every more refined andaccurate ways. This is the real beauty of science that educators can draw upon toattract students.

Despite seeming like a subjective endeavour, science is a self-correcting frameworkof knowledge, made so because it demands that theoretical predictions agree withobservations, plus the demand that observations need to be reproducible. This isvital for science as, say, distinguished from art or pure mathematics. Although

all isolated observations that scientific experiments record are disputable and havesubjective aspects, when a large group of scientists communicate and repeat theexperiments then objective data is obtained. Subjective interpretations are alwayspresent typically, unless the data is particularly simple, but the use of mathematicallogic to derive predictions from theory is an objectively specifiable process.

Science starts out as a subjective constructivist process, but has the goal of evermore closely approximating a presumed objective physical reality. It is not alwaysa continually improving discipline, indeed sometimes a branch of science may strayfurther from the underlying objective laws of nature before self-correcting, but in thelong run it does improve and becomes more objective in content over time, despite

its constructivist development.

There is a problem with the constructivist paradigm worth mentioning. If knowl-edge is constructed from our prior attempts to make sense of the world one couldask how do we ever get any knowledge? If we have no prior knowledge then wecannot construct any new knowledge or meaning. The answer is that all humanshave some pre-existing knowledge which could be called self-awareness or conscious-ness or other similar terms. No one knows where or how this primal knowledge orawareness originates. Nevertheless, it is a fundamental aspect of human existence


9/106


10/106

CONTENTS 9

together into theories and models that accurately predict the phenomena under in-vestigation, and of course we then need to communicate science to each other and

interpret one anothers research and statements. So science has grand final goals,and ideals of crisp concepts and arbitrarily accurate models, but it often ends upbeing a somewhat messy and fuzzy activity along the way to finer refinements.

Is there a single explanation for a phenomenon which teachers should

aim at? This is a slightly dopey question. The constructivist obviously pointsout, No, look at history! Of course it does not take much humility to realize thatno one can have the ultimate answers, and so there is never a single best explanationfor anything in science. Yet, from the collective knowledge of human science at anygiven point in history, there is often a best preferred explanation for any givenphenomenon, even if it is only, we have no idea about this phenomenon right nowother than that we are sure there is a rational explanation. A wise teacher willnot always try to teach students the preferred best explanation, since often (in thecase of fluid turbulence for example, or Lamarckian inheritance, or protein foldingto name just three examples) these current best explanations are too complicatedfor many students to understand, and can better be taught slowly and graduallyby first exposing students to more fundamental concepts that are prerequisites forunderstanding the full story so far. Even when students reach an advanced levelwe would do well to remind them that the preferred explanations and definitions ofconcepts can probably always be refined and improved. The more important goal

of education should probably be to teach students how to ask good questions! Wewould like our scientists to probe nature by asking deep questions and challengingexisting explanations. It is less important to teach students the formulations ofexisting explanations, unless they are presented as one way to devise more interestingquestions!

Can science provide an answer to a question? This is another dopey ques-tion. History is rife with so-called scientific explanations that were plain wrong, aswell as mysteries that for a long time had no scientific explanation at all (human con-

sciousness still has no scientific explanation, neither does gravity for that matter).The gravitational force is an instructive example. Newton and Kepler came up witha description of motion under the influence of a presumed force labelled gravity,but offered no explanation for it at all, then Einstein showed the phenomena couldbe accurately interpreted as a warping of space-time. Particle physicists now thinkgravity is a quantum field propagated by particles called gravitons. But really noone at present can fully explain the existence of gravity, we do not even know whatmass is yet. What the authors of the article really mean, we suppose, is that manyfolks think science can roughly explain anything, and that there is a sort of faith


11/106

CONTENTS 10

that exists in the science community that there is nothing that cannot ultimatelybe explained in scientific terms if only given enough experimental data and thought.

Furthermore, many people may think that all of the topics in the school science cur-riculum are supposed to have correct explanations that teachers should be drillinginto students. Here we can readily agree with constructivist sociologists of sciencewho point out the incredible navety of such views. The teacher needs to take careto correct poor scientific thinking and foster accuracy and incisive explanations anddeep questioning, but never allow students to think that there is only one correctanswer to any given question. There may objectively be a best answer of course,but who are we to say that we know what it is?

What a minute though, doesnt all of this conflict with what we tend to expectfrom students in examination answers? Wed argue yes. There is still a level ofduplicity in the way science is taught in many schools. When an exam is gradedby comparing student answers to certain template model answers then we areimplicitly teaching science in the old school way by expecting students to offer asingle best explanation. There are ways to avoid this without doing away withexam assessments, for example by posing open-ended questions in exams, and byusing flexible grading schemes that award marks for carefully explained reasoningrather than just correct answers.

When a better explanation is proposed how do scientists decide to ac-

cept it? It is worth considering the possibility that our universe is an artificiallygenerated dream-world. In that case there would be something akin to a pristinetablet upon which the exact laws of our universe are written and encoded. Thiswould be the source code for our world. Whatever the actual case, the fundamentalworking hypothesis of science is that we humans cannot find such pristine tablets ofknowledge and yet the structure of our universe is believed (yes, an article of faith)consistent and complete, so that all of the necessary facts required for explainingand predicting repeatable physical effects exist in nature in raw form. The job ofscience is to gather data about these effects and construct theories that give evermore accurate and complete predictions and explanations.

So we can agree with the constructivists that science is not a hallowed set offacts and theories about the world. Science is however predicated upon the objectiveexistence of such pristine facts and theories that may forever be inaccessible to thehuman mind and the human race as a collective. Given this it is a bit weird to readthis statement from the articles authors,

The false idea that science is exact and therefore that concepts inscience are unproblematic can be argued to have trapped science teaching


12/106

CONTENTS 11

into a pedagogy which misrepresents both the content of science and theprocess whereby this content is constructed.

How on Earth could such a situation have ever arisen in science teaching? One canonly conclude that at some time in the history of science education things wenthorribly conservative. We believe that most successful scientists have avoided sucheducation systems and have never in their blessed lives thought of science as exactand unproblematic. We pity the students who ever had to sit through school classeswhere such unrealistic and conservative ideological views of science education weresustained.

The three rules of thumb for acceptance/rejection of one scientific theory over

another are interesting to ponder for their teaching implications.

1. Parsimony: this refers both to the economy of a theory and its generalapplicability. This might be hard for some students to comprehend. A niceway of giving students an appreciation of this rule might be to get them tolook at the atomic models of Thompson and Bohr and compare the generalityof each. Another basic way of illustrating the point might be to get one groupof students to describe the trajectory of a cricket ball (just for instance) usinga sequence of coordinates that can be interpolated to make predictions; andgive another group of students the power of the classical kinematic relationsto describe the flight of the ball in a single equation. Ask the groups how theycould use their respective models to predict the trajectory of a tennis ball.

2. Elegance: this is very easy for students to comprehend. Just write theequations for classical electrodynamics in Clifford algebra notation and com-pare to Maxwells mechanical gear model for electrodynamics. The Lotka-Volterra equations describing predator-prey population relations is anothernice example of elegance. Consider prior models of predator populations in anecosystemthey were probably simple seasonal models with no variable forthe prey population number.

3. Power: predictive power is slightly more subtle because it demands of stu-dents an appreciation of what a prediction means.

Heres another interesting, comparatively recent, comparison of models that youmight like to get a year 12 or 13 physics class to explore. The old conventionalexplanation of winged flight proposed that aeroplanes are kept aloft by the pres-sure differential caused by the airflow over the specially shaped wing surface. TheBernoulli equations for gas dynamics show that since over the top wing the air trav-els further and connects with the air travelling under the wing which travels along


13/106

CONTENTS 12

a shorter path, so for smooth flow the air flow over the top wing must be faster,and Bernoullis equation predicts that this results in lower pressure, so the higher

pressure under the wing tends to raise the wing. Its quite amazing to think thatthis effect can lift a 400 ton Boeing 747. But aeroplanes can also fly upside down!Shouldnt the pressure differential then send the plane plummeting to the ground?The better theory in this case is good old Newtonian particle dynamics: the lift isnot merely caused by the pressure differential of air flow over the wing (which inany case is highly turbulent and so Bernoullis equations do not hold), the mainlifting effect is the simple high speed impact of air molecules onto the lower wingsurface which is always slightly inclined at a high angle of attack so-to-speak tothe forward motion of the plane through the atmosphere. This explanation worksfor both normal and inverted flight. We say this is the main lifting effect but

we should expect and encourage students to further critique this model of wingedaerodynamic lift. How do birds and insects achieve lift for example?


14/106

1. Module 1Science Content and

Pedagogy

Modules 1-2 & 1-3: Science and Safety

This module covers one week of study on,

Introduction: Safety and What is science and why should students learn sci-ence?

The Nature of science

Introduction to Science within the New Zealand Curriculum 2008

Issues in science teaching and learning identified by recent research.

The set tasks are,

1. Read lecture one then please work your way through the files sequentially.

2. Read lecture two after the Nature of Science file.

3. Complete the studio task for this week in the Studio folder. This will be thefirst forum for the week for online students.

4. Complete the NOS Questionnaire, email answers to [email protected]

Safety and Science ManualHighlights

Teachers need to always consider,

what could go wrong;

13
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


15/106

Module 1Science Content and Pedagogy 14

what can be done to prevent something going wrong;

what must be done if something does go wrong;

and be prepared and able to act appropriately in any emergency.

Some key parts of the document Safety and Science: a Guidance Manual for NewZealand School published by the Ministry of Education are noted below.

The legally binding Health and Safety Code of Practice is available online,www.minedu.govt.nz/Property/HealthSafety.

A whole bunch of health and safety and codes of practices apply to schools,

including the HSNO Act 1996.

Boards of Trustees are required to develop suitable health and safety policiesand practices and school staff are required to adopt them. A number of policyrequirements are mandated, such as

Compulsory recording of any serious accidents that harm staff or students.

All electrical accidents must be reported

First Aid registers are required to record at least eight specific items ofinformation as listed on page 8 of the manual.

Schools should have an animal ethics policy. [EDITOR: query, what isthe legal meaning of should compared to required?] An animal ethicscommittee may also be required if certain conditions of animal use applyto the school.

Teachers are considered at work during EOTC activities and full schoolresponsibilities apply.

A teachers first duty in an emergency is to ensure the safety of thestudentswhich implies knowing about all school emergency policies andprocedures.

All science rooms should have a first aid kit within easy reach.

Hazards need to be dealt with in the following precedence: EliminationIsolationMinimization. This includes hazards that are possibly neces-sary parts of a lesson.

All science room doors should be locked (for entrance) when the room isnot in use.

A code of conduct for students is recommended.
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/Property/HealthSafetyhttp://www.minedu.govt.nz/Property/HealthSafetyhttp://www.minedu.govt.nz/Property/HealthSafety


16/106


There are strict requirements for building safety and equipment storage.

Electrical and radiative safety needs to be comprehensive, and in particular,

Electrical equipment for school use operating at high voltage must belimited to less than 5 mA.

Teachers should know how to quickly cut-off mains supply and shouldensure circuits are protected by RCDs.

Electrical equipment should be regularly inspected and maintained incorrect working order. Class 3B and Class 4 lasers are not permitted forschool use.

Strict regulations and codes of practice also cover use of other equipmentincluding optical devices, burners, gas cylinders, glassware and sharp objects,protective clothing and sound generating equipment.

A strobe lamp and sound below 40 Hz should never be used at the sametime.

All schools must comply with the Animal Welfare Act 1999, and animalsshould be treated with respect.

Various common-sense codes of practice are given that cover handling and useof micro-organisms, organic materials, plants and minerals.

Hazardous Substances codes of practice, among many other recommendations,include the following.

Use of safety glasses, pipette fillers, fume cupboards, and safety screensmust be made part of routine laboratory practice where applicable.

The appropriate material safety data sheet should be referred to prior touse of any chemical.

No one should be exposed to hazardous chemical concentrations greaterthan threshold or permissible exposure limits.

Data sheets can be found at www.ilpi.com/msds/index.chtml, and www.-msdsonline.com and www.hazard.com.

Safe storage and labelling practices cover things like,

Under no circumstances should concentrated nitric or sulphuric acidor strong oxidizing agents be stored in plastic containers.

All chemical should be stored adequately labelled and according totheir compatibility (e.g., separate acids from bases and so forth).
http://www.ilpi.com/msds/index.chtmlhttp://www.msdsonline.com/http://www.msdsonline.com/http://www.hazard.com/http://www.hazard.com/http://www.hazard.com/http://www.msdsonline.com/http://www.msdsonline.com/http://www.ilpi.com/msds/index.chtml


17/106


Module 1-4: The Nature of Science

By the end of this section we should be able to: (1) articulate our personal beliefsabout the nature of science, (2) identify possible purposes for learning science andbegin to debate the merit of the arguments for each purpose, and (3) begin todevelop an understanding of the structure of the science curriculum.

Read the following definitions and consider their relevance to science teaching.

Definitions of Science

Science is seeing what everyone else has seen but thinking what noone else has thought.

Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowl-edge. Carl Sagan.

Comments. Considering the first definition, teaching can be thought of as theexposition part of scienceshowing students what the world is made of and howthings relate and interact at fundamental physical, chemical and biological levels.The thinking what no one else has thought aspect implies science teaching must

also involve teaching students how to think insightfully and how to ask interestingand probing questions, and how to go about trying to answer them. This secondaspect is very difficult to master, because one generally begins with purely acquiredknowledge. Generating novel ideas and thoughts, as demanded by this definition, isnot something that can easily be automated or routinely performed, instead studentsneed to acquire meta-cognitive skills that enhance their ability to think in newways and originate new ideas. Some students will be naturally more skilled atthis and others will need extensive training to reach a stage of mature scientificcontemplation. Some of us never reach this highly mature stage but can still practicegood science.

Sagans view of science recognizes that science is a body of collective knowledge,yet his emphasis is again on the thinking aspects of scientific activity. So scienceis impossible without a culture or society of mind. One person can constitute sucha culture of mind, but science works best in building up an ever evolving bodyof knowledge and idea generation when it involves communication between manyminds.

A flaw, or perhaps just an omission, from these definitions is any statementabout how science thinking and knowledge differs from other forms of collected and


18/106


synthesized knowledge. Science is unique in that it demands a cycle of observationhypothesizingmodellingpredictionexperimentation and repeated iterations. This

cycle is not always linear, continuous and smooth, and it involves a lot of messysocial interaction in some cases and mistakes and trial and error and so forth, butthe basic format of the science cycle can be seen at least in abstract form in all trulyscientific activity and research.

Next we look at the pictures in the Epol344 Book of Readings (p. 53). Thencontemplate the questions, suggested answers are given in italics.

What image of science is portrayed here? Why? Is it right? How does theview suggested here compare with the real world of contemporary scientists?

The images portray a very human image of science, a social activity, and alsoan intellectual activity. Thinking of the science cycle mentioned above, the pic-tures seem to convey an accurate impression of what science is all about. Themodelling aspects of science are captured by the making predictions, solvingproblems and calculating images. The honesty and perseverance images arevery important and should probably be explicitly part of any students scienceeducation. It also seems appropriate that the very first image is asking ques-tions since this, along with experimentation, is probably the beginning of allscience. The images could be made to reflect the real world of science evencloser if the honesty aspect could somehow be conveyed to capture the problems

of integritysuch as when science is funded by interest groups that put pres-sure on scientists to find the correct answerssince that motive is somethingall scientists, good or bad, should avoid! Also, perseverance might be betterportrayed not so much as involving tedium but the challenge of trying to ob-tain good data in the face of frustration from equipment failure, interference,bad judgements, poor guesswork, the need for repeated trial and error in somecases, exhaustive search and so forth. For all of these reasons these images ofscience from Relph et al. (2003) seem about right.

Does it actually distinguish science from other ways of knowing?

Yes. The images include the unique aspects that form the aforementioned sci-ence cycle of observation, hypothesis, experimentation and iteration. Perhapsthe sense of a cycle of potential improvement is not portrayed as explicitly asit could be, though it should be seen as implicit in the role of perseverance.

Weve read some definitions of science. Now wed like to add a definition of ascientist. Here is one whimsical, but we think quite accurate, definition: a scientistis someone who, in seeking to understand the world, is so lazy that they will go tosuperhuman efforts to organize and simplify their knowledge to the barest minimum


19/106


number of elementary facts possible required to explain whatever they are interestedin. So good scientists can be extraordinarily lazy people.

Jinxi had an elegant way of putting this,

Simplifying our understanding of the world is a highly complex ac-tivity.

Questions Arising from the NOS Questionnaire

There is a fair degree of subjectivity involved in answering those questions. I [EDI-

TOR] found the very first few questions quite difficult to answer unambiguously. Iwould often change my mind from Agree to Disagree depending on how I interpretthe question and interpret the key words in context.

For the first questions: Science does aim to find out the absolute truth, butin practice we dont expect to attain the absolute truth about the world, in factmost scientist would probably hope they never find out the absolute truth, sincethat would bring an end to science. So there is an inherent conflict within anypure minded scientist: they want to find out the truth about the world, and yetthey realize this is probably an impossible task. The practical compromise is totry to improve our understanding of the world and seek to improve our theoretical

approximations to physical reality.I had a number of difficulties with other questions that I now discuss.

Q.2 If a scientific theory is proven right it becomes a scientific law.

To my mind this is a good definition of a scientific law, but it is incompletebecause no scientific theory can be proven right in an absolute sense. Never-theless, scientific laws do exist. They are agreed upon findings of science thatcover general phenomena, such as the law of conservation of energy. Within aprescribed limited domain of application these laws can be considered as proven

exactly, but outside the prescribed limits there could be exceptionsthink of theimplications of Heisenbergs uncertainty principle for localized energy conser-vation. Taking the question literally I would tend to agree strongly with thestatement, yet I think it is a useless statement because no theories can beproven absolutely right.

Q.3 Science neutrally assesses the risks and benefits of modern technology.

In an ideal world this statement would be true, and I would like to agree withit. The trouble is, in the real world science is run by people, and people have


20/106


flaws and misunderstandings, and so the community of science cannot neu-trally assess risks and benefits. The intention of most scientists is probably to

aim for neutrality, and science and political watchdog groups and ombudsmenhave a role in making sure neutrality is adhered to to a high degree, but thesesystems are imperfect and cannot guarantee perfect neutrality.

Q.4 Scientific experiments can never be measured exactly.

We can always make measurements with perfect accuracysimply place un-realistically large uncertainties on the results! The difficulty in making exactmeasurements is not that we have uncertainties, but rather that we cannot be100% sure about our estimates of uncertainties. So if I state that the length of asteel ruler is 31.0270.003 cm where my coverage factor is for 95% confidence,

then that seems like an exact measurement, but the problem is my method forcomputing the uncertainty of0.003 cm is not perfect. It relies upon referenceto some length standard, which I have to trust has been accurately calibratedby some laboratory, and I also have no way of knowing whether my procedurefor measurement and comparison with the standard and indeed my uncertaintyanalysis calculation are flawed or not. So my statement of 95% confidencein the result still has some unquantifiable associated error. In other words, Imight have been overly conservative so that the 0.003 cm interval might inactual fact be closer to 97% coverage, or there may be systematic errors that Idid not take into account that would not effect the result 31.027 but would effect

the error estimate which might actually need to be 0.005 for 95% confidence. Q.7 Science can never determine absolute truth.

This statement is probably correct. But just as we cannot ever perfectly testa theory, likewise we cannot ever prove a scientific theory is wrong unlesswe know of contradictory data. So at some point in the future someone maystumble upon an absolutely correct mathematical model of quantum gravity.They would have no way of knowing it is absolutely true. So the key word inthis question is determine. Science could hope to find an absolute truth, butunless it is a tautology, this putative truth could never be humanly determinedas absolutely true.

Q.14 Scientific experiments produce precise, accurate results.

See Q.4 comments. Precision and accuracy refer to uncertainties. We canalways be overly conservative and plonk massive error estimates onto our rawnumerical results, and thereby fool ourselves into saying we have perfect pre-cision (no sound measurement will be able to contradict our number with itshuge error estimate). But when we are required to also state the confidencelevel associated with these errors then we get into trouble. So perfect accuracy


21/106


is ultimately impossible due to our finite resolution of any given measurementscale. This would be true even if quantum mechanical uncertainties were re-

moved.

Q.16 Scientific evidence only includes data about the natural world.

I agreed with this, but I do not really know what the natural world means.Does it include human consciousness? But conscious thoughts are purely sub-jective phenomena, so they cannot be fully made the subject of scientific in-quiry. Brain scans can only go as far as correlating neural impulses and pat-terns with first person subjective accounts of thinking. So if consciousness isconsidered part of the natural world I might think twice about agreeing with thisstatement. I would still agree of course, because the scientific evidence from

brain scans is then still data about the natural world. Is there anything unnat-ural that counts as scientific evidence? I cant think of any scientific evidencethat would be unnatural, but again, it depends what you mean by natural, andfor that mater what we mean by evidence. If we mean not magical and not fictitious nor imagined then yes, all scientific evidence is natural. Imagina-tion is used in science to help originate new theories or formulate conjecturesand so forth, but this is not evidence, if by evidence we mean objective data.

Q.24 There is no reason to question established scientific laws.

Taking this literally, one might say this statement is true. However, what

scientific laws are established? Probably none that we know of, although a few, like conservation of energy or PCT invariance and the second law ofthermodynamics, are all so well established that one would only question themwhen studying a novel phenomenon outside the usual domain of application ofthese laws. Scientific laws are never sacrosanct for this reason, so they canalways be questioned. One has to choose ones battles wisely though!

Q.27 Scientific explanations are created by interpreting evidence.

Im not sure about this. I guess some people can explain certain phenomenawithout the aid of evidence, but I think this sort of person is rare.

Q.28 When many scientific theories exist, the correct one is identified whenenough data is collected.

This statement seems tautologically true. Of course, if enough data has beencollected naturally one unique theory will emerge as the best fit. However,who can say it is the correct theory? Maybe none of the competing theoriesare truly correct, but only form a sequence of better approximations to aputative correct theory (see Q.7). Taking a more relaxed interpretation of thestatement, we can still disagree with the statement because merely given that


22/106


enough data has been collected does not automatically decide which theory isbest. Data does not think, so data cannot decide. Humans (or some sentient

thinkers) are required to do science and analyse the data. Unless the dataclearly points out the relative correctness of one of the theories, one generallystill has the hard work of analysing the data to see which theoretical modelbest fits the data, this may be far from trivial, even with sufficient data. Ifwe take an even more relaxed interpretation of this question, and suppose theintent is to consider when gathered data can decide between the best of manyalternative theories, then the statement is tautologically true and therefore aninane question-statement.

Q.29 Scientific methods are the same in every culture.

I have never thought about this carefully. Some methods of science are acul-tural, and so are indeed the same in every culture. However, science has origi-nated in many different cultures and societies independently, so there will alsobe many culturally specific methods. These can however all be borrowed, thatis, co-opted by another culture, if perhaps found to be efficacious or just inter-esting. So there is nothing inherently culture-dependent about science. Thisis one reason why science is so powerful and important in any education sys-tem, it transcends culture in many ways, as does mathematics, although eachculture brings to these disciplines its own unique approaches and insights.

The Value of Science

The module provides six reasons why science is important.

1. Economic argument: We need a supply of qualified scientists to maintainand develop the industrial process on which national prosperity depends.

2. Utilitarian argument: Everyone needs to understand some science to man-age the technological objects or processes they encounter in everyday life.

3. Democratic argument: In a democracy, it is desirable that as many peopleas possible can participate in decision making; many important issues involvescience and technology; every-one should understand science in order to beable to participate in discussion, debate and decision making about this.

4. Cultural argument: Science is a major cultural achievement; everyoneshould be enabled to appreciate it.

5. Moral argument: The practice of science embodies norms and commitmentsthat are of wider value.


23/106


6. Learning argument: Understanding the nature of science supports learningof science content.

We should also add that science involves a fair amount of playfulness and fun andcan be engaged in for pure aesthetic pleasure, the Aesthetic argument. Indeed,a huge amount of great science has originated from playful hacking with nature.Most Nobel Prizes in science probably begin with people having fun or discoveringstrange things and exploring them deeply out of a sense of curiosity.

The Constructivist Paradigm and Science

A commentary on the article (Carr et al., 1994) was given above in the introductionto these course notes on page 5. So there is no need to discuss this article furtherhere. The next reading is the British report on What should we teach aboutscience? (Osborne, Ratcliffe, Collins, Millar, & Duschl, 2001). An initial threepronged dilemma posed by the report was the identification of three competingmotives in science education, (1) the need to communicate the power of scienceboth as a knowledge creation and exciting activity, (2) the method of authoritarian,sometimes dogmatic and extended education and training required of scientists,(3) providing students with a picture of the inner workings of science. These threegoals or motives of traditional science education are not easy to blend harmoniously

together in the short time span of a typical school lesson. The report sought to findout what really should be taught in science classes in a broad sense, independentlyof any particular field of science.

The report questioned a number of learned individuals and collated their opinionsabout the question title of the report. Three open-ended questions were chosen.

1. What, if anything, do you think should be taught about the methods of sci-ence?

2. What, if anything, do you think should be taught about the nature of scientific

knowledge?3. What, if anything, do you think should be taught about the institutions and

social practices of science?

After a few rounds of revision nine key themes emerged from the collective expertson what they thought should be part of science education.

1. Science and Certainty


24/106


2. Analysis and Interpretation of Data

3. Scientific Method and Critical Testing

4. Hypothesis and Prediction

5. Creativity, Science and Questioning

6. Cooperation and collaboration in the development of scientific knowledge

7. Science and Technology

8. Historical Development of Scientific Knowledge

9. Diversity of scientific thinking

The concluding remark of the report is worth noting,

. . . what is needed is an education for citizenship which, as we haveargued both here and elsewhere, requires a much greater emphasis onexploring the nature of science and its practices. And, given that thisstudy has shown that even within the science and science educationcommunity there does exist a consensus about the core features of anaccount of the nature of science, this research has served to remove

one obstacle to teaching about science. We see this work, therefore,as providing a significant body of empirical evidence to buttress the casefor placing the nature of science and its processes at the core rather thanthe margins of science education. (Osborne et al., 2001, p.82)

Personal Philosophy of the Nature of Science

An example personal philosophy is outlined in the Journal section of these coursenotes on page 99.

Teaching Students About the Nature of Science

The second task is to read the Aims of the Nature of Science Strand of the NZ sciencecurriculum foldout. What four aspects are included in the Nature of Science? Theyare,

1. Understanding about science.


25/106


2. Investigating in science.

3. Communicating in science.

4. Participating and contributing.

Now read the Achievement Objectives for this strand of the curriculum for Level 5.Think about an example of how you would teach the students about the nature ofscience. Add any questions arising from this task in the forum. Below are varioussample streams of thought on these topics.

ExampleCommunicating an Experiment

Begin by splitting the class into group teams of about 3 to 4 students.Give each group a simple but not trivial experiment to analyse. If thereis time then the groups could be asked to perform the experiments andcollect the data, but this is not necessary. If there is insufficient timethen just provide some appropriate dummy data plus a rough outlineof the aim of the experiment. The real objective of the lesson is to getthe group to write up their dummy (or real) experiment as if they werepublishing a scientific paper, with the intention of providing sufficientdetail so that another team could reproduce the same experiment. The

teacher should provide some general guidance on how to do this and pro-vide some constraints to avoid excessive pedantry. The students shouldbe told that they will need to pass on their write-up to another groupfor scrutiny. The dummy data should contain enough information for acomplete reproduction of the experiment, but the teams should not betold what to include or exclude in their report. When they have com-pleted their write-up the groups share their reports. It would now bedesirable to allow time, perhaps another full class period, for the teamsto conduct the experiments that attempt to reproduce the results of theshared report. The teacher should let the groups decide for themselves

what level of communication they need to adopt.If some teams struggle to complete the reproduction of the experi-

ment because they have failed to discuss the report with the teacher ororiginal team who wrote the report then this will be a good learninglesson. Another thing to do would be to ask each team to suggest im-provements to the original experiment and finally discuss their resultsand compare them with the original experiment and then discuss thewhole exercise as a class.


26/106


[TODO: discuss enhancements and specific sample experiment data. Can be tailoredto suit any curriculum level and science subject.]

ExampleUnderstanding Science with Instrument Calibration

Tell the class that they are to investigate melting and boiling pointsof various substances. The number of substances to investigate shouldbe small, say three, such as ice, water, paraffin wax. Arrange suitableapparatus and small samples of materials. For an advanced class saltcould be provided to encourage students to investigate the effect of im-purities on the m.p. and b.p., but is not necessary. The important thing

is to provide each student (or in small groups) with three thermometers,two of which have been deliberately incorrectly calibrated. So eitheralcohol glass thermometers with faulty scale markings or offset digitalthermometers are required. Bunsen burners are needed for achievingb.p. measurements, with suitable tripods and water baths. Buckets orthermos flasks of crushed ice should be provided so that students canzero calibrate their thermometers. The teacher should provide minimalinstruction and just let the students freely conduct measurements, sim-ply telling them the objective is to accurately estimate the m.p. and b.p.of the various sample substances.

During the period, as students discover discrepancies in the ther-mometer readings the teacher can gently guide them towards figuring outhow to correctly calibrate a thermometer by indirect questioning. Ad-vanced classes should be guided to account for measurement uncertain-ties in both the calibration and the m.p.b.p. measurements and shouldbe expected to quote results with reasonable estimates of uncertaintyand coverage factor. Advanced classes can also be shown where to lookon the Internet for expert advice on how to perform accurate thermom-etry measurements (for example, msl.irl.cri.nz/training-and-resources/-technical-guides)

Alternatively, the same activity could be performed with weight/mass

measurements using deliberately mis-calibrated balance scales. Simi-larly, another alternative is to do simple length or area or volume mea-surements using deliberately mis-calibrated rulers or callipers. For thesemeasurements the class need to be given some minimal information aboutreference lengths and masses.

Yet another simple alternative would be stop watch or other timekeeping instrument calibration. This will require phoning the IRL talk-ing clock or using a computer running an NTP client as a time standard.
http://msl.irl.cri.nz/training-and-resources/technical-guides#Temperaturehttp://msl.irl.cri.nz/training-and-resources/technical-guides#Temperaturehttp://msl.irl.cri.nz/training-and-resources/technical-guides#Temperaturehttp://msl.irl.cri.nz/training-and-resources/technical-guides#Temperature


27/106


For students familiar with basic electronics a crude voltmeter or ohm-meter calibration is a possibility, but a reference standard voltage would

need to be arranged, although for classroom purposes it need not beabsolutely calibrated by a commercial laboratory if the cost would beprohibitive.

One problem with this type of activity is the inevitable boredom asmany students will quickly grasp the intent and purpose and methods,and so forcing them to go through the whole process of calibration justto measure something obvious like a melting or boiling point can causemotivation problems. So to spice up the activity a wise teacher mightintroduce an element of risk (simulated of course). For example, a sce-nario could be established whereby students need to measure something

using the calibrated instruments very precisely, if they are in error by asignificant amount they wills stand to lose something massive, such asrevenue earnings (from a shipment of massive cargo for example) or theymay even cause someones life to be placed in jeopardy if they performan inaccurate measurement. It does not take much imagination to thinkup many such scenarios and ask students to play act them. A real sim-ulated risk could be used, such as a bucket of cold water poured on astudent (or cold ice if they dont want to get too wet)1 if they end uprisking a human life as a result of their inaccurate measurement attempt.This could be explained as a metaphorical chill of death.

Another neat variation would be to use the same idea of introducingthe importance of calibrating all instruments used in science for quanti-tative measurements on other messier, more complicated systems. Forexample using systems involving nominal scales (where no meaning canbe attributed to differences or ratios of readings) such as measurements ofcolour scale, or food sweetness, or loudness (audio decibel levels are inter-val scaled but subjective loudness perceived by the human ear is at bestonly ordinal scaled). See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level of measurementfor reference.

ExampleInvestigating Science with Imaging Games

For this activity a computer is desirable, but a simplified version ofthe lesson could be done with pencil and paper. If the teacher does nothave access to appropriate software or computer programming skill thena cool variation would be to design a physical experiment using tennisballs or marbles as the probe projectiles, and the object to be imaged

1Nothing that violates school policy of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_measurementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_measurement


28/106


could be hidden by a black screen or wall. The students would fire theprojectile though a small hole in the screen without being allowed to look

though it. Of course contrarian and wise-ass students would be asked tosuspend their judgement for the sake of simulation purposes!

So the idea is to simulate a system that cannot directly be observed.The aim is to figure out the shape of the hidden object by observingwhat happens to visible projectiles as they scatter off the object. Thecomputer version is simple. A pen and paper version would need toinvolve some preparation of data. Students could also make up objectthemselves and figure out how to simulate scattering data and then letother students try to figure out the shape of their sample object. Forthe physical version of the game it would be best to keep the scattering

2-dimensional by using a large flat table.For Level Six or lower classes the hidden objects will probably need

to be very simple, either square or circle or toroidal cross sections, andat first only the cross section shape (one-dimensional projection) needsto be considered for simplicity.

Advanced students could be given clues about how to numerically re-construct the shape of the object. Less advanced students can be askedto deduce a simpler methodology that may just allow the rough size(extent) of the hidden object to be approximately determined. Thereare many ways to do this, one is to use brute force methods such as

comparison with scattering results from known sized objects. Another isto use simple shadow projection. Sophisticated basic image reconstruc-tion algorithms, such as Radon transforms, could be introduced to giftedstudents and Level Eight students.

More advanced students might be able to cope with the complicationof gravity on the flight of tennis balls used as probes for 3D imaging,which would probably take at least three class periods.

When summarizing and concluding the lesson the teacher can in-troduce the technologies of X-ray imaging, computed tomography, andmaybe even high energy particle accelerators. Comparisons with thevery different methods of optical imaging could be discussed with more

advanced students.

ExampleParticipating in Science with Country Pollution Level Com-

parisons

Here data on levels of pollutants need to be gathered for variouscountries or cities. It would be nice to use real data. However, for


29/106


teaching purposes a couple of fake data sets should be provided andstudents should not be able to tell they are fake. The point is simply

to provide many data sets that are clearly from different sources. Themeasurement uncertainties and methods of data collection should beclearly indicated along with the numerical data. Advanced studentsshould be left alone to interpret all of this auxiliary information andhandle it accordingly. For example, some of the dummy data sets shouldbe made so poor that students will naturally think of rejecting themfrom the inter-comparison.

The students should be asked to examine all of the data sets andanalyze them with the intention of forming some scientific conjecturesand comparisons between countries, possibly even to rank the countries

or cities from most heavily polluted to least. This can be done in groupsor individually.

The methodology for data analysis should be only very vaguely de-scribed by the teacher, and refined by class or group discussion withteacher input, as the lesson proceeds, and as students discover difficul-ties with some data sets.

Before class wide discussion the groups of students should be askedto prepare a brief presentation of their analysis, then the teacher shouldsummarize the activity and consolidate the main lessons about data anal-ysis, rejection, comparison statistics and so forth.

Curriculum Study Tasks

After following the direction in the Curriculum document for Module 1, and afterreading the Living World achievement aims and level objectives in the NZ Sciencecurriculum, we see the following questions. Sample answers are given after each initalics.

1. What do you notice about the complexity at each level?

The complexity increases as we go up levels, and each successive level complex-ity builds upon the lower level objectives. Thus living requirements graduateinto life processes which up another level become structural features of or-ganisms, up another level awe add functional features, and diversity of livingprocesses are added, and the high level 8 objective looks at processes on manylevels such as organismenvironment interactions, genetics and evolutionarydiversity.


30/106


2. Read the achievement aim for Living World Strand for Life processes. When astudent completes their secondary schooling, if they have taken biology would

the aim of the strand be achieved?

Yes, it seems reasonable to expect that a completion of the achievement objec-tives at each level would end up in a student having a good understanding ofthe overall achievement aims for the Living World strand of the curriculum.Partly this is obvious since the Achievement Aims are sufficiently vague asto be difficult to avoid some sort of appreciation of after completing all thedetailed Achievement Objectives. So the curriculum does appear to be at leastwell designed enough to be consistent.

3. Why do you think it is important for the teacher to follow the curriculum

instead of teaching a topic from a text book?This is a leading question which I dispute! Seriously though, there is nothingwrong with a teacher teaching a topic from a textbook, provided it has somerelation to the grand plan of the schools interpretation of the science curricu-lum. What would seem a bit weird would be a teacher who solely teaches lessonsout of textbooks with no appreciation of the learning goals of the curriculum.Maybe they have a better curriculum in mind, but sadly that would be a legalobligation problem! Teachers do have social obligations to practice certain pro- fessional standards and not deviate too much from the curriculum, and theywill always have the opportunity from time to time to participate in curriculum

reviews.

Thematic Re-organization of the NZ Curriculum

Next we look at Rex Bartholemews thematic re-organized curriculum document.The task is to complete the following little assignment:

1. Pick another strand, this time choose your senior specialist subject (Physics/Chemistryetc. if you are a biologist choose Planet Earth).

OK, for this sample weve chosenphysics.

2. Starting from the achievement aim (first column) follow through the sameobjective for each level, up to level 8.

Assume weve done so.

3. Is there a similar pattern?

Yes. For physics the increasing stages of complexity are as follows,


31/106


Exploration and description of simple patterns in physics.

Level 3 & 4 extend to description and identification of trends in patternsand effects of forces, the concept of energy is introduced explicitly.

Level 5 extends to description of changes in energy and forces, and in-cludes applied physics explorations (in technology or biology). New con-tent introduced includes electrical circuit phenomena.

Level 6 extends level 5 to both trends and relationships and extends skillsto problem solving tasks. Also the topics are extended slightly by intro-ducing atomic and nuclear physics. Applied physics skills are extendedto investigative activities. Problem solving is extended to include dataanalysis skills.

Level 7 extends explanatory skills to cover unfamiliar phenomenon andinclude quantitative explanation. Applied physics skills are extended toexplanatory activities.

Level 8 extends quantitative explanations to cover complex situations.Applied physics extends to cover astronomy and skills involving an abilityto relate physical ideas to applied physics issues.

4. For each level, can you think of the content you might teach to achieve thatparticular objective?

Here are suggestions for the Physics Levels:

Level 1 & 2: Exploration and description of simple patterns in physics.

One of the patterns I [EDITOR] like is simple harmonic motion. Thispattern is seen in waves of many kinds. Vibrations of string, spring mo-tion, violin strings and other string instruments, water ripples, light in-terference patterns, and many others. Many fun lesson plans could bebased around this content.

Level 3 & 4 extend to description and identification of trends in patternsand effects of forces, the concept of energy is introduced explicitly.

Continuing the wave motion theme. There are energy loss trends in all

real examples of wave motion. These are due to damping forces, whichare generally frictional in nature (complex electromagnetic interactions,often referred to as contact forces.) This sort of content (investigatingdamped motion and frictional effects) covers both the extension to trendsin patterns and the concept of energy an contact forces required at thislevel.

Level 5 extends to description of changes in energy and forces, and in-cludes applied physics explorations (in technology or biology).


32/106


We could continue with the wave motion theme, but for a change letsconsider some quite different physics content. How about the effect of

switches in electrical circuits. This topic would cover the notion of changesin energy and forces, as well as the new content at this level. Conserva-tion of energy is also involved through the basic circuit lawsKirchoffslaws (the junction rule and loop rule).

A suitable related technology application of physics worth exploring at thislevel could be computer network basics, such as signal routing and logicgates. These can make for a lot of fun game-based lessons.

Level 6 extends level 5 to both trends and relationships and extendsskills to problem solving tasks. Also the topics are extended by introduc-ing atomic and nuclear physics. Applied physics skills are extended toinvestigative activities.

The extensions at this level seem quite pronounced. To cover all of themlets consider a few additional physics subjects. At this level the rela-tionships between position, velocity and acceleration of ballistic projectilesshould be easy to introduce with minimal calculus tools. There is a wealthof interesting problem solving involving simple particle kinematics in thepresence of gravitational fields. To avoid the doldrums of traditional kine-matics lessons we could make most of the lessons activities where studentsneed to solve real problems to achieve some sort of automated game so-lution, such as setting up a tennis ball gun to hit targets first time up

without any trial and error. Similarly billiards games could be set up toinvestigate simple 2D collisions.

If Geiger counters and safe radioactive sources are available studentscould investigate the tolerance that simple organisms (safe bacteria, fungi,or plants) have when placed near a source. This activity would span a weekmaybe, during which other investigations could be done. Food sterilizationtechnology perhaps could be investigated, if not demonstrated.

Level 7 extends explanatory skills to cover unfamiliar phenomenon andinclude quantitative explanation. Applied physics skills are extendedto explanatory activities. Problem solving is extended to include dataanalysis skills.

Most students beginning this level will be unfamiliar with Poisson statis-tics, and so this topic could be introduced along with further investigationsof radioactivity and atomic energy level transitions. An interesting relatedtechnology that could be explained using radioactivity and atomic energylevels could be cell death due to radioactivity. What energy dose typicallydestroys a cell? Why are there lethal dose thresholds? What possible ex-planations are there for radiation tolerance? Many of these question can


33/106


involve quantitative analysis. There are of course endless questions worthasking that a skilled teacher can elicit from students. The answers may

take longer than the lesson time allotted to fully explore!

Level 8 extends quantitative explanations to cover complex situations.Applied physics extends to cover astronomy and skills involving an abilityto relate physical ideas to applied physics issues.

The previous level discussed radioactivity, so lets choose a different topic for this level discussion. What about optics? Specific content here couldinclude explanation of light interference effects, diffraction gratings, andso forth. There is plenty of scope for imagination here in lesson planningand activity creation.

Forum Comments on the NZ Science Curriculum

The Editor did not have many questions arising from the initial study of the NZscience curriculum. Below are some thoughts posted by our colleagues.

One issue is the vagueness of the achievement aims and objectives. This is a goodthing in the Editors opinion. It gives teachers much room and flexibility to concen-trate on providing science students with a rich and rewarding educational experienceat secondary school One problem with this is the external assessment regime which

still seems to demand that students answer fairly black & white questions, and doesnot appear to give students much chance to demonstrate their scientific thinkingskillswhich one might think would be the aim of a science education! Instead theexternal exams are somewhat traditional and place undue emphasis on rote learning.It is entirely possible that a student schooled in the curriculum skills will achievetremendous external assessment results, but this would be a side-effect. Many stu-dents might struggle to achieve good exam grades without reducing themselves tostudying by rote. This places a dual burden on teachers: on the one had a rich andvaried educational experience is demanded by the curriculum, with many vague andholistic goals and aims, on the other hand the pressure to help students do well inexternal assessments might lead to poor teaching methods such as dreary drills and

verbatim blackboard notes instruction and so forth.


34/106


Studio Tasks

Studio Task 1: Is there such a thing as a Scientific Method?

Start by reading, Being Scientific, Epol344 Course Reading 6 (p. 54 of your bookof readings). The questions posed and some sample answers are given below.

Write three reasons why you think teachers would do this activity with theiryear 9 class.

1. It gives students some hands on experience in making real measurements

and data analysis, which are two crucial skills in all sciences.2. The students are gently introduced to hypothesis formation and testing,

another critical attribute of all science.

3. The activity is probably engaging and semi-fun, or at least can be madeto be engaging and fun with the right teaching emphasis and extensions.

Here is another reply from Diana,

(1) Using and introducing scientific equipment that may be newto learners. (2) Highlighting aspects of safety in science. (3) Car-

rying out an experiment and making observations including logicaland systematic work

What do you think are the limitations of this activity?

It is a little one dimensional, the aim is too obvious and the results areintuitively obvious. So it lacks the element of surprise that often makes scienceespecially fun and interesting. The instructions are very prescriptive, whichis not necessarily bad, but it leaves little room for students to make mistakesand explore their understanding of experimental processes.

Here is another reply from Diana,

The experiment yields only single results or single comparisonso there is a long set up time and many observations but it missesways to incorporate learning more from a lesson such as this in avaluable time period. The students may in fact know the answerso the hypothesis is not disproved and there is little scope for fur-ther engagement or interest in this task. The experiment providessome opportunity for collaboration with others to observe, recordand plot the results but no real commencement or introduction of


35/106


critical thinking or reasons to debate this experiment on a (year 9suitability) level provoking deeper understanding. The hypothesis is

not created by the students so they are not as engaged. The activityprovides a chance to handle equipment and safety is introduced butlimited opportunity to improve all the students skills over the courseof this experiment, some may become bored.

Would you call this activity a science investigation? Why?

Yes. Students are investigating properties of a liquid. However, due to theabove limitations, it is not as open-ended as one might hope for a good qualityscience activity. It is at best only weakly investigative, but this will dependvery much on the initiative of the students, some may really go for it and

extend the overly structured activity beyond just doing what they are told.Again, here is Dis reply,

The present experiment is a simple practical experiment withan aim, hypothesis, method, observation, recording of results andconclusion, but not so much an investigation because the resultsare likely to be already known or at least easy to predict. Thisexperiment seems to follow a perhaps older learning tradition ofwhat I found referred to as rhetoric of conclusions and is not learnercentred or inquiry or discovery focused.

Thinking back to your residency science workshops, is there one scientificmethod?

No, there are many broad methods useful in scientific investigation. Puretheory is one. Experimentation is another. There are many varieties of exper-imentation, too numerous to list. Computational experimentation is anotherdistinct form of investigation, useful when physical materials are not availableor too hazardous or expensive to use for real.

What were some of the types of investigations we did?

During the residency we did some practical experimentation (the effects ofheat and pressure on enclosed volumes using the candle and dyed water andboiled egg); we did some theorizing (thinking about energy transformationwith the eight task stations as props; we also did some fact checking or memoryenhancement with the flip card game (also called reading the literature inprofessional circles); and we did some concept mapping, which is not a formalscientific activity but is something that all scientific thinkers do on a dailybasis, whether formally or not.


36/106


In the studio forum for this week, discuss how you could make the activitydescribed here into an open ended investigation?

We could challenge the students to look for ways to confound their expec-tations. What happens if the heat source is moved further way from thecontainer? Is there an asymptote whereby with a very weak flame the timeto reach boiling is almost indistinguishable? What happens if impurities areadded like salt or sugar or oil? What about adding dirt or other solid or liquidinsoluble impurity? What about predicting the time it would take for a in-termediate sized container to boil, or a much larger container? Does the timetaken increase linearly with the volume? These are all questions that extendthe activity.

To make the activity open-ended from the beginning, the teacher could merelypresent the students with the equipment and ask them to do something withscientific merit! Then ask students to bounce some ideas around. Someoneis highly likely to think of the boiling point measurement, and it would beup to the teacher to give the go ahead to start on any suitable suggestedexperiments. This might take up more period time, but would be worth itowing to the mental exercise involved.

Im not sure if Azra had something else in mind to make the activity moreopen-ended. . . ?

Here is another nice answer from Diana,

An open-ended investigation includes identifying possible prob-lems and learners proposing their own hypotheses to come up withexperimentation, therefore giving a chance for experimental design.Open ended also helps with individual learning and proceeding withdifferent rates of progress, therefore is a flexible and dynamic ratherthan a static approach, I found a reference to the fact the existingexperiment is a rhetoric of conclusions and therefore is not learnerdriven. I am sure that this experiment could be made open endedand still suit Year 9 students and not swamp them.

This experiment measures only a comparison between boilingtime for two volumes of water. By designing a similar experimentfor boiling water with the addition of further variables and allowingthe student to be given contact with the materials and come upwith some discovery themselves, the experiment will include morefeatures of making science more exciting around discovery. Variablesto be added could be sugar but other solutes such as salt could bechosen.


37/106


In the introduction links could be made to prior knowledge andan explanation that instead of boiling pure liquid water, if we add a

solute to it, the resulting solution behaves differently when heated.Also the concept of entropy could be introduced before or after theexperiment to allow further understanding.

The teacher could follow up the intro with questions and an-swers for why this may be or get the class to jot some ideas downaround elevation of boiling points and time taken, and discuss orprovoke thinking around some real examples such as adding salt towater before cooking pasta, and what the students may have alreadyobserved.

The learners may come up with some reflection or understand-

ings around the idea that the molecules in a liquid solution are lessorganized as compared to those in pure water; this is because the so-lute molecules or ions are free to move about randomly. As a result,the water molecules are more disorderly in a solution as comparedto pure water.

It is probably important to ensure any discussion is not based onmisconceptions at this stage so that the experiment and hypotheseshave real meaning and learning so this sort of discussion is usefulearly on.

When the practical stage is reached the teacher can give the

opportunity for the students to organize the equipment and methodsthey need themselves and work at their own pace and with theirown experimental design. That means the aims could be slightlydifferent or varied and this would in turn allow more hypotheses tobe included and evaluated. If the students weigh the solutes andrecord these measurements as well, they will be able to experiencefor themselves more understanding about solutions and experiencelearning inquiry as well benefit from increased autonomy for theoverall experiment.

In summary the experiment although not much more compli-cated than the original one actually can allow for a more complex

set of variables: in a continuum of different types of solutes, differentamounts or ratios of solutes and liquids, different overall volumes.The students learn more, have more challenge from their multi levelobservations or for those that cannot work as quickly, the experi-ment can be scaled down and be slightly less ambitious (perhapsonly introduce two extra variables).

Once the conclusions are reached the class could end with dis-cussing both elevation of boiling point and conversely depression of


38/106


freezing point, leading on to possibilities to experiment with moreconversions or knowledge around solid, liquid, gas phases and future

learning opportunities.

Studio Task 2: The Nave Ideas of Children

This reading (Ross, Lakin, & Callaghan, 2000b) was a delight to review. Somequestions were a little bewildering or required a second glance even for an educatedadult, other were so simple and yet revealing when considering the nave answersgiven by some children. The questions posed in the Module notes were: Whatexamples provided in this reading did you find interesting? Choose one of the

examples, in your view what may have led to students holding these alternativeideas. Discuss your ideas in the online forum. Below is an extract from discussionof some of the questions.

The Temperature Question: Mixing hot and cold water is lovely and sim-ple. It is particularly cool to wonder about children who predict a 7010 =50 result in the second instance. They are at least applying some analyti-cal thought to the task, and only lack the correct understanding of intensiveproperties, which after all is quite an advanced concept. So they should beinitially applauded perhaps for obtaining an interesting answer, before being

guided to the correct approximation of (70

+ 10

)/2 = 40

.

The Light Seeing Question: This is cute. Until about the 15th centurymany learned philosophers used to still think that we see due to vision spiritsor what-have-you emanating from our eyes. So young children who still havethis nave view can be comforted by explaining to them what adult historicalintellectual company they share.

The Gravity Question: this is a short and sharp little problem. The direct-ness of the possible answers and the world-view one needs to adopt to get thecorrect answer is lovely in its simplicity and perhaps surprise to youngsters.

The difficulty might lie in convincing them (young children) about why theycorrect answer is correct, rather than just telling them the answer and havingthem merely accept it upon authority. It requires some abstract thinking andideas about pictorial models, and of course involves a 2D representation ofsomething only astronauts and space tourists ever see as a whole in real life(the Earth suspended in space).

The Food Question: this was quite complex. A correct answer from themultiple choices depends upon ones ability to parse the terms fuel and mate-


39/106


rial correctly, and of course overcome natural prejudices about what makes usheavy after eating food. Excretion and exercise are the natural socially primed

answers to weight loss. But that is not what the question asks upon carefulreading. It takes quite an analytical mind to eliminate the incorrect choices.The first option (a) is even a little ambiguous. It is true that using up foodwill result in conversion of mass to energy. Similarly choice (e) is inviting butmisleading. The questions asks not about how energy leaves the body though,it asks us about what happens to the (possibly chemically rearranged) atoms.I enjoyed the complexity of this question, hence the multiple discussions aboutit that could ensue in a classroom debate about the correct answer.


40/106

2. Module 2Science Lesson

Planning

Modules 2-1,2A Model Lesson

Task 2.1A Model for Planning

When planning we refer back to the curriculum document to make sure that thelesson/activity we are planning is suitable for the right strand, achievement level,achievement objective and the learning outcomes are specific and measurable. Yourtask is to follow the systematic process used to write the model plan you will belooking into the mind of Azra as she prepared the plan.

As an example exercise:

1. Open the curriculum fold-out to level 5 and go to Material World, Achieve-ment objective, Properties and change of matter. Investigate the chemical andphysical properties of different groups of substances, for example, acids andbases, and metals.

2. Consider what key science ideas are involved with acids and bases e.g., acidsand alkalis are chemical (material) groups with common properties.

3. Now we have to decide what we expect the students to know at the end of thelesson (Learning Outcomes). These have to be specific and measurable. e.g.recognise that indicators are chemicals that change colour in acidic/alkalinemedium.

Carry out an investigation to make Camellia petal indicator.

Use this indicator to test four household chemicals to determine if they areacid or bases.

Make observations.

39


41/106

Module 2Science Lesson Planning 40

Write a report.

4. Look at the Nature of Science achievement objectives. We could choose tointegrate any of the four AOs. In this lesson I have chosen Investigating inscience.

5. For this lesson I have decided to use Investigating and at level 4. (The reasonI have chosen level 4 is that my class at this stage are not up to level 5)

Now think about the following questions:

Which scientific skills can we teach in this lesson?

What Key competencies do we need to develop that we could do through thislesson (page 1213 of NZC)?Azras model plan considers that participating and contributing are appropri-ate here.

What skills do I want to integrate here?Azras plan would like the students to observe changes, she wants to developtheir skills of systematically record observations. The curriculum is seamlessand it is our job to bring the students up to the level and extend those whoare able and need to be challenged. So it might be worth looking at level 4

and see if any AOs from there could be appropriate. You have seen me use alevel 4 NOS objective but remember if you choose a different level you needto have a reason for it.

Forum 2-1Comments and Questions arising from the video A Model

Lesson. In light of the rapidly approaching TE when you will be critiqued onmanaging practical workpost comments on Azras lesson management. Considerthe issues raised above, which will be the focus of your associates comment on yourteaching, and aim to make positive suggestions on how one of the issues was handledwell or could be handled differently. Keep your initial comments to about 50 words

but take time to read and respond to other folks comments too.

Here are some of the forum comments: First from Michael,

It was good to see that instructions were issued prior to allowing thestudents to leave their seats and that they were required to wear safetyglasses however Azra was not wearing any. I think that it is best todevelop high safety standards from the start. It is better to be cautious.I would have requested that the drink bottle be removed and that the


42/106


students wash their hands post the trials. The pouring of hot water intothe test tubes was not a good example!

From Rewa,

I liked the way in the introductory discussion about what an indi-cator was that Azra took a wrong answer and turned it around to helpher get the right answer. This helped progress the lesson, related theindicator concept to something they all knew and would demonstrate tothe students that any answer is appreciated and adds to a discussion.

From Hannah,

I enjoyed seeing how the instructions were explained clearly, onestep at a time to the whole class, and how they only had the necessaryequipment for that step in their possession at the time. That way allthe groups in the class could keep up and none would rush ahead or playaround with other things and become off task.

From Leah,

I expected that safety precautions would be modelledusing safetygoggles, using a glass rod to push petals in, pouring hot water frombeaker using tongs or silicon grabber. I thought it was interesting thatthe broken test tube was not cleaned up immediately, but understandthat it would have disrupted the flow of the instruction. In this case, Iwould have thought students would be asked to stay seated until it couldbe cleaned up.

From Blair:

On Behaviour Management: I was impressed by the short sharpway in which Azra handled mistakes and confusion and poor behaviour.The kids were probably behaving extra well for the camera, but evenwhen they were silly Azra was able to easily put them in line with asingle word or a single stare. There was no embarrassment induced, onehopes, and the kids got the message. There was no time wasted withdiscipline.


43/106


Forum 2-2. Planning Management Issues

We were asked to discuss potential management issues. The online Forum was setup with three strandsone for each lesson plan. We were to select two plans tocritique and write an entry discussing potential management issues. Discuss themanagement issues with at least two other students by responding to their forumentries and exchanging ideas.

Critique of the WeatherWind Lesson Plan. Below are some comments.

From Blair:

I couldnt think of any management issues with this lesson plan.Im not sure why a key activity would be Everyone display their

title page, whats the point of that?Why should they need to be told to copy things into their book? I

Documents

Sci-epol344 Course Notes - Science Curriculum Study