The Nature of Science

This week I read two writings by my professor, Jerrid Kruse.  The first was What Makes Up Stuff?, a short story about the history of the discovery of matter and particles given in a way that children might understand.  It's interesting to me because I think that a teacher could go even further with the story and maybe write a short reader's theater script for students to act out.  It could be a fun way to combine reading with science history.

The story of how people favored Aristotle's idea of four elements because he was famous is annoying to me, but not shocking.  It reminds me of the history of astronomy and the many different theories that lasted simply because they were popular or easy to pair with cultural ideas.

I like the very last question Kruse asked, "What does this story tell you about people who do science?" because it might help students to think that scientists are regular people with flaws and that they might be able to be scientists too.

The second story I read was also by Jerrid Kruse, Studying Animals.  This short story is about the history of ecologists and the different ways they have studied animals.  The story is interesting but I think the questions are more important because they require the student to think more about the nature of scientists and how they work.  It would hopefully challenge their ideas of what scientists do and lead them to ask more questions as well as read more about people like Charles Darwin and Jane Goodall.  I also like the metaphor of "science" being a puzzle that scientists are trying to piece together.  I'm not sure how others would look at it, but it makes me wonder what the "big picture" might look like when all put together.

The third writing I read this week was Keys to Teaching the Nature of Science by William F. McComas; in the article he discusses The National Science Education Standards and nine core nature of science (NOS) ideas that students in the K-12 setting need to learn.

• Science demands and relies on empirical evidence.
• Knowledge production in science includes many common features and shared habits of mind. 
• McComas goes on to state that, "in spite of such commonalities there is no single step-by-step scientific method by which all science is done."  I am a big fan of the scientific method because I feel that it helps to rule out some types of bad data and inaccurate conclusions so I am not sure how I feel about this.
• Scientific knowledge is tentative but durable. 
• Laws and theories are related but distinct kinds of scientific knowledge.
• Science is a highly creative endeavor. 
• I've always considered myself a creative person but this concept is a difficult one for me.  I acknowledge that the initial spark of inspiration is creative but I am still unsure that, "The knowledge generation process in science is as creative as anything in the arts."  One thing I like about science is that it's logical, being creative tends to make things "messy."
• Science has a subjective element.  
• I get this because PEOPLE are subjective and fallible.  This is also one of the reasons that I appreciate the scientific method.
• There are historical, cultural, and social influences on science.
• Science and technology impact each other, but they are not the same.
• Science and its methods cannot answer all questions.  
• My first reaction to this statement was of strong disagreement, but then I thought about it for a moment.  Science can't say why certain colors are my favorite or why people like different kinds of music.  It also can't say why people think the things that they do.  It isn't to say that science is "wrong" it's just that there are certain things that scientists can't study.

Fostering Scientific Habits of Mind

Right now I am taking a methods course on teaching science in the elementary grades.  Last Thursday the main thing we discussed was what we felt our goals for students in science class should be.  Our teacher wanted us to whittle down the class list to ten.  It took awhile but was manageable.  It was interesting to see other future educators think about what was actually important to them in terms of student goals and engagement.

For me, science is a passion.  It's a long-time friend of mine due to things like Star Trek, A Wrinkle in Time, and teachers that really enjoyed their jobs.  Not all of my teachers were the greatest, but I got lucky for the most part and grew up to be very curious.  For me, thinking about the nature of the universe is akin to how some people view church.  I don't expect others to feel that way, but it is important to me that my students (and child) want to know more and are inspired to keep learning.  

Back to the subject of "goals," for my class I read a few articles and one that stands out to me is Fostering Scientific Habits of Mind by Craig Leager.  He talks about teaching students science in a way that impresses upon them the attitudes and values found in the science community at large.  I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that many people don't equate science with values.  

He writes about an elementary student excited to learn more with a teacher that values her passion but then goes on to the low rates of science-literacy in the United States.  The techniques used by many teachers are merely memorization and regurgitation.  As an alternative he brings up Science for All Americans' (1990) list of "societal values as (being) inherent to scientific habits of mind,"

• Curiosity
• Openness to New Ideas
• Informed Skepticism

Paired with this list, Leager states three key factors for teachers who wish to impact their students positively:

• Teacher Modeling
• Valuing Mistakes
• Authentic Questioning

Leager discusses each idea in depth through a classroom scenario that is extremely positive and, I think, truthful. It demonstrates good science teaching using broader goals instead of only using very narrow objectives.  I think that by keeping some objectives for science more "holistic" instead of just content based it will help produce more well-rounded students that are better able to apply their curiosity and thinking abilities to all their subjects.  

Science literacy is important to being a intelligent, critically-thinking adult.  The skills that students can learn with science are not only applicable to science topics and science careers.  Critical thinking, authentic questioning, and all the rest are important traits to have whether you are a scientist, business manager, construction worker, or customer service rep.

Leager, C. (2005). Fostering scientific habits of mind. Retrieved from http://www.iacad.org/istj/32/3/habits.pdf