frank jenkins, phd secondary science education centre for mathematics science and technology...

Frank Jenkins, PhDSecondary Science Education

Centre for Mathematics Science and Technology Education (CMASTE)Centre for Research in Youth Science Teaching and Learning (CRYSTAL

Alberta)

University of AlbertaEdmonton, Canada

[email protected], CMASTE

My History for Beyond InquiryThen (laboratory inquiry)Processes displayed in laboratory problem solvingSkills, processes, problem solving & nature of scienceCreate-test-use for kinds of NOS problem solvingProcesses required for each of create-test-useFalsification of hypotheses and predictionsNow (beyond laboratory inquiry to media inquiry)(and then) Multi-perspective view pro and conCreating criteria list for evaluating claims to knowledgeTesting/Using criteria for evaluating claims to knowledge

[email protected], CMASTE 2


Kinds of Laboratory Inquiry

Problem Solving

Processes

Skills

N ature of Science

C-I T-HI T-HD U-D

sC-I: create inductivelyT-HI: test hypothesisT-HD: test predictionU-D: use deductivelyC - createT - testU - use

CTU & NOS Perspectivescreate a concept

inductive reasoningtest & verify hypothesis

hypothetico-inductivetest & verify prediction

hypothetico-deductiveuse a concept

deductive reasoningtest & falsify an

hypothesis or prediction

The scientific purposes of laboratory work are classified as C, T or U.

C T U is a progression for a concept—an increase in certainty/validity/trust.

C T U T eventually leads to falsification of hypotheses or predictions.



CTU Lab Reports: ProcessesPurpose Create (I) Test (H-I) Test (H-D) Use (D)

Problem general general specific specific

Hypothesis X test hypothesis

test hypothesis

X

Prediction X X test prediction

X

Analysis create hypothesis

general specific use hypothesis

Eval. 1 evidence evidence evidence evidence

Eval. 2 X hypothesis prediction

hypothesisX

5

Lab Unit Plan: CTU & Evid.Bases


Evidential Bases Test (HorP) (falsify)

Create (I)

Test(HorP) (verify)

Use (D)

thought experiment Inv. 10.3

demonstrations Inv. 10.6

dry lab (lab exercise) Inv. 10.2

wet lab (in a laboratory) Inv. 10.1

field trip

computer probes Inv. 10.4

video/photo lab Inv. 10.5

computer video-analysis

simulation/animation Inv. 10.7

remote access

Scientific (NOS) LanguageWatch your language!Based upon the evidence

gathering here, ....According to the Bohr

model of the atom, ….The evidence suggests a

correlation between ….The prestigious journal,

Science, reports that ….

Only using three samples we found that…

The reliability was high among the class members but ….

The certainty expressed in significant digits is ….


Write like a scientist writing for a peer-reviewed journal. Use nature of science language.

Scientific Language ExerciseTake pure science

notesin the left column

[Listen to a science lecture or read primary literature and take standard pure science notes in the left column and nature of science language notes in the right column.]

Take NOS notesin the right column

“Based upon personal peer-reviewed evidence and publications ….”

“Research published in JRST and in Science Education indicates that…”

“If … and … then ….”“With a high certainty,

….”[email protected], CMASTE 8

Scientific Attitudes (not attitudes towards science)

That which is left after all else is forgotten.

critical-mindednesssuspended judgmentrespect for evidencehonesty; objectivitywillingness to changeopen-mindednessquestioning attitude

tolerance for uncertainty

curiosity; creativityappreciation for beauty,

unity, and complexityperseveranceAlso see:Technological attitudesSocietal attitudesin STS monograph.


(Adapted) Primary LiteratureLearning ScienceStudents learn science by

reading primary literature by adaptation of:language; conceptual

level; sentence structure

examples; analogiesamount and level of

mathematicslength of article

Learning About Scienceby adaptation of:

names for experimental designs, procedures, materials and skills

the presentation of counter arguments

quantitative expressions of (un)certainty

reliability & validity arguments


Creating & Testing My ClaimEducation and science primary research literatureDaily Edmonton Journal including Sunday ReaderNutrition Action Health Newsletter by Centre

for Science in Public Interest (a magazine)Climate Cover-up by James Hoggan (a book)Wingnuts by John Avlon (a book)The Best American Science Writing by

GroopmanWhat the Dog Saw by Malcolm Gladwell (a book)The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan (a

book)[email protected], CMASTE 11

Contexts: Inquiry for CitizenshipSource of claimsnewspaper articlesmagazine articleslobbying literatureradio and TV newsprimary research

literature (peer-reviewed)

textbook and classroom language/talk (yours?)

Types of claimsmedical research

MS liberation treatmentalternative medicine

candling; aromatherapyenvironmental research

Oil sands developmentclaims of the paranormal

water witching


Health claims to evaluatehealth claimsdrug efficacysurgery efficacyalternative medicinenaturopathic; chiropracticaromatherapy;

acupunctureherbal or magnetic therapyfaith-healing; hair growthemergency wait-timessurgery-wait-time deaths


Environmental claims to evaluateenvironmental

claimsAthabasca River waterglobal warmingoil sands operationcoal-burning plantscoal-bed methanewind turbineshigh voltage power

linesgasoline automobiles


Political claims to be evaluatedpolitical claimscorporate tax cuts

create jobs (or not)private medicine is more

efficient (or not)snow removal costs

money (or not)higher pay invites more

competent politicians (or not)

tough punishment deters crime (or not)


Paranormal claims to be evaluatedparanormal claimsalien abductions; UFOsbig-foot; crop circlespsycho-kinetic powerschanneling;

mindreadingfairies; ghosts; visionsastrology; ESPhalo readingswater/gold witching


Education claims to be evaluatededucation claimsimplicit teaching of NoS is

effective (or not)smaller class-sizes increases

achievement (or not)depth of curriculum is better

than breadth (or not)60 min periods are better

than 80 min periods (or not)inquiry-based learning

increases achievement (or not)


Nutrition Action byCentre for Science in the Public InterestQuick StudiesMg and Sudden Death

88 000 women26 yearscorrelational study

Omega-3s Miss Markrandomly assigned4,800 subjects (60-80 a)1 of 4 margarines; 3.5 ano significant difference

Don’t Just Walk260 middle agedfour groups (1 control)9 monthsquotes other studies

Protein & Carbseight country study800 adults lost weightthen given either

protein or carbs


onHealth by Consumer ReportsLowering Blood Pressure3 pages; no research

citednatural medicines—

“evidence is meager …”Need for Vaccines (1 p)Marvin M. Lipman, MD,

Consumer Union’s chief medical advisor since ’67

Strength & Circulationsmall study; journal cited

Work Out Your Cold (0.1 p)1002 adults; 3 months5+ vs. 1- days of workoutBritish Journal of Sports

MedicineSupplements & CataractsArchives of Ophthalmology11, 545 male doctors; 50+ avitamin C, E or placebo; 8 a


Climate Cover-Up book (Hoggan)--evaluating claims to knowledge

relevant credentials?practicing researcher?legitimate peer-review?paid “expert” opinion?respected journal?source hyper-vigilance?national science

academy?evidence-based science?selected evidence?fact checking?

scientific attitudes?scientific integrity?big-money lobbying?ethical PR firm?against misinformationpetition vs. survey?problem of balance?economic interest?tolerance for

uncertainty?manipulated media?


Inquiry Concepts for Citizenship--evaluating claims to knowledgeanecdotal evidence?correlational study?cause & effect study?animal or clinical trial?placebo & placebo

effect?double blind design?sample size?random sample?term of study?

controls & control group?

peer-reviewed (refereed)?

prestigious journal?funding agency?replication needed?expressed (un)certainty?scientific attitude(s)?multi-perspective view,

pro and con?


Testing claims to knowledgeGeneral criteria:independent tests?substantive debate?trust for authority?alternative hypotheses?qualitative and/or

quantitative evidence?chain of argument?parsimony/Occam’s

razor?

mere contemplation?mere argumentation?descriptive power?explanatory power?predictive power?testable & falsifiable?carefully designed

and controlled experiments?

. . . [email protected], CMASTE 22

Evaluating health claims: Q’s1. funding agency?2. relevant credentials?3. legitimate peer-review?4. respected journal?5. anecdotal, correlational

or cause-&-effect study?

6. animal or clinical trial?7. double-blind study?8. placebo & placebo

effect?

9. evidence-based science?

10. population for sample?

11. random sample?12. sample size?

13. term of study?

14. replication needed?

15. (un)certainty expressed?

16. statistically significant?

17. in whose interest? ethics?


Evaluating environmental claims—Q’s1. funding agency?2. relevant credentials?3. legitimate peer-review?4. respected journal?5. anecdotal, correlational

or cause-&-effect study?9. evidence-based science?10. population for sample?13. term of study?

14. replication needed?

15. (un)certainty expressed?

16. statistically significant?

17. in whose interest? ethics?

18. number of samples?

19. number of variables?

20. number of sample sites?

21. seasonal sampling?

21. up-down stream tests?


Perspectives on an issueScientificTechnologicalEconomicEnvironmentalPoliticalLegalEthicalSocialMilitaristic

AestheticMysticalEmotionalThis can be an exercise

involving using newspaper clippings and the create-test-use inquiry cycle, where students create and test the list of perspectives.


CTU Exercises for Beyond InquiryEvaluating Claims to Kgather & distribute

media clippingscreate criteria list

(from one or more clippings)

test criteria list (from multiple clippings)

use criteria list to analyze & evaluate claims to K


CTU Exercises for Beyond InquiryEvaluating STSE viewsgather & distribute

media clippingscreate perspectives list

(from one clipping)test perspectives list

(from multiple clippings)

use perspectives list to analyze & evaluate socio-scientific (STSE) views


Carl Sagan on School ScienceCarl Sagan:“The whole idea of

democratic application of skepticism is that everyone should have the essential tools to effectively and constructively evaluate claims to knowledge.” Demon Haunted World, p. 76

“[These tools] are hardly ever mentioned in the schools, even in the presentation of science….” DHW, p. 77

Personal statement:We have allowed pure science

knowledge to dominate other kinds of knowledge. This expresses our current (not past, and hopefully not future) valuing within curriculum & assessment.


Thank youHand-off to you:1.How do we create, test

& use inquiry-based (NOS) science education in the classroom & laboratory.

2.How do we create, test and use inquiry (NOS) tools for citizenship.

Consider the potential and persevere with your experience, knowledge and problem solving approach.

Acknowledgements:my fellow authors; school

and university colleagues my students; my familyothers who have written and

worked on this endeavourwww.CMASTE.ca under

Outreach and Science Educ.www.CRYSTALAlberta.ca

under Science Reasoning Text

[email protected]


frank jenkins, phd secondary science education centre for mathematics science and technology...

Documents

mathematics science

science lecture

c t u t

youth science teaching

standard pure science

thi thd udsc

nos notesin

kinds of laboratory