puzzles nos lesson + historical short story1

7/24/2019 PUZZLES NOS lesson + Historical Short Story1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/puzzles-nos-lesson-historical-short-story1 1/3

Puzzles (Part One) Talk about Nature of Science 1. (5 min.)Hand out pieces General investigative skills used before. **work in partners

a. “See what you can make.”

2. Discuss results (5-10 min) Collaborative then Creative -“How did working in a group help you to find an answer?” -“How were you being creative in solving the puzzle?”

“I have a new piece to give you, but first, let’s talk about it …”

- discuss how thinking will change when I give them new piece

-“how will this change your thinking?”

-“what are you wondering about this now?”

3. Hand out new piece Curiosity a. “Here is your new piece of evidence”

4. Time to work (5-10 min) Evidence/ Reasoning -“How did the new piece of evidence change your thinking?” -“To what extent do you think it’s like what real scientists have to deal with?”

5. Motivate/ Push small groups Whole-group bias & frustration -“why do you think your peers might not accept your shape?” -“what else could you do (to change your shape)?”

6. Join with another group (5 minutes) Cultural, Revisions & Models “Now I’m going to have you combine groups, so why don’t we split into two groups ofthree?” Or you guys can keep working over here and then we’ll rotate and switch?”

Have each partner group share their final product and explain how they got there.

-“How did working with new peers or a new group influence your ideas and choices?” -“how did that affect your overall result?”

7. Discuss/share results (10-15 minutes) Collaboration & Patterns &Theory-laden

Questions: - How can we relate this to plate tectonics?- Why do you think I waited to give you the new piece until after the first puzzlewas solved?



- To what extent do you think this is like what real scientists do?

Historical Short Story (Part two)

Plate TectonicsImagine a picture of the world. What do you see? How do you think it became the way

it looks today? Our Earth and its continents have not always looked the way they dotoday. There have been multiple scientists that discover ideas that help explain why theEarth is formed and looks the way it does today. One of the main components of this isthe exploration and discovery is plate tectonics.

Before scientists had ever heard of plate tectonics, they noticed details about thedifferent continents and our Earth. In 1620, Francis pointed out the similarities in thecontinental outlines of eastern South American and western Africa. They seemed toalmost match up. Antonio agreed with Francis, but believed the similarities werecaused by the continents moving in a biblical flood.

However, neither of these men were able to provide much evidence to back up theirideas. People accepted that the continent coasts did in fact look similar, but that wasnot proving anything.

What role does evidence play in this? Why do you think scientists decided to explore how the Earth looked?

Alfred W made the same observation as the scientists before him. He proposed thatthe continents were once a single land mass called Pangaea and have drifted to thelocation we see today over the years. Alfred’s idea stuck out a little more because hewas able to use evidence to support it.

One of the main pieces of evidence that Alfred used was fossils. He discovered a fossil

of a small lizard during the Paleozoic Era (270 million years ago) that only appears intwo places on the Earth. The only two locations this fossil is found is in Southern Africaand eastern South America. The lizard was a freshwater animal and would beincapable of crossing the Atlantic Ocean.

However, even with that evidence, Alfred’s ideas soon became shot down. Otherscientists believed that the continents could not simply “plow” through the oceanfloor. Although he had evidence of the fossils, he could not come up with anexplanation of how or why the continents had moved away from one another.

How does Alfred use the other scientists’ ideas to come up with newobservations?

How were the sci entists’ new ideas creative? Even with evidence, how were the scientists’ ideas/observations limited?

In 1929, another scientist named Arthur began to explore the same idea that Alfred hadproposed. Arthur championed the theory of continental drift, which was promoted by

Alfred, but there was a problem with the theory. The problem was with how thecontinents moved. Because of this problem, Arthur proposed that the Earth’s mantlewas moved by the heat that was under the Earth.



Because Alfred’s ideas were challenged, another scientist, Harry, played a key role indetermining how oceanic mountain ranges were fundamental to the tectonic movementthat resulted in the drift of the continents. During World War II, efforts to map the oceanfloor intensified because of the new U.S. Office of Naval Research. Harry was intriguedby the new information about the ocean floor, so he started asking questions, especially

the question, “why do continents move?” Harry supported Alfred’s theory of continentaldrift and explained how the once-joined continents became the seven that we knowtoday.

How/Why did the scientists’ ideas change from the beginning to the end? (tryingto get to something about revision or tentative and how science ideas changeover time)

How were the sci entists’ creative when exploring how the Earth was formed?

How did the new evidence change/influence the scientist’s past ideas?

puzzles nos lesson + historical short story1

Documents