styles of scientific reasoning, scientific practices and argument in science and science education
Post on 10-Jan-2017
111 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Jonathan Osborne
Graduate School of EducationStanford University
Styles of Scientific Reasoning, Scientific Practices and Argument in Science and Science Education
The History of Science
2
“A history of vision and argument”
Crombie, Alistair Cameron. (1994). Styles of scientific thinking in
the European tradition: The history of argument and explanation
especially in the mathematical and biomedical sciences and arts
(Vol. 1): Duckworth London.
Crazy Ideas in Science
Day and Night is caused by a Spinning Earth
The Continents have moved
We have evolved from other animals
The Earth is 5 billion years old
Diseases are caused by tiny living organisms
We live at the bottom of a sea of air
You look like your parents because every cell carries a chemically coded message of how to reproduce yourself
3
History of Science as a History of Error
Ptolemy’s geocentric universe,
Lamarkianism
The ether,
The Denial of Wegner/s Theory
Cold fusion
Phlogiston
Spontaneous generation,
4
Styles of Reasoning in Science
1. Mathematical Deductive Logic
2. Experimental Exploration
3. Hypothetical Modeling
4. Categorization and Classification
5. Probabilistic and Statistical Thinking
6. Evolutionary/Genetic Explanations
5
Crombie, Alistair Cameron. (1994). Styles of scientific thinking in the European tradition: The history of argument and explanation especially in the mathematical and biomedical sciences and arts (Vol. 1): Duckworth London.
Features
Style
Entities Procedural Enties
Epistemic Constructs
Heroes
Mathematical Deduction
ExponentsDifferentials
Geometry, Calculus Deductive proofPythagoras, Euclid, Newton, Maxwell, Einstein
Experimental Exploration
Intrumentation Control of VariablesObservations
Experimental TestsControls/RCT testing
Galileo
Hypothetical Modeling
Wave model of light Thought ExperimentsExplanatory coherence
Accuracy/ParsimonyGalileoBohr
Probabalistic and Stastical Thinking
Gaussian Distribution Statistical Testing Role of uncertainty Pascal, Gauss, Poisson, Cronbach
Categorization and Classfication
Species,ElementsRock Types
Criteria for Category Membership
The significance & role of classification
LinnaeusMendelev
Evolutionary/Genetic Reasoning
GeneAdaptationDNA
Genetic DeterminationRole of Observation and Inference
Mendel, Darwin
Procedural Knowledge
• Concepts of Evidence
• Observation• Measurement• Instrumentation• Reliability/Validity• Variables/Fair Testing• Control of Variables
Epistemic Knowledge
• Ideas-About-Science
• Observation• Argument• Theory• Model• Hypothesis
9
Elaboration of the Definition
•Explain phenomena scientifically:Recognise, offer and evaluate explanations for a range of natural
and technological phenomena.
•Evaluate and design scientific enquiry:Describe and appraise scientific investigations and propose ways of
addressing questions scientifically.
•Interpret data and evidence scientifically:Analyze and evaluate scientific data, claims and arguments in a variety
of representations and draw appropriate conclusions.
A scientifically literate person, therefore, is willing to engage in reasoned discourse about science and technology which requires the competencies to:
What is wrong with inquiry?
12
Students describe objects and events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations against current scientific knowledge, and communicate their ideas to others. They identify their assumptions, use critical and logical thinking, and consider alternative explanations. In this way, students actively develop their understanding of science by combining scientific knowledge with reasoning and thinking skills.
The Practices of Science
1416
1. Asking Questions and Defining Problems
2. Developing and Using Models
3. Planning and Carrying out Investigations
4. Analyzing and Interpreting Data
5. Using Mathematics and Computational Thinking
6. Constructing Explanations and Designing Solutions
7. Engaging in Argument from Evidence
8. Obtaining, Evaluating and Communicating Information
Thee Central Questions of Science
15
1. What exists? (The ontological question)
2. Why does it happen? (The causal question)
3. How do we know? (The epistemic question)
3. Planning and Carrying Out Investigations
20
A Teacher asked her students to investigate this problem:
How does temperature affect the time taken for sugar to dissolve?The students were asked to describe the investigation. These are some of the things they write. How clearly has each student described the investigation? And which is the best?
JEMMA: We have got to write down what we are going to do and then do it.
KIRSTY: We are looking to see how different temperatures affect how long it takes the sugar to dissolve.
EMMA: We are trying to see if sugar dissolves in water.
ANITA: We are adding sugar to hot and cold water to see how long it takes to dissolve
ALEX: We are trying to find the best temperature for dissolving sugar in water.
LOUISE: We have to put the same amount of sugar in water with different temperatures and see what happened
3. Analyzing and Interpreting Data
22
(a) One pupil had the most breaths and she also had the highest pulse rate.
(b) All the people with a high breath rate had a high pulse rate.
(c) The higher your breathing rate, the greater the pulse rate.
(d) On the whole, those people with a higher breath rate had a higher pulse rate.
5. Using Mathematics & Computational Thinking
23
1. Who is the tallest
2. Who is the smallest
3. What is the average?
6. Constructing Explanations
24
Why do objects fall at the same rate in the absence of air?
• Gravity pulls on all objects
• If the mass is double, the pull of gravity will double
• Twice the mass takes twice as long to speed up
• Think of two objects, one twice as massive as the other
• Force is double but so is the mass
7. Engaging in Argument from Evidence?
26
Construction Critique&
Knowing why the wrong idea is wrong matters as much
as knowing why the right idea is right
THE MARRIED TASK
Peter looks at Linda
Linda looks at Henry
Peter is married
Henry is not married
Is this an example of someone who is married looking at someone who is not married?
YES NO CAN’T TELL
Argumentative Theory of Reasoning
28
Humans are poor at reasoning
Group Discourse forces epistemic vigilance
Reasoning should work best when used in group contexts
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(02), 57-74.
Before
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth?
Arguments For
Arguments
Against
After
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth
50%
50%
How Likely? Ratio of 1:129
Before Teaching
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth?
After Teaching
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth?
Arguments For
Arguments
Against
66%
33%
How Likely? Ratio of 2:130
Before Teaching
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth?
After Teaching
Day & Night Caused By A Spinning Earth?
Arguments For
Arguments
Against
80%
20%
How Likely? Ratio of 4:131
6 Arguments for Argument
Empirical Case
Moral Case
History of Science Case
Literacy Case
Pedagogical Case
Affective Case
33
Arguments Against a Spinning Earth
1. The Sun moves from East to West during the day
2. If the Earth was spinning, you would not land on the same spot when you jump up.
3. If it was spinning, once a day, the speed at the equator would be over 1000 miles an hour. At that speed everybody would be flung off.
34
8. Obtaining, evaluating and communicating information
36
Science without Literacy is like a ship without a sail
Theory of Reading in Science
Reading is a constructive
Dependent on interpretation
Principled
Good reader is a critical reader
Specific Challenges of Science Texts Density Academic Language Multi-modality Genre
41
top related