Bio+Reading+Group+A

Erion, Stephanie, Katie

Reading 1:THE PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF THE NATURE OF SCIENCE: DISPELLING THE MYTHS

-If the Scientific method taught is not neccessarily the way it progresses in labs, how releavnt is teaching the scientific method?

The Scientific method is a way to facilitate thinking, and a good set of steps for problem solving (not neccessarily one to adhere to strictly but rather to use as guidance). It also allows most students, the public and scientists process the information presented in journal articles, because the article presentation follows the format of the Scientific Method. The question was raised whether it is worth exposing the students to the fact that not all science adheres strictly to the scietific method. There was a suggestion to have students compare presentation of reseach findings on a Journal vs Magazine to highlight the different presentation styles on the same topic for scientists and the common public.

-How disconcerning is it that most experimental results published are not re-verified by multiple labs?

There was concern and surprise that most experiemntal results may be done a single time and accepted as such by the community. Striking a balance between good science on the one hand, and time, resources and funding on the other is an importnant aspect. Scientific Paradigms (particular ways of thought and accept tenets in particular fields) may on one hand prevent research and discovery by having a community with underlying biases and set in their ways discount valid findings....but this happens less often than when Paradigms serve as protection to flag unusual results. Albeit results may not be re-verified every time, unusual results that do no fit within the paradigm are likely to attract attention and re-verification (putting Paradigms in a more positive light as protective measures against unusual/improbabale results).

Remaining on the topic of paradigms, in consideration of the classroom, there was an opportunity to highlight mini-Paradigm shifts (presenting students with new accurate information for the first time, and helping them make that transition from their intepretations thus far...to the new knowledge presented).

-The Hypothesis, Theory, Law progression and relationship?

There was agreement in a need to present law and theory as two sides of the same coin, rather than as hierarchichal relationship. Clarifying that Laws may lead to theories explaining the underlying mechanism, or vice versa, theories about the workings of nature may lead to easy to follow laws is important in the classroom context.

Hypothesis is not merely a prediction, but sometimes an educated guess that hopes to predict a new set of events based on current exploratory work. Would it be worth to expose students to the fact that sometimes Science is done backwards, where the researcher starts with unusual results from an unrelated experiment and backward-constructs a procedure to recreate and explain those results. Also discussed that the underlying basis of science is not neccessarily to find proof, but rather to find negating infomartion in order to disprove a hypothesis. Yet negative information, troubles and issues with an experiment are rarely posted in a Journal article for fear of taking away from the credit of the new knowledge.