Blog Post Week 1
(Lehrer, Galileo, Hazen and Trefil)
The Lehrer article aimed at discussing certain approaches to
design a successful way to teach students about scientific disciplines. The approach thought most rewarding by Lehrer
to truly educate students was modeling.
The article focused on designing a strategy that allows students to
learn more so by exploring scientific questions empirically and less by simply
accepting what a scientist (or teacher) tells them as fact. By using physical and representational models
students are more likely to explore the subject in a way that allows them to
make more connections that can help them not only understand the question at
hand, but also explore the questions that arise as a result of
experimentation. By using the invention
and revision of models as Lehrer puts it, students are able to actively search
and find answers to the questions of the natural world.
The Hazen and Trefil chapter had a focus on the
interconnectedness of some of the most important discoveries of all time, as
well as how models helped and continue to help advance our knowledge of
science. The chapter also highlighted
the importance of the scientific method and design. By not taking what was thought to be at the
time a fact, great thinkers were able to do their own exploration through different
models and experiments. This was key in
unlocking new and seemingly hidden truths most people take for granted.
The Galileo piece also focused on the importance of
exploring scientific questions empirically and not solely through reason alone. The article explores the properties of
naturally accelerated motion and various people discuss the topic. Multiple times reason and logic seem
concrete, however when modeled in the natural world the results are not as
expected. It once again shows how
important it is to do experiments and come up with your own understanding of
certain natural phenomena.
A couple themes across all the articles seem to be the idea
of modeling, as well as the importance of gaining scientific knowledge
empirically. It seems that although reason
alone can be very powerful, gaining insights through empirical evidence is
extremely important in science. By using
experimentation and observation to model events in the natural world, it is
easier to reshape ideas and theories based on what you know. It is one thing to
just believe what you are told, but the more significant discoveries have come
from scientists that create their own representations to help answer questions
about the world. I definitely think the
readings connect back to the activity we did on the first day of class. Instead of using reason alone to answer if
the ball was accelerating, all the groups used different representations to
prove it through experimentation and observation.
Educators and certainly science educators will encounter material that cannot be easily modeled to their students. Agreeing that modeling can benefit science learning, in what ways could students benefit from lessons that do not involve modeling? Every classroom unfortunately, will not have access to limitless materials and resources. As said about Hazen and Trefil, do you plan on challenging your students to not take what you say for fact, but to prove it themselves? Finally, what importance can be gathered when models do not work as planned?
ReplyDeleteLeher described a sharp divide between modeling and logic. Without deductive reasoning, models fall flat. Students need to use apply logic to create models and draw meaning from them. I think that answers the question that David presented in part. When materials and time are too scarce for students to create a model to learn a particular topic, they can interact with, learn from and critique a previously formed model or data which was collected by someone else. Students can learn from applying logic and reasoning to models. Both are an interconnected part of the practice of science.
ReplyDelete