Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Aims
To explore the components of an argument.
To develop the participants knowledge and understanding of the language of
argument.
1 Timings
Resources
OHTs 1.1 1.3
Handouts 1.1 1.5
Blank paper
Pritt Stick
Scissors
Aim
This session aims to show that much of the evidential base for belief in standard
scientific ideas is neither simple nor straightforward. This is done by asking participants
to explore what is the evidential basis of many of the standard beliefs in science. The
major cultural achievement of science has been to establish a body of hard-won
knowledge transforming our vision and understanding of the world around us. This has
been done by constructing arguments from a body of data and observations that
support innovative and creative theories about how the natural world behaves from
the idea that the period of a pendulum does not vary with amplitude to the idea that
we look like our parents because there is a chemically coded messenger in each of our
cells. Yet, the evidence and arguments for these beliefs are often under explored in
school science. This session provides an opportunity to demonstrate that this is so and
for exploring why the elaboration of the evidence is often an underplayed feature of
science.
Activity
Distribute Handout 1.1: What is the Evidence?
Explain that the purpose of this exercise is to examine how familiar we are with the
evidence for some common ideas that are taught in science education. In this exercise,
participants are asked to list for each statement, what is the scientific evidence and
argument(s) for believing in these ideas. For instance, a major piece of evidence for
believing in a spinning Earth is the time-lapse photograph that can be taken of the stars
In this exercise, other common ideas that are taught in KS3 will be examined for the
evidence and justification for such beliefs. Ask the participants to get into groups of 4
and first individually complete Handout 1.1. Then hold a plenary discussion about the
evidence that the group has generated.
This is the first of many exercises that will involve the participants in small group
discussion as a means of learning on the course. Each time such a technique is used,
draw attention to the importance of group work, and to the particular technique
that is being used.
Explain that some ideas might appeal to evidence that may not be in the realm of
everyday experience, and is not easy to access. Science often relies on evidence
obtained through use of technology.
The box on the right hand side should be used to provide summary answers/notes for
discussion later. A summary of the scientific evidence is:
Forces are pushes and There is no evidence for this as this is just a definition of
pulls what a force is.
Plants take in carbon The standard evidence that plants give off oxygen is to
dioxide and give out collect the gas given off by elodea in a jar when
oxygen during illuminated by light. The gas will then relight a glowing
photosynthesis splint showing it to be oxygen. The evidence that plants
take in carbon dioxide is hard to show in school science
and much more indirect. Normally, we conduct a starch
test on a leaf which has been exposed to light and one
that has not. By inference the absence of starch in the
covered leaf is used to argue that photosynthesis is a
process of taking in carbon dioxide to construct more
complex molecules.
Day and Night are The evidence for this is either a photograph taken with a
caused by a spinning long exposure of the pole star. This shows all the stars
Earth going round the pole star. Either all the stars are
rotating around the Pole Star or the ground on which
the camera sits is turning. The second argument is
Current is conserved in The normal means of arguing for this is to measure the
a simple circuit current before and after a bulb with an ammeter. Both
readings are identical.
Living matters is made The crucial evidence here is direct observation with a
of cells microscope normally of onion cells.
Lithium, sodium, and The evidence here comes from the reactivity of these
potassium are similar metals with other substances. All three react with cold
elements water to produce hydrogen gas in a similar manner.
Ask what any lack of familiarity with the evidence, or difficulty with the task, says about
the manner in which science is often taught. The answer is likely to be essentially that
much scientific knowledge is taught by assertion without presenting the evidence to
justify the beliefs. Given that the central defining feature of science is a commitment to
evidence as the basis of belief, it is to say the least that that evidence for belief forms
such a small part of school science.
Aim
This activity is an opportunity to explore what is meant by the term argument in
science and why it is a significant feature of science. An important aim is to ensure that
the everyday meaning of the word argument is not the one that is being used in this
work.
Activity
Distribute Handout 1.2 which contains several different metaphors for peoples
perceptions of argument. This exercise is an opportunity for participants to reflect on
what they believe argument to be and to consider what the word might mean in the
context of science.
Explain that the purpose of this exercise is to explore how the participants think about
argument. All they have to do individually is put down in the Comments column,
whether they think each metaphor is appropriate.
Discussion in pairs (10 min): Then ask them to compare answers with one another
noting points of agreement and disagreement.
Explain that ideas and theories in science are based on interpreting data collected from
the real world and that the development of theories is not self-evident. Who for
instance would have ever believed that:
In short, that all of these beliefs that we now hold were the product of producing
models of the world as it might be and arguing that these models not only fitted better
with our existing observations but also predicted the behaviour of the world more
accurately than other ideas. At the time, none of these arguments were self-evident.
Then explain that the next exercise is an opportunity to construct a more elaborate
model of science. Give participants a sheet of paper. Ask them to take the words:
REAL WORLD
DATA
MODEL
PREDICTION
Write these words onto a piece of paper and then join the words using lines as links to
show what they think is the role of each of these in science. They can write additional
words on the lines as they think fit. Allow 5 minutes for this activity and another 5 min
to share with the other participants.
When they have completed this activity compare what they have produced with the
one on OHT 1.3. This comes from the contemporary philosopher Ron Giere1
1
Giere, R. (1991). Understanding Scientific Reasoning (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Plenary Discussion
Ask:
Is this a satisfactory picture of science?
If not, what is missing?
Where might arguments occur?
What kinds of arguments might these be?
How does this differ from the model of science commonly developed by school
science?
The general view is that this model is a reasonable but inevitably incomplete model of
science. It does not, for instance, capture the major difference between those sciences
which are engaged with the reconstruction of the past such as geology, paleontology
and cosmology, and the hypothetical-deductive sciences of biochemistry, physics and
chemistry.
There are arguments about what kind and the amount of data to collect. For
instance whether the data will be valid and how much is needed to make it reliable.
Finish by asking whether they now think that argument might be a central component of
science. Discuss what the implications are for teaching science.
Aim
In this exercise, participants are given an opportunity to construct arguments for
themselves.
This sheet presents two competing theories for how we see. One of these, theory 1, is
a common misconception, and the other, theory 2, is the scientific world view. Beneath
are some pieces of evidence. These may support one of the theories, both of the
theories or neither.
We can still see at night when there is Tends to support active vision (Theory
no sun 1) as ostensibly there is no light present.
The counter to this is that we cannot
see in a totally dark room.
Sunglasses are worn to protect our eyes Supports Theory 2 as why would we
wear glasses to stop something coming
out of our eyes if whatever was coming
out was necessary for vision.
We stare at people, look daggers and All support the notion that vision is
catch peoples eye active i.e. Theory 1.
At the end, if time permits, ask what might be the difficulties of using such an exercise in
the classroom. The common concern that teachers have is that undertaking such an
exercise might reinforce childrens misconceptions. Point out the following:
The irony/implication that such a view suggests that the questioner does not have a
lot of confidence in the persuasive power of the scientific evidence as their worry
reflects a belief that their students might be more convinced by the evidence for the
common misconception.
That research shows that opportunities to consider common misconceptions as well
as the scientific conception lead to a better understanding the scientific conception2.
It would make sense at the end of such an activity to hold a class discussion and
evaluate the evidence critically to show that some pieces of evidence are more
significant than others and that the bulk of the evidence supports the scientific view.
For instance, it is difficult to see why we would need to wear sunglasses if vision
occurred by rays emanating from the eye. Looking at the sun is painful and wearing
sunglasses reduces the pain suggesting that it is blocking rays from the sun entering the
eye.
2
Hynd, C., & Alvermann, D. E. (1986). The Role of Refutation Text in Overcoming Difficulty with
Science Concepts. Journal of Reading, 29(5), 440-446.
Handout 1.4 shows two possible results of the change in temperature from an
experiment to heat ice to water and then to steam. Handout 1.5 presents a set of
arguments and data. It can be used to as a resource to help construct an argument for
ideas that are more likely to be true.
Ask each pair to stick down the points into a coherent argument for their graph.
Finish by asking the group whether they feel that this is the sort of exercise that it
would be possible for KS3 pupils to do. If the response is negative, explore why. If
the response is positive, ask why it is seen relatively infrequently.
Idea Evidence
Brainstorming
War
Diplomatic negotiation
Confrontation
An explanation
A dead end
(Other suggestions/thoughts)
Some Year 8 students have been studying how water heats up.
They had to predict the shape of the graph to show how the
temperature would change as they heated ice to steam.
a)
100
Temperatur
e
5
0
0
Time in Minutes
b)
100
re
Temperatu
5
0
0
Time in Minutes
In your groups discuss which graph is most likely to show how the
temperature of water changes as it heats up. Your group must
have at least ONE reason to support your argument.
Argument
Metaphor:
Argument is like. Comments
Brainstorming
War
Diplomatic negotiation
Confrontation
A Roundabout on the
Road to Truth
Explanations
A Dead End
Generated by School
Science?
REAL WORLD
Observation/Experiment
THEORY
Step 1 Step 2
Model fits/Doesnt Fit
REAL WORLD MODEL
Negative Positive
Evidence Evidence
Observation/ Reasoning/
Experiment Calculation
Step 3 Step 4
Agree/Disagree
DATA PREDICTION
Idea Evidence
Brainstorming
War
Diplomatic negotiation
Confrontation
An explanation
A dead end
(Other suggestions/thoughts)
Some Year 8 students have been studying how water heats up.
They had to predict the shape of the graph to show how the temperature
would change as they heated ice to steam.
a)
100
e
Tem peratur
5
0
0
Time in Mi nu tes
b)
100
re
Tem peratu
5
0
0
Time in Mi nu tes
In your groups discuss which graph is most likely to show how the
temperature of water changes as it heats up. Your group must have at
least ONE reason to support your argument.
Argument
Metaphor:
Argument is like. Comments
Brainstorming
War
Diplomatic negotiation
Confrontation
A Roundabout on the
Road to Truth
Explanations
A Dead End
Generated by School
Science?
REAL WORLD
Observation/Experiment
THEORY
Step 1 Step 2
Model fits/Doesnt Fit
REAL WORLD MODEL
Negative Positive
Evidence Evidence
Observation/ Reasoning/
Experiment Calculation
Step 3 Step 4
Agree/Disagree
DATA PREDICTION