Exploring the Nature of Science

In order to provide effective science teaching for students, we as teachers need to be aware that science has certain characteristics that describe it. These characteristics are known as the Nature of Science (NOS) and establish how science is different from other ways of knowing. Many people, including myself before taking this course, have misconceptions about what science is and how the field of science works.

The characteristics that distinguish science and that many people have misconceptions about are:

1. Science is a creative endeavor. Scientists have to come up with what needs to be investigated as well as possible solutions or explanations for the unexplained. Scientists must also come up with a way to investigate the facts in order to draw conclusions from those facts.

2. Science is social. Scientists do not work alone in a laboratory, but rather work together to engage in investigations, come up with explanations, and compare/contrast data.

3. Science is tentative. Because we are making inferences based on observation, we can not prove anything in science. Instead, it is heavily supported with evidence (see empirical below) and scientific ideas can change as new evidence comes about.

4. Science is empirical. This means that science is evidence-based and all conclusions should be supported by data. Along with science being evidence-based, it is important to note that evidence is not only found through conducting experiments, but can also be found through observations and other means of looking at what has occurred in similar situations in the past.

5. Science is limited. There are some things that we simply cannot investigate in a scientific way. An example of this would be the supernatural and religion. These are not natural phenomena that can be explained through science. Science is also limited in the sense that there are some things we can't observe - like what the very center/core of the earth looks like/what it is made of, but we can use inferences through what we can see to help us come up with explanations.

6. Science is theory-laden. There is a difference in law and theory. Laws are patterns in nature and theories are the explanations for why the laws are true. The explanations for why patterns in nature are occurring and determining what makes those patterns occur is the basis of what science is.

7. There is no one scientific-method. Scientists use a variety of ways to investigate, observe, and to develop understanding of scientific ideas. Because of this, teaching students that there is a step by step process that scientists go through with everything they do is an inaccurate portrayal of scientists. Because there is no one scientific method, science becomes a much more creative endeavor.

As teachers, we have to be aware how we are portraying science to our students and how that shapes their perceptions of what science is. By incorporating these ideas into our content instruction and through explicitly teaching students to recognize these ideas, we can give students a better understanding of science and can peak student interest in science. One way that we as teachers can actively ensure we are not contributing to students' misconceptions about the NOS is to what watch language we use in the classroom (saying investigations instead of experiments, being careful when referring to theories & laws...etc.), to plan decontextualized activities (like Dr. Kruse's tube activity) that lend themselves to conversations about the nature of science, to have students reflect about how what they are doing is like what real scientists do, and to plan activities and investigations that accurate reflect the key aspects of the NOS (allow students to come up with procedures for investigations, engaging students in collaborative learning, ensuring that students are using evidence to support claims...etc.) Students of all ages can engage in conversations about the NOS, it just depends on the context of that conversations and which aspects of the NOS that students are being asked to recognize. The NOS aspects being addressed with students should still be developmentally appropriate, as some of the aspects of the NOS are very abstract. For example, while a kindergarten student should probably be able to understand that science can and is social and that we have to use evidence (the 5 senses) in science, we probably would not have a conversation about theory vs. law or about how science is limited and tentative with kindergarten students.

Using Formative Assessment to Guide Lesson Planning

Past experiences and background knowledge are terms that get thrown around a lot when discussing getting to know your students and deciding how to teach them. There are a wide variety of ways to address students' prior knowledge. Today in my practicum classroom, I gave the 4th grade students a formative assessment to figure out where they are at in regards to the content I will be teaching them. Accounting for the prior beliefs, knowledge, and experiences of students in essential when determining how to best meet their learning needs. Without assessing this information, we cannot truly teach our students because we do not know what they have been taught before, what misconceptions need to be addressed in the actual lesson, or how to deepen their understanding of the concept we are teaching. Formative assessment can also be an indicator of what background knowledge you need to provide students with during the anticipatory set of the lesson. In science, this should be an engaging activity that promotes student inquiry or a concrete experience relating to the content that will be addressed in the lesson in order to get students actively mentally engaged with the material right away.

The formative assessment I gave today was focused on accessing students' prior knowledge and determining students' misconception in regards to weathering and erosion. Originally, I was going to just ask some open ended questions about the big idea that I was trying to address; however, it was brought to my attention that being that open-ended on a pre-assessment might cause students to give you responses completely unrelated to the content you are going to teach. Therefore, I changed my formative assessment. I gave each student a picture of a landform that was created through the process of weathering/erosion and asked students to describe to me how they thought the structure was formed or how it got to be the way it was. I chose not to use the terms weathering or erosion within the formative assessment because I did not want students to simply regurgitate a definition they had heard before; I wanted to know if they actually understood the process, not just the label. I allowed students to draw their ideas too if they were better able to explain what they knew in that way. I also asked questions about what they had written so that I could better understand what they were actually thinking. Students came up with a wide variety of answers from earthquakes to humans to rocks falling on top of each other. The various answers given indicated to me that I need to provide ways throughout my lesson to address each of these misconceptions, give the students something to replace the misconceptions with, and help them fit this new information into their existing schemas (Conceptual Change Theory).

Based on student responses, the formative assessment I used may have been too abstract because it was a picture of something that students had not seen before. However, after reading through student responses and talking to students about their ideas, it did allow me to get a general sense of what they knew about the processes of weathering and erosion - not much. I now know that when designing my lesson, I need to provide concrete experiences for my students so they can have some kind of background knowledge to link the actual content to (Developmental Learning Theory) and I need to be sure to address those misconceptions shown in the formative assessment (Conceptual Change Theory/Constructivist Learning Theory) through picture of actual erosion and weathering that causes change in the environment. Through the formative assessment, I also learned more about where students' ZPDs might be at, which will inform how I group students. I want students to be able to work together and discuss ideas so that they will be successful in their learning. I think that student conversations about weathering and erosion will help the students who may need more supports better understand the concepts if they can hear them described in the language of their peers (Social Learning Theory).

The formative assessment gave me a lot to think about in regards to how to approach the content I am going to teach. It also addressed some other issues that students had in regards to the nature of science. After giving the formative assessment and assuring students that they were not going to get a grade, that I just wanted to know what they were thinking, several students asked me if I would tell them the answer to the question when they were done. This indicated to me that students believe there is one right answer in science that the teacher can give them, so I am going to address this in my lesson as well. While, I plan to include other aspects of the nature of science within my lesson, this was the nature of science idea that presented itself through formative assessment.

Formative assessment can be used in a variety of ways in the classroom across content areas and grade levels. In this instance, I used formative assessment to figure out what my students' prior knowledge and experiences were in regards to erosion/weathering as well as their perceptions of the nature of science. Formative assessment can (and should) be used constantly before, during, and after teaching to provide the most beneficial learning environment for your students because formative assessments can allow you to figure out what students are thinking in their heads and whether or not they are understanding the content you are teaching. In regards to my formative assessment in particular, I plan to give students the same assessment at the end of our lesson in hopes that they will apply what they learned and be able to provide a more developed and accurate description of how the structure in the picture was formed.