Nines

Kelli, Kristen, Chris, Jeff

1. It will depend on the activity/what is being taught. If it is continuously taking notes and defining words, then that is not real science. Students must actively be engaged in an activity, researching, questioning, experimenting, and communicating their findings to be a part of real science. They do need the background knowledge, so instruction could be considered as part of this process, as long as it plays a role in a project/activity the students can do.

2. The unique features include: focus on a phenomena, defending their position, they are able to change their minds, it is derived from their life experiences, and it pushes for differences in opinion and theory. With position-driven discussion, you are capable of changing your position. Others can help you see their side and sway your opinion with evidence and theory. It is also more student driven, with the teacher only guiding the question (attempting not to sway anyone's opinions). The benefits include: everyone actively engages in the process, individuals have the chance to share their views and convert the class, and the students have the power with this process/.

3. In scientific argumentation, you need facts and data to support your opinion. It is a way to participate in a collaborative effort, where you can pose your position, convey it to another person, hear their opinions, and review/revise your position based upon the discussion. Simple argumentation does not require facts. Thus, someone's opinions suffice for their evidence. Much of general argumentation is conjecture or repeating/rephrasing information heard elsewhere.

4. When writing a research paper on genetically modified food, I presented the pros and cons associated with the process and the foods themselves. From there, I presented my take on the topic and used evidence to support my side. During that, I was attempting to have whoever read my paper to join my side and convert. This seems like a type of scientific argumentation, just one in which the contact between people is not direct.

5. Being scientifically literate means you understand the process of doing science and have the evidence to back up what you are doing. You understand that you need the hypothesis, experimentation, data, and defending your project. Reasons for all of your claims are a necessity. The person is also able to scientifically reason and understand the world around them. The book defines scientific literacy as being able to understand and read science. We define scientific literacy as being capable of understanding and conveying scientific concepts (data, experimentation, hypotheses, etc) to others.

6. We agree with this statement. They may be able to read it, but do they really understand what is occurring? Are they capable of conveying the reasoning and data behind what they read to someone else? We believe this is where the 72% fail. They cannot scientifically convey the meaning or understanding.

7. The benefits to a project-based learning lesson are that students achieve a higher understanding of material, active participation by the students, inquiry based, more likely to make an impression on the student (sticks with them so they can recall the lessons). The disadvantages include: time necessary for the project as well as preparation, teachers must be prepared, a number of materials are needed, and students may not arrive at the desired conclusions.