Jacks

1. Yes, to a point. They are not discovering new facts and theories, but they are learning how to think scientifically and come to their own conclusions.

2. Position-driven discussion allows the students to choose between around three different answers that are all reasonable. They then actively discuss the three answers and why they feel each is either wrong or right. This generates reasoning, theorizing, and predicting. The teacher also does not allow the students to know if they are correct or incorrect in their predictions. This differs from typical classroom discussion because their is no clear right or wrong answer to the questions being asked. The benefits of position-driven discussion for science learning is that the students are prompted to come up with their own answers and reasoning behind what they think. This promotes inquiry and scientific thinking. It also allows them the opportunity to defend their argument or change what they think due to a fellow classmate's explanation.

3. Scientific argumentation relies on theories, experience, and prior knowledge to support the student's viewpoint. They are also required to look at all possible angles and question why that point is either correct or incorrect. It is focused on understanding the topic through ideas. Everyday argumentation is more focused on proving one's point and "winning" the argument as opposed to looking at all sides and then deciding which is correct.

4. The example we thought of was an NMR followed experiment. The teacher asked us what happened during the reactions. Did it a) go to completion, b) have nothing happen, or c) not go to completion. We were then given an NMR spectra of the reaction. By analyzing the spectra, we were required to rely on previous knowledge and come up with a thoughtful answer to the question. We then discussed as a class why we thought what happened and use our annotated spectra as evidence. Some student's then changed their minds once hearing others viewpoints.

5. A student would be considered scientifically literate if they not only know facts, but are able to explain the background reasoning for why the facts are so. For example, a scientifically illiterate person would simply state that the climate is changing but not be able to explain why. A scientifically literate person would be able to give the reasoning for why this is so using previous knowledge and having a true understanding of the events that lead to this phenomenon.

6. I would disagree with this statement. First, it would depend on how they arrived at this statistic. Some people may be scientifically literate in some fields of science, but not all. If the researcher only asked physics related questions, more people would fail as opposed to asking a broad range of science questions. Also with the recent focus on the STEM fields, students today are more geared toward science starting at a young age. This allows students who will not be in a science related field later in life, to still be able to think scientifically.

7. A problem-based learning lesson is when a problem is presented to the students and they are required to discuss and use what they already know to formulate an answer and reasoning for why they believe so. The benefits of this is that they students are required to come up with their own ideas and have to provide a valid argument for why they believe what they do. A drawback could be that if a student was wrong, they could still have the previous misconception. However, this could also be a positive if they find they are wrong and understand why they were so.