BASIC INFORMATION

Instructor: Alan Colburn

Classroom: PH1-112

Meeting Time: Mondays 4:00-6:45

Office: FO5-132

Office Hours: Tu, Th 11-12. I'm also available by appointment. I check e-mail frequently. I am on campus everyday, and I can usually stay after class for awhile, too.

Telephone: 562 985 5948

E-mail: acolburn@csulb.edu
   

OVERVIEW OF THE COURSE & COURSE GOALS

SCED 404 is a special course. It was originally offered as an alternative specifically for middle/secondary science teaching credential students in place of Origins of Scientific Thought. The course is now an official part of the credential subject matter program, replacing the other course. I enjoy teaching it, and I think you're really going to enjoy it. 

Let me orient you to the course a bit. I have three aims for you. The first aim is that you better understand the nature of science . "Nature of science" (NOS) is a broad term denoting the history, philosophy, sociology, and psychology of science--in the broadest terms, it's about what science is & how science works.

The course's second aim is for you to better understand the methods of science and evaluate reports about scientific investigations. In truth, the science most people hear about is what they receive from sources like TV, radio, and newspapers. Most people don't read Nature or the New England Journal of Medicine. The K-12 science teacher needs to be able to help his or her students evaluate scientific reports presented in the media. How do you figure out whether to believe something you see reported? Should you believe reports that the earth is warming? Does cigarette smoking cause coronary heart disease? Do some people really have ESP? Should we all drink red wine--for our health? Evaluating these kinds of questions requires an understanding of scientific methods.

Finally, you need to be able to able to take what you learn about the NOS and scientific reasoning, and apply it to the K-12 classroom. What can teachers do to encourage students to leave school with an accurate picture of the NOS? Thus, my third aim is that you apply knowledge about the nature of science to teaching science .

When the course ends, if I have been successful, you will have reasoned responses to most of these questions:

• What is science?
• What characteristics distinguish science from other ways of knowing?
• What kinds of questions can science answer?
• What kinds of questions can science not answer?
• Is science an extension of common sense?
• How does history help us understand how science works?
• How do scientists test for correlations, causes, and explanations?
• What is the place of models in science?
• What is the place of critical thinking in science?
• What are inductive and deductive thinking? How are they important to science?
• What are the differences & relationships between observations, hypotheses, predictions, laws, and theories?
• Is observation objective?
• What are operational definitions and questions?
• What is "the" scientific method?
• Why can explanations (theories and models) never be completely proven or disproven (e.g., aux. hypotheses)?
• What does it mean to explain something? To confirm? To say a scientific idea is 'known' or 'true'?
• How is science distinguished from pseudoscience (or marginal science)?
• Is knowledge ultimately socially constructed and relative?
• Is the world described by science real? Should we care?
• How do science and society interact?
• How do we distinguish science and religion?
• How is evolution different from creationism?
• What preconceived ideas do K-12 students have about the nature of science?
• What do the standards say about the nature of science?
• What can we do to help K-12 students learn about the nature of science?
• What should people learn about the nature of science?

Notice that at the beginning of this list I said you'd have "reasoned responses" to the questions. Many of the questions are philosophical in nature, and don't have single correct answers. Some of the questions have responses generally accepted by most science educators or science philosophers, dome don't. So, please be sure this point is clear to you: I won't be evaluating the correctness of your responses (in some cases); I will be listening for your reasoning and how you support your thinking (in all cases).

You must purchase a book: Understanding and Using Scientific Evidence: how to critically evaluate data by Richard Gott and Sandra Duggan. The book is available at the university book store. It's listed under a course different than SCED 404, though. You'll find the book listed under SCED 401.  The bookstore should have new and used copies available; you may also find copies online. 

Although Gott and Duggan is currently the only required purchase for the course, you may decide to purchase one or more additional books before the course is finished, used in conjunction with an assignment or two. 

Additional reading for the course will be posted online via BeachBoard. 

ASSIGNMENTS & ASSESSMENT

Assignments are expected to be handed in on time. Late assignments will be marked down unless arrangements have been made with the instructor before the assignment is due.

Attendance and participation are essential components of this course. If you don't come, and talk, class won't work! You and your classmates' ideas need to be heard for individual and collective growth to occur. As such, your final course grade will reflect your level of attendance and participation: an "A" student will have attended virtually all classes and participated in each. I understand, of course, that things happen. I don't want you coming to class if you have a contagious disease, for example! So, you can miss one class session (of 15 total) without a penalty. However, if you miss two sessions you will have missed more than 10% of the total classtime. In a class like this, you can't miss that much class and learn as much as if you were present and participating. Thus, your final grade will decrease 5% if you miss two class sessions, 10% if you miss three class sessions, etc. If you know weeks beforehand that you will miss a class, please let me know.

Course grades will be based on these assignments.

1.  Course attendance, reading, and reasoned participation: Almost every week you'll e-mail me a brief summary of the assigned reading (a paragraph) & your reaction to it (another paragraph), sent in before class begins. Your reaction includes not only something as simple as what you did or didn't like about the reading, but also discussion about particular parts that were unclear, questions you had as a result of the reading, etc. The purpose of this brief assignment is simple: I want you to have completed the assigned readings, and seriously thought about them, before coming to class.

I may occasionally substitute something different for this assignment. Most commonly, I could give you a question or two ahead of time & ask you to e-mail reasonded responses to these questions, in place of the usual summary/reaction paragraphs. Occasional problems  may also be assigned, and short in-class assignments are also possible.

After each class period, I will make a judgement on which members of the class participated in that day's discussion and make note of these individuals. As the semester progresses, if I would like to see you participating more in class I will probably let you know. At the end of the semester, I will review these notes & grade accordingly.

This is an upper level class, and you are all motivated. I assume most students will earn an "A" for this part of the course--though nothing is guaranteed. (30% of total grade)

2.  Historical Case Study Assignment The purpose of the assignment is ultimately two fold. First, the history of science makes for excellent case studies about how science works in the "real world." Second, I think it's valuable for you to have an understanding of how and why scientists accept a scientific conclusion. Most of the scientific ideas you accept were given to you, as established conclusions. You just know they are "right" because they were in textbooks and your teachers are trustworthy authorities. I generally teach this way, and you will likely teach your students this way. However, I think it's good--even if only once in a year--for students to understand that scientific ideas are more than pronouncements from on high, that there is evidence and testing that led the majority of scientists ultimately to be convinced of the veracity of a conclusion. In other words, at least once in the course of a year students should learn the story of an idea, to help them understand how the scientific way of understanding the world differs from other ways of knowing.

Here's how the assignment will work. We are going to choose by consensus a book to read together. It will be a book you did not read in SCED 403 or elsewhere, and it will fit the criteria I alluded to above. I will present a couple choices, while being open to your suggestions. We'll read the book together over the course of several weeks. We will discuss details in class, but I'm going to be asking you to keep some of the questions below in mind as you read the work. You will prepare a *short* typewritten document before each of the classes in which we discuss the work--less than a page at a time. During the class session, if you note other things you might like to have included in your document, you can add those by hand. The document will be handed in for grading at the end of each class session. 

I will probably ask you to write a short synthesis about the key things you noticed and learned from the assignment, after you finish reading the book. This will be graded on a combination of the depth of your analysis and how well you relate the book to the course's key ideas.

Here are the kinds of guiding questions I am thinking about:

• How did people explain the book's topic in the past?
• What are some of the key investigations in the idea's story? What did the investigators do, and what did they find?
• How did scientists (or the public) react to these investigations? Why did some people resist the work? Discuss the nature of any debate or disagreement.
• Discuss the interplay between observations and explanations (theory), how predictions led to new data.
• Discuss how data was useful in developing new ideas.
• Discuss how data limited the development of new ideas.
• Show how "biased" or theory-laden observation of seemingly anomolous data led to new scientific ideas.
• Show how reproducible data supported or changed accepted ideas.
• What flaws did you see in the way investigation(s) were done? How might you (or other scientists at the time) challenge the validity of data or conclusions?
• Discuss general aspects of the nature of science you see illustrated in the reading. What does the book illustrate about how science works?
• In what ways did this work *not* follow the standard multi-step scientific method? Discuss aspects of the work(s) that would not be found in a lab report or standard scientific paper.
• If you see discussions in the book that would help students learn content found in the state's science standards, feel free to note the pages and content.
• Note any particular passages that caught your attention as something we should reexamine in class. Note the page(s), and why the passage(s) caught your attention. Note also any particular sections that you didn't understand or found confusing, which we might also reexamine in class.
• How do you think the culture of the time influenced the scientists' beliefs, values, or ways of interpreting observations?
  

• The Seashell on the Mountain (Cutler), about geology
• The Map that Changed the World (Winchester), about geology
• The Monk in the Garden (Henig), about Mendel
• Night Comes to the Cretaceous, about dinosaur extinction (most likely choice)
• Flu (Kolata), about the 1918 pandemic
• The Doctor's Plague (Nuland), about Semmelweis and childbed fever
• Miss Leavitt's Stars (Johnson),
• Einstein's Cosmos (Kaku),
• The Eye of Heaven (Gingerich), about Copernicus
• Evolution: the history of an idea (Bowder),
• just about anything historical by Ernst Mayr, a famous biologist 

(20% of total grade)

3.  Write a detailed three day (or more) lesson plan showing ways you would modify a pre-existing lesson to make the lesson better exemplify some aspect(s) of the nature of science. Choose a lesson that was not initially created with the nature of science as a primary student learning outcome. You don't need to start from scratch; find some curriculum materials in the Science Ed office, lesson ideas from an NSTA journal, online lesson plans, or any other source that strikes your fancy. Try to find something you might teach someday. The purpose of this assignment is to accent the idea that you can teach students about the nature of science while still teaching your "regular" lessons. 

Include separate discussion about how your lesson modifications exemplify aspects of the nature of science. For each change you make to a lesson, tell me about (1) what you changed, (2) your rationale for the change, (3) what you would do (or say) during the changed part of the lesson, and (4) what you would assume students would do (or say) during the changed part of the lesson. 

I can't say ahead of time what you will change, of course, but common changes include adding questions, changing written or spoken wording to be a more accurate reflection of the nature of science, "lecturettes" at opportune points in a lesson about a relevant aspect of the NOS, and changing activities to become more open-ended (along with thoughts about aspects of the NOS students might likely demonstrate during the more open-ended activity).

Optional: Teach the lesson, videotaping yourself. Afterwards, select tape segments for discussion in our class and/or write a brief essay commenting on the lesson as a vehicle for teaching students about the nature of science or scientific reasoning. If you are interested in pursuing this option, see me ahead of time and we will structure the assignment a little differently for you. (15% of total grade)

4. Research Project In this assignment you will apply what you know about science to answer a question that you choose. You will be using raw data from any of several publicly available databases. I'll show you some data sources in class, to get you started, and show you how the assignment works. Your job is to devise a question that uses that data to support a possible answer. The questions should examine trends or relationships between two (or more) variables, and you will have to parse the data yourself--you are not using someone else's study. Once you've selected a question, please check with me to be sure it's OK. 

You will analyze and interpret what you have found and communicate your findings through a written report of 4-6 pages (double spaced) that includes:

• Introduction--this section should be a statement of the question(s) you plan to answer in your report; background information to help the reader understand why this question is important ('So what?') as well as what we already know. It should provide the information we need to understand the study and its value
• Procedure--this section should help the reader understand how the data was collected. The process here is two-fold. First, discuss procedures related to your data--where it was collected, when, how, etc. You will need to look over the websites where you found the databases to find this information. Second, briefly discuss *your* procedures--how did you find the databse(s) you used, how did you parse and analyze your data, etc.
• Graphs, Tables, Charts--use graphical methods to display your important results. You don't need to include the entire database, only the data that you are using to answer your question. In most cases your report will include at least one graph. More than one graph is OK, just be sure each graph supports your results/discussion--if you make it, you need to talk about it! Graphs should be completed using MS Excel or some sort of graphing program.
• Results--present your findings. What did you discover? How well was the data able to (or unable to) answer the question(s) you posed? Be sure to include discussion of limitations of the data and places where you're making assumptions about things like controlled variables, as well as places where you're results/conclusions are a little subjecitve. Put another way, data analysis is rarely as clear cut in real life as it is in school labs; it's usually more messy. Discuss this "messiness."
• Implications--this final segment should include: i) A discussion of what your findings suggest. That is, why are these results important or relevant? ii) A discussion of what a researcher might do to establish a stronger link in the study. What additional information would you need? What sorts of tests might you design to get it? (20% of total grade)

5.  We will have a small final exam, based around the ideas I mentioned in the course overview above. (15% of total grade)

TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE
 

Students with disabilities who need reasonable modifications, special assistance, or accomodations in this course should promptly direct their request to the course instructor. If a student with a disability feels that modifications, special assistance, or accomodations offered are inappropriate or insufficient, s/he should seek the assistance of the Director of Disabled Student Services on campus.

SCED 404