Internal-External

Delineating the internal and external features of theories as well as regarding them seperately as potential indicators of the truth of a theory was only an start up suggestion. The stock of information can be divided into two categories to evaluate a theory, depending on the source of information. There is the information from the theories themselves, and the information from the world.  To justify a theory, you would need a combination of thoery-to-theory relations and theory-to world relations. These conceptions are needed for thinking about evidence.

I would like to have a better idea of what theory to theory relations and theory to world relations look like as I am not sure what they really mean.

I would use this in my teaching and learning by ensuring that my students are able to see theories in relation to other theories as well as in relation to the world we live in.

Learning artifacts

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/science-theory-observation/

file:///C:/Users/user_PC/Downloads/chapter_7_readiing_the_book_of_nature_peter_kosso.pdf

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/what-thomas-kuhn-really-thought-about-scientific-truth/

observation

In this lesson, we learnt about observation. Observation is fundamental in most of scientific learning. It is the act of viewing objectively. The definition of observation is the action or process of observing something or someone carefully or in order to gain information. It is also a remark, statement, or comment based on something one has seen, heard, or noticed. The importance of observations must be emphasized so as not to get lost in the analysis that follows the observation. Observations must be scrutinized in detail. It must be described thoroughly so that no details are lost out are left unanalyzed. When there is objective observation, we are more able to prevent error and bias that humans tend to make. To be objective, the observation must be accountable. To be an accountable observation, it must be informative. It must also have certifiable justification without being haphazard or uncontrolled.

I would like to know more about some examples of accountable and unaccountable observations to get a better idea of the differences.

In my teaching and learning, I would use it to ensure that my students always observed events and experiments objectively before scrutinizing it. My students must justify each of their observations and ensure that they review each others findings to certify the observations as accountable.

Learning Artifacts:

https://books.google.com.my/books?id=VK5yIq-wzdgC&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=accountable+observation+science&source=bl&ots=-wer9fXspO&sig=Jq63nhzUCRbngW57JBRV3i9VWcE&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=accountable%20observation%20science&f=false

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/k/kusnickj/sanjuan/academicconversationssjccday3.pdf

Week 7

I learnt about the Hypothetical-Deductive Model of Confirmation. It is a way to confirm a theory based on deductive reasoning. In this model, also known as the HD Model, If the HYPOTHESIS is true, then the EFFECT must happen, and when the effects HAPPEN or can be SEEN, so the theory must be TRUE. In this first model, there are only 2 components, which are hypothesis, and effects. However, the conditions of the environment might affect the result. Therefore, a new model with certain amendments were made. It has 3 components: hypothesis, conditions of testing, and predicted effect. If the hypothesis is true, and the conditions are right the effect will be observed. The result might fail because the conditions were wrong, but that does not mean that the hypothesis itself is wrong. Therefore, we must regularly test in order to confirm our hypothesis.

I am not sure what would be the best amount of times to confirm the theory and test it through the model. I also would like a basic format with which we can use this model to test theories.

I would use this model to help students in training deductive skills and testing skills. 

Learning artifacts:

https://explorable.com/hypothetico-deductive-method

Week 6

I learnt that 'explanations'  is one of the external virtues of theories. Explanations are important in understanding a theory.  However,  just because a theory explains something, it does not make it true.  The model for good explanations, called the covering law model or deductive nomological model depicts a structure which explanations should aim for. Laws that cover events should aim to explain it.  The covering law model alone is insufficient without certain amendments.  The amendments are including a measure of unification and inclusion of causal laws or theories as support.

The concept that I don't understand is the whether or not a unit is the same as a measure of unification and what it means by unity of nature. 

I would use this by ensuring that everything that I do and every piece of knowledge I impart is justified with proper explanations. 

Further reading and learning artifacts:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-explanation/

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx13e2-RPv4UYU9UOHZxb2tSeWM/view?usp=docslist_api

Week4 : internal and external virtues

R For this lesson,  I've learnt about the features of a scientific theory.  Each scientific theory has many features.  For example,  the theory might have the feature of being proposed by Einstein. In this lesson,  we focused on two features : they must be truth-conducive and accessible.  This means that the theory must be reliable indicators of truth and the information must be accessible for us to evaluate.  The features can be categorised into internal and external features.  Internal features mean that the theory can be evaluated logically and intuitively. The theory should be logically consistent and not logically contradictory.  External features must be evaluated in relation to the world.  This means that we require observation and information through experimentation. 

What I'm still unsure about is whether or not all features of a theory must be true virtues.  If a theory has internal virtues but no external virtues,  does that make it a failed theory?

The ways that this would help my learning and teaching is that I can encourage students to reason out ideas in their heads.  I would encourage them to point out logical inconsistencies.  I would also encourage them to test their ideas out in the real world and gather information to evaluate different theories.

https://youtu.be/ruRDBAmRuCc

Reflection blog week 3

During this lesson, we watched many presentations on the scientific laws, scientific theories, and the misconceptions of scientific theories. Jess, Divya, and I also presented our own video. Kim was unable to make it for the presentation as she was doing her placement at SK kampung Lindungan. I learnt from making this video that there are certain concepts about theories and laws that are slightly complicated. However, when simplified in a engaging and interesting way, the concepts are easy to grasp. Thus, creating the video and watching videos that were well presented and succinct helped us to understand better. I also learnt how to create hypotheses. We practiced how to make hypotheses using "if...then" clauses. For example, "if a person consumes excessive amounts of sugar daily, then the risk of them being diagnosed with diabetes increases". Another example is "if an object is pushed off table, then it will fall downwards. What I am unsure of is whether or not this is the best way of making a hypothesis . For example, in high school, the method that we learnt for making scientific hypotheses was using "the more....the more...". How I would use this in my teaching is by getting students to make hypotheses on their own and thinking critically about effective ways of testing these hypotheses.

Scientific Theory vs Scientific Laws

I understood from the video is  that scientific theory has to be proven and supported by facts as it is supposed to be an educated guess and not just a random guess made baselessly. I learnt that science and laws have differing characteristics.A scientific theory is a coherent explanation for a large number of facts and observations about the natural world. One of the characteristics of a theory is that it is internally consistent and compatible with the evidence found as well as future evidence to be found. Theories are more certain than hypotheses, but less certain than laws. A scientific law is a description of a natural phenomenon or principle that invariably holds true under specific conditions and will occur under certain circumstances.

Knowing that scientific laws and theories are different, I would like to know how hypothesis also differ from the two. It would also be good to know what the procedures are to prove different hypothesis and theories.

I would be able to use different theories and laws so that my students are able to see an end objective. It would be good to show students how science can be made sense of through consistent experimentation and understanding of what scientists in the past have also discovered.

What is a scientific theory?

An example of a proven theory

A table of differences between theories and laws

Lesson 1: The Origins of Mod Science

I have learnt that there has been a progression in science from merely stating observations to proving those observations. For example, Aristotle claimed that everything in the universe is only made of four basic components: fire, water, earth, and air. However, there was no attempt to prove that claim and that was how science was in those times. The first step from this into modern science was when Copernicus tried to counter the idea that the earth was the center of the universe with heliocentrism. From there, I learnt that modern science has continued to grow.

I am unsure on how the steps to prove a claim. I am so unsure of the details when it comes to scientific concepts although I remember the general concepts and names. I believe I can use this knowledge to show my students how as the culture of inquiry and investigation became more valued, modern science has progressed exponentially. In saying so, I hope to use this to instil a healthy sense of curiosity and inquisitiveness within my students. I would also create a timeline to how my students could possibly contribute to that time line of great people and discoveries in the future if they have a passion for science.

This is one of my favourite videos on science by Carl Sagan, a great modern scientist.

Carl Sagan on "the beginning" (n.d.). Retrieved August 28, 2015.

I also realized that biology is a very interesting field and evolution is an astounding concept.

The history of life: Looking at the patterns. (n.d.). Retrieved August 28, 2015.