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