Chapter 1 was a very easy read. The chapter had a lot of good thoughts, opinions, and suggestions. There were also good ideas to get you started on some science projects that would be fun for kids. The ideas presented would allow you to flow in any direction that your lecture wanted to take. It also allowed for brainstorming of other ideas that would be fun experiments.
The idea that conceptual knowledge and understanding in science is able to be broken down into six categories made sense to me. The categories of facts, concepts, principles or laws, models, theories, and explanations are categories that are essential for students to start to learn at an early age. If they start learning these at an early age, they will have a deeper understanding of them and be able to expand their knowledge later in their school careers. This expansion will allow the students to use their critical thinking skills to deepen their understanding and problem solve. All of these categories all go together to produce a deeper understanding of the material.
I was surprised that this chapter did not entail the use of the scientific method. Everything used to be about using the scientific method to solve problems. According to chapter one, the three proficiencies that were listed were very similar to what the scientific method entails. Formulating theories, gathering data, observations, and conclusions. The scientific method is used in scientific inquiry as well. Is this the new and updated version of the scientific method? It appears that the steps are very similar. Obviously if they are updated they are not going to be word for word the same.
The part on using science in earlier years was not stressed enough. The section was cut short I felt. I also felt that this section could have been developed more because it is an important first step in developing their minds and allowing young children to start thinking this way. Using science in the early years could provide deeper critical thinking skills earlier. The book stated that "children are naturally curious", but if this curiosity was developed earlier by using the three proficiencies this could allow students to understand the basics and grow their curiosity into being more beneficial in the earlier years of elementary school. By having the students use their curiosities, this could produce deeper scientific thinking and the concepts of using science would be better understood.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Krista,
ReplyDeleteI am so glad that you brought up the "scientific method!" Your thinking about the chapter--in relation to your prior learning about the "scientific method"--is a good example of constructivism at work in your own mind. So what's the deal? Do we still teach "The Scientific Method" in school today? The answer is "yes" and "no." This is probably not a very helpful response at this point. I would like to discuss this in our next class. The question for us could be stated as follows: How does the current model of inquiry science teaching mesh with the way in which the "Scientific Method" was taught in the past?
I also agree that the textbook authors could have gone into greater depth when it came to discussing the teaching of science to young children. However, I imagine that an entire textbook could be devoted to just that. Out of necessity, I think, the authors do not go deeply into every topic. If, however, you plan to teach in the early elementary years, then more research on this would be helpful to you and others in the class who have that interest.