Some Advice on Teaching Science

Frederick W. Westaway gives lots of advice on teaching science. Regarding experiments or labs, he provides plenty as well. Here is some.

Beware of the pseudo method of discovery. "Pour H₂SO₄ on granulated zinc, and you will discover that hydrogen is given off "!

Beware of verification methods. "Show that ferrous ammonium sulphate contains one-seventh of its own weight of iron." This is simply asking for the evidence to be cooked.

When a boy works an experiment, keep him just enough in the dark as to the probable outcome of the experiment, just enough in the attitude of a discoverer, to leave him unprejudiced in his observations.

Do not adopt the heuristic extremist's principle that a pupil must not be permitted to take anything second hand. Life is too short.

Do not make the fatal mistake of thinking that all boys have an instinct and imagination for making discoveries, or can be made first-class workers in the laboratory. In any average science class, be satisfied with 25 per cent of α's, 50 per cent of β's, and 25 per cent of γ's, but do not stick labels on the γ's for all the world to recognize them.

Teach boys the virtue of recording all mistakes as well as successful results. Tell them that all science workers make mistakes: that that is almost the normal thing! Faraday, the most resourceful experimenter that the world has ever seen, said that he learnt far more from his mistakes than from his successes. A boy's laboratory note-book containing no mistakes is never a true record of the work he has done, and it is morally wrong to let it be presented as if it were such a record.

The pupil's notes should tell a plain tale to people who were not present when the record was made, and they should be written up in the laboratory, in ink, when the work is in progress.

In the laboratory, a teacher should have everything in readiness before a lesson is due to begin, including instructions as to the procedure to be followed in all experiments to be performed. If these instructions are given orally, they are forgotten; dictated, they take up much time; written on the blackboard, they are not permanent, and have to be written up again for a future lesson. Typed instructions answer best.

Whatever general method of teaching you adopt, do everything possible to economize time. It is bad economy — it is worse, it is sheer waste of time, to say nothing of a lack of ordinary teaching intelligence to worry beginners about, say, the difference between density and specific gravity, or " pressure at a point ", or the number of stamens in a flower.

Of course, Westaway, in 1929, had no idea that simulations would become popular 80 years later. As you read his words, you have to conclude that he would not have liked his students doing simulations in place of the real thing. Demonstrations may not allow students to do the experiments with their own hands, but at least they're real. With a good teacher, they can provide a good learning opportunity, provided that the class is not too large.

© 2009 by Paracomp, Inc., U.S.A. www.smartscience.netFollow this author on ETC Journal.

Science Teachers Have It Tough

I recently came across a blog about the problems that science teachers have. You'll find it at http://halljackson.blogspot.com/2008/09/interactive-labs.html.

"Science teachers have it tough. They have one of the most costly subjects in a school to teach, yet get a very small budget."

Ms. Jackson is totally correct in this statement. If we all can assume that textbooks are a similar cost in all courses, then which courses have as much capital equipment and expendables/consumables? All right, which of those are required courses? You just have to come up with science.

Of course, science teachers reach out to free (and low cost) simulations. And, that's great!

A serious problem arises, however, when they substitute those simulations for lab experience. Some of the key reasons for lab experiences in science classes are as follows.

1. Understanding the nature of science.
2. Developing scientific reasoning.
3. Understanding the complexity and ambiguity of empirical work.

That all may seem a bit abstract. However, these goals are critical for any student in a science class. Leaving a class without advancing these goals means that the time in the class was wasted.

Really! Who cares if you can list the first twenty elements in the periodic table or recite the level of taxonomic classification or name the eons, eras, and epochs of geologic time? You can look that stuff up. The real question surrounds the use of this information. And, not just use but wise use.

The three goals above are from America's Lab Report. In that same report, the National Research Council states that the typical American student's lab experience is poor. Their reasons include the lack of meeting these goals among others. They point out that in order to be a science laboratory experience, an activity must use data from the "material world." Simulations do not.

These days, science teachers can find more and more options other than simulations to provide quality lab experience to their students. One such option, the Smart Science(R) core learning system, although not free, is inexpensive and meets all of the goals of America's Lab Report as well as its definition of a science laboratory experience. Students work with real experiments at a cost of pennies per experiment. By blending inexpensive and safe hands-on experiments with these prerecorded real experiments, our overtaxed science teachers can produce great science classes and have their students leave the class understanding what science is really all about. At the same time, they can demonstrate a cost savings to their department head or principal.

© 2015 by Smart Science Education Inc., U.S.A. www.smartscience.net
Follow this author on ETC Journal.

Simulations Aren't Science

I've finally had enough. I'm tired of seeing teachers use simulations as substitutes for science labs.

As a scientist, I would like to see people learn about science, not memorize definitions, formulas, and laws. The only way to learn science is to do it. Science requires investigating the real world, not some made-up world created by algorithms.

Learn science instead of learning about science.

This issue has become even more urgent lately because of the expansion of online courses. Many purveyors of online courses use simulations in their science courses in place of real science investigations or "labs." By so doing, they cheat their students of a wonderful opportunity to find out about science and to begin learning how to think as scientists do. They also are robbing our country of its science future. Basically, they are being unpatriotic.

But, many protest, science labs require expensive equipment, fancy facilities, lots of time, safety rules, and other stuff that many students don't have. What are we to do about those in poor rural areas and underserved urban neighborhoods? I've visited these locations around the country myself and know this problem. You can do great science without all of that fancy stuff. Here are the five ways in which people have provided science experience in online courses.

1. "kitchen" labs (can do at home with readily available materials)
2. investigation of large online scientific databases (like DNA)
3. remote real-time experiments (use programmable equipment, e.g. MIT's iLabs)
4. prerecorded real experiments (with highly interactive software for personal data collection)
5. simulated labs (using algorithms to generate data, phenomena, and objects)

The first four are valid. The fifth is not!

For an authority on this analysis, take time to read America's Lab Report. You can read it online for free. It's fairly long, but you can just read the executive summary. The National Research Council of the National Academies wrote it. They define a science lab experience as follows.

“Laboratory experiences provide opportunities for students to interact directly with the material world (or with data drawn from the material world), using the tools, data collection techniques, models, and theories of science.”

Having this experience instead of simulations creates the opportunity for students to develop an "understanding of the complexity and ambiguity of empirical work." According to America's Lab Report, only the real thing allows you to achieve this crucial goal of science education.

Real experiments also allow you to understand the nature of science and to develop scientific reasoning skills better than the fake simulated labs do.

I urge everyone who cares about our future to oppose the use of simulated labs in science courses as substitutes for real labs. The first four items in the list above provide plenty of opportunity for doing science without high cost, safety problems, or lengthy times.

© 2015 by Smart Science Education Inc., U.S.A. www.smartscience.net
Follow this author on ETC Journal.