I am a science teacher, and I have been for 15 years now. I LOVE science. I LOVE teaching science. I LOVE kids DOING science. I hate "The Scientific Method". I despise it. I also really hate mandatory science fair projects, but I'll rant about that on a later post, back to the subject at hand, the false "Scientific Method".
I think that "The Scientific Method" oversimplifies the true nature of science, and sends the message that there is "only one true way" to perform an investigation. I can understand why teachers would include this in their curriculum, and I can even understand why this method would be reinforced through the participation in science fairs (I will rant about those later), but I do not like it, in fact, I despise it. If you are a teacher that uses "The Scientific Method" in your classroom currently, I am asking you to really be reflective in your practice. Please read the California Framework for Science Instruction, and you will notice that the only mention of "The Scientific Method" is that it doesn't exist.
Science is messy. Science is creative and ever-evolving. Science is exploring and inquiring and trying to figure out phenomenon. Science is performed in many ways.
My main sentiment, my main point, my goal of this post: Please DO NOT teach "The Scientific Method".
I know it sounds contrary coming from a science teacher, but as the Next Generation Science Standards have been created, adopted, and implemented, many science teachers are now realizing that there is a better way. A blog post by @tksciguy echoes my sentiment when it comes to including "The Scientific Method" in classrooms. You can read that blog post here. Another blog post, this one by Hallie Mills, explains her own realization about her practices as she has learned more about the NGSS. You can read that blog post here.
So, what now?
The Next Generation Science Standards contain three different dimensions: disciplinary core ideas (these are the basic content for each topic), cross-cutting concepts (these connect the nature of science across the different disciplines), and the science and engineering practices (these describe what scientists do).
Instead of "The Scientific Method," please use the science and engineering practices.
I know it's scary because it's different from what we have been doing for years. You may have created a beautiful unit on "The Scientific Method", or have spent many hours scrolling through Teachers Pay Teachers for worksheets or task cards, copied them in color, and even laminated them for permanent use. You may have a color coded system, a station rotation, excellent examples in the cupboards. You did a great job. However, true science involves changing ideas based upon new evidence and research, it's time we did this with our teaching practices too.
I think that "The Scientific Method" oversimplifies the true nature of science, and sends the message that there is "only one true way" to perform an investigation. I can understand why teachers would include this in their curriculum, and I can even understand why this method would be reinforced through the participation in science fairs (I will rant about those later), but I do not like it, in fact, I despise it. If you are a teacher that uses "The Scientific Method" in your classroom currently, I am asking you to really be reflective in your practice. Please read the California Framework for Science Instruction, and you will notice that the only mention of "The Scientific Method" is that it doesn't exist.
Science is messy. Science is creative and ever-evolving. Science is exploring and inquiring and trying to figure out phenomenon. Science is performed in many ways.
Image by http://undsci.berkeley.edu
This webpage provides a great description about how science works. If you have a minute, go explore this site. It provides great visuals and flowcharts (like the one above) that illustrate the messy nature of science.I know it sounds contrary coming from a science teacher, but as the Next Generation Science Standards have been created, adopted, and implemented, many science teachers are now realizing that there is a better way. A blog post by @tksciguy echoes my sentiment when it comes to including "The Scientific Method" in classrooms. You can read that blog post here. Another blog post, this one by Hallie Mills, explains her own realization about her practices as she has learned more about the NGSS. You can read that blog post here.
So, what now?
The Next Generation Science Standards contain three different dimensions: disciplinary core ideas (these are the basic content for each topic), cross-cutting concepts (these connect the nature of science across the different disciplines), and the science and engineering practices (these describe what scientists do).
Instead of "The Scientific Method," please use the science and engineering practices.
Image from commoncore.tcoe.org
"Science and Engineering Practices describe what scientists do to investigate the natural world and what engineers do to design and build systems. The practices better explain and extend what is meant by “inquiry” in science and the range of cognitive, social, and physical practices that it requires. Students engage in practices to build, deepen, and apply their knowledge of core ideas and crosscutting concepts."http://www.nextgenscience.orgI know it's scary because it's different from what we have been doing for years. You may have created a beautiful unit on "The Scientific Method", or have spent many hours scrolling through Teachers Pay Teachers for worksheets or task cards, copied them in color, and even laminated them for permanent use. You may have a color coded system, a station rotation, excellent examples in the cupboards. You did a great job. However, true science involves changing ideas based upon new evidence and research, it's time we did this with our teaching practices too.
We need to move toward the NGSS.
Comments
Post a Comment