PLATON: Promoting Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Sciences Inquiry Under the Microscope: Training Activity for Inquiry Component 7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

The shadow WHAT HAPPENED? A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. WHAT HAPPENED? Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

The shadow A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. You can ask 5 questions about the story which can only be answered by yes or no. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

Guess what happened: Write your explanation on a paper. The shadow A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. Guess what happened: Write your explanation on a paper. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

The shadow Share your stories!!! A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. Share your stories!!! Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

Time to reveal what really happened… The shadow A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. Time to reveal what really happened… Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

The shadow A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. A mosquito flew over a world map and while it first went over Tokyo, two seconds later someone killed it over New York. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

The shadow A shadow lies over Tokyo and two seconds later the New York City is drown in blood. Who got it right and who did not? Why? Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

Some thoughts… What was the first think you did after the story was revealed? What would be the point of the game if there was no ‘true’ story to be revealed in the end?

Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory INQUIRY COMPONENT 7 Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Traditional Practices The hypotheses and/or questions students formulated prior to their research are not revisited. The established scientific knowledge is presented in isolation with the conclusions formulated by students. If the conclusions drawn by students are not consistent with the scientific knowledge the “correct answer” is presented. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Why is there a need to change? Students often lose their focus as they progress with an activity. Many times by the end of an activity they forget what the problem was to begin with. Thus, in order for the activity to go full circle, it is important for students to look back at the starting point and remember why they did the investigation to begin with. This process helps students develop connections between what they knew/believed prior to their investigation to what they have learnt during their investigation and their conclusion. Elaborating on what was known and what is learnt enables students to develop deeper understandings about specific concepts and make connections to Big Ideas and other disciplines. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Inquiry Practices Help students recall their hypothesis (and on what grounds they made that hypothesis), to compare their hypothesis to their conclusions, to identify which pieces of knowledge they were missing while making their hypothesis (new knowledge) and how it changed their understanding of the problem (in other words how new knowledge complements their existing knowledge). By the end of this process students should be able to explain why their hypothesis is disproved or why it is verified. Make your students consider alternative explanations (getting into the role of being a devil’s advocate can facilitate this process and it can also make it more interactive and challenging for your students). Be positive when students are discouraged because their hypothesis was disproved and show them that this is also an important and productive step in the scientific process. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Inquiry Practices Remember to call back mistakes students made in previous steps and discuss them. Prompt students to make connections and inferences based on their prior knowledge, the new knowledge and the established scientific knowledge.   Follow a circular inquiry process when necessary. For example, if the hypothesis students formulated was disproved new hypotheses can be formulated and therefore a new inquiry cycle can start again etc. How did we implement some of these practices in our activity? 10% Lesson timeline Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory Some more inquiry tips Help your students recall the arguments on which they build their hypotheses on and review them based on their new found knowledge. Have your students compare their conclusion to their hypothesis. If they don’t match students have to explain what was wrong about their hypothesis. It is often the case that conclusions will have to be compared to existing theory. In the case there are deviations, help your students understand why; what simplifications they used or if there were any errors in their methodology. A wrong hypothesis is also part of the process. Reaching conclusions that don’t match their hypothesis also happens many times to scientists. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

IC7: Comparing conclusions to hypothesis and existing theory An Example X “Now that all groups investigated the phenomenon and draw a conclusion we can move on to the next chapter”. √ “We have built an explanation about the relation between plant’s growth and sunlight through the construction of a graph. Revisit your hypothesis and consider whether it is valid or not based on the outcomes of your research. Think of whether we need to formulate a new question”. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881

Materials prepared by the Research in Science and Technology Group (ReSciTEG), University of Cyprus in the framework of the PLATON project co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union. Promoting Innovative Learning Approaches for the Teaching of Natural Science 2016-1-PT01-KA201- 022881