2. Critical Thinking in the Natural Sciences
Chapter 19
Critical Thinking in the Natural Sciences

3. Learning Outcomes
Identify the kinds of questions natural scientists ask
Illustrate how natural scientists consider intriguing phenomena, testable explanation, experimentation, and integration of findings
Describe the investigative methods used in the natural sciences
Learning Outcomes
The chapter identifies the kinds of questions natural scientists ask.
Further it illustrates how natural scientists consider intriguing phenomena, testable explanation, experimentation, and integration of findings.
Then it describes the investigative methods used in the natural sciences.

4. Learning Outcomes
Explain the standards used to evaluate natural science research
Describe social science applications in fields such as climatology, medicine, engineering, and agriculture
Learning Outcomes
Chapter explains the standards used to evaluate natural science research.
Finally describes social science applications in fields such as climatology, medicine, engineering, and agriculture.

5. Chapter Opening Video Chapter Opening Video
In the video, the duo discusses the relationship between the increase in the level of methane in the atmosphere and fracking.
They try to analyze the possibility of the relationship using critical thinking.
This chapter explains how strong critical thinkers engage in natural science inquiry and apply natural science understandings and strategies to support their professional work.

6. Critical Thinking Questions of Natural Scientists
Natural science: Systematic empirical inquiry into the causal explanations from the subatomic to the galactic in scope for
Observed patterns
Structures
Functions of natural phenomena
Thinking like a natural scientist
Critical Thinking Questions of Natural Scientists
Natural science: Systematic empirical inquiry into the causal explanations from the subatomic to the galactic in scope for:
Observed patterns.
Structures.
Functions of natural phenomena.
Thinking like a natural scientist.
Mainly ask questions about nature and natural phenomena.
Engage in scientific inquiry seeking to understand, explain, and predict the mechanisms of nature and establish a knowledge base.

7. Thinking Like a Natural Scientist
Natural scientists:
Ask questions about nature and natural phenomena
Investigate the empirically asked questions
Utilize a shared understanding of terminology and methods of inquiry
Thinking Like a Natural Scientist
Natural scientists:
Ask questions about nature and natural phenomena.
Analyze, interpret, and explain the recurring patterns in the natural world.
Investigate the empirically asked questions.
Utilize a shared understanding of terminology and methods of inquiry.

8. Thinking Process of Natural Scientists
Think curious and intriguing natural phenomenon
Think empirically testable causal explanation
Null hypothesis
Thinking Process of Natural Scientists
Think curious and intriguing natural phenomenon
Natural phenomena that scientists find intriguing are associated with team’s project and program.
Think empirically testable causal explanation
Scientists require a causal explanation that can be empirically tested.
Natural scientists prefer to explain, predict and control naturally occurring phenomena.
Null hypothesis
Two events, factors, or phenomena are not related.

9. Thinking Process of Natural Scientists
Think how to prevent and bring about the phenomenon
Think how to integrate new knowledge with broader scientific understandings
Thinking Process of Natural Scientists
Think how to prevent and bring about the phenomenon.
Thinking like a physicist means finding patterns and connections between phenomena to synthesize a deeper understanding of the workings of the natural world.
Think how to integrate new knowledge with broader scientific understandings.
Physical phenomena occur through empirically discoverable causal mechanisms.
Natural scientists ask themselves four questions.
How can we accurately describe the pattern of events in the natural world we are seeking to understand?
Can we find an empirically testable causal explanation for the natural phenomenon?
What can we do to make the pattern in nature recur or prevent it from recurring?
How well does the knowledge newly gained integrate with our broader, more established scientific understandings of the natural world?

10. Think Curious and Intriguing Natural Phenomenon
Observations of scientists are related to professional interests and training
Natural phenomena that scientists find intriguing are associated with team’s project and program
Think Curious and Intriguing Natural Phenomenon
Observations of scientists are related to professional interests and training.
Natural scientists are focused and purposeful about work.
Natural phenomena that scientists find intriguing are associated with team’s project and program.
Scientific research teams are formed on empirical reasoning, around a topic or issue of broader concern.

11. Think Empirically Testable Causal Explanation
Natural science requires explanations of empirical reasoning applied to:
Potentially testable hypothesis about causal factors that produce the phenomenon
Think Empirically Testable Causal Explanation
Natural science requires explanations of empirical reasoning applied to potentially testable hypothesis about causal factors that produce the phenomenon.
Policy recommendations are arrived post the findings of scientific investigations.

12. Null Hypothesis Two events, factors, or phenomena are not related
Help investigators maintain a valuable level of objectivity in work
Null Hypothesis
Two events, factors, or phenomena are not related.
Natural scientists protect inquiry from policy biases by investigating the null hypothesis and experimenting to prove the hypothesis is wrong.
Help investigators maintain a valuable level of objectivity in work.
Scientists should not leap to the wrong conclusion when an experiment falsifies the null.

13. Think How to Prevent and Bring About the Phenomenon
Natural scientists prefer to mirror experimentally a logical scenario
If A, then B but not B so surely not A
Thinking like a natural scientist implies:
Discarding theories and explanations that are not consistent with the experimental data
Think How to Prevent and Bring About the Phenomenon
Natural scientists prefer to mirror experimentally a logical scenario, if A, then B but not B so surely not A.
Thinking like a natural scientist implies discarding theories and explanations that are not consistent with the experimental data.
Thinking like a physicist means finding patterns and connections between phenomena to synthesize a deeper understanding of the workings of the natural world.
Natural scientist’s quest is underlying mechanisms that explains, predicts, and possibly controls the phenomenon.

14. Discussion Questions
People with severe headaches often experience physical reactions that hamper their daily activities
Has this happened to you?
What physical reactions did you experience?
Suppose you are a natural scientist, what possibilities might you investigate for preventing severe headaches?
Discussion Questions
People with severe headaches often experience physical reactions that hamper their daily activities.
Has this happened to you?
What physical reactions did you experience?
Suppose you are a natural scientist, what possibilities might you investigate for preventing severe headaches?
These discussion questions should help the student analyze problems as natural scientists would do.

15. Fundamental assumptions of natural science
Think How to Integrate New Knowledge With Broader Scientific Understandings
Fundamental assumptions of natural science
Physical phenomena occur through empirically discoverable causal mechanisms
Physical universe is an integrated whole
Think How to Integrate New Knowledge With Broader Scientific Understandings
Fundamental assumptions of natural science.
Physical phenomena occur through empirically discoverable causal mechanisms.
When current scientific knowledge cannot explain a phenomena, knowledge needs to be updated.
Physical universe is an integrated whole.
Various scientific domains are engaged together in one grand enterprise, to explain empirically how everything works.

16. Synthesizing knowledge
Think How to Integrate New Knowledge With Broader Scientific Understandings
Synthesizing knowledge
Anomalies: Solid scientific findings that are not consistent with prevailing theories
Think How to Integrate New Knowledge With Broader Scientific Understandings
Synthesizing knowledge
Offers confidence in new findings and larger theories that can be related.
Anomalies: Solid scientific findings that are not consistent with prevailing theories.
Constant reminder to scientists that something is not right.

17. Natural Scientists’ Investigation
Testable hypothesis: Can be shown to be false by reference to empirical evidence
Let the empirical question drive the inquiry
Natural Scientists’ Investigation
Natural scientists investigate questions by open-mindedly seeking good evidence to describe, explain, and predict the patterns of events in natural phenomena.
Testable hypothesis: Can be shown to be false by reference to empirical evidence.
Strategy of expressing conjectures about natural phenomena.
Let the empirical question drive the inquiry.
Natural scientists treat a phenomena as a falsifiable hypothesis and investigate it empirically.

18. Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Identify a problem of significance
Form a hypothesis
Review the scientific literature to learn from the work of others
Identify all the factors related to the hypothesis
Make each factor measurable
Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Identify a problem of significance.
Form a hypothesis.
Describes what we can expect to happen under certain conditions.
Review the scientific literature to learn from the work of others.
About the hypothesis or similar hypotheses.
Identify all the factors related to the hypothesis.
Identify the factors of phenomenon of interest that it will be important to measure, control, or monitor.
Make each factor measurable.

19. Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Ensure that the experimental conditions can be met
Design a procedure to ensure the data reveals the full range of observations
Run a pilot to test the feasibility of design plan
Conduct the study/experiment and gather the data
Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Ensure that the experimental conditions can be met.
Design a procedure to ensure the data reveals the full range of observations.
Run a pilot to test the feasibility of design plan.
Feasibility test can be conducted to at least some portion of the study.
Conduct the study/experiment and gather the data.

20. Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Conduct appropriate analyses of data
Interpret the findings and discuss its significance
Critique the findings
Publish the research
Design a follow up study
Steps in a Scientific Investigation
Conduct appropriate analyses of data.
Interpret the findings and discuss its significance.
Critique the findings.
Publish the research.
Contributes to better understanding of the healthcare environment.
Design a follow up study.

21. Let the Empirical Question Drive the Inquiry
Scientists do not retreat from an empirical question
Natural scientists treat a phenomena as a falsifiable hypothesis and investigate it empirically
Let the Empirical Question Drive the Inquiry
Scientists do not retreat from an empirical question.
Good investigators employ critical thinking skills to decide relevant evidence and methods to answer natural phenomena in a fair-minded, systematic, and accurate way.
Natural scientists treat a phenomena as a falsifiable hypothesis and investigate it empirically.
Permitting ideological frames of reference to limit search for knowledge should be avoided.

22. Let the Empirical Question Drive the Inquiry
Scientists are focused on scientific interpretation and falsifiable question
Empirical investigation of a hypothesis requires documented data
Let the Empirical Question Drive the Inquiry
Scientists are focused on scientific interpretation and falsifiable question.
Investigation of a phenomena requires restating the claim to interpret empirically and organize a scientific study of the hypothesis.
Empirical investigation of a hypothesis requires documented data.
Documented data should be systematically gathered and objectively analyzed.

23. How do Natural Scientists Think About Standards?
Confidence in scientific findings
Confidence in scientific theories
How do Natural Scientists Think About Standards?
Confidence in scientific findings.
Level of confidence in the results of investigation.
Confidence in scientific theories.
Standards that apply to theories.

24. Confidence in Scientific Findings
Strong critical thinkers assert findings with warranted confidence
True to a scientific certainty
Causal factors in natural sciences function with precision and regularity
Statistical significance: Represents the probability that an obtained result has not occurred by chance
Confidence in Scientific Findings
Strong critical thinkers assert findings with warranted confidence.
Mindful of the risks associated with empirical reasoning.
True to a scientific certainty.
Causal factors in natural sciences function with precision and regularity.
Statistical significance: Represents the probability that an obtained result has not occurred by chance.
Standard expectations for statistical significance are demanding.
Tolerance for random error is lower.
Statistically significant findings are asserted by scientists to be true to a scientific certainty.

25. Confidence in Scientific Findings
Finding what isn’t there and not finding what is there
Wrong to conclude that reliance on numerical data will eliminate human vulnerabilities
Confidence in Scientific Findings
Finding what isn’t there and not finding what is there.
Wrong to conclude that reliance on numerical data will eliminate human vulnerabilities.
Setting the level of tolerable error at one-tenth of 1 percent is high a risk in some circumstances and stringent in other circumstances.

26. Confidence in Scientific Theories
Scientific research is iterative
Understanding of natural phenomena becomes accurate, and deeper with every investigation
Natural scientists embrace a set of standards for evaluating scientific theories
Confidence in Scientific Theories
Scientific research is iterative.
Scientists strive for larger theories, which can integrate and explain more social phenomena.
Understanding of natural phenomena becomes accurate, and deeper with every investigation.
Natural scientists embrace a set of standards for evaluating scientific theories.
Theories can be of unequal quality.

27. Confidence in Scientific Theories
Explanatory scientific theories strive to be:
Consistent
Testable
Comprehensive
Productive
Parsimonious
Confidence in Scientific Theories
Explanatory scientific theories strive to be:
Consistent - Integrate information and new research findings without producing mutually contradictory statements.
Testable - Open to being independently replicated by other investigators in an array of investigative conditions.
Comprehensive - Integrate all of the accepted facts and findings about the patterns evident in natural phenomena.
Productive - Suggest new directions and new hypotheses for research that goes beyond a restatement of initial findings.
Potentially enable investigators to strengthen explanations and make well-founded predictions about the patterns evident in natural phenomena.
Parsimonious - Provide the simplest, concise representation of the complex phenomena under investigation.

28. Natural Science Applications in the Real World
Mitigation of the impact of global climate change on human food supplies
Microbiology, chemistry, and the promise of gene therapy
Interaction of genetics, environment, and personal determination in lives
Enviropig project and genetically modified foods
Natural Science Applications in the Real World
Mitigation of the impact of global climate change on human food supplies.
Scientific information affects everything from personal and family concerns to the policies developed by government agencies.
Microbiology, chemistry, and the promise of gene therapy.
Interaction of genetics, environment, and personal determination in lives.
Enviropig project and genetically modified foods.

29. Natural Science Applications in the Real World
Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities (SENCER)
Sponsored by National Science Foundation
Assists colleges and universities in the development of science courses
Focuses on real-world problems
Natural Science Applications in the Real World
Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities (SENCER)
Sponsored by National Science Foundation.
Assists colleges and universities in the development of science courses.
Focuses on real-world problems.
Examples of courses listed by SENCER Web site.
TeachEP - An Emerging Model of Curricular Integration.
Evolutionary Medicine.
Undergraduate Biochemistry Through Public Health Issues.
Pregnancy Outcomes in American Women.

30. Sketchnote Video Sketchnote Video
The video summarizes how natural scientists apply critical thinking to explain and predict the causes of natural phenomena.