1. Frank Jenkins, PhD Secondary Science Education Centre for Mathematics Science and Technology Education (CMASTE) Centre for Research in Youth Science Teaching and Learning (CRYSTAL Alberta) University of Alberta Edmonton, Canada 1FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE

2. My History for Beyond Inquiry Then (laboratory inquiry) Processes displayed in laboratory problem solving Skills, processes, problem solving & nature of science Create-test-use for kinds of NOS problem solving Processes required for each of create-test-use Falsification of hypotheses and predictions Now (beyond laboratory inquiry to media inquiry) (and then) Multi-perspective view pro and con Creating criteria list for evaluating claims to knowledge Testing/Using criteria for evaluating claims to knowledge FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE2

3. 3 Kinds of Laboratory Inquiry C-I T-HI T-HD U-D s C-I: create inductively T-HI: test hypothesis T-HD: test prediction U-D: use deductively C - create T - test U - use

4. CTUCTU & NOS Perspectives create a concept inductive reasoning test & verify hypothesis hypothetico-inductive test & verify prediction hypothetico-deductive use a concept deductive reasoning test & falsify an hypothesis or prediction The scientific purposes of laboratory work are classified as C, T or U. C  T  U is a progression for a concept—an increase in certainty/validity/trust. C  T  U  T eventually leads to falsification of hypotheses or predictions. 4FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE

5. CTU Lab Reports: ProcessesProcesses PurposeCreate (I)Test (H-I)Test (H-D)Use (D) Problemgeneral specific HypothesisX test hypothesis X PredictionXX test prediction X Analysis create hypothesis generalspecific use hypothesis Eval. 1evidence Eval. 2X hypothesisprediction hypothesis X 5

6. Lab Unit Plan: CTU & Evid.BasesEvid.Bases FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE6 Evidential BasesTest (HorP) (falsify) Create (I)Test(HorP) (verify) Use (D) thought experimentInv. 10.3 demonstrationsInv. 10.6 dry lab (lab exercise)Inv. 10.2 wet lab (in a laboratory)Inv. 10.1 field trip computer probesInv. 10.4 video/photo labInv. 10.5 computer video-analysis simulation/animationInv. 10.7 remote access

7. Scientific (NOS) LanguageLanguage Watch your language! Based upon the evidence gathering here,.... According to the Bohr model of the atom, …. The evidence suggests a correlation between …. The prestigious journal, Science, reports that …. Only using three samples we found that… The reliability was high among the class members but …. The certainty expressed in significant digits is …. 7FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE Write like a scientist writing for a peer-reviewed journal. Use nature of science language.

8. Scientific Language Exercise Take pure science notes in the left column [Listen to a science lecture or read primary literature and take standard pure science notes in the left column and nature of science language notes in the right column.] Take NOS notes in the right column “Based upon personal peer-reviewed evidence and publications ….” “Research published in JRST and in Science Education indicates that…” “If … and … then ….” “With a high certainty, ….” FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE8

9. Scientific Attitudes (not attitudes towards science)Attitudes That which is left after all else is forgotten. critical-mindedness suspended judgment respect for evidence honesty; objectivity willingness to change open-mindedness questioning attitude tolerance for uncertainty curiosity; creativity appreciation for beauty, unity, and complexity perseverance Also see: Technological attitudes Societal attitudes in STS monograph.STS monograph FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE9

10. (Adapted) Primary LiteratureAdapted Learning Science Students learn science by reading primary literature by adaptation of: language; conceptual level; sentence structure examples; analogies amount and level of mathematics length of article Learning About Science by adaptation of: names for experimental designs, procedures, materials and skills the presentation of counter arguments quantitative expressions of (un)certainty reliability & validity arguments FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE10

11. Creating & Testing My Claim Education and science primary research literature Daily Edmonton Journal including Sunday Reader Nutrition Action Health Newsletter by Centre for Science in Public Interest (a magazine) Climate Cover-up by James Hoggan (a book) Wingnuts by John Avlon (a book) The Best American Science Writing by Groopman What the Dog Saw by Malcolm Gladwell (a book) The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan (a book) FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE11

12. Contexts: Inquiry for Citizenship Source of claims newspaper articles magazine articles lobbying literature radio and TV news primary research literature (peer-reviewed) textbook and classroom language/talk (yours?) Types of claims medical research MS liberation treatment alternative medicine candling; aromatherapy environmental research Oil sands development claims of the paranormal water witching FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE12

13. Health claims to evaluate health claims drug efficacy surgery efficacy alternative medicine naturopathic; chiropractic aromatherapy; acupuncture herbal or magnetic therapy faith-healing; hair growth emergency wait-times surgery-wait-time deaths FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE13

14. Environmental claims to evaluate environmental claims Athabasca River water global warming oil sands operation coal-burning plants coal-bed methane wind turbines high voltage power lines gasoline automobiles FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE14

15. Political claims to be evaluated political claims corporate tax cuts create jobs (or not) private medicine is more efficient (or not) snow removal costs money (or not) higher pay invites more competent politicians (or not) tough punishment deters crime (or not) FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE15

16. Paranormal claims to be evaluated paranormal claims alien abductions; UFOs big-foot; crop circles psycho-kinetic powers channeling; mindreading fairies; ghosts; visions astrology; ESP halo readings water/gold witching FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE16

17. Education claims to be evaluated education claims implicit teaching of NoS is effective (or not) smaller class-sizes increases achievement (or not) depth of curriculum is better than breadth (or not) 60 min periods are better than 80 min periods (or not) inquiry-based learning increases achievement (or not) FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE17

18. Nutrition Action by Centre for Science in the Public Interest Quick Studies Mg and Sudden Death 88 000 women 26 years correlational study Omega-3s Miss Mark randomly assigned 4,800 subjects (60-80 a) 1 of 4 margarines; 3.5 a no significant difference Don’t Just Walk 260 middle aged four groups (1 control) 9 months quotes other studies Protein & Carbs eight country study 800 adults lost weight then given either protein or carbs FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE18

19. onHealth by Consumer Reports Lowering Blood Pressure 3 pages; no research cited natural medicines— “evidence is meager …” Need for Vaccines (1 p) Marvin M. Lipman, MD, Consumer Union’s chief medical advisor since ’67 Strength & Circulation small study; journal cited Work Out Your Cold (0.1 p) 1002 adults; 3 months 5+ vs. 1- days of workout British Journal of Sports Medicine Supplements & Cataracts Archives of Ophthalmology 11, 545 male doctors; 50+ a vitamin C, E or placebo; 8 a FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE19

20. Climate Cover-Up book (Hoggan) --evaluating claims to knowledge relevant credentials? practicing researcher? legitimate peer-review? paid “expert” opinion? respected journal? source hyper-vigilance? national science academy? evidence-based science? selected evidence? fact checking? scientific attitudes? scientific integrity? big-money lobbying? ethical PR firm? against misinformation petition vs. survey? problem of balance? economic interest? tolerance for uncertainty? manipulated media? FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE20

21. Inquiry Concepts for Citizenship --evaluating claims to knowledge anecdotal evidence? correlational study? cause & effect study? animal or clinical trial? placebo & placebo effect? double blind design? sample size? random sample? term of study? controls & control group? peer-reviewed (refereed)? prestigious journal? funding agency? replication needed? expressed (un)certainty? scientific attitude(s)? multi-perspective view, pro and con? FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE21

22. Testing claims to knowledge General criteria: independent tests? substantive debate? trust for authority? alternative hypotheses? qualitative and/or quantitative evidence? chain of argument? parsimony/Occam’s razor? mere contemplation? mere argumentation? descriptive power? explanatory power? predictive power? testable & falsifiable? carefully designed and controlled experiments?... FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE22

23. Evaluating health claims: Q’s 1. funding agency? 2. relevant credentials? 3. legitimate peer-review? 4. respected journal? 5. anecdotal, correlational or cause-&-effect study? 6. animal or clinical trial? 7. double-blind study? 8. placebo & placebo effect? 9. evidence-based science? 10. population for sample? 11. random sample? 12. sample size? 13. term of study? 14. replication needed? 15. (un)certainty expressed? 16. statistically significant? 17. in whose interest? ethics? FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE23

24. Evaluating environmental claims—Q’s 1. funding agency? 2. relevant credentials? 3. legitimate peer-review? 4. respected journal? 5. anecdotal, correlational or cause-&-effect study? 9. evidence-based science? 10. population for sample? 13. term of study? 14. replication needed? 15. (un)certainty expressed? 16. statistically significant? 17. in whose interest? ethics? 18. number of samples? 19. number of variables? 20. number of sample sites? 21. seasonal sampling? 21. up-down stream tests? FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE24

25. Perspectives on an issue Scientific Technological Economic Environmental Political Legal Ethical Social Militaristic Aesthetic Mystical Emotional This can be an exercise involving using newspaper clippings and the create-test-use inquiry cycle, where students create and test the list of perspectives. FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE25

26. CTU Exercises for Beyond Inquiry Evaluating Claims to K gather & distribute media clippings create criteria list (from one or more clippings) test criteria list (from multiple clippings) use criteria list to analyze & evaluate claims to K FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE26

27. CTU Exercises for Beyond Inquiry Evaluating STSE views gather & distribute media clippings create perspectives list (from one clipping) test perspectives list (from multiple clippings) use perspectives list to analyze & evaluate socio- scientific (STSE) views FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE27

28. Carl Sagan on School Science Carl Sagan: “The whole idea of democratic application of skepticism is that everyone should have the essential tools to effectively and constructively evaluate claims to knowledge.” Demon Haunted World, p. 76 “[These tools] are hardly ever mentioned in the schools, even in the presentation of science….” DHW, p. 77  Personal statement: We have allowed pure science knowledge to dominate other kinds of knowledge. This expresses our current (not past, and hopefully not future) valuing within curriculum & assessment. FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE28

29. Thank you Hand-off to you: 1. How do we create, test & use inquiry-based (NOS) science education in the classroom & laboratory. 2. How do we create, test and use inquiry (NOS) tools for citizenship. Consider the potential and persevere with your experience, knowledge and problem solving approach. Acknowledgements: my fellow authors; school and university colleagues my students; my family others who have written and worked on this endeavour www.CMASTE.ca under Outreach and Science Educ. www.CMASTE.ca www.CRYSTALAlberta.ca under Science Reasoning Text www.CRYSTALAlberta.ca fjenkins@ualberta.net FJenkins@UAlberta.net, CMASTE29