BDW Lesson 5c - Ohio Academic Standards

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

LESSON TEMPLATE

Lesson Code: E 0 9 F 0 8

Date : For November 24 th , 2003 submission

Lesson Title : Scientific Revolutions- a Historical Perspective of Earth & Space Sciences.

Author : Brian Wilson

Ohio Standards Connection :

Standard: Earth & Space Sciences-Grade Nine- Historical Perspectives and Scientific Revolutions

Benchmark F: Summarize the historical development of scientific theories and ideas, and describe emerging issues in the study of Earth and space sciences.

Indicator 8 . Use historical examples to explain how new ideas are limited by the context in which they are conceived; are often initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators (e.g., heliocentric theory and plate tectonics theory).

Benchmark/Indicator Background .

Reserved, yet to be determined

Associated Standards: Ideas in this lesson are also related to concepts found in:

Grade 9 Earth & Space, Benchmark A, Indicator 2; Benchmark C, Indicator 3;

Benchmark E, Indicator 7

Grade 9 Scientific Inquiry, Benchmark A, Indicators 3, 5 & 6

Grade 9 Scientific Ways of Knowing, Benchmark A, Indicator 3, and Benchmark B,

Indicators 7

Lesson Summary :

Most students will likely know something about the historical development of at least a few scientific theories or ideas. In addition some students may know some aspects of emerging issues in the study of Earth and space sciences.

In this lesson, students will build on this knowledge as they inquire and research one or more historical examples to explain how new ideas are limited by the context in which they are conceived; are often initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators. Student will further summarize the historical development of scientific theories and ideas, and describe emerging issues in the study of Earth and space sciences.

The lesson begins with a teacher example demonstration of the historical development of

Heliocentric solar system theory from the Geocentric theory. A teacher led discussion and answer session of these thought provoking items ensues.

Page 1 of 13 Lesson # 5 GREEN BDW 4/16/2020


Using Plate Tectonic theory and several other partially developed timelines of Earth and space models that are provided as a starting point, the students will then research existing observational data on the models and create a finished timeline that links the observational evidence with the development of the theory. A follow-up gallery walk of the timelines will next occur with the students writing in their journal key comparisons and contrasts (if any) between the timelines.

Estimated Duration :

2 to 4 classroom periods

Pre-Assessment :

Instructions to the Teacher:

To start Part 1A- Teacher Example Demonstration, a vocabulary sheet will be handed out and briefly discussed in class. The teacher will then display Fig 1-“Teacher Example Demonstration” on an overhead and also hand out a copy for each student to follow. The students should be informed that the purpose of the teacher example demonstration is to give the student a quick general overview of the procedure that they will be following next and therefore they are not to dwell on any specific details of the example. The teacher then spends a few minutes going over the historical development of Solar System geometry as shown in the figure, noting the scientific revolution that occurred when the Heliocentric theory superseded the existing Geocentric theory.

Fig 1

Teacher Example Demonstration

Example Solar System Geometry Timeline



Circa 500 B.C.; Earth was a sphere, the stars were in a sphere around the Earth, the Earth traveled around a central fire once a day; Pythagoras.



Circa 350 B.C.; Earth was at the center of the Universe and that everything else revolved around it; Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC).



Circa 200 A.D; Geocentric theory; Ptolemy.



1543; Father of modern astronomy; Heliocentric theory, the planets moved around the sun in circular orbits; Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543).



Circa Pre-1600; Provided tables of planetary motion and the position of 777 fixed stars;

Tycho Brahe (1546-1601).



Circa 1600; Discovered that the planets orbited the sun in elliptical orbits and Keplers laws of planetary motion; Johannes Kepler (1571-1630).



Circa Post-1600; One of the first scientists to use a telescope; Discovered Jupiter had moons, spots on Sun appeared to move daily therefore the Sun turned on its axis, Venus went thru phases and therefore had to revolve around the Sun (Heliocentric); Galileo Galilei (1564-

1642).

END OF FIG 1

During the demonstration of Fig 1, students are to list those vocabulary words that pertain to Fig 1.

In addition they are to write any comments they may have that tie into historical perspectives and scientific revolutions. Afterwards a teacher guided classroom discussion follows pertaining to the vocabulary, the social climate that influenced the current thought during various time periods on


DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT these theories, and any general (not specific) questions the students may have on the example timeline.

During Part 1B- Brief Essay Question, the teacher asks each student to write a brief KWL chart on how the Fig 1 historical example explains how new ideas are limited by the context in which they are conceived; are often initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators. Again it should be noted that the students should be informed that the purpose of the example demonstration is to give the student a quick general overview of the topic and not to dwell on any specific details.

The teacher then collects the student’s completed KWL chart. After the class is over, the teacher evaluates each student’s KWL chart individually to gauge the student’s prior knowledge of the subject matter.

Scoring Guideline :

This is an informal evaluation of the students understanding and knowledge. Teachers should make informal notations and record anecdotal comments about the level of understanding of the students.

Post-Assessment :


Transition into Part 2- Scientific Evidence that can support Earth & Space models

The teacher is to hand out photocopies of Figures 2 & 3 which are partially completed timelines of the following two Earth & Space models:

Fig 2- “Universe Models & Partial Space Data Timeline”

Fig 3- “Plate Tectonics Models & Partial Earth Data Timeline”

In addition, Fig 4- “Suggested Alternative Earth & Space Concepts/Theories” is also handed out which lists other alternate concepts/theories (but no timelines) for the students to choose from.

Alternatively, other Earth and Space scientific model historical timelines may be included or substituted from those shown at the teacher’s discretion.

Students are then put into groups of two to three students each. Each group of students is to pick one of the two partially completed timelines (Figures 2 or 3), or alternatively one of the other uncompleted timelines listed in Figure 4 depending on whether their interest is in Earth or space science. From the given model partially completed timeline (or alternate concept/theories uncompleted timeline) the student groups are to perform research into the available data on the subject, noting the general name used for each type of data and the date it was generated or discovered. Suggest that each general name be no longer than one sentence. As a final product the student groups are to finish the timeline by inserting the general names of each of their found data into the appropriate chronological date on the timeline. Suggest the student groups spend no more than 4 hours of after class research time to complete the timeline.

The student groups are next to compare the dates between: the observation of the scientific evidence; and the development of the model. They can then see how the model was modified as a


DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT result of the new observational evidence. They should note if there are any gaps or inconsistencies between the observational evidence and the development of the model. Students should individually (and not in groups) jot down their own observations and conclusions from their comparison analysis. Suggest no more than one hour of after class time be spent on the comparison of the model and the data by the students.

A gallery walk will then occur with students writing individually in their journal notebook key comparisons and contrasts (if any) between each student group’s completed timelines.

The teacher collects the student group’s timelines and individual notes, and then after the class is over evaluates each student based upon the Rubric.

Fig 2

Universe Models & Partial Space Data Timeline

Note: The evidence for various models of the Universe comes from many pieces of observational data that may or may not be consistent with the various models. None of these evidences prove the models, since scientific theories are not proven. ( www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

)

Many of these observations are consistent with the cosmological models. The models make scientific testable hypotheses in each of these areas and the agreement with many of the observational data gives many cosmologists confidence in the model.



1931; Theory that the Universe originated as a single particle of vast energy and near-zero radius called the ‘primeval atom’; Abbe’ Lamaitre.



1954; Modern Big Bang theory; George Gamow.



1984; Inflation theory; Alan Guth.



1991; Electric/Plasma; www.electric-cosmos.org/ ; Eric Lerner.



1995-1996; The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) had better optical resolution than Earth based telescopes, thus ensuring a much better calibration of distance measures. This has allowed more accurate estimates to be made of Hubble’s constant H. Early (extreme distant/extreme age) galaxies and quasars have also been observed by the HST raising serious doubts about current structure formation models of the Universe; www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/bb_cosmo.html

; Hubble Space Telescope.

 2002; “The Big Bounce” (Cyclic models incorporating Big Bang); Paul Steinhardt.

 October 9, 2003; NASA’Wilkinson Microwave Anisotrophy Probe’ (WMAP) was launched in 2001 to measure background radiation presumed to be left over from the Big Bang, and to produce a map of the temperature fluctuations. The current leading view is that the universe is geometrically flat, but infinite (open). This infinite universe would contain wavelengths of all sizes and have an infinite amount of matter. Recent data from the WMAP shows only short and medium wavelengths. The longest wavelengths are missing and this points to a finite closed universe which does not have long wavelengths. The geometric shape of this closed space may be based on a dodecahedron, a solid composed of 12 pentagons, similar to a soccer ball. It should be noted that the Inflationary theory predicts unequivocally that the

Universe should globally be exactly flat, thus this new data of a closed (non flat) Universe causes a discrepancy with the Inflationary theory; www.nature.com/nsu/031006/031006-

8.html

Nature, 425, 593-595, Jeff Weeks et.al..



END OF FIG 2

Fig 3

Plate Tectonics Models & Partial Earth Data Timeline

 1850’s; First proposed horizontal movement of continents; Antonio Snider.



Circa 1900; Matching coastlines; Alex duToit, (1878-1948).



1915; Continental Drift theory- The Origins of Continents and Oceans; Alfred Wegener,

(1880-1930).



1963; Magnetic stripe pattern explanation for sea floor spreading; Vines & Mathews.

 Early 1960’s; Sea Floor Spreading theory; Harry Hess.

 Late 1960’s early 1970’s; Plate Tectonic-Continental Drift model; Earth constant radius but continents are mobile and drift around globe.



1956-1996; Vertical plate tectonics model: Earth is globally expanding; www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/8098/1.htm

; S. Warren Carey.

END OF FIG 3

Fig 4

Suggested Alternative Earth & Space Concepts/Theories



Earthquake Prediction



Volcanic Activity



Animal behavior used to predict weather and earthquakes



Geysers



Mountain Formation



Glaciers



Global Warming



Weather Prediction (Meterology)



Phases of the Moon.

END OF FIG 4

Scoring Guideline :

Rubric for Grading of Displays

CATEGORY

Depth of

Understanding

Evidence of

Inquiry

Level 4

Scientific information and ideas are accurate, thoughtfully explained and accurately linked to the Theory.

Evidence and explanations have a clear and logical relationship.

Level 3

Scientific information and ideas are accurate and linked to the

Theory.

Evidence and explanations have a logical relationship.

Level 2

Scientific information has occasional inaccuracies or is simplified.

Evidence and explanations have an implied relationship.

Level 1

Scientific information has major inaccuracies or is overly simplified.

Evidence and explanations have no relationship



Communication Presentation is effectively focused and organized (e.g., using tables, models, texts, figures).

Relevance to

Society

Background information provides clear context for interpretation.

Presentation is focused and organized

Background information provides context for interpretation.

Presentation has some focus and organization

Background information provides some context for interpretation.

Presentation lacks focus and organization

Background information provides minimal context for interpretation.

Instructional Procedures :

Engagement


Part 1A Teacher Example Demonstration

1. If the teacher or their students want to do some preliminary research on the topic before the lesson go to a standard Earth & Space Science textbook.

2. A vocabulary sheet will be handed out and briefly discussed in class.

3. Fig 1: Teacher Example Demonstration- Solar System Geometry Timeline, will then be displayed on an overhead and also handed out for the students to follow. The students should be informed that the purpose of the teacher example demonstration is to give the student a quick general overview of the procedure that they will be following next and therefore they are not to dwell on any specific details of the example.

4. The teacher then spends a few minutes going over the historical development of Solar system geometry as shown in the figure, noting the scientific revolution that occurred when the

Heliocentric theory superseded the existing Geocentric theory.

5. During the demonstration of Fig 1, students are to list those vocabulary words that pertain to

Fig.1. In addition they are to write any comments they may have that tie into historical perspectives and scientific revolutions.

6. Afterwards a teacher guided classroom discussion follows pertaining to the vocabulary, the social climate that influenced the current thought during various time periods on these theories, and any general (not specific) questions/comments the students may have on the example timeline.

Part 1B KWL Chart

7. The teacher asks each student to write a KWL chart on how the Fig 1 historical example explains how new ideas are limited by the context in which they are conceived; are initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators.

8. Again it should be noted that the students should be informed that the purpose of the example demonstrations is to give the student a quick general overview of the topic and not to dwell on any specific details.

9. The teacher collects the student’s completed KWL chart.



10. After the class is over, the teacher evaluates each student’s KWL chart individually to gauge the student’s prior knowledge of the subject matter.

Allow a total of one half to one whole class period for Parts 1A,B

Instructions to the Student for Parts 1A,B:

Write down your questions and comments while you read the Fig 1 teacher example demonstration.

What would you want to know or hope to learn about: how new ideas are limited by the context in which they are conceived; are initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators.

Be prepared to share your questions and comments with the class.

Development

Instructions to the Teacher

Part 2 Scientific Evidence that can support Earth & Space Models

11. The teacher is to hand out photocopies of Figures 2 & 3 which are partially completed timelines of the following two Earth & Space models:

Fig 2- “Universe Models & Partial Space Data Timeline”

Fig 3- “Plate Tectonics Models & Partial Earth Data Timeline”

12. In addition, Fig 4- “Suggested Alternative Earth & Space Concepts/Theories” is also handed out which lists other alternate concepts/theories (but not timelines) for the students to choose from.

Alternatively, other Earth and Space scientific model historical timelines may be included or substituted from those shown at the teacher’s discretion.

13. Students are then put into groups of two to three students each.

14. Each student group is to pick one of the two timelines (Figures 2 or 3), or alternatively one of the other uncompleted timelines listed in Figure 4 depending on whether their interest is in Earth or space science.

15. From the given model partially completed timeline (or alternate concepts/theories uncompleted timeline) the student groups are to perform research into the available data on the subject, noting the general name used for each type of data and the date it was generated or discovered. Suggest that each general name be no longer that one sentence.

16. As a final product the student groups are to finish the timeline by inserting the general names of each of their found data into the appropriate chronological date on the timeline.

Suggest the student groups spend no more than 4 hours of after class research time to complete the timeline.

17. The student groups are next to compare the dates between: the observation of the scientific evidence; and the development of the model.

18. They can then see how the model was modified as a result of the new observational evidence.

19. They should note if there are any gaps or inconsistencies between the observational evidence and the development of the model.

20. Students should individually (and not in groups) jot down their own observations and conclusions from their comparison analysis.

Suggest no more than one hour of after class time be spent on the comparison of the model and the data. A total of one half period in class time should be allowed for the research, timeline


DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT preparation and comparison. It should be understood that some additional out of classroom time will be needed by most students for them to finish and complete their timeline.

21. A gallery walk will then occur with students writing individually in their journal notebook key comparisons and contrasts (if any) between each student group’s completed timeline. Allow one half period for gallery walk

22. Up to one half a class period is taken by the class as a whole to answer any questions that the students may have regarding the timelines.

23. The teacher collects the student group’s timelines and individual notes, and then after the class is over evaluates each student based upon the Rubric.

Instructions to the Student:

Your teacher can help guide you on potential reference sources to use or suggest key words/phrases to try when using internet web search engines.

Follow Attachment 1 guidelines on researching and reporting.

The student is to compare the dates between: the observation of the scientific evidence; and the development of the model.

The student should see how the model was modified as a result of the new observational evidence.

The student should note if there are any gaps or inconsistencies between the observational evidence and the development of the model.

Differentiated Instructional Support : Instruction is differentiated according to learner needs, to help all learners either meet the intent of the specified indicator(s) or, if the indicator is already met, to advance beyond the specified indicator(s). Suggest that books of lower reading level may be helpful. Also magazines from which to cut pictures may also help.

For students who struggle with the material covered in this lesson plan, partner them with others that possess understanding. Use material from a textbook, internet site, or other lesson plan that contains similar subject material. Encourage the struggling student to work on the material, preferable with the helper partner whenever possible, outside of instructional time. This can take place prior to or after the daily lesson, during shared study hall periods, before or after school, etc..

Possible use of supplemental multi-media software.

Extension :

Part 3 Extended Learning- Summarize the historical development of scientific theories and ideas, and describe emerging issues in the study of Earth and space sciences.


For extended learning, each student has an option of researching and writing a report on one additional historical timeline example of an Earth and space scientific topic that was not covered in this lesson cycle. See Attachment 1- General Student Research and Reporting Guidelines for specifics. The report shall summarize the historical development of scientific theories and ideas, and describe emerging issues in the study of Earth and space sciences. Some possible historical timeline examples of an Earth and space scientific topic are listed in Figures 5 & 6. Note that other scientific model historical timelines may be included or substituted from those shown at the teacher’s discretion. As an option, the student may also explain how the new ideas are limited by


DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT the context in which they are conceived; are often initially rejected by the scientific establishment; sometimes spring from unexpected findings; and usually grow slowly through contributions from many different investigators.

Fig 5

Stratigraphy (Sediment Layering) Timeline



1667-1669; Stenon’s Principles: Strata (separate layers sediments) are ancient successive sediments- Canis Carchariae 1667. Three Principles of Stratigraphy: Superposition (placed horizontally one of top of the other), Strata Continuity, Original Horizontality

- Prodromus 1669. Original founder sedimentation deposits (in absence of a current)

Nicolas Stenon.

 1894; Walther’s Law: Facies (Series of successive layers of sediments) can exist in both a

Superposed position (Placed horizontally one of top of the other), and also a

Juxtaposed position (Placed vertically side by side). Thus Facies do not always follow

Stenon’s principles of superposition and continuity; Johannes Walther.



1965; Reported observations of sediments deposited during an extreme stream flood event in which the stratified deposits exhibited particle sorting and bedding planes; Edwin McKee.



1970s to 1980s; Ship Glomar Challenger borings showed that Walter’s Law also applied to deep sea sediments.



1986-1993; PaleoHydraulics; Sedimentation erosion and transport (in a moving current); In a moving current strata do not form in accordance with Stenon’s principles of stratigraphy, but instead strata can form laterally and vertically at the same time and thus are not always a measure of chronology; http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/fusion/ ; Guy Berthault.

END OF FIG 5

Fig 6

Catastrophism, Uniformitarianism, Neo Catastrophism Timeline

(Note: Date shown is that of publication or discovery, except if in (parentheses) then dates shown are year of birth and death of person. Position whether supporting Catastrophism,

Uniformitarianism, or Neo-Catastrophism is also shown.)

 1282; Found fossils of fish and sea shells on a high mountain; Ristoro d’ Arrezzo (?-?);

[Catastrophism].



Circa 1520; First earth scientist; classification system for rocks and minerals; Georgius

Agricola (1494-1555); [Catastrophism].



Circa 1780; Explanation for sedimentary rocks and formation of fossils; Abraham Werner

(1750-1817): [Catastrophism].



1795; Explanation for Metamorphic Rocks; The Theory of the Earth ; James Hutton (1726-

1797); [Uniformitarianism].



1826; Successive multiple catastrophes theory; Discours sur les Revolutions de la Surface du Globe ; Georges Cuvier (?-?); [Catastrophism].



Circa 1830; The father of stratigraphic geology; Associates fossils with geological layers or stratum (stratigraphy); William Smith (1769-1839); [Uniformitarianism].



Circa 1850; Principles of Geology ; Charles Lyell (1797-1875); [Uniformitarianism].



 Circa 1950’s; Ages in Chaos; Worlds in Collision ; www.ebi.com.net/~rsfl/vel/velik.htm

; Dr.

Immanuel Velikovsky (?-?); [Catastrophism].



1981; The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record , New York, John Willey, pp.106-7; Dr.

Derek Ager (?-?); [Neo Catastrophism].

 Sept. 1982; ”

Twelve Fallacies of Uniformitatianism

”

Geology 10; Dr. James Shea (?-?);

[Neo Catastrophism].



Circa 2000; NASA Near-Earth Object Program Office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory;

Extra-terrestrial object striking the Earth; http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/welcome.html

;

[Catastrophism].

Note: Definitions:

Uniformitarianism principle- All geologic processes had been very gradual in the past (“The present is key to the past”).

Catastrophism principle- Sudden and violent catastrophic geologic processes have occurred in the past.

END OF FIG 6

Copies of all references used by the student shall be presented along with the written report. After the reports are turned in the student shall prepare a brief presentation on their findings. The teacher will then conduct a teacher directed discussion on the additional scientific evidence. Allow 1 week non classroom time for the students to prepare the report as homework, and minimum 2 minutes, maximum 3 minutes for each student presentation, with a maximum 2 minute class discussion immediately following each presentation. Allow 1 class period.




If you have any questions regarding what format to use in your presentation, ask your teacher to help you in choosing an acceptable model to follow.

Homework Options and Home Connections :

Part 4- Sun Models


Research one of the following Sun models (Figure 7). Other possible alternatives include: Solar

System formation theories, Moon formation theories. Note that other Earth and Space models or theories may be included or substituted from those shown at the teacher’s discretion. Write a brief one page paragraph on one or more of the following models as shown in the figure below. Assume one half a class period to discuss any questions relating to the homework.

Fig 7

Sun Model Theories Timeline



1870s; Gravitational Collapse; Hermann von Helmholtz and Lord Kelvin.



Circa 1930; Thermonuclear Fusion Reactor; Sir Arthur Eddington.





Late 20 th Century; Electric/Plasma; www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

; Hannes Alfven-

Noble Laureate.

END OF FIG 7




Interdisciplinary Connections : Grade 9

Social Studies (Social Studies Skills and Methods- Thinking and Organizing Indicators 1,2,3)

English Language Arts (Reading Applications: Informational, Technical and Persuasive Text

Indicators 2,4; Research Indicators 2,3,4; Communication: Oral and Visual Indicators 8,10)

Materials and Resources :

Science notebooks, Poster sized paper, Colored pencils or magic markers, Masking tape,

Textbook, Library and internet access by the Teacher and/or Student

Note for classrooms with only one computer-

An overhead, LCD or television screen can be used to project images from the computer onto a classroom screen. The lesson can be bookmarked or previously downloaded onto the computer or

CD. This will facilitate a more organized and predictable large group presentation and minimize glitches.

Note for Classrooms that do not have computer access-

For teachers with school library or home computers with internet access selected parts of the lesson may be printed out on paper or transparencies.

If there are one or more computers located outside the classroom inside at the school or nearby at a local library, students may experience their research lesson individually or in small groups as a learning station.

For those students with home computer internet access, their research lesson may be done as homework or as an extension lesson.

Vocabulary :

Geocentric, Heliocentric, Strata, Superposed, Juxtaposed, Facies, Uniformitarianism,

Catastrophism.

Note: vocabulary is defined locally at each Figure where it is used.

Technology Connections :

Internet web sites, multi-media computer downloads, analog photo copies or scanned digital images

Research Connections :

Inquiry strategies, theory on multiple intelligence, Marzano cooperative group learning,

Identifying similarities and differences, direct vocabulary instruction, writing answers more memory retention than oral answers

General Tips :



Note: The evidence for various models comes from many pieces of observational data that may or may not be consistent with the various models. None of these evidences prove the models, since scientific theories are not proven. ( www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

)

Attachments :

Attachment 1: General Student Research and Reporting Guidelines

References:

Note: All references are embedded locally within the lesson where first cited.

Disclaimer: All references are optional and provided here for use by the inquisitive student. It is not necessary nor required that any reference listed be used to successfully complete the lesson.



Attachment 1

General Student Research and Reporting Guidelines:

1.

Teacher is to provide topic and question.

2.

Suggested reference source(s) and key word(s)/phrase(s) for web search engine will be provided by teacher.

3.

Student is to evaluate the usefulness, and whenever possible the credibility, validity and possible bias/slant of data, information and sources (primary and secondary). Teacher is to act in a review capacity during this process.

4.

The credentials and past reliability track record of both the author and publisher should be taken into consideration in evaluating the reference source. One should note though that some important paradigm shifts in the past were first discovered by investigators working outside of their specialty field of formal education, e.g. Charles Darwin was a divinity school graduate. Also, from 1903 until 1908 the two bicycle mechanics Wilbur and Orville

Wright were rejected by Scientific American for their 1903 claim to have successfully built and flown a heavier than air flying machine.

5.

Critical thinking skills should include a check by the student for potential errors in logical reasoning and/or extrapolation used in the reference source.

6.

Where appropriate and available, contrary/anomalous information should also be evaluated in order to provide an intellectually honest and balanced perspective.

7.

An attempt should be made to include some non-American references that provide written information available in the English language.

8.

Student should utilize investigative inquiry methods appropriate to the type of question being researched.

9.

Research should be linked to relevant scientific theory/knowledge, and be germane to the topic so as to stay on target with the indicator and benchmark.

10.

The student should use and describe a logical, coherent and explicit line of reasoning.

11.

Information from various resources should be organized, and the sources selected should be appropriate to support the central ideas, concepts and themes.

12.

Students should produce reports that give proper credit for sources.

13.

The findings communicated on the substance and processes should include using the proper modes and media appropriate to the nature and/or type of information.

Modified from Reference: “Scientific Research in Education”, Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research, Richard J. Shavelson and Lisa Towne, Editors, National Research Council

ISBN 0-309-08291-9


BDW Lesson 5c - Ohio Academic Standards

LESSON TEMPLATE

Related documents

Products

Support

BDW Lesson 5c - Ohio Academic Standards

LESSON TEMPLATE

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib