Written by

(This article was prepared for South American Science Educators, as a starting point for discussions. A follow up including STS, the role of technology and the status of inquiry learning must follow this introduction.)

How do you define science? Is it a body of knowledge or a known set of formulas? Before you continue reading, stop for a moment and consider what science means to you. If you wish, write your thoughts in the space below.

The question "What is Science" can best be answered by describing its two primary components.

First: Science is a way of examining the world which involves:

Second: Science is an organized body of knowledge containing information gathered from data and forming the relationships and theories upon which scientists rely as they go about their work. The strength of science lies in this interrelationship between the subject matter of science and the processes used in science. The challenge, then, is to teach content while conveying an explicit message about the nature of science. Far too often teachers pay little attention to explicitly intertwining these two inseparable components.

The nature of science is expressed by the methods used by science. When the general public hears the phrase "the scientific method," they immediately relate this to what they understand as being "the way scientists work." In other words, they believe that there is a single way in which science is done - the scientific method.

Scientists, however, know that there is no linear path to scientific research. Each problem may be approached from a variety of directions and even the order of these steps depends on the nature of the problem and the chosen path of the researcher. But even if there is no one method or approach, there are rules to which science must adhere. Scientific research has no room for superstition, personal wishes, or even stubborn retention of preconceived beliefs. Human emotions must be set aside. Science is, therefore, a way of looking at the world and, just as history or art or religion have rules and special approaches to reaching conclusions, so scientists must adhere to science's rules and remain impartial in their questions, observations, and conclusions.

These scientific techniques are not reserved for scientists. In fact, most people use some form of these methods everyday. Think about the process employed when a person decides what package of food to choose from the shelf or what clothing to wear. Anytime we attempt to reach a logical conclusion based on data collected and critical examination of that data, we are employing a scientific method. In other words, this skill is not confined to science nor to a science classroom. Let us examine each component of this process to better understand how we can build connections between the processes and products of science.

The first scientist was the first person to wonder and then set out a logical approach to reach an answer.

Wondering is the very foundation of science. The only critical rule is that the question be worded in such a way as to make it specific and limited to the essence of one's problem. For example, wondering about the nature of the universe can not be examined until one rephrases and limits the scope of the question. A better question might be, "What evidence do we have to indicate the age of the universe?" or "What appears to be the basic building blocks of the universe as we know it?"

Wonderment is a natural part of a child's daily life. At times students seem so full of questions that one can see little else. And yet, far too often this curiosity is stifled by the very cultural component that holds questioning at its roots - education. Many educators believe that if we do not help students construct logical understanding and a process for dealing with new information, they will construct meaning of these experiences on their own, even if they must use superstitious beliefs to do so.

This is the time for messing around with the idea. Trying different approaches, both mentally and physically. It is the time for examining the question from various angles and experiencing its basic underlying concepts. Remember, if this is a necessary step for science, then it must be included in the learning of science as well. Students need time to experience a concept without the burden of detail or added information. At this point, the essence of a concept is laid open for all to see and explore.

Now the real work begins. But just as science entails operational rules, so does experimentation. Whenever any scientific experiment is carried out, it must be carefully designed to isolate a single variable. This variable must directly relate to the original question posed, thus forming a check for accuracy. This check is called a control. If these rules are carefully followed, the experimenter can be somewhat assured that only the question at hand is being studied. We say 'somewhat' because the results will only provide the scientist with evidence for a conclusion, not absolute proof. An example may help clarify this very important point.

If a scientist wants to know if a plant needs sunlight to grow, he/she could place a plant in the dark and see what happens. Sure enough, after a given time interval, the plant is dead. This, however, proves nothing. He/She has no way of knowing if other factors may have been the cause of this outcome. It could have been due to a lack of water or different temperatures or dozens of other uncontrolled variables. The experiment lacked controls to make sure that one, and only one, variable was being tested. Even with all these controls in place, a scientist only has evidence, not proof, but the use of controls is essential for any sound experiment.

Information gathered must be filtered through tools of observation, our five senses - sight, smell, taste, touch, and hearing. It is at this point that many human errors may occur. We have all seen or heard of an event witnessed by many people who all saw something different. There are times when information is altered or blocked even before it reaches our senses, but our own mental interpretation of these observations is the greatest concern. In other words, we sometimes see what we want to see and ignore the rest. To guard against such outcomes, scientists must remain open to all available data and not become emotionally involved in the results.

All scientific observations require some form of measurement. It is this tool which forms the primary bond between science and mathematics. With very little work, math and science can be communicated with the same activity. This combination is a natural for interdisciplinary teaching. At the same time, the kind of measurement and its complexity evolves as we progress through the grade levels. At the primary grades, the five senses are heavily relied upon. As we enter the middle grades, more accurate and greater manipulation of the data may be carried out. By the high school years, students will find their measurements to be the tools of both analysis and interpretation.

After exhaustive data collection and analysis, the scientist finally reaches a conclusion. But even the best conclusion must remain open to the possibility that new evidence may be found that will refute the original finding. For this reason, many of our basic scientific concepts remain as theories. This has been fertile ground for misunderstanding by the general public. Often they define theory as one's "best guess," while science defines it as a work in progress but work that has withstood the trials of time and continuous re-examination through carefully designed experimentation.

Teachers must not fall victim to this definitional error. They must also have experienced science and its processes often enough during their schooling and preparation to recognize this misinterpretation of science.

This is the phase where one's careful observations and conclusions are shared for others to, in turn, substantiate or begin the process of collecting evidence that ultimately alters or even refutes. The same rules of logic and detachment must be followed in this reporting as well. Thus, this world view called science has its own built-in checks and balances.

Nowhere in the first section of this article was there a mention of biology or any other science because the processes of science are universal, applying to all science areas. And yet it is the content areas of science for which the general public forms connections. They define science as an organized body of factual information, and they are correct. But just as science is not a set of process skills, neither is it a set of facts. Without processes, science would not grow and self-correct; and without content, science would have nothing to process.

We create many of our own problems regarding student misunderstandings by not taking the time to help our students make these connections. We fail to expose the processes used to reach our present understanding and then wonder why our students see science as a stagnant body of complex facts. Far too often, these facts are taught in a linear fashion with no attention to context, interrelationships or explicit connections to the processes used to reach these findings. Then we wonder why students, nearing completion of a college program, have difficulty identifying a scientific question and completing a thesis.

This task of developing connectiveness falls upon the teacher. Most curriculum materials are specifically designed to present subject matter and do not always expose the underlying processes. This does not mean that we should develop separate courses for the two parts of science. It does mean that the teacher must develop lesson plans which interweave content and the nature of science into an accurate and complete representation of science. Only then will science come alive with the wholeness that many of us have grown to love and view as a way of life.

Note: The original structure for this paper was stimulated by the 1961 publication, "What Science Is " published by The University of the State of New York, The State Education Department, Albany, New York.