These areas of study are still sciences, however. Consider archaeology: even though one cannot perform repeatable experiments, hypotheses may still be supported. For instance, an archaeologist can hypothesize that an ancient culture existed based on finding a piece of pottery.
Further hypotheses could be made about various characteristics of this culture. These hypotheses may be found to be plausible supported by data and tentatively accepted, or may be falsified and rejected altogether due to contradictions from data and other findings. A group of related hypotheses, that have not been disproven, may eventually lead to the development of a verified theory.
A theory is a tested and confirmed explanation for observations or phenomena that is supported by a large body of evidence. Science may be better defined as fields of study that attempt to comprehend the nature of the universe. Scientists seek to understand the world and the way it operates.
To do this, they use two methods of logical thinking: inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that uses related observations to arrive at a general conclusion. This type of reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist such as a biologist makes observations and records them. The central purpose of American education. Education and the spirit of science.
Elementary Science Study New York: McGraw-Hill. Finke, R. Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Gabriel, S. Risk of connective-tissue disease and other disorders after breast implantation. New England Journal of Medicine, , — Galilei, G. The sidereal messenger. Shapley, S. Wright Eds. A treasury of science. Gentner, D. The mechanisms of analogical learning. Ortony Eds. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Germann, P. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 , — Grossberg, S.
Studies of mind and brain. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Hand, B. Tynjala, L. Lonka Eds. Hanson, N. Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science.
Harrison, A. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 , 55— Hauser, M. What do animals think about numbers? American Scientist, 88 , — Hempel, C. Philosophy of natural science. Heiss, E. Modern science teaching. New York: MacMillan. Hestenes, D. Modeling games in a Newtonian world. American Journal of Physics, 55 , — Hoffman, R. Metaphor in science. Hoffman Eds. Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Hofstadter, D. Metamagical themas: How might analogy, the core of human thinking, be understood by computers? Scientific American, , 18— Holland, J.
Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. See especially Chapter Inhelder, B. The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books. Johnson, M. The body in the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. What are the relative effects of reasoning ability and prior knowledge on biology achievement in expository and inquiry classes?
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 , 89— Johnson-Laird, P. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness.
Mental models and reasoning. Sternberg Eds. New York: Cambridge University Press. Karplus, R. A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally. Koestler, A. The act of creation. London: Hutchinson. Kosslyn, S. Wet mind: The new cognitive neuroscience. New York: The Free Press. Lawson, A. The development of reasoning among college biology students.
Journal of College Science Teaching, 21 , — Deductive reasoning, brain maturation, and science concept acquisition: Are they linked? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30 , — What should students learn about the nature of science and how should we teach it?
Journal of College Science Teaching, 28 , — How do humans acquire knowledge? And what does that imply about the nature of knowledge? Science and Education, 9 , — Science and Education, 11 , 1— The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25 , — The neurological basis of learning, development and discovery: Implications for teaching science and mathematics.
A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. The development of reasoning skills in college biology: Do two levels of general hypothesis-testing skills exist?
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 , 81— How good are students at testing alternative explanations of unseen entities? The American Biology Teacher, 62 , — A case study of the tenacity of misconceptions.
The Journal of College Science Teaching, 29 , — Encouraging the transition from concrete to formal cognitive functioning — an experiment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13 , —; also Lewis, R. Biology: A hypothetico-deductive science. The American Biology Teacher, 50 , — Medawar, P. Induction and intuition in scientific thought. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. Miller, G. If the treated ponds show lesser growth of algae, then we have found support for our hypothesis.
If they do not, then we reject our hypothesis. Be aware that rejecting one hypothesis does not determine whether or not the other hypotheses can be accepted; it simply eliminates one hypothesis that is not valid.
Using the scientific method, the hypotheses that are inconsistent with experimental data are rejected. In the example below, the scientific method is used to solve an everyday problem. Which part in the example below is the hypothesis? Which is the prediction? Based on the results of the experiment, is the hypothesis supported? If it is not supported, propose some alternative hypotheses. In practice, the scientific method is not as rigid and structured as it might at first appear.
Sometimes an experiment leads to conclusions that favor a change in approach; often, an experiment brings entirely new scientific questions to the puzzle. Many times, science does not operate in a linear fashion; instead, scientists continually draw inferences and make generalizations, finding patterns as their research proceeds. Scientific reasoning is more complex than the scientific method alone suggests.
The scientific community has been debating for the last few decades about the value of different types of science. Is it valuable to pursue science for the sake of simply gaining knowledge, or does scientific knowledge only have worth if we can apply it to solving a specific problem or bettering our lives? This question focuses on the differences between two types of science: basic science and applied science. It is not focused on developing a product or a service of immediate public or commercial value.
In applied science, the problem is usually defined for the researcher. Many scientists think that a basic understanding of science is necessary before an application is developed; therefore, applied science relies on the results generated through basic science.
Other scientists think that it is time to move on from basic science and instead to find solutions to actual problems. Both approaches are valid. It is true that there are problems that demand immediate attention; however, few solutions would be found without the help of the knowledge generated through basic science.
One example of how basic and applied science can work together to solve practical problems occurred after the discovery of DNA structure led to an understanding of the molecular mechanisms governing DNA replication. Strands of DNA, unique in every human, are found in our cells, where they provide the instructions necessary for life.
Understanding the mechanisms of DNA replication enabled scientists to develop laboratory techniques that are now used to identify genetic diseases, pinpoint individuals who were at a crime scene, and determine paternity.
Without basic science, it is unlikely that applied science would exist. Another example of the link between basic and applied research is the Human Genome Project, a study in which each human chromosome was analyzed and mapped to determine the precise sequence of DNA subunits and the exact location of each gene.
Other organisms have also been studied as part of this project to gain a better understanding of human chromosomes. The Human Genome Project relied on basic research carried out with non-human organisms and, later, with the human genome. An important end goal eventually became using the data for applied research seeking cures for genetically related diseases. While research efforts in both basic science and applied science are usually carefully planned, it is important to note that some discoveries are made by serendipity, that is, by means of a fortunate accident or a lucky surprise.
Penicillin was discovered when biologist Alexander Fleming accidentally left a petri dish of Staphylococcus bacteria open. An unwanted mold grew, killing the bacteria. The mold turned out to be Penicillium , and a new antibiotic was discovered. Even in the highly organized world of science, luck—when combined with an observant, curious mind—can lead to unexpected breakthroughs. Whether scientific research is basic science or applied science, scientists must share their findings for other researchers to expand and build upon their discoveries.
Communication and collaboration within and between sub disciplines of science are key to the advancement of knowledge in science. Scientists can share results by presenting them at a scientific meeting or conference, but this approach can reach only the limited few who are present.
Instead, most scientists present their results in peer-reviewed articles that are published in scientific journals. The process of peer review helps to ensure that the research described in a scientific paper or grant proposal is original, significant, logical, and thorough. Grant proposals, which are requests for research funding, are also subject to peer review.
Scientists publish their work so other scientists can reproduce their experiments under similar or different conditions to expand on the findings. The experimental results must be consistent with the findings of other scientists. There are many journals and the popular press that do not use a peer-review system. A large number of online open-access journals, journals with articles available without cost, are now available many of which use rigorous peer-review systems, but some of which do not.
Results of any studies published in these forums without peer review are not reliable and should not form the basis for other scientific work. Biology is the science that studies living organisms and their interactions with one another and their environments.
Science attempts to describe and understand the nature of the universe in whole or in part. Science has many fields; those fields related to the physical world and its phenomena are considered natural sciences. A hypothesis is a tentative explanation for an observation.
A scientific theory is a well-tested and consistently verified explanation for a set of observations or phenomena. A scientific law is a description, often in the form of a mathematical formula, of the behavior of an aspect of nature under certain circumstances.
Two types of logical reasoning are used in science. Inductive reasoning uses results to produce general scientific principles.
0コメント