Phase 4: Expert Metacognitive Prompts

Erin E. Peters

February 26, 2006

 

Nature of Science Concept

Expert Metacognitive Prompts

Scientific knowledge is durable, yet tentative

·        What did people long ago think about the phenomena you were studying?

·        How did people’s ideas change over time about the topic for your lab?

·        How can scientific knowledge be believed if it keeps changing over time?

Empirical evidence is used to support ideas in science

·        Can other people understand your observation out of context?

·        Is your observation free of any judgment?

·        Are your observations relevant to the purpose of the investigation?

Social and historical factors play a role in the construction of scientific knowledge

·        Was there any information that you learned elsewhere that helped you in the lab? What was the information and where did you learn it?

·        Did other groups point out ideas or processes that needed improvement?

·        How might you consider these areas of improvement in your next lab?

Laws and theories play a central role in developing scientific knowledge, yet they have different functions

·        What big ideas (theory) did you use to make sense of your observations?

·        What generalization did you develop because of your observations?

·        How do your observations support this generalization?

·        What do scientists understand about your generalization?

·        Has your thinking about the observations become more like an expert?

Accurate record keeping, peer review and replication of experiments help to validate scientific ideas

·        What categories make up the system you are using to classify? (For example: classifying by the system of color might result in the categories of red, blue and yellow)

·        Could other classification systems be more effective?

·        Does this classification system emphasize important features of the items?

·        Is your data organized to clearly illustrate your point?

·        Have you ignored any factors in taking the data?

·        Are all factors accounted for?

Science is a creative endeavor

·        How did you make sense of your data? What patterns and generalizations did you see in your results?

·        Do the results from your lab make sense with other experiences you had?

·        What kinds of thoughts did you need to think so that you could make a conclusion from your data?

·        Are there other ways you could explain what you saw in your results?

·        What made you choose your conclusions instead of other explanations?

Science and technology are not the same, but they impact each other

·        Does your measurement method have a standard to compare against?

·        How does your measurement interrupt the phenomena you are measuring?

·        What technologies are available to better describe the phenomena?

·        What degree of accuracy can your measurement method offer?