In your own words and thoughts, define the title of the course (Physics). In what ways do you think the material covered in this course will be similar and different to your past science classes? Be specific.
Physics can be defined as the reaction to a specific action; for every action there must be a reaction. This course will be similar to my past science classes because science is all related, and intertwined. I believe physics will be different because it is a different aspect of science. Where in my previous science classes I learned about plants, animals, and cells, in this class I will probably find myself learning more about laws, and motion.Journal #2 Topic:
In science, mistakes or "bad" ideas happen. What were some examples of the class' "failed" ideas from the tube activity? What was gained from these "failed" ideas? How does making mistakes help in your learning?
The class had a lot of failed ideas due to the fact of little previous experience with the tube. The more one studies something the more one realises how foolish some ideas were. This is perfectly fine, as long as knowledge is gained from the original foolishness. An example that failed with the tube were some of the basic ideas, before we really started testing it more and more; such as, if you held down string "x" and pulled on string "y" what would happen. In the end, making mistakes helped us learn what definitely wasn't in the tube; such as a gremlin. One can only better themselves before reaching to others' to point out their flaws. Yet, a person should never be done in trying to better themselves.
Journal #3 Topic:
Journal #4 Topic:
Journal #3 Topic:
Many politicians are arguing for Intelligent Design to be taught in science classes. To what extent do you believe Intelligent Design is scientific. Explain your thoughts. Defend teaching Intelligent Design in science classes or suggest, with reasons, a class where Intelligent Design could be taught/discussed.
I believe that teachers are denying students the right to learn fully all of the theories that are out there. Should teachers preach one way or another? No, certainly not! But only allowing them to discuss evolution is basically forcing children, who do not come with a religious background, one option of how this world came to be. I think that evolution and religion are two very deep and personal subjects; and that they in themselves are very involved in science. It is such a large topic span, that I think they should have another science class made, "The Science Of Creation." In this class they would cover the theory of evolution, as well as the fact that the creator of this theory later on did not even believe in it himself. They would teach about the different religions, and all of the other theories (official and unofficial) that people over the years have conjured up. Teachers would not reveal their own personal beliefs in class, so not to persuade the children one way or another, but teach on both. The instructors could include organized debates for part of a lesson plan. Our school systems are depriving us of a full education, that with the appropriate tactics and right approach could be a very successful class.Journal #4 Topic:
How were you and your classmates creative while doing the measuring activity? Explain in detail how you believe creativity influenced the discovery of two other science ideas you have learned about in the past.
Daniel and I were creative by using me to measure things. We were able to measure my height by me laying on the the table, it is exactly the the same length as my height. In our measuring, we also used Subway boxes to measure the height of the chair. This creativity brought about my previous knowledge of measurements. Everyone can measure something using anything they want, but it might not do anyone else any good, because it's not a standard measurement. If something is three Sydney's tall, it will only benefit me, and any person who might be with me. Standardization is very important when trying to give a person directions, or give them instructions. 
#1
ReplyDeletePhysics tries to simplify everything into a mathematical formula. These formulas allow us to predict outcomes. That is the power of physics.
#2
I love that you notice the power of reflecting on mistakes in order to improve. Too many people will never take the time to think over things and actually see what worked well and what didn't and how to improve the things that did not work well. This is why I will always be asking people to explain in detail why an idea is not as good as another.
#3
Science focuses on explaining phenomena by using natural explanations. A hypothesis must have the chance to be shown to be false. This boils down to being able to be tested and the data providing evidence for or against the hypothesis. A theory is an idea that has been tested and verified over and over and over again and also is able to predict phenomena. This is often times confused because the general public misuse the term “theory” so many times. The public often times uses the word “theory” when they truly mean “hypothesis”.
The problem with Intelligent Design is its inability to be tested. How do you test the supernatural? If it is outside the natural world, there is no possible way to naturally measure it (i.e. collect data) and have evidence for it.
I am curious as to where you have heard Darwin did not believe in his own idea. He went on to write about the evolution of humans. I do believe he still thought a god existed, if that is what you mean, but evolution does not claim there is no god, for you cannot test that statement.
#4
Creativity is everywhere in science. Someone had to create the experiments that are commonly acclaimed in science. A lot of people view science as complacent and boring, but I think this is because science classes actually leave out the science part! Without doing science and creating experiments, science is just history (though I think history can also be taught better than it is, though I have no idea how history is taught here so it might be much better than what I experienced).