AccueilGroupesDiscussionsPlusTendances
Site de recherche
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.

Résultats trouvés sur Google Books

Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.

Chargement...

How We Teach Science: What's Changed, and Why It Matters

par John L. Rudolph

MembresCritiquesPopularitéÉvaluation moyenneDiscussions
5Aucun2,966,376AucunAucun
The science taught in high schools-Newton's theory of universal gravitation, basic structure of the atom, cell division, DNA replication-is accepted as the way nature works. What is puzzling is how this precisely specified knowledge could come from an intellectual process-the scientific method-that has been incredibly difficult to describe or characterize with any precision. Philosophers, sociologists, and scientists have weighed in on how science operates without arriving at any consensus. Despite this confusion, the scientific method has been one of the highest priorities of science teaching in the United States over the past 150 years. Everyone agrees that high school students and the public more generally should understand the process of science, if only we could determine exactly what it is. From the rise of the laboratory method in the late nineteenth century, through the "five step" method, to the present day, John Rudolph tracks the changing attitudes, methods, and impacts of science education. Of particular interest is the interplay between various stakeholders: students, school systems, government bodies, the professional science community, and broader culture itself. Rudolph demonstrates specifically how the changing depictions of the processes of science have been bent to different social purposes in various historical periods. In some eras, learning about the process of science was thought to contribute to the intellectual and moral improvement of the individual, while in others it was seen as a way to minimize public involvement (or interference) in institutional science. Rudolph ultimately shows that how we teach the methodologies of science matters a great deal, especially in our current era, where the legitimacy of science is increasingly under attack.--… (plus d'informations)
Récemment ajouté parGalenWiley, theodarling, sjcmce, grahamhay
Aucun
Chargement...

Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre

Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre.

Aucune critique
aucune critique | ajouter une critique
Vous devez vous identifier pour modifier le Partage des connaissances.
Pour plus d'aide, voir la page Aide sur le Partage des connaissances [en anglais].
Titre canonique
Titre original
Titres alternatifs
Date de première publication
Personnes ou personnages
Lieux importants
Évènements importants
Films connexes
Épigraphe
Dédicace
Premiers mots
Citations
Derniers mots
Notice de désambigüisation
Directeur de publication
Courtes éloges de critiques
Langue d'origine
DDC/MDS canonique
LCC canonique

Références à cette œuvre sur des ressources externes.

Wikipédia en anglais

Aucun

The science taught in high schools-Newton's theory of universal gravitation, basic structure of the atom, cell division, DNA replication-is accepted as the way nature works. What is puzzling is how this precisely specified knowledge could come from an intellectual process-the scientific method-that has been incredibly difficult to describe or characterize with any precision. Philosophers, sociologists, and scientists have weighed in on how science operates without arriving at any consensus. Despite this confusion, the scientific method has been one of the highest priorities of science teaching in the United States over the past 150 years. Everyone agrees that high school students and the public more generally should understand the process of science, if only we could determine exactly what it is. From the rise of the laboratory method in the late nineteenth century, through the "five step" method, to the present day, John Rudolph tracks the changing attitudes, methods, and impacts of science education. Of particular interest is the interplay between various stakeholders: students, school systems, government bodies, the professional science community, and broader culture itself. Rudolph demonstrates specifically how the changing depictions of the processes of science have been bent to different social purposes in various historical periods. In some eras, learning about the process of science was thought to contribute to the intellectual and moral improvement of the individual, while in others it was seen as a way to minimize public involvement (or interference) in institutional science. Rudolph ultimately shows that how we teach the methodologies of science matters a great deal, especially in our current era, where the legitimacy of science is increasingly under attack.--

Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque

Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku

Discussion en cours

Aucun

Couvertures populaires

Vos raccourcis

Évaluation

Moyenne: Pas d'évaluation.

Est-ce vous ?

Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing.

 

À propos | Contact | LibraryThing.com | Respect de la vie privée et règles d'utilisation | Aide/FAQ | Blog | Boutique | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliothèques historiques | Critiques en avant-première | Partage des connaissances | 204,246,744 livres! | Barre supérieure: Toujours visible