Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Science Fair


As a high school senior involved in a science outreach program and
planning on majoring in physics, I think that science fairs are one of
the best things going for getting kids involved in real science. My
personal rules for science are threefold: 1) create fun/interest, 2)
teach something, 3) don't teach anything WRONG. You'll notice that
explaining EVERYTHING is nowhere on the list. While the Bohr model of
the atom does not explain what is really going on with 3 dimensional
electron orbitals and electrons that don't even really exist as a
point charge spinning around the atom, it is usefull, and perhaps even
essential to teaching atomic structure and energy levels. I think ths
is analagous to what I learned in my first science fair projects. I
remember the instructions fairly clearly. Follow a set procedure.
Make your hypothesis first. Report results regardless of their
confirmation or denial of your hypothesis. Experiment with only ONE
variable. These are important things for any student fo science to
learn at a young age.

Will the experiments be trite and full of errors? Of course? Did I
discover the top quark in my project? No, I compared the
effectiveness of laundry experiments, but even in this simple
experiment, I could see errors, and if not know how to correct them at
least identify them. In the areas where science fair experiments
fail, perhaps they teach the most. Any student who really tries to do
the thing right will realize how difficult it is to control variables,
how much work goes into a simple project, the enormous amounts of
materials required, the frustration of inconclusive or difficult to
interpret data. All this is science, no matte how much we wish it
wasn't. While my laundry detergent experiment was not double blind,
and I could recognize the shapes of the pizza sauce stains and
correlate them with the detergents used, I tried to keep that out of
my decision making process. How well did I do? I don't know I was
10, not exactly champion of introspection and psychological
self-knowledge. The point is I recognized the problem then, and now,
6 years later, I know how I could have avoided it. Trial and error,
learning through role-playing, childish experiments and technique, the
science fair experience is an imperfect experience that is still one
of the greatest ways to introduce youth to what science is.


---"Donald E. Simanek" <dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu> wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Raacc wrote:

I went to my daughter's 6th grade science fair tonight. The
experiments
ranged from the battery that lasted the longest, to the paper
towel that
absorbed the most. It was an introduction to the scientific
method and I was
pleasantly surprised at the turn out.

Surprised at the turn out, but were you surprised at the quality of
the
experiments and their interpretation/analysis?

Having judged science fairs in my mis-spent youth, I am rather
unconvinced
that they are operated in a way which promotes "scientific method"
(whatever that is).

One experiment dealt with the effect that music has on plant
growth. The
student had three plants with labels below them giving the names
of the
musical groups.

This goes back to the 50s when they were doing experiments on the
"power
of prayer on plants." An interesting reported result was that negative
prayer (praying for the plant to die) was more effective than positive
prayer. I still have the book of this title, which was a hot seller
at the
time. Of course the studies claimed proper controls, use of control
groups, etc. etc.

One group was Hansen(?), another was Spice Girls and the
third was Blank. Upon asking, I found that the group, Blank, was
actually a
blank tape. The conclusion was that the plant experiencing the
blank tape
grew the fastest. Apparently, plants don't like Spice Girls or
Hansen(?).
Perhaps Harry Chapin or Gordon Lightfoot would have produced
better results.

Please tell us what conclusions this student drew from the
experiment, and
how one determined what sort of results could have been expected
from a
statistical analysis of the inherent variablities of the conditions
of the
experiment. Considering these, was the sample size large enough to
draw
*any* meaningful conclusions from the experiment?

The conclusion I enjoyed the most dealt with the brand of popcorn
that popped
the most. It was, "The one that popped the most tasted the
worst." Perhaps
Murphy's Law is fundamental.

I sense that you are expressing the same concerns I have about these
so-called "research" projects, as done in schools. Many projects I've
seen venture into areas which have subjective aspects, and for which
one
ought to consider using more than a control group, but also blind or
double-blind experimental protocols. Are the students who do these
projects aware of the importance of this? Do they even know what such
protocols are? This would certainly be a fine place to make students
aware
of these matters. Also, statistical analysis of experimental
uncertainties
is absolutely necessary to draw any conclusions from most of these,
even
to draw negative conclusions.

I know you said 6th grade. That's a bit early to get sophisticated
about
these things, too early to expect any meaningful understanding of the
"scientific method". What I'm questioning is whether *these*
activites, as
performed, are even appropriate for this level. Aren't there more
valuable
and "cleaner" things 6th graders could be doing, such as collecting
data,
learning how to make graphs of data, and drawing some conclusions
from the
patterns found in data? Perhaps hypothesis-testing could come later,
especially if it involves experiments with lots of variables, some
difficult or impossible to control.

A judge at one of these high school science-fair events once
remarked to
me that this is no more than "Playing at Research", that is,
play-acting
the role of a scientist as an actor plays a role, going through the
motions and talking the language without necessarily understanding
it. "I
play a doctor on TV, so you can trust me when I tell you that this
snake-oil really works!"

-- Donald

.....................................................................
Dr. Donald E. Simanek Office: 717-893-2079
Professor of Physics FAX: 717-893-2048
Lock Haven University, Lock Haven, PA. 17745
dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek
.....................................................................




_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com