Re: [Phys-L] Metacognition

[Paul Lulai <plulai@stanthony.k12.mn.us>]

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote:
2) I reckon that any discussion of "the scientific method" counts as metacognition, insofar as thinking about science counts as thinking about thinking.

  I would be happier if the usual discussions of "the scientific
  method" were not quite so ludicrously wrong
    http://www.av8n.com/physics/scientific-methods.htm#sec-poster
  but I suppose if you are going to have metacognition you must
  allow for the possibility of wrong metacognition.

For a high-quality discussion of "What Is Science" including a plea for common sense, we turn again to Feynman:
  http://www.fotuva.org/feynman/what_is_science.html
also
  http://ipv6.google.com/search?tbm=vid&q=feynman+%22character+of+physical+law%22
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Discussion of the scientific method seems (to me) to be closer to identifying steps or parts of a process.  It seems (to me) that this wouldn't be thinking about one's own thinking, but identifying what would need to be done for a process.  






Paul Lulai
Physics Teacher
St Anthony Village S.H.
3303 33rd Ave NE
St Anthony Village, MN 55418

612-706-1146
plulai@stanthony.k12.mn.us
http://www.stanthony.k12.mn.us/hsscience/ ;