Is the Scientific Process really used by scientists?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of the scientific method in real scientific practice versus its portrayal in education. Participants agree that while the scientific method is fundamental to scientific inquiry, its steps often become second nature to experienced scientists. Concerns are raised about the effectiveness of teaching methods in schools, suggesting that budget constraints and teacher engagement significantly impact students' learning experiences. The conversation highlights a disconnect between theoretical understanding and practical application in educational settings. Overall, the scientific method remains a crucial tool for scientists, despite its varied implementation in classrooms.
split
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
The "Scientific Process"

Hi guys,

I'm new to this forum, and I just want to start by saying that it's really great and I've gained a lot of knowledge and insight.

I have a minor question regarding this so-called "scientific method" that is taught so often in K-12 schools and is usually the first thing mentioned (along with the measurement systems) in most textbooks.

Is it really used? Do scientists who are conducting experiments and developing theories go through the scientific process checklist? I would think that to most people those steps would come naturally after experimenting. If this is true, then why do the teachers hand out worksheet after worksheet about it instead of having the student do experiments to develop the skills? Is this just bad teaching?

Oh, I guess I will include a diagram of what I mean by this scientific method. Here is the one shown in Biology by Sylvia S. Mader, published my McGraw-Hill.

The Scientific Process

Observations ->
Previous data ->
Formulation of hypothesis ->
Observations and/or experiments ->
New data ->
Conclusion -> (Go to hypothesis, or)
Theory

That's not the best "diagram," but it illustrates the basic idea.

Thank you,

Mike Nolan
www.zx.ath.cx[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry to swear to a possible youngster but if you're a scientist or attempting to discover any truth you damn well better use the scientific method.

Absolutely every scientist interested in discovering truth uses it. I use it every single day and never break from it.

Yes it becomes "second nature".

What you described below is a great start.

Why they don't have you do experiments is subject to the schools budget and the teachers interest.

A teacher who could not possibly care less about your class experience will hand out flier after flier and never show you a damn thing themself.

A teacher that has interest will take you through it in actuality.

If you're in a public school (which I bet my life you are) this is the case.

U.S. public schooling is truly tragically horrible.

If you have any questions about science ask here please!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just started bio. a few days ago at my high school. It's the first real science class I've had, and it seems GREAT! I'm really looking forward to it. I'll sign up at your forums, maybe I'll learn something. Eventually, I may even be able to teach others. :smile:

Anyway, thanks for the answer. It's good to get answers from people who have experience.

Mike Nolan
www.zx.ath.cx[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Back
Top