Philosophy
Philosophy and Methods of Science (P&M)
Prepared by Dr. Deanna Kuhn and Dr. Paul Thomson Curriculum Advisers to CSS
The P&M course will in many senses serve as a cornerstone of the Columbia Secondary School (CSS) curriculum, as it embodies the educational philosophy and values that characterize the entire CSS curriculum. It is a course that does not carry with it a long history of explicit expectations and objectives, as do courses in the more traditional subject areas, and is therefore able to define itself in fresh, nonentrenched ways. CSS of course seeks to instill intellectual curiosity and critical thinking in its students, but we commit to going beyond these hard-to-argue-with generalities, to identify just how such attributes are embodied in the kinds of activities students will engage in, the kind of collaborative intellectual environment these activities will take place in, and the specific kinds of intellectual skills students will develop through their involvement.
Pedagogical approach and commitments. A more extended description of the educational philosophy that characterizes CSS and a few other schools like it can be found in an article by Barab & Roth, 2006.1 The overarching goal is to support students “detection of, and participation in, extended possibilities for action” (Barab & Roth, p. 4). Participation in one situation enhances the capacity and interest to create new action possibilities, as well as increasingly abstract representations of such actions. Students will be enlisted as partners in undertaking and assuming responsibility for their own education. The purpose of their education, we will stress to students, is to prepare them to address the significant problems of their day, both individually and collectively.
Problem-based curriculum. The curriculum, accordingly, will be extensively problem-based, with the P&M course providing an explicit foundation in a problem-based approach. Inquiry activities proceed much more productively, research has shown, if the student has a clear idea that there is a genuine question to be asked, something worth finding out. The question, “Why would anyone want to know this?” must have an answer.
The questions students will confront, working collaboratively, will range from the immediate and highly practical (What to do about illegal immigration? High oil consumption?) to those that have been contemplated over centuries (Can we be certain about what we know?), and many (What are the causes and cures of childhood obesity?) will require investigation from the perspectives of a number of different disciplines. A “need to know” to address the problem at hand will motivate students’ inquiry and compiling of a knowledge base they can draw on. They will not reinvent the wheel, but, to the contrary, will acquire an awareness of and respect for the knowledge-building that has preceded their efforts.
Science will indeed be a centerpiece of the curriculum at CSS, but students will not only learn a good deal of science; they will also learn a good deal about science -- its philosophical underpinnings, nature, evolution, and methods, including all of the controversies that those topics engender. This science “meta-curriculum” will be a key part of the P&M course described here. For a more detailed outline of these topics to be addressed in the Philosophy and Methods of Science course, CLICK HERE [insert 1]. For an example of a discussion topic, CLICK HERE to see the Fish Problem [insert 2].
Skill development. When we speak of skill development at CSS, we are less likely to be referring to the so-called “basic skills” that are the staple of the current testing and accountability movement, although we expect students will become proficient in these skills as they engage them on a daily basis. We are more likely to be referring to the higher-level intellectual skills that will play an increasingly central role in students’ academic accomplishment as they progress to the secondary and post-secondary levels. In particular, we focus on the key skills of inquiry and argument, skills that need to be engaged and practiced on a continuing basis if students are to appreciate their power as intellectual tools.
Inquiry. The basic inquiry cycle (identifying a question, designing an investigation, accessing and evaluating data, and drawing conclusions, leading to new or reformulated questions and another iteration of the cycle). These skills are not naturally in place among young learners; they must be painstakingly developed. Middle-school students have difficulty in firmly differentiating their own beliefs and expectations from the evidence they generate or observe. Hence, they need support in recognizing that the goal of inquiry is to find something out (rather than simply illustrate what one already knows) and in learning how to access data that will be informative with respect to the questions being asked.
The software we have developed for this purpose for use with beginning middle-school students starts with simple exercises in looking for relationships and coordinating theories and evidence. They gradually increase in complexity, incorporating more complex (interactive and probabilistic) relations among variables and eventually students’ identification of their own questions and design of their own investigations. Students work together, in pairs or small groups, with the software, and are instructed to discuss and debate each of their choices and decisions, requiring them to be reflective, and thus externalizing and strengthening reasoning processes that typically would remain covert. Eventually, students write collaborative research reports of their investigations and begin to design their own investigations on topics of their choice. For a sample of the inquiry software, CLICK HERE [insert 3].
Argument. Development of argument skills is based on the idea endorsed by growing number of educators, psychologists and philosophers that engagement in argumentive discourse is the most effective way to build written or verbal individual argument skills. It provides the missing interlocutor, helping students to see their arguments as having a purpose. Much of the class activity in the P&M course will take the form of argumentive discourse, with students engaged in dyadic exchanges with a peer or working on small-teams of peers to build an argumentive position.
Like inquiry, argument skill development also has a technology-supported component. Pairs of students partake in “arguing on the computer,” using electronic chat software and engaging in an electronic dialog with a different pair from an opposing team (who hold a contrasting position on an issue) at each class session. Additional reflective activities include: (a) written exercises in which students examine their own argument, counterarguments, and rebuttals and reflect on how they could be improved, (b) planning exercises for a final debate between the two teams followed by (d) an argument map portraying the final debate, which students can reflect on in group discussion.
Gradually, these activities come to incorporate assignment of individual written argumentive essays, a form critical for students to master. As a foundation, however, we focus on students’ mastery of the rudimentary skills that are the foundation of all argument. To see an outline of these CLICK HERE [insert 4].
1 Barab, S., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Curriculum-based ecosystems. Educational Researcher, 35, 3-13.
Insert 1
The Philosophy and Methods of Science: Meta-Curriculum
1. Science as a way of knowing
a. Doing science: Asking questions and seeking answers
b. The inquiry cycle: formulating questions, examining evidence, making inferences, constructing and evaluating arguments
c. Science as theories or facts?
d. Science as argument
e. Goals of science: description, explanation, modeling, prediction, control
f. Scientific thought, and critical thought more generally, as the coordination of theory and evidence
g. The scientific method
2. The epistemology of science and human knowing more generally
a. How do people know?
b. Confronting diversity of positions and perspectives
c. Can scientists, or anyone, ever be certain?
d. The transition from absolutist, to relativist, to evaluativist thought: Where do I stand?
e. Why argue?
Can one ever be too tolerant?
Criticizing ideas vs. people
The goals of argument
3. Science and human values
a. Is vs. ought
b. Where do values come from?
c. Do values have a place in science?
d. Values and decision-making
4, Science and society
a. What role can and should science and technology play to enhance society?
b. How will my education in science prepare me to address the issues raised by life in modern society?
c. How will study of other cultures, of history and of literature contribute to my ability to address such issues in my own personal decision-making and in contributing to decision-making at a societal level?
d. The roles of science, values, argument, and emotion in personal decision-making
5. Identifying and tackling life’s most challenging and enduring questions
a. Where did we come from and why are we here?
b. Faith and reason: The interface between science and religion
c. Morality: Perspectives from philosophy, religion, science, and biology
d. What makes a good life?
Living for self or others
Insert 2 The Fish Problem
[From the New York Times, Wed. Oct 18, 2006 page F5, Washington]
A report about the risks and benefits of eating seafood, released by the Harvard School of Public Health, said eating fish reduces the risk of heart attack death by 36% and total death by 17%.
A similar report released simultaneously by the National Institutes of Health concluded that there is only enough evidence to say that eating fish, especially fatty fish like salmon and mackerel, “may” reduce the risk of heart disease…
Dr. Darius Mozaffarian, one of the authors of the Harvard study said, “Seafood is likely the single most important food one can consume for good health.”
Dr. Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, public health and food safety at New York University remains unconvinced. “Those of us who have been in nutrition for a long time have seen miracle foods come and go: vitamin E for heart disease, beta carotene to prevent cancer; now it’s fish.”
Dr. Jose M. Ordovas of the National Institute of Health panel and a professor of nutrition at Tufts … said the 36% figure “is based on circumstantial evidence that does not provide definite proof.”
Dr. Mozaffarian responded, “It’s the best evidence we have.”
Sample from Inquiry Software: What makes a difference in earthquake risk?
Argument Skills
Summary of Curriculum Activities and Goals.
GENERATING REASONS
Goals: Reasons underlie opinions.
Different reasons -> same opinion
ELABORATING REASONS
Goal: Good reasons support opinions.
SUPPORTING REASONS WITH EVIDENCE
Goal: Evidence can strengthen reasons.
EVALUATING REASONS
Goal: Some reasons are better than others.
DEVELOPING REASONS INTO AN ARGUMENT
Goal: Reasons connect to one another and are building blocks of argument.
EXAMINING AND EVALUATING OPPOSING-SIDE’S REASONS
Goal: Opponents have reasons too.
GENERATING COUNTERARGUMENTS TO OTHERS’ REASONS
Goal: Counters to reasons can be rebutted.
GENERATING REBUTTALS TO OTHERS COUNTERARGUMENTS
Goal: Counters to reasons can be rebutted.
CONTEMPLATING MIXED EVIDENCE
Goal: Evidence can be used to support different claims.
CONDUCTING AND EVALUATING TWO-SIDED ARGUMENTS
Goal: Some arguments are stronger than others.
.
