It is very important for teachers to help students understand that science and technology are two distinct areas.

The two interact, but they are not the same. By teaching students about the nature of science (NOS) and the nature of technology (NOT), I think they will be better prepared to understand science content as well as think critically about that content. Within the NOS, I think that the most important elements include: scientific ideas are subject to change but are durable, science cannot provide complete answers to all questions and science takes time. For NOT, I have chosen to discuss the ways in which technology is limited, is evolutionary instead of revolutionary, and comes with trade-offs. I would plan hands-on and discussion based activities in order to illustrate these points to students. I want students to experience these aspects of NOS and NOT through activities and discussions instead of lecture. It is essential for students to realize that scientific ideas are subject to change. What we are teaching in science are the ideas that we have invented based on data and evidence. Most anything in science can change if there is enough data and evidence to support it, as well as support and acceptance from the community. Just because scientific ideas can change does not make our current ideas any less credible though. Students should understand that what it accepted now, will not necessarily be followed in the future. Science is constantly changing. We do not want students to think that there is one right answer because this could cause them to develop misconceptions about how science works. However, we do not want students to have the misconception that science ideas are able to change overnight. According to Clough & Kruse (2009), However unlikely, even the most cherished and well established scientific knowledge could, in principle, be revised or replaced. I could teach this NOS idea while I am teaching content to students. While discussing Rutherford, Bohr and the development of models for the atom, I can help students see how scientific ideas change based on new evidence and accidental discoveries. I would teach students about both of the models and how these scientists arrived at their conclusions. I would then ask students questions to get them thinking about why the model of the atom continued to be revised, why didnt everyone just accept the first model and stop looking for more or different evidence, how did unexpected results lead to new questions, and finally how do your answers to all of these questions support the idea that scientific ideas are subject to change? It is important to understand current ideas because they can lead to future ideas. This makes me think about how it is important to understand how current technologies work because those same key ideas carry over into new technologies. This brings me to my next point that technology is evolutionary, not revolutionary. Like scientific ideas, technological advances are not revolutionary, they are evolutionary. Both new technologies and new scientific ideas are built upon past findings and ideas. I want students to understand that scientific ideas build upon each other. Students should understand that technologies are interrelated. New technologies are usually a modge podge of older technologies with improvements based on needs, wants and demands from society. Just because technologies are constantly being improved upon does not mean that we are throwing out the key ideas that old technologies were based upon. I could illustrate this idea for students by doing an activity where we trace the cell phone back all the way to its roots. We could talk about

the first telephone or telegraph. The main purpose of this technology was to relay messages. Later on people started to have telephones in their homes and business people carried large mobile phone around with them. We also went through a phase where there were car phones so that we could get messages while we were away from home. We then skipped to today when we have mobile phone and it has not been very long since phones gained the capability to connect to the internet and download applications. I could do this through a discussion or have students work with partners to map it out on paper. The main purpose of the phone has generally remained the same, relay messages and contact one another via wires and signals. However, the way in which we do this has changed and evolved by way of technology. In the second paragraph, I mentioned how science is constantly changing. It is important for students to understand that these changes do not happen overnight. We want students to understand that it takes a lot of work to provide evidence and support for a scientific idea. We do not want students to think that scientists ask a single question, find data to support or counter their ideas, and then make a conclusion based on their evidence. Experimentation, studies and data collection can take days, months, or multiple years depending on what is being studied. We want students to see science as a process instead of just multiple single events. I could use the Rutherford and Bohr atom model example to show this point this as well. I would ask students to look at the year the first model was drawn up and then at the year when a more detailed and accepted model was drawn up. I would ask students to consider how many people worked on developing these models as well as how long it took for the community to accept alternate explanations for the model of an atom. All of these points would showcase how science takes time. I also want students to understand that science cannot answer all questions. According to a publication in NSTA News, One of the most important elements of NOS is for students to understand that limits exist to science and to appreciate that some questions simply cannot be investigated using scientific means (McComas, 2004). We do not want students to have the misconception that we can solve all problems through science. It is also important to differentiate between science and religion here. I would tell students that we can do science to find data and evidence to defend or contradict scientific ideas. Scientists ask questions and then design ways to find out more information about their questions. Scientists also look at the work of others and then create questions off of those ideas. However, just because we ask a question or wonder about something, does not mean that we can answer it with scientific ideas. Not everything can necessarily be explained by science. We can find data to support an idea but we may never be able to fully prove something. If my class were doing a unit on evolution, I could incorporate this NOS idea. Darwins theory of evolution by natural selection is a set of scientific ideas that works to explain why certain traits are carried on throughout generations while others are not. This question about traits being passed on can be answered by science. As for the question about why humans are here, not all will agree that this can be explained by science. I would ask students to discuss the difference between these two separate ideas in groups and then when we came back together I would not give them one definitive answer. We would agree as a class that

science can help us form explanations as to what we observe in the world, like traits being passed on through generations, but it can not necessarily answer all of our questions, such as why we are here. Just as science is unable to explain everything and answer all questions, technology is limited in what it is able to do. All technologies have limits associated with them. Just as science is not capable of answering all questions, technology is not able to perform all functions or help us do everything that we want to do. It is important for students to understand that we cannot rely on technology to solve all problems. We want to encourage students to come up with their own ideas and rely on their own knowledge instead of relying on technology for all of the answers. For example, a tablet is limited to certain functions and processes. I would probably recreate the marble activity that we did in class and have my students work on it in small groups. I think that giving students a puzzle is different and it gives students a visual and an experience to refer back to. Students will not buy into something unless they have evidence to anchor those new beliefs. After allowing students to work with the boxes in their group when using just the marble I would ask students about what they were finding and what they were unable to do by just using the marble. I would then introduce a smaller rolling object like a bead and ask students about how this new technology is affecting their ability to find out what is holding up the small piece of cardboard. I could also give each group a different small object, some that roll and some that do not, and ask them how their new technologies have either helped or hindered their efforts in finding out what is underneath the cardboard. This could then lead into a discussion on how technology is limited and how different technologies have different benefits and limits. Finally, all types of technologies have trade-offs associated with them. I could illustrate this concept to students while teaching content. I could ask students to create a concept map about forces that include gravity and Newtons second and third laws about net force, momentum, and action-reaction. I would split the class into groups and have one group use a single computer, one group use a permanent marker and paper, one use a pencil and paper, one group use the computer with internet access and one without internet access. All groups would be assigned the same task but they would be completing it with different types of technologies. After all of the groups completed the task, I would ask them to describe how well their group worked together and if all members were equally involved. I would expect students that worked on paper to have more group collaboration than those that worked on the computer. I would also ask students who worked on the computers if they had an easier time coming up with the components of their concept map. Those with the internet access could obviously look up the right answers versus those without who would have to draw from memory. Both of these questions can lead to a discussion about trade-offs because students who used the computer were easily able to find the ideas to fill their concept map, but they gave up group collaboration because only one or two people were operating the computer while the rest did not participate as much. The students that used paper or a whiteboard were more inclined to work as a group but they may have not gotten as many ideas down on their concept map. It is important to teach students that with technologies come trade-offs because we want to encourage students to be critical of

their technology use. It is good to teach students to think critically about not only technology, but what they see on television and in movies, what they read in newspapers, websites they may come across, and opinions of others. We want students to be inquisitive and not blindly accept information without thinking about it first. This is a good life skill to have and a great way to introduce that is through this NOT idea. Overall, I think that these six are very important to teach to students. It is best to give them a concrete example such as a hands on activity or puzzle so that students have something to connect the NOS or NOT idea to. If students experience the concept then they will be more likely to accept it and remember it. These concepts can be integrated with subject matter. All of the NOS and NOT ideas are important and I think it is best to present more than one of them at a time to show students that they are connected and work together. It is important to keep in mind though that science and technology, while related, are two separate entities. According to the NSTA Position Statement (2000), while science and technology do impact each other, basic scientific research is not directly concerned with practical outcomes, but rather with gaining an understanding of the natural world for its own sake.

References

Clough, M.P. & Kruse, J.W. (2009). Characteristics of Science: Understanding Scientists and Their Work. The Story Behind the Science.

McComas, W.F. (2004). Keys to Teaching the Nature of Science. NSTA Feature News Story. 10/29/2004

NSTA Position Statement (2000).The Nature of Science.