Scientific Process
By: Grace Stringer, Jonathon Hong, Brian Tran, and Horea Oprean
- How did you start the scientific process? What are the similarities? What are the differences?
Our group all agreed that the scientific process began with observations. We then agreed that we needed to ask questions and pose a hypothesis and/or predictions. The next step was to design experiments that help support the hypothesis/predictions.
- Are the diagrams similar to each other? What are the major differences? What steps are only included on 1-2 of the student’s diagrams. Do you agree that this is a valid or important step?
Jonathan added that we should ask questions and that’s pretty important so we added that into our collaborative diagram.
- Is there one diagram that stands out as being the most “correct” in terms of describing how you understand the scientific process?
While not single diagram can represent the multiple interconnected steps of the entire scientific process, we made a diagram that incorporates elements from all of our diagrams into one.
- Was there anything that surprised you when looking at the diagrams drawn by your lab mates?
Brian Tran’s diagram particularly stood out the most, it reminded me of a powerpoint slide I’ve encountered in the past chemistry classes.
- What change(s) did you decide to make and why?
We decided to add peer review after hearing you say it was essential to any research project. We also saw the value in having peers look over your work and receiving feedback from them.
- Did this lab today help you see how to approach your research project for the quarter?
Unfortunately, not by much.
- What did you learn about the scientific process/how science works that you did not know or realize before?
That the scientific process is much more fluid and flexible than we had previously thought.
I like how your group's diagram used arrows and how the process seems more circular and less like a list of things that need to be done. Personally that helps me understand the process more thoroughly and is a better approach for working through it in my mind!
ReplyDeleteI also like that there can be a circular flow to the scientific process, repeating multiple steps along the way. Good job illustrating this. Do you think it is important to peer review only after you have completed all the steps of the process or do you think it would be beneficial to have peer review after many steps of the process? Here's my peer review for this assignment, don't give up and don't become strippers, you're all better than that :)
ReplyDeleteIt is cool to see how we have similar thing but just with different wording. For me it is good to see different perspective because we all think differently. yours is really similar to us bu just with different patterns.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the peer review at the end, I think there should be a peer review right after designing the experiment. This way, other scientists in your field can check to see if your design is sound, or they can point out errors, or give helpful suggestions before you begin your experiment.
ReplyDelete