Fundamental Skills
in Science: Observation
"We value our sight above almost everything else. The reason for this
is that of all the senses sight makes knowledge most possible for us and
shows us the many differences between things." Aristotle, "Metaphysics",
Book I
- "You see but you do not observe." Sherlock Holmes
to Dr. Watson in "A scandal in Bohemia"
Long before our ancestors invented writing, they created art
representing their observations, and detailed observations of the night
sky were being systematically recorded nearly 3,000 years ago (Kavassalis,
2000).
Though the early Greeks recognized the importance of our senses
in constructing knowledge, the primacy of observations was formally put
to the test by Galileo who faced charges of heresy for supporting the
heliocentric theory of the universe. Risking his life for the sake of
ideas, Galileo not only believed in what he observed through the newly
invented telescope, he believed in the newly emerging views of
scientific knowledge based on reasoning and observations.
De Duve (2002) has characterized science as being "based on
observation and experiment, guided by reason" (p. 285), and this
combination is what distinguishes science from other paths to knowledge.
Derry (1999) makes the same point by saying that "well constructed
scientific arguments, defending a scientific conclusion, generally rests
on two foundations: reliable empirical evidence and sound logical
reasoning" (p. 89). Martin (1972) was more explicit:
"Scientific theories are primarily tested against observation and
accepted, rejected, or modified mainly because of observational data.
Observation is thus generally considered to be the touchstone of
objectivity in science; it seems to be primarily observation that
provides an independent standard for the evaluation of theories and
hypotheses. If it were not for observation, there would be little reason
for choosing between scientific theories and fictional accounts, between
science and pseudoscience, between warranted assertions and fanciful
hopes. "
- He goes on to caution, though, that "observation
clearly cannot be maintained as infallible or certain. The existence
of perceptual illusion, hallucinations, and other less dramatic
perceptual errors proves that people can be deceived by their senses"
(pp. 112-113).
Despite the apparent centrality of observation to the development of
scientific knowledge, there has long been a debate about the exact role
of observation and its supposed contribution to objectivity in science.
It is acknowledged that observations can be both unreliable and
theory-dependent (Hodson, 1986). Martin (1972) has made the argument
"that a trained observer with certain knowledge and training can observe
things that a person without this knowledge and training cannot
observe." Further, "a person's background will influence what properties
he [or she] visually attends to in a particular object, or indeed
whether he [or she] attends to any properties of the object at all.
Finally, the theoretical background of a scientist leads him [or her] to
observe noncognitively objects which the layman, because of his [or her]
lack of theoretical background does not observe at all" (p. 107).
Ironically, observations are seemingly at the heart of both stability
and change in scientific understanding. Writers associated with Project
2061 (AAAS, 1989) stated that "sooner or later, the validity of
scientific claims is settled by referring to observations of phenomena.
Hence, scientists concentrate on getting accurate data. Such evidence is
obtained by observations and measurements taken in situations that range
from natural settings...to completely contrived ones (such as in the
laboratory). To make their observations, scientists use their own
senses, instruments...that enhance those senses, and instruments that
tap characteristics quite different from what humans can sense (such as
magnetic fields...Because of this reliance on evidence, great value is
placed on the development of better instruments and techniques of
observation, and the findings of any one investigator or group are
usually checked by others" (pp. 26-27).
Shermer (1997) identified observation as accounting for the
difference between science and pseudoscience and being the means by
which scientific knowledge changes over time. He claims "science is
different from pseudoscience...not only in evidence and plausibility,
but in how [it changes]. Science [is] cumulative and progressive in that
[it continues] to improve and refine knowledge of our world...based on
new observations and interpretations" (p. 38). Derry (1999) points out
that science needs better observations and more precise measurements for
progress in understanding to occur.
Though human senses are limited in range and are easily deceived,
observation remains at the heart of science and is the final arbiter in
constructing and testing scientific ideas. Observation in science is
more than "seeing"; it refers to skills associated with collecting data
using all the senses, as well as instruments that extend beyond the
reach of our senses, and it is influenced by the assumptions and
theoretical knowledge of the observer.
For over three decades a focus on "science process skills", including
the skill of observation, has been highly promoted in school science.
Indeed, one influential elementary curriculum developed during the
science curriculum reform flurry of the 1960s-"Science: A Process
Approach"--was organized around the development of skills (AAAS, 1975).
More recently, curriculum standards in science related to observation
have typically appeared in sections related to learning through inquiry.
According to the National Research Council (NRC,1996), students in the
earliest grades should be expected to use simple tools--magnifiers,
thermometers, and rulers--to gather data and learn what constitutes
evidence (pp.122-123). Strategies for helping young students make
detailed observations have been described (i.e., Checkovich & Sterling,
2001), and ways of linking observations to familiar readings have been
offered (i.e., Angus,1996).
Students in the middle grades should learn to conduct systematic
observations, interpret data, use computers to collect and display
evidence, and base explanations on observations (NRC, 1996; p. 145). In
high school, students are expected to design and conduct investigations
that involve the use of equipment and procedures to collect data, the
use of computers to analyze data, and the development of models or
explanations based on the evidence from investigations (p. 175). As an
example of how to engage students in constructing a model from data,
Cummins, Ritger, and Myers (1992) described an activity using
observational data of the moon to construct a model of the
sun-earth-moon system. More generally, "everyone should acquire the
ability to handle common materials and tools...for making careful
observations, and for handling information. These include being able to
do the following" (AAAS, 1989):
* Keep a notebook that accurately describes observations made, that
carefully distinguishes actual observations from ideas and speculations
about what was observed, and that is understandable weeks or months
later.
* Store and retrieve computer information using topical,
alphabetical, numerical, and key-word files, and use simple files of the
individual's own devising.
* Enter and retrieve information on a computer, using standard
software.
* Use appropriate instruments to make direct measurements of length,
volume, weight, time interval, and temperature. Besides selecting the
right instrument, this skill entails using a precision relevant to the
situation.
* Take recordings from standard meter displays, both analog and
digital, and make prescribed settings on dials, meters, and switches
(pp.137-138).
In the view of the AAAS (1989), science teaching consistent with the
nature of scientific inquiry will:
* Engage students actively. Students need to have many and varied
opportunities for collecting, sorting, and cataloging; observing, note
taking, and sketching; interviewing, polling, and surveying; and using
hand lenses, microscopes, thermometers, cameras, and other common
instruments (p. 147).
* Concentrate on the collection and use of evidence. Students should
be given problems--at levels appropriate to their maturity--that require
them to decide what evidence is relevant and to offer their own
interpretation of what the evidence means. This puts a premium, just as
science does, on careful observation and thoughtful analysis. Students
need guidance, encouragement, and practice in collecting, sorting and
analyzing evidence, and in building arguments based on it. However, if
such activities are not to be destructively boring, they must lead to
some intellectually satisfying payoff that the students care about" (p.
148).
Typical of resources to assist teachers in these tasks is a handbook
(Gabel, 1993) that includes a section on observation as a basic science
skill to be taught in elementary school. Another teaching guide (Pauker
& Roy, 1991) includes activities that present observing as a science
process skill and thinking skill. Similar resources are available in
many commercially available instructional materials.
Though curriculum standards and the professional literature of
science education promote attention to science process skills, and
observation in particular, the research on student conceptions of the
role of observation in science seems limited. Reviews of research have
shown that when science process skills are emphasized in the classroom,
student proficiency on individual skills increases, some transfer of
skills to new situations is noted, and skills are retained over time
(Padilla, 1990). One study, however, (Haslam & Gunstone, 1996) provides
evidence that students tend to view observation as a teacher-directed
process rather than a self-directed pursuit of evidence. Student
conceptions of evidence-based inferences also seem limited.
Surprisingly, many students do not see the process of observation as
being particularly relevant to the science learning process (Haslam &
Gunstone, 1998). Evaluation studies associated with the current trend
toward increased proficiency testing in science will undoubtedly shed
more light on student performance in using the tools of observation and
the level of skill development in observation techniques. Still there
will be open questions regarding the extent to which students can
purposefully observe in a self-directed manner to gather evidence in
support of their ideas. This is at the heart of doing science, and we
have little direct evidence of the extent to which students can couple
observations with reasoning to construct models and explanations of
natural phenomena.
THIS DIGEST WAS CREATED BY ERIC, THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ERIC, CONTACT ACCESS ERIC
1-800-LET-ERIC
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). "Science
for all Americans: A Project 2061 report on literacy goals in science,
mathematics, and technology". Washington, DC: Author. [Available online
at: http://www.project2061.org/tools/sfaaol/sfaatoc.htm]
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1975).
"Science: A process approach". Lexington, MA: Ginn.
Angus, C. (1996, Fall). Sciencing with Mother Goose: Observation
activities with Chicken Little. "CSTA Journal", 4-6.
Checkovich, B. H., & Sterling, D. R. (2001, January). Oh say can you
see. "Science and Children", 38 (4), 32-35.
Cummins, R. H., Ritger, S. D., & Myers, C. A. (1992, March). Using
the Moon as a tool for discovery-oriented learning. "Journal of
Geoscience Education", 40 (2), 142-46.
de Duve, C. (2002). "Life evolving: Molecules, mind, and meaning".
New York: Oxford University Press.
Derry, G. N. (1999). "What science is and how it works". Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gabel, D. (1993). "Introductory science skills", 2nd Edition.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. [ED 396 929]
Haslam, F., & Gunstone, R. (1996). "Observation in science classes:
Students' beliefs about its nature and purpose". Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science
Teaching (69th, St. Louis, MO, April). [ED 396 909]
Haslam, F., & Gunstone, R. (1998). "The influence of teachers on
student observation in science classes". Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching
(San Diego, CA, April 19-22). [ED 446 927]
Hodson, D. (1986). The nature of scientific observation. "School
Science Review", 68, 28.
Kavassalis, C. (2000, December). "The role of observation in the
history and philosophy of science". Online publication: http://www.softwareimpact.com/cathy/Observation1.htm
Martin, M. (1972). "Concepts of science education: A philosophic
analysis". Glenview, IL: Scott, Forseman.
National Research Council. (1996). "National science education
standards". Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [Available online
at: http://books.nap.edu/html/nses/html/index.html]
Padilla, M. (1990, March). "The science process skills". Paper 9004
in the series, "Science matters-to the science teacher", published by
the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. [Available
online at: http://www.educ.sfu.ca/narstsite/research/skill.htm]
Pauker, R. A., & Roy, K. R. (1991). "Strategies for learning:
Teaching thinking skills across the curriculum through science.
Analyzing information and data". Teacher's Edition. Annapolis, MD: Alpha
Publishing. [ED 388 505]
Shermer, M. (1997). "Why people believe weird things: Pseudoscience,
superstition, and other confusions of our time". New York: W. H.
Freeman.
Wilson, C. (1996, April). A classroom who-dunnit to sharpen science
skills. "Teaching PreK-8", 26 (7), 52-54.
-----
This digest was funded by the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract no.
ED-99-CO-0024. Opinions expressed in this digest do not necessarily
reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the U.S. Department of
Education.
Title: Fundamental Skills in Science: Observation. ERIC Digest.
Document Type: Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis
Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in
Full Text (073);
Available From: ERIC/CSMEE, 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH
43210-1080. Tel: 800-276-0462; Fax: 614-292-0263; e-mail: ericse@osu.edu;
Web site: www.ericse.org.
Descriptors: Elementary Secondary Education, Inquiry,
Observation, Science Instruction, Science Process Skills
Identifiers: ERIC Digests
|
