Nature of Science Book Review
Introduction
Teachers cannot teach accurately about the nature of science if they do not
first thoroughly understand it. Taking a traditional series of physics courses
does precious little to help one understand the nature of science. Most
courses in physics tend to be rather didactic and content driven. Many physics
teachers more or less conclude that students learn about the nature of science
and scientific inquiry by "osmosis." This, unfortunately, is rarely the case.
If students are to learn about the nature of science and scientific inquiry,
there needs to be an explicit treatment of the subject matter.
In order
to gain
a more
comprehensive understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry
(e.g., terms, distinctions,
history, values,
impact, philosophy, procedures,
problems,
processes, etc.),
it is
incumbent upon teacher
candidates
to read widely in the field of science. Time being at a premium for undergraduates,
it is best for teacher candidates to read at least one good summary work
that deals in some way with the
nature
of science.
In this project you will write a book report to summarize the
important points found in the book of your choosing. Sequence your efforts
in the following way:
- Select for reading one of the following books that deals with
the nature of science (other books are options with the prior approval
of the course instructor):
- Bauer, H. H. (1994). Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific
Method. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
- Cromer, A. (1993) Uncommon Sense: The Heretical Nature of Science. New
York: Oxford University Press.
- Gardner, M. (1957). Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science. Dover
Publications.
- Goran, M. (1974). Science and Anti-Science. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc.
- Goran, M. (1979), Fact, Fraud and Fantasy. Cranbury NJ: A. S. Barnes
and Co., Inc.
- Hatton, J. & Plouffe, P. B. (1997). Science and Its Ways of Knowing.
Upper Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall.
- Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
- McCain, G. & Segal, E. M. (1989). The Game of Science. Belmont,
CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
- Park, R. (2000). Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud.
Cambridge: Oxford University Press.
- Rothman, T. & Sudarshan, G. (1999). Doubt and Certainty. New
York: Perseus Printers.
- Sagan, C. (1996). The Demon Haunted Word: Science as a Candle in the
Dark. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
- Shermer, M. (1997). Why People Believe Weird Things. New York: W.
H. Freeman and Co.
- Shermer, M. (2001). The Borderlands of Science: Where Sense Meets Nonsense.
Cambridge: Oxford University Press.
- Obtain your selection from Milner Library, interlibrary loan, or
a book store.
- Note that a book review is an evidence-based evaluation of a book, not
a point-by-point summary. Write your book review following these general
guidelines, being certain to include each of the following questions between sections. This helps ensure that all questions are answered, and makes for easier scoring by the instructor. Papers that fail to include this type of outlining will be returned unscored.
- The first sentence of your book report should give the title of the book
(italicized), the author's name, year of publication, publisher,
and a general statement. Here are three different examples of ways you might
do
this.
- Fact, Fraud and Fantasy (1957, Dover Publications), by Martin
Gardner was an interesting book to read because...
- Martin Gardner's Dear Fact, Fraud and Fantasy (1957, Dover
Publications) was an enjoyable book to read because...
- I enjoyed reading Martin Gardner's Fact, Fraud and Fantasy (1957,
Dover Publications) because...
- Why or how did you select this book?
- What is the main point about the nature of science that the author is attempting
to make in this book?
- What evidence is provided by the author to support the claim(s)?
- Does the author make an effective case in support of the claim(s)?
- What did you think was
the best or most interesting part of the book?
- Do you find any quotations worthy of note? If so, please include.
- What new facts did you learn about the nature of science that you hadn't
known before?
- Would you like
to read other books by the same author? Why or why not?
- If you could talk to the author,
what would you say or ask?
- Would you recommend this book to other teacher candidates?
Why or why not?
Criteria
In addition, your essay must satisfy the following general
criteria:
Return to The Nature of Science
I and II
Return to PHY 310 Course Syllabus
(Last updated 1/21/2009)