Real Science Real People

History of Science

One of the most enjoyable and interesting things about learning science is the history behind it, in particular the human endeavour and the circumstances that drove such scientific discoveries.  Such a knowledge of the scientific enterprise throughout history is important in facilitating a deeper understanding of science itself.  Such knowledge shows that science is a complex social activity done by ordinary people (albeit some with unique proclivities) and that this activity is not isolated from the personal, cultural, and political factors throughout any stage of history.   Also, despite some universal aspects to scientific ideas they are not authoritarian, are open to change, and can evolve interactively alongside technological developments.  Importantly, science cannot provide complete answers to all questions, but it is in the determination and curiosity to answer such questions that the scientific enterprise flourishes. 


Unfortunately, in many school textbooks the history of science is pushed to the background with oftentimes only the name of the discoverer given and the year they made the discovery 'Wilhelm Röntgen discovered X-Rays in November 1895.  The end. Now here is the theory.'  There is little context given to the story behind the discovery.  At least putting the story behind the discovery as an appendix in a textbook would be great for students to read in their own time.  I believe that it is in the knowledge of such stories that a real appreciation of science develops and an understanding that science is not a body of foregone conclusions.  Deeper understanding is also possible in learning about the history of science, as students can see misconceptions that scientists previously had in relation to certain phenomena and how such misconceptions were overcome.  


So what else is there to know about Röntgen?  Röntgen is commonly portrayed as discovering X-Rays by accident, when he noticed cathode rays (streams of electrons from a vacuum tube) caused fluorescence on a nearby small cardboard screen painted with barium plantinocyanide.  He was colourblind so he actually noticed more of a flickering on the screen.  However, Röntgen had strong investigative skills and he would most likely have discovered X-Rays either way, as he had planned to use the same screen in a following stage of his investigation.  He was in fact such an 'investigator' that he had to prove to himself beyond all doubt that what he was observing was not an hallucination.  It was not surprising that he thought he was going a bit mad as he was able to see through different things: he could see a key in a book, see through wooden boxes, and even see the bones in his hand.  He did not jump to tell people about his discovery, but instead spent a number of weeks in his laboratory meticulously investigating the phenomena further.  He wanted to ensure that he had objective results.  

X-Ray of Bertha's hand

One of the more well-known things about Röntgen is that he did an X-Ray of his wife's hand.  She saw it as an omen for death and refused to go back into his lab again.   Other physicists were very skeptical about his discovery at first, but he had done such a thorough investigation that he was able to answer to any objection, highlighting the strength of his investigations and the importance of such objective results to the scientific pursuit.  Some other interesting aspects about Röntgen was that he was very modest and benevolent.  He wanted the rays he had discovered to be called X-Rays and not  Röntgen rays.  He donated all the prize money from winning the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1901 to his university and he refused to take patents out on his discovery so that it could benefit mankind.  Unfortunately, he later became bankrupt after World War I.  In 2004, element number 111, formerly called unununium, was re-named roentgenium in his honour.




Further Reading:


-Gribbin, J. (2002) Science: A History. Penguin Books Ltd, London.
-Kean, S (2011). The Disappearing Spoon and Other True Tales from the Periodic Table. Transworld Publishers, London.


Images retrieved from Understanding Society and Wikipedia.

What Did You Learn (At School) Today?

What did you learn at school today?  I heard a parent say this to her child the other day while walking in their direction.  The child said he learned 'Nothing', but his mother pushed him for an answer 'You had to have learned something!'.  I saw the contemplation on the child's face as I passed him and his mother, but never got to hear his response as I walked on.  Witnessing this event gave me flashbacks to my own school days when my parents, some aunt or uncle visiting, or indeed a neighbour would ask the same question.  It felt like talking about the weather, but laboured small talk between a grown up and a child.  In many instances (not all!), I never really felt the person cared if I genuinely tried to answer the question.  Hence, I would avoid the effort required to think, reflect on, and articulate what I had actually learned, and would retort 'Nothing'.

The question 'What did you learn at school today?' typically does conjure up the image of an older family member asking a child such a question.  Why is it that such a question does not immediately conjure up the image of a school teacher or that of a classmate asking a similar question?  Even if the 'at school' was removed from the question one may still not think of a teacher first.  An important way in which people learn is by reflecting on their experiences (Dewey, 1933). Hence, it would be expected that this is something that should occur very often in schools.   However,  many classes end with the bell ringing while the teacher is still in mid-sentence and/or the students are only a few minutes into a new activity.  Planned activities can go on longer than expected and a teacher may decide to just carry on from where they left off in the previous lesson.  In such instances, students have not been given the opportunity to consolidate new ideas covered in the lesson with their previous understanding.  However, such consolidation may be expected to be done as homework.  Homework can certainly play a role in encouraging student reflection, but the beginning of such reflection would be better started in the classroom.

Simply taking five minutes at the end of a lesson for reflection can very valuable.  The five minutes is not a recap in asking students generic questions about the content or activities, but involves asking students what they learned from today's lesson.  This is valuable to every student in that they can articulate what they have learned, but also see what they may have missed from their peers' responses.  Students could also ask each other in pairs or threes what they learned today and then contribute it to the rest of the class through a whole class discussion. Such activities would certainly prepare students to answer what they learned today or what they should have at least learned.

It is also good to ask students questions that they still have from the lesson and they should still have questions if the lesson has in any way been thought-provoking!  These questions are best not answered, but are left with the students as food for thought until the following lesson and in many ways can serve as the basis for much more meaningful homework than assigning questions from a workbook.  As Richard Feynman once said 'It is in the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn't get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man.'  Schools should develop an equal student appreciation of both answers and questions.  Maybe some day the question most associated with a parent talking to their child after school will not be what did you learn but 'What questions do you have after school today?'.

Reference:
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D.C. Heath.