Theory of Knowledge Presentations Some more details to consider…

Theory of Knowledge

Presentations

Some more details to consider…

Real-Life Situation

Other Real-LifeSituation


Knowledge Issue(recognized)

Knowledge Issue(s)(developed)

extraction

progression

application

Theory of Knowledge: Presentation Structure

Science and predictionPresentation 1

Science and predictionPresentation 1

If you have a theory or a model then you should be able to make a valid prediction….

REAL LIFE SITUATIONThe 2004 Indian

Ocean tsunami andthe location ofits epicentre

Presentation 1: Science and Prediction

Tectonic theory explains occurrence

of a sunami. Sunami occurs. Does

that mean that prediction theory is

valid? Could there be another reason

for a sunami besides the movement

of a tectonic plate.

Identify a pattern and then you

can make a prediction without

needing to continuously test.

Tectonic theory suggests that movements in the plates of the earth crust cause earthquakes under the ocean and this causes massive water surges leading a sunami.

The story of the

neutron and the atom.

Scientific theory states

that every atom has a

nucleus. If you fire

radiation at the centre

of the atom then you

can expect to have

radiation rebound off

the nucleus. This

proves that atom has a

neutron.

If nothing comes back

then the theory is

invalid? Or maybe not.

Maybe the conditions of

the experiment were

flawed. Eg problem with

using wrong kind of

radiation or a lack of

precision in the

measuring instrument.




KEY: Extraction

• Can you say that theory is valid if you can use it to make accuarte predictions?

• Theory = “atom has a nucleus”. Fire radiation at an atom. Some of the radiation will be deflected back because of nucleus.

• Is there some other reason the radiation would be returned?

• Do results agree with model?If they do then model might be true. It does not prove it 100% to be true.But I can disprove it? If Nothing comes when I fire radiation at the nucleus then atom has no nucleus.




General nature ofscientific theory

KEY: ExtractionDevelopment

• As long as expeiments agree with theory you keep the theory.

• If the results can’t be explained what do you do. Change the theory or modify experiment.

Sunami tells you that

Tectonic theory works. Is this

true? Is it true because

prediction works the theory

then works also? The

prediction that works validates

the theory.





Predictionsgenerated

by standardtectonic theory

Geology: tectonictheory as an

explanation forcontinental drift

Explanatory power,predictions from patterns

Strengths


Application back

Note: out of 10 slides then 6 should be below the line. Of the 4 above 2 for establishing the relevance of the RLS and 2 for the application to other RLS.










Amenability toexperimentation,historical versus

experimental data

Application of,and responses to,these difficultiesin the context of

the tsunami

Problems of inductionand generalization

Difficulties withmeasurement, specifying

Initial conditions

Confounding variables,complexity of interactions

Observer effects

ProblemsStrengths


Application back

Note: pink boxes Relate to problems encountered during experimentation. It is not possible to have a 100% perfect experiment. Therefore is it possible to justify the theory based on an imperfect experiment?



Biology: evolution bynatural selection:

homology, palaeontology,artificial selection, etc.









experimental data


the tsunami

Chemistry:Mendeleev and

periodicity

Economics:the Phillips

curve

Chemistry:valence shellelectron pair

repulsion theory



Initial conditions


Observer effects

ProblemsStrengths

Other real-lifesituations (natural

sciences and human sciences)


Application backApplication onward



Economic migrants raise the level of crime in urban

Areas. Forced expulsion Is necessary. Is this

Prediction valid.









experimental data


the tsunami

Faith: does aMoving statue

Justify faith? If you don’t see it move

Does faith decline? Economics:the Phillips

Curve. Prediction/ Model fails in 1970’s.

History: can youUse the causes of War to predict Conflict?



Initial conditions


Observer effects

ProblemsStrengths

Other real-lifeSituations: how valid is

the practice of prediction in other

subject areas?


Application backApplication onward

Real-Life Situation



Knowledge Issue(recognized)

Knowledge Issue(s)(developed)

extraction

progression

application

Theory of Knowledge: Presentation Structure

extraction

progression

application

Theory of Knowledge: Build your own presentation here!

Slides 1+2: explain the RLS. Make

its relevance Understood.

Slide 10:How does

‘prediction’ theory connectwith another RLS?

Slide 9:How does

‘prediction’ theory connectwith another RLS?

Slides 3-4:Derive K.I. from RLS

And Formulate K.Q.

Slides 5-8:Highlight strengths +Weaknesses of your

Response to the K.Q. Try and Consider the implications of

accepting the validity ofprediction and the problems

of ignoring the use ofprediction as highlighted in part ‘a’

Above.

extraction

progression

application

Theory of Knowledge: how to construct the presentation?

40% of presentation above the line60% below the line. (this is a general guide only.)

Above the dotted line:consider the RLS + apply your discovery to other RLS’s

Below the dotted line:

Focus on addresing your K.Q. using ‘b’ and ‘c’ to help you

Key Objective:

make sure you refer to the

issue of knowledge building

+ knowledge construction.

How has shared knowledge

been affected by this

reliance on prediction

theory?

What is relevance of discussion below the

Dotted line for your real life situation?

Theory of Knowledge

Presentations

Documents

Theory of Knowledge Presentations Some more details to consider…