Module Code and Title:       SRE101 Scientific Reasoning

Programme:                          BSc in Environmental Management (borrowed)

Credit:                                                12

Module Tutor:                       Kinley Dorji

General objective: The module aims to improve scientific literacy, reasoning skills, and ability for informed decision-making for students without strong science backgrounds. Students will be introduced to the historical development of science and scientific thought and approaches. The module presents science as a proven and reliable method of comprehending the natural world as distinct from nonformal approaches. Students will learn how to apply fundamental scientific concepts to distinguish science from non-science, bad science, and pseudoscience by analysing a variety of claims and through case studies. The module draws from basic principles, facts, laws, and theories from the natural sciences and, as appropriate, from psychology.

Learning outcomes – On completion of the module, students will be able to:

1. Discuss historical perspectives of scientific advancements.
2. Analyse common fallacies and perceptual biases that interfere with the ability to draw reasonable and/or correct conclusions.
3. Differentiate between facts, informed opinions, and uninformed opinions.
4. Apply scientific terminology pertaining to the nature and conduct of science such as: observation, hypothesis, law, theory, data, control, placebo.
5. Interpret reported outputs and findings in light of potential uncertainties.
6. Apply a critical thinking framework in handling evidence in relation to science.
7. Evaluate claims based on the methods of reasoning used by scientists: Falsifiability, Logic, Comprehensiveness of evidence, Honesty, Replication of research, and Sufficiency of evidence.
8. Relate common phenomena observed in daily life with evidence, models, and scientific explanations.

Learning and Teaching Approach:

Assessment Approach:

1. Journal Entries on VLE: 15%

Students will maintain a journal as regular submissions (3 total) on the VLE, noting pseudoscientific or superstitious beliefs or claims they come across in daily life. Each entry of 200-300 words is marked out of 5%:

2%       Description of the pseudoscientific or superstitious beliefs or claims with relation to the nonformal approaches highlighted therein

3%       Identification of the role of fallacies, opinion, anecdotes, biases and/or uncertainties in the pseudoscientific or superstitious beliefs or claims

2. Class Test: 15%

Students will be provided readings in advance on a recent scientific discovery or advance reported in at least three popular media sources (at least one of which is a reputed science news outlet). Based on the readings, the class test of 1 hr duration comprising structured and open-ended questions will cover elements of scientific inquiry and approaches exhibited in the reported scientific discovery.

3. Individual Presentation: 15%

Students will individually present on self-proposed (tutor-approved) topics from current news or popular media (within past six months) related to discoveries or claims that seem questionable or misinformative. Students should apply the operational approach to critical thinking (four questions) and the FiLCHeRS framework to evaluate the discoveries/claims. Each 10 min. presentation will be followed by 3 min. of Q & A.

3%       Introduction of the discovery/claim within its wider scientific field and context

4%       Application of the operational approach to critical thinking

5%       Application of FiLCHeRS

3%       Discussion on alternative conclusions that are more scientifically reasonable

4. Midterm Examination: Portion of Final Mark: 15% 

Students will take a written exam of 1.5-hr duration covering topics up to the mid-point of the semester. The exam will comprise structured questions like MCQ, fill-in-the-blanks, matching, definition, as well as open-ended problem-solving and scenario interpretation questions.

5. Semester-End Examination: Portion of Final Mark: 40%

Students will take a written exam of 2.5-hr duration encompassing all the subject matter covered in the semester. This assessment is comprehensive and summative in nature, and will comprise structured questions like MCQ, fill-in-the-blanks, matching, definition, as well as open-ended problem-solving and scenario interpretation questions.

Overview of assessment approaches and weighting

Pre-requisites: None

Subject matter:

1. Unit I: Scientific ways of knowing vs. non-formal approaches to truth
   1. Importance of reason and risks of informal fallacies; historical cases of risks and dangers of unscientific and pseudoscientific beliefs or superstitions
   2. Opinion vs. knowledge and expertise; limitations of truth from personal experiences and anecdotal evidence; problems with human perception and memory, relevant cognitive biases
   3. Science as an inquiry; features of scientific inquiry
   4. Processes of scientific inquiry: Problem statement, collecting information, forming a hypothesis, experiment to test the hypothesis, recording and analysing the data, and result
   5. Use of reasoning in science: Inductive reasoning and Deductive reasoning
2. Unit II: Introduction to empirical approaches
   1. Scientific evidence and evidence meter 
   2. Observation and Inferences/interpretation: Empiricists and theoreticians (Case study on Ptolemy’s observation Geocentrism and Copernicus’s observation and Heliocentrism)
   3. Scientific theory; characteristics of good scientific theory: principle of parsimony; Case: considering both Geocentrism and Heliocentrism as theories
   4. Hypothesis: Conjecture, Model, Theory, and Law (Case study on the Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion)
   5. Observation and technology: Natural observation and experimentation, activity on Galileo’s inclined Ramp Experiment, activity on Eratosthenes calculation the radius of the Earth, and Galileo’s discovery with the telescope)
3. Unit III: Uncertainty of science
   1. Logical fallacy: meaning and types (Case study on Galileo’s Dialogue)
   2. Scientific uncertainty: types of scientific uncertainty and addressing them
   3. Error, bias and uncertainty (Case study on the Carbon-14 dating)
   4. Graph and data interpretation in relation to uncertainty
   5. Data ambiguity, data distortion, and data distraction
4. Unit IV: Critical thinking and scientific-reasoning framework
   1. Evaluating claims (scientific or pseudoscientific) with an operational approach to critical thinking when presented with a claim by asking 1) What am I being asked to accept? 2) What evidence supports the claim? 3) Are there alternative explanations/hypotheses? 4) What evidence supports the alternatives?
   2. Lett’s rules for use of scientific reasoning in ordinary life to evaluate claims - FiLCHeRS: Falsifiability, Logic, Comprehensiveness of evidence, Honesty, Replication of research, and Sufficiency of evidence
5. Unit V: Science of everyday life and health
   1. Food and health - Balanced diet and the quality of food; food deterioration & its causes; nutrition and non-communicable diseases
   2. Pollution - air, water, and land pollution: Impacts on human health; Case study on biomagnification
   3. Scientific discoveries regarding morbidity and germ theory of disease; Case study on Ignaz Semmelweis and hand-washing
   4. Communicable diseases and public health; Case study on COVID-19 information and misinformation
   5. Evaluating health claims: diet & supplements, eating practices & fitness
6. Unit VI: Evolution: science of life’s diversity
   1. Approaches in history to origin of life and evolution
   2. Darwin and Natural Selection; case study on Galapagos finch evolution
   3. Evolution as a non-random process based on random variation
   4. Genes and heritability
   5. Processes and patterns of evolution, sexual selection; case of female birds evaluating male birds before mating
   6. Evidence of evolution; case of evolutionary relationship between whales and land mammals including humans
   7. Basics of human evolution
   8. Adaptation and evolution; case studies on antiviral drug resistance (HIV), antibiotic resistance (multi-drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis [MDR-TB]), and SARS-CoV-2 variants
7. Unit VII: Climate Change
   1. Introduction to atmospheric chemistry, greenhouse gases, radiative forcing, and the estimate of climate sensitivity
   2. Key concepts such as climate and weather, science of climate change: early discoveries, energy, balance model
   3. Sources of scientific data on climate and climate change
   4. Questions and evidence on anthropogenic climate change including attribution science; case study on climate change denial
   5. Observed and projected trends and impacts - surface temperature, precipitation, ocean pH, sea-level and Arctic sea-ice extent
   6. Climate feedback loop
   7. Global climate governance - Kyoto Protocol, IPCC, UNFCCC etc.
   8. Climate change mitigation - Strategic frameworks and policy approaches
   9. Climate change adaptation - Vulnerability assessment, selecting adaptation options and development planning

Reading Lists:

Essential Reading

Bryson, B. (2004). A short history of nearly everything. Crown.

Hewitt, P. G., Lyons, S., Suchocki, J., & Yeh, J. (2019). Conceptual integrated science (3rd ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

Schick, T., & Vaughn, L. (2019). How to think about weird things: Critical thinking for a new age (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Shermer, M. (2002). Why people believe weird things. Holt Paperbacks.

Additional Reading

Johnson, A.E. & Wilkinson, K. K. (2020). All we can save: Truth, courage, and solutions for the climate crisis. One World.

Feynman. R. (1974). Cargo cult science: Adapted from the Caltech commencement address given in 1974. Retrieved from http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.pdf

Lett, J. (1990). A field guide to critical thinking. Skeptical Inquirer, 14: 153–160.

Overbye, D. (2009, January 29). Elevating science, elevating democracy. New York Times.

Pollack, H. N. (2005). Uncertain science... uncertain world. Cambridge University Press.

University of California Museum of Paleontology. (2004). Understanding

evolution. Retrieved from http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

Date: June 2022