Well, as it turns out, more than a day late! I've spent this week down the rabbit hole, had my observation on Monday (everything went well, hooray!), and then 100 report cards had to be completed by Wednesday night. That meant last minute review of 95 notebooks, which is actually a pretty good number. There are always those few who absolutely refuse to do their assigned work no matter what incentive you dangle before them; neither the carrot nor the stick will do the trick.
So I just figured out late last night that this blog entry was due LAST week, although the write up of the experiment wasn't due until today. My apologies to everyone, I feel as if I'm constantly chasing my own tail, and heaven knows what I would do with it if I ever caught it!
On to the experiment. I knew in advance what the results would be, no spillover, of course. The less dense ice floating in the denser water, displacing the volume to which it would melt (or close to the same volume... as water expands when it freezes, which helps to account for the weathering of rocks).
The interesting part was in the research. The opinions are SO heated... it seems funny when the image of the scientist is that of someone who is coldly logical, working off facts alone. There was a great deal of hedging in the language around the causes of global warming (or to be more politically correct, "climate change"). Yes, it is still in the hypothesis state right now, but all evidence suggests that the average temperature is indeed climbing at a rate not before seen in recorded history. The factor most likely to be implicated is the industrialization of the Earth, i.e., the burning of fossil fuels and other things that lead to the release of greenhouse gasses.
A great deal more research needs to be done, of course, but in the meantime, it is my opinion that it would be prudent do find ways to decrease human spurred release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, or ways to counter such release... which would require a massive effort to "reforest" rather than "deforest", which is the direction we are currently headed in.
As to the experiment itself, it would be a good way to help students understand that the melting of the "North Pole" will not flood the Earth, but I believe that clouds the larger issue. I suggest that this experiment be paired with one showing what will happen when land based ice sheets melt, for example the ones covering Greenland and Antarctica. (The model could be created by placing modeling clay "land masses" into the bowls, placing the "glaciers" on top of the land masses, then filling the bowls to the brim with water.)
I think this would give students a much better picture of what can and will happen when the land based ice sheets melt. There should be some spectacular "floods" for them to witness.
Further, I think that they would need to follow up with some research about what happens to the animal and plant life of the Arctic region when the ice melts, perhaps even put tiny polar bear models on the original ice floes so the students can see that the bears will have no where to go once the ice melts. That should generate some thought provoking discussions.
All in all, a decent example of the inquiry method of science teaching. With supports, this could well illustrate the issue of climate change for my students, who live very far from nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment