SC.912.N.1.1 - Define a problem based on a specific body of knowledge, for example: chemistry and physics, and do the following:

• pose questions about the natural world(articulate the purpose of the investigation and identify the relevant scientific concepts)

• conduct systematic observations, (Write procedures that are clear and replicable. Identify observables and examine relationships between test (independent) variables and outcome (dependent) variables. Employ appropriate methods for accurate and consistent observations; conduct and record measurements at appropriate levels of precision. Follow safety guidelines)

• examine books and other sources of information to see what is already known

• review what is known in light of empirical evidence, (Examine whether available empirical evidence can be interpreted in terms of existing knowledge and models, and if not, modify or develop new models)

• plan investigations(design and evaluate a scientific investigation)

• use tools to gather, analyze, and interpret data (this includes the use of measurement in metric and other systems, and also the generation and interpretation of graphical representations of data, including data tables and graphs)(collect data or evidence in an organized way. Properly use instruments, equipment, and materials (e.g., scales, probeware, meter sticks, microscopes, computers) including set-up, calibration, technique, maintenance, and storage)

• pose answers, explanations, or descriptions of events

• generate explanations that explicate or describe natural phenomena (inferences)

• use appropriate evidence and reasoning to justify these explanations to others

• communicate results of scientific investigations and evaluate the merits of the explanations produced by others

• What evidence is appropriate to collect during an investigation?

• Compare and contrast an experiment and an investigation?

• What do you observe in the data that determines the relationship between the variables?

• Why is it important to identify controls and variables before conducting an experiment (or when evaluating another scientist’s work)?

• Why do scientists clearly record their procedures? 

• Is another scientist’s work still valid if their hypothesis is not supported? Why or why not?

• Is another scientist’s work still valid if their results are not replicable? Why or why not?