The famous phrase “curiosity killed the cat” did it? As I recall Wilbur and Orville were curious, but now we have planes, look at what Newton discovered with his curiosity, let us not forget the first man who put a log in water and saw it float, the first person who dropped seed and food grew out, not to mention the person who realized not being wet was better than getting soaked in the rain, the women who found flowers mixed together made the stomach pain go away. If you take a look at these people who have created history and developed inventions where would we be if they agreed that if you are curious you died. Now we all know what this little children’s folklore is about; no one wants to see kids get hurt playing in the street or getting into places they shouldn’t be. However who says a child has to get hurt to learn? Why not let a fruit demonstrate that a car makes things go boom if it hits you, or that if a plant tastes the blue water it gets a booboo. We have to face it curiosity is not going away just because poor Mr. Whiskers hasn’t been around the yard for a while, there are still so many things Mr. Whiskers hasn’t tried and children will build upon these curiosities continuously forever and ever they will be curious of the new and strange. This is what the teaching strategy “Generating and Testing Hypothesis” tries to nurture.
“Now what is this crazy guy talking about cats, birds, fruit it does not make any sense”, and grandpa micstuffenhargen is one hundred percent correct it does not make sense right now, but that is because so far all you have seen is a little piece of the grand picture we all have before us. The way this teaching style works is that it uses kids, teens, and adult’s creative minds in order to acculturate learning. Think about it grandpa micstuffenhargen isn’t yelling at me through my topic for no reason he is following along with us. This teaching strategy can be used on all ages, because we as human beings have survived based not on what we already knew, but on what we were curious about. So this strategy has three parts to it the first is allow students to formulate hypotheses, second allow for creative experimentation to ensure adequate results are collected to derive a true or false statement to the initial hypothesis, finally a conclusive argument that validates or disproves the initial hypothesis. A quick disclaimer to this teaching style right off the back is that if you intend to use this strategy for all students in every subject it will not work, from my personal experience I am a terrible English student couldn’t write a paper to save my bacon, BUT! This strategy could then be used to cross that barrier and where a student was once failing, that student may now find a great interest in the subject.
How it is done:

Obviously this teaching style will not work for every class period you have with the students, but it could be a fun weekend assignment over the weekend in order to see what kind of curiosities and experimentation strategies student’s come up with on their own. Which will then give you the educator all the more relevance, because students will then want to learn more from you to be able to come up with better or more fun experimentations.

Clearly if we as educators assign children this assignment for them to do then it will just turn into a boring assignment that no one really cares about. So with this strategy absolute creative freedom is needed. That means from the most outlandish hypothesis to the most OCD analytically deciphered code to which it is a guaranteed Harvard graduate sitting in front of you question. The student has to be the curious proponent here, but let us take a look at Marilyn P. Arnone as she tries to create an environment in order to cultivate creativity. She states
“Create an atmosphere where students feel comfortable about raising questions and where they can test their own hypotheses through discussion and brainstorming. (Not only does this foster curiosity, but it also helps to build confidence.)” (Arnone
So what she is telling us is pretty simple if students do not feel like they are in an environment to ask questions or that their stupid question is too stupid to ask then we have a missed opportunity and that question could have stimulated the class’s knowledge of the subject. I have experienced this first hand in my observations my former instructor allowed me the chance to educate students about vectors, radii, and the Pythagorean Theorem in order to solve complicated proofs and complex equations. So when I asked a student what to name a side he said to use the letter A to represent the new equation (1/2) x=2y-4 so the class began to snicker and chuckle as if the idea was a bad one and the teacher joined in with the class and proposed an alternative approach to solving it. I instantly stepped up and defended the student’s position stating the fact that in mathematics so long as the equations parameters remain the same the variable is simply a value holder to be determined upon further calculations and can be made into anything. Suffice to say the teacher found this interesting, the student having received positive encouragement to his new found idea felt rewarded and it helped solve four student’s questions about fractions and how they affect equations.


Could spark creativity
Requires individual work from students
Gives purpose to all classes
Student may feel disheartened if their hypotheses seem to never work.
Is opportunity for group collaboration

Gives students a chance to see what they already know and want to know.

Opens opportunity for new explorations and ideas to help explain causality of experiments.

Order #2

In order to effectively use this strategy we must allow the creative minds of students go without restriction we need to allow them to figure out experimentation. An example for a first grade class’s lesson plan is provided by Elizabeth Bailey at at this hyperlink:
1st grade science class lesson plan
As the lesson plan demonstrates in order to fully educate the students about hypotheses and what hypotheses are the students must be able to fully use all their senses in order to come up with explanations for what something is. Also they will also rely on their back ground information in order to come up with their hypotheses so it will also open up the educator to be prepared and know what to expect from each students based on their analyses. However why is this, why do children automatically rely on their past experiences to help explain the unknown? The answer is the BRAIN the brain itself will automatically relate objects to memories in order to try to understand these new objects. The classic psychology game is ask a color get the first word that comes to mind, what you would find is that as you say the colors, the person you’re asking so long as they do not cheat will spit out their childhood teacher of that color whether it’s a yellow school bus, a red fire truck, or a blue blueberry. This game tells about a person’s childhood when they were first learning their colors.
Why should we let students come up with their hypotheses why not just tell them the answer? Think about it when a person is first learning something how much do they actually listen? When students do not get a chance to see the importance of what we, as educators, are trying to explain to them then they lose interest and their time and our lesson plan is useless. A personal example of this is that when I was taking Chemistry I my friend and I would be completely focused in the LAB class, but when lecture came around our interest would just fail, but why? Well as we are both kinesthetic learners the LAB offered the greatest chance to educate us as we experimented and practiced utilizing the methods we learned in the class, but in the class it was straight lecture with premade notes available to us. This is what the teaching style creating and testing hypotheses will work to correct by putting the theories with real world examples.

Order #3

The last part of the scientific method is to write up a conclusion a concise expression of the experimenter to determine what was found out, why it is important, and how it happened. So likewise this teaching style requires the same scientific strategy. Imagine this you find a way of mixing regular foods you come up with a natural insecticide and deer repellant. So you experiment it and you find that it worked, but you never write a conclusion what have you done? Some would say well the experiment proved that it worked so what else do you need? The conclusion is the most crucial part of the scientific process it is the BIG answer to the GREAT why. The conclusion states why the experiment was necessary and what will come from it, what you as the reader will achieve from it, and what it means for the scientific community.

The conclusion is more important than water in the dessert:
external image thirsty-desert-guy.jpg
More valuable than Eldorado:
external image 1354636959_110304eldorado.jpg
More precious than the mystical Pink Panther:
external image article-2104896-11D6BB27000005DC-129_634x536.jpg
The conclusion here is that when students write their own conclusions they experience the experiment and make it real by analyzing the data and turning it into their own. So with these three orders put together our students are ready to truly experience what it means to learn.