DOC PREVIEW
CSUN SED 610 - CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4 out of 13 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 13 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 13 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 13 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 13 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 13 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Kevin D. McMahon Student ID#: 78513 SED 610 CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT Funding Agency: W. M. Keck Foundation: Southern California Program Funding Request: $115,000 for 3 years. Principal Investigator: Kevin D. McMahon (Science Teacher/Science Magnet) Co-Investigators: Karen Nicols (Art Teacher/Performing Arts Academy) & Don Moore (Literature & Drama Teacher/Performing Arts Academy) Project Name: Teaching Science in the Context of Classical Aesthetics Investigator Credentials: • Kevin D. McMahon (Principal Investigator): BA Biology & Chemistry (California State University, Northridge), MS: Clinical Nutrition (University of California at Davis), MS: Science Education (California State University, Northridge) • Karen Nicols (Co-Investigator): BA (California State University, Northridge) • Don Moore (Co-Investigator): BA Theatre Arts (San Francisco State University).PROBLEM STATEMENT “You can recognize truth by its beauty and simplicity,” said Nobel Laureate, Richard Feynman (Augros & Stanciu, 1984 p. 39). It is in this relationship between truth and beauty that many scientists are beginning to recognize that aesthetics has the potential of playing a significant role in the Scientific Method. As Augros and Stanciu observed The New Story of Science, “All of the most eminent physicists of the twentieth century agree that beauty is the primary standard for scientific truth” (Augros & Stanciu, 1984 p. 39). However, it should be noted that when scientists speak of Beauty they are not informed by the Modernists subjective interpretation of aesthetics whereby “beauty is in the eye of he beholder.” Rather, as Arthur Miller observed, “So what makes [science] beautiful? For most art theorists and artists, beauty is subjective, but not for scientists. To scientists symmetry is beauty and therefore objective….” (Miller, 2006). Objective Beauty is inherent in the object perceived and is independent of the subject and hence is not subjective. Consequently, the Beautiful in science is not in the eye of the beholder, but is intrinsic to the object being beheld. Whether or not the Beauty is beheld is therefore a function of the acuity of the perception of the beholder. In this regard, aestheticians of science have more in common with Classical Aesthetics than Modern subjectivists conceptions of beauty. This Classical view of aesthetics holds that there is an intimate relationship between the Beautiful, the True and the Good. As the philosopher/theologian, Hans Urs von Balthasar, observed, “… a being appears, it has an epiphany, in that it is beautiful and it gives itself, it delivers itself to us: it is good. And in giving itself up, it speaks itself, it unveils itself: it is true” (von Balthasar, 1993, p. 116). This epiphany of Beauty is an encounter with Mystery; as Albert Einstein observed, “The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious—the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science” (Einstein, 1931). Mystery reminds us of the limits of our epistemologies while transfiguring our inquiry from an investigation of an object to an epiphany of the Other. This is a radical re-conceptualization of the Nature of Science. The next generation of scientists may be more open to challenging the Baconian axiom of Science: Scientia est Potentia—Knowledge is Power; that the goal of science is the empowerment of man through the manipulation of nature. But, Beauty cannot be possessed, only safeguarded. And it is only with the utmost care and humility that we should ever considermanipulating Her. Would we dare to complete Schubert’s Unfinished Symphony? What would happen if someone entered the National Gallery and attempted to finish Leonardo da Vinci’s uncompleted painting, “The Virgin and Child with St Anne and St John the Baptist”? Yet, scientists are pushing headlong into the manipulation of genomes—the material manifestation of Beauty’s formal cause as a Classical Aesthetician might characterize DNA. Do these scientists expect that genomic manipulations will produce organisms that will possess more unity, harmony, symmetry, and wholeness than they did formally? Will they be more radiant? Does any one care or think that these are questions worthy of asking? The Action Research Project I conducted, Teaching Science in the Context of Classical Aesthetics, suggests that a new generation of scientists may indeed be ready for a new, perhaps even radically new, approach to doing science. During the course of a four-month study, AP Chemistry students from the Reseda High School Science Magnet received instruction in Classical Aesthetics and philosophy and its relationship to science. Although this instruction was minimal the findings of this study indicated that it had a significant effect on the students’ perception of science. One student stated, “It opened up science in a new way for me to incorporate philosophy and freedom of thought into the scientific field which I had previously considered really strict.” Here, we begin to see an openness to re-conceptualizing science; one willing to consider the value of incorporating aesthetically and philosophical ideas into what was formally believed to be “really strict.” And students recognized the value of learning science in the context of classical aesthetics and what a science informed by this perspective might look like, “ I think students would have greater appreciation for science if they understood the beauty of it. Then, I think that would make them more motivated to learn science and do well in class.” They also began to perceive that a new, more modest, science might emerge from being informed by Beauty, “You get to appreciate the beauty within science and science is not all about trying to find an answer.” What is science then, if it is not all about trying to find an answer? Perhaps it is more than taking Francis Bacon’s inquisitional stance to force nature to reveal her secrets: “The secret workings of nature do not reveal themselves to one who simply contemplates the natural flow of events. It is when nature is tormented by art, when man interferes with nature, vexes nature, tries to make her do what he wants, not what she wants, that he begins to understand how she works and my hope to learn how to control her…. It is my intention to bind, and place at your command,


View Full Document

CSUN SED 610 - CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT

Documents in this Course
Week 2

Week 2

6 pages

Week 11

Week 11

3 pages

Load more
Download CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view CURRICULUM FUNDING PROJECT 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?