P.O. Box 2180Iowa City, Iowa 52244-2180

PHONE: 800-776-3454FAX: 877-365-0111

www.BuckleDown.com

Catalog # 1BDAZ08SN01

8Science

AIMSArizona

Buckle Down Arizona AIMS 8 Science

Unit 1 Science Inquiry

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms Review 2: Performing Scientific Investigations Review 3: Representing and Analyzing Data

Unit 2 Life Science

Review 4: Cells and Cell Division Review 5: Heredity Review 6: Adaptations to the Environment Review 7: Interactions Among Organisms

Unit 3 Physical Science

Review 8: Physical Properties of Matter Review 9: Elements, Compounds, and Mixtures Review 10: Force and Motion

Unit 4 Science, Technology, and Society

Review 11: Human Activity and the Environment Review 12: Engineering and Risk-Benefit Analyses

Go to www.BuckleDown.com to review our complete line of AIMS materials for Grades 3–12 READING • WRITING • MATHEMATICS • SCIENCE

Arizona A

IMS

8 S

CIE

NC

E

The cactus wren has a clever strategy for protecting its young. The male wren builds six or more nests, but the female wren lays her eggs in just one or two of them. The remaining nests serve as decoys to protect the primary nests from predators.

9 7 8 0 7 8 3 6 5 0 8 9 0

ISBN 0-7836-5089-251495

TABLE OF CONTENTS©

2007

Buc

kle

Dow

n P

ublis

hing

.CO

PY

ING

IS

FO

RB

IDD

EN

BY

LA

W.

iii

Introduction ..................................................................................... 1

Unit 1 – Science Inquiry ................................................................ 5

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms..................... 6AIMS Objectives: S1.C1.PO2, S1.C3.PO7, S2.C1.PO1 & 3, S2.C2.PO2–3

Review 2: Performing Scientific Investigations .............. 20AIMS Objectives: S1.C1.PO1–3, S1.C2.PO1–5, S1.C3.PO4–6 & 8,S1.C4.PO4, S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO1 & 4

Review 3: Representing and Analyzing Data.................. 37AIMS Objectives: S1.C3.PO1–3 & 7, S1.C4.PO1–3 & 5, S2.C2.PO1

Unit 2 – Life Science..................................................................... 55

Review 4: Cells and Cell Division.................................... 56AIMS Objectives: S4.C2.PO1

Review 5: Heredity............................................................ 66AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1–2, S4.C2.PO2–3

Review 6: Adaptations to the Environment .................... 79AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S4.C4.PO1–3 & 5–6

Review 7: Interactions Among Organisms ...................... 91AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S4.C4.PO4

Unit 3 – Physical Science .......................................................... 105

Review 8: Physical Properties of Matter ....................... 106AIMS Objectives: S5.C1.PO1 & 7

Review 9: Elements, Compounds, and Mixtures .......... 117AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S5.C1.PO2–7

Review 10: Force and Motion......................................... 138AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1–2, S5.C2.PO1–5

Unit 4 – Science, Technology, and Society ............................ 157

Review 11: Human Activity and the Environment....... 158AIMS Objectives: S3.C1.PO1–2

Review 12: Engineering and Risk-Benefit Analyses..... 168AIMS Objectives: S3.C2.PO1–4

Appendix ....................................................................................... 179

Glossary........................................................................... 180

1BDAZ08SN01 FM 9/15/06 12:31 PM Page iii

Table of Contents

iv ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.To the Teacher:To the Teacher:

“AIMS Objectives” codes are listed for eachreview in the table of contents and for eachpage in the shaded gray bars that runacross the tops of the pages in theworkbook (see example to the right). Thesecodes indicate which performanceobjectives are covered in a given review oron a given page.

1BDAZ08SN01 FM 9/15/06 12:31 PM Page iv

How Scientific Knowledge FormsThink about all the kinds of scientific research you’ve heard about: Geneticistsprobing the secrets of DNA, marine biologists tracking whales across oceans, andcosmologists considering the beginning of the universe. These pursuits have acommon goal—to discover and explain the patterns at work in natural systems.Scientists develop theories that explain their observations and predict events notyet witnessed. As scientists gather more evidence, however, scientific theories canchange. This review focuses on how and why scientific theories change.

Scientific theories can changeIf you look in a dictionary, you’ll see that most words have a few meanings. Takethe word theory. It has both an everyday and a scientific meaning.

Give an example of how you might use the word theory in its everyday sense.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Find and write down the scientific meaning of the word theory.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

How does the scientific meaning of theory differ from its everyday sense?

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

EVIER W 1

6 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

Words to Know

alpha particle

atom

atomic nucleus

bias

electron

element

hypothesis

plum-pudding model

theory

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 6

When you use the word theory in everyday speech, you usually mean “hunch” or“good guess.” Scientific theories are a much stronger claim of knowledge. Inscience, a theory is a dominant explanation that is supported by a mountain ofevidence. A theory explains how many different events are related to each other,and it makes predictions about events not yet seen. The theory of gravity, forexample, explains how the force that pulls apples to the ground also keeps theMoon circling the Earth. Nineteenth-century astronomers used the theory ofgravity to predict the existence of the planet Neptune long before they actually sawit. Obviously, the theory of gravity is more than a hunch: It describes and predictsthe effects of gravity on small and large scales.

But scientific theories can change. If scientists find data that contradict the theory,then they might alter the theory. If scientists find a lot of data that the theorycannot explain, then they may propose a hypothesis that explains the new dataand makes new predictions. Other scientists will run experiments and collect datato test the hypothesis. If the hypothesis stands up to repeated testing, explains awide range of data, and makes successful predictions, then it may become a theory.

For over 2,000 years, most scientists believed that everything in the universecircled the Earth. Suggest one reason why this theory, now disproved, was sosuccessful.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Early atomic theoryToday, we take for granted that matter is made of atoms—individual bits of mattertoo tiny to see. But 120 years ago, scientists did not agree on what atoms were, andsome doubted whether they existed. The development of modern atomic theoryshows how theories change in response to new findings, and how a new theory caninterpret old findings in new ways.

Our story begins with Democritus, a Greek philosopher who lived nearly2,500 years ago. Democritus asked: What would happen if you took a piece ofmatter, like a stone, and kept cutting it into smaller pieces? Eventually, you wouldget to a piece of matter so small that you could no longer divide it. Democrituscalled this smallest piece of matter an atom, which comes from a Greek wordmeaning “uncuttable.”

For a long time, many scientists did not accept Democritus’s atom. By the early19th century, however, the idea of atoms got a boost. Scientists developed themodern idea of an element, a substance that cannot be broken down into simpler

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

7

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 7

substances. Water, for example, is not an element because it can be broken downinto hydrogen and oxygen. Scientists of the day could not break down hydrogen oroxygen into simpler substances, so scientists called them elements. These scientistsreasoned that the smallest unit of each element could not be broken down into anyother substances. Following Democritus, 19th-century scientists called these unitsof elements atoms.

Name three elements that you know.

__________________________________________________________________________

By the late 19th century, many scientists believed that atoms existed. This beliefcame with a few assumptions. First, scientists thought that atoms were solid andindestructible, like tiny, hard balls. Second, they thought that each element wasmade of a different kind of atom. So, an atom of helium was different from an atomof gold, and so on. They did not know whether atoms had anything in commonother than their small size. Third, they thought that atoms contained no electricalcharges. That is, they assumed that atoms held neither negative nor positivecharges but were simply neutral. Experiments seemed to confirm this assumption.You know that opposite charges attract, and like charges repel. An electric field canchange the motion of particles with positive or negative charges, making theparticles move this way or that. An electric field will not affect the motion ofneutral particles. When scientists exposed gases (which are made of atoms) toelectric fields, the particles’ motions were unaffected. This seemed to confirm thatatoms were electrically neutral.

Name two assumptions that atomic theory made about atoms in the 1890s.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Discovery of the electronBy the end of the 19th century, scientists began making findings that their atomictheory could not explain. In 1897, the English scientist J. J. Thomson discovered anew particle of matter. An electric field affected the motion of this particle, whichturned out to have a negative charge. The real shock, however, was the mass ofthis particle. Experiments showed that it was about the mass of a hydrogenatom! Compared to this particle, an atom was enormous. Thomson and other

12,000

8 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 8

scientists also realized something else. This wasn’t just any particle—it was thecarrier of electricity. For this reason, Thomson named the particle the electron.(When electricity flows through a wire, for example, electrons are moving from oneplace to another.) Later experiments showed that electrons moving at great speedscould actually pass through thin layers of solid matter.

The discovery of the electron led scientists to ask new questions about atoms andmatter. Scientists had known for nearly 100 years that mixing together certainchemicals makes electricity. (This is how batteries work.) Now they realized thatmixing these chemicals was producing electrons. But where did electrons comefrom? Scientists agreed that electrons could not appear from nothing; they had tobe a part of atoms. After 2,000 years, an important part of the old atomic theoryhad been disproved. The atom was not “uncuttable” after all. Somehow, you couldchip electrons off them.

But the discovery of the electron raised some new problems. If electrons were partsof atoms, then why did other experiments show that atoms were electricallyneutral? And, how could fast-moving electrons pass through what seemed likeotherwise solid matter?

You are a 19th-century scientist. The latest information suggests that atomscontain electrons. Propose a model of the atom that explains how an atom canhold negative particles but also be electrically neutral.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Thomson kept experimenting. In 1904, he offered a newmodel of the atom. The atom, he said, was not a solid ballmade of the same stuff through and through. Instead, itwas a combination of two things: tiny, negative particles(electrons) and a larger, cloudlike, positive sphere. Theatom’s mass and its positive charge were not focusedanywhere in the sphere. Instead, they were spreadthroughout. The electrons were stuck in this sphere, andthe positive and negative charges canceled each otherout. This model explained how atoms could holdnegatively charged particles but still be electrically neutral. It also explained howhigh-speed particles, such as electrons, could pass through thin layers of solidsubstances; they just zipped through the cloud. Thomson’s model came to be calledthe plum-pudding model, after a popular English dessert that mixed raisins in ablob of pudding.

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

9

Cross-Section of“Plum-Pudding” Atom

light,negativeelectroninsidepositivecloud

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 9

More findings followed Thomson’s 1897 discovery of the electron. In 1898, thescientist Ernest Rutherford discovered that the element uranium emits two typesof particles: electrons, and something that came to be called alpha particles. Likeelectrons, alpha particles can travel through thin sheets of solid matter. But alphaparticles differ from electrons in two ways. First, they are far more massive thanelectrons—over 7,000 times as massive. Second, alpha particles have a positiveelectrical charge.

Remember that opposite charges attract and like charges repel. Predict whatwill happen if an electron is brought near an alpha particle.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Now predict what will happen if two alpha particles are brought near eachother.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Rutherford soon found that an alpha particle is a helium atom that has lost itselectrons. This is why an alpha particle is positively charged: With the electronsgone, nothing cancels the positive charge that remains. Rutherford also learnedthat alpha particles travel at incredible speeds—an average of 16,000 kilometersper second! Despite these great speeds, however, alpha particles did not alwaystravel in straight lines. When they “bumped” into particles of gases, liquids, andsolids, the direction of their motion changed slightly.

You are a mad scientist with a pea shooter that can fire a pea at 16,000kilometers per second. You fire a pea at a thin wall made of plum pudding.Predict what will happen.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

10 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 10

The birth of modern atomic theoryRutherford and his assistants experimented on alpha particles for many years. Inspring 1909, they aimed a beam of alpha particles at an extremely thin piece ofgold foil. Three things happened. First, most of the alpha particles went straightthrough the foil. This made sense: An alpha particle, traveling at incredible speeds,could tear through the “plum pudding” cloud or pass through spaces between theatoms. Second, some of the alpha particles passed through the foil but came out theother side at an angle. This also made sense: If an alpha particle came into contactwith many atoms, its path could be bent. But the third thing that happened madeno sense at all. A few of the alpha particles—about 1 in 8,000—bounced off the foiland came back. Rutherford was amazed; how could anything so fast-moving bounceoff something so thin? Years later, he described it this way: “It was quite the mostincredible event that has ever happened to me in my life. It was almost asincredible as if you fired a 15-inch [cannon] shell at a piece of tissue paper and itcame back and hit you.”

Experiments sometimes seem like recipes: gather the ingredients, mix themup, and get the predicted results. Explain how Rutherford’s gold-foilexperiment contradicts this “recipe” model of scientific experimentation.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Rutherford tested and retested his results, just to be certain they were true. Healso considered what new model of the atom could best explain his results. In May1911, he published a new model of the atom’s structure. Like any new model, it hadto do two things: It had to look at the old findings in a new way, and it had toexplain the new findings.

Name one old finding that Rutherford’s model of the atom had to explain.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Name one new finding that Rutherford’s model had to explain.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

11

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 11

Rutherford explained that an atom is not a positivecloud with negative particles. Instead, it is more like atiny solar system. At the atom’s core is a tiny,massive, and positive nucleus. The nucleus contains99.9% of the atom’s mass and all of its positive charge.Around the nucleus whirl the electrons. Between theelectrons and the nucleus is nothing—empty space.How small is the nucleus? If an atom grew to the sizeof a baseball field, the nucleus would be a pea on thepitcher’s mound. How dense is the nucleus? A heliumnucleus the size of a pea would weigh 250 milliontons; a gold nucleus would weigh 12 billion tons. How much empty space isbetween the nucleus and the electrons? If the pea-sized nucleus is on the pitcher’smound, the nearest electron is a dust speck in the bleachers.

The diagram below shows how Rutherford’s model explained the results of hisexperiment where the plum-pudding model could not.

An alpha particle is a helium nucleus—tiny, dense, positive, and fast. Most of theseparticles zip through the gold foil because gold atoms, like all atoms, are mostlyempty space. If an alpha particle comes near a gold nucleus, the two nuclei push oneach other, and the particle’s path changes slightly. But if an alpha particle hits themassive, dense, positive gold nucleus head-on, the particle bounces back. Onlysomething so massive and positively charged could make a fast-moving alphaparticle bounce back.

Rutherford’s model explained the old findings—the atom’s neutrality and the existenceof electrons—in a new light. It also successfully explained the new findings—the fast-moving alpha particles bouncing off a thin foil. The new model of the atom still had

positivelycharged

alphaparticles

gold atoms nucleus

mainalphabeam

deflectedalphaparticles

rebounded alphaparticles

Atom-Level View of Rutherford’s Gold Foil Experiment

12 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2

dense,positivenucleus

light,negativeelectron

Rutherford’sNuclear Atom

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 12

some gaps. Exactly how did electrons move around the nucleus? Why did the negativeparticles not smash into the positive nucleus, like meteors hitting a planet? Otherscientists soon solved these problems. But Rutherford’s basic model—a dense, positivenucleus surrounded by light, negative electrons—is the basis of modern atomic theory.You will review more of this theory in Review 9.

The discovery of the atom’s structure demonstrates how scientific knowledge forms.Scientists use theories to make sense of a broad range of facts. If new evidencesuggests that the theory needs changing, they suggest hypotheses that can explainthe old findings and make sense of the new ones. They test these hypotheses andadjust them as necessary. If a hypothesis makes sense of many findings, then itbecomes a theory.

How science reduces biasBias is a point of view that affects the way that people interpret events. Putanother way, bias is a person’s tendency to see the world as he or she wishes it tobe (or fears it to be), not as it actually is. Bias is not in itself a bad thing. Everyhuman being sees the world in a certain way. The goal of science, however, is tofind out how the world actually works, not how humans believe it works.

Suppose that Dr. Slyde develops a new substance. He claims that his experimentshave shown that this new substance, if applied in a thin coat, can make a surfacenearly frictionless. He calls his new substance slyderite. If Dr. Slyde’s claim is true,slyderite could be incredibly useful. In cars, pistons and other moving parts have tobe lubricated with oil. If these parts were coated with slyderite, people would usemuch less motor oil. This, in turn, could help the environment. And consider largeships. A large ship traveling across the ocean expends a lot of energy overcomingthe friction of the water against its hull. A hull coated with slyderite could decreasethe amount of fuel needed for the ship to cross the ocean. The possibilities areendless.

Why might Dr. Slyde have a bias in making his claims about slyderite?

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

What could the scientific community do to see whether Dr. Slyde has such abias?

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1, S2.C2.PO2, S2.C2.PO3

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

13

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 13

One important way that science reduces bias is to make sure that an experiment isrepeatable and its results are reproducible. The words repeatable and reproducibleare similar, so we should look at their scientific meanings. An experiment isrepeatable if the materials used and the steps taken by one scientist can be copiedby other scientists. When a scientist does an experiment, he or she includes morethan the data and a conclusion. The scientist also describes

• the materials used in the experiment,

• the steps followed in that experiment, and

• anything else that may have influenced the results of the experiment.

With such information, other scientists can try the experiment themselves to see ifthey get similar results.

The results of an experiment are reproducible if the scientists duplicating theexperiment get similar results. If the scientists get results that do not match eachother or the original experiment, then they try to figure out why. If an experimentis not repeatable, or if the results of an experiment are not reproducible, then thescientific community will not accept the conclusions of the experiment asknowledge.

Dr. Rennab claims to have grown a turnip that, when eaten, will make theeater instantly grow two inches taller. He ate the only turnip, lost his notes onthe experiment, and accidentally burned all his records. Using the termsrepeatable and reproducible, explain how the scientific community will mostlikely react to Dr. Rennab’s claim.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

14 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S2.C2.PO3

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 14

Keys to KeepIn science, a theory is a dominant explanation supported by a mountain of evidence.

Scientific knowledge is subject to change as new information or technology challengesexisting theories.

The scientific community reduces the effect of bias through accurate record keeping,openness with one’s peers, and the replication of experiments.

Francis Bacon argued that observation and experimentation were the best ways to gainknowledge about the natural world.

Some people are important to the history of science for their experiments and discoveries. Otherpeople are important for their thoughts. Sir Francis Bacon falls into the second camp.

Bacon wanted to change how natural philosophers—the people we now call scientists—wentabout gaining knowledge. In Bacon’s day, natural philosophers didn’t do a lot of what we call science.They read books written centuries earlier, debated what was said in those books, and passed on whatthey learned from the books to their students. If a book said that something about nature was true,then the natural philosophers tended to accept it as true. Neither they nor their students checkedwhether the books’ claims were true.

Bacon thought this was a poor way to learn about the natural world. He wanted natural philosophersto gather information about the natural world through observation and experimentation. “Fiatexperimentum,” he would say in Latin. “Let the experiment be tried.” Only after collecting a lot ofinformation should a natural philosopher come to any conclusion about what was being studied.Even then, that conclusion would always be open for testing through more observation andexperimentation. If this sounds a lot like the way that scientists of today study the world, it is. Baconwas one of the first people to propose this way of gathering information and reaching conclusions.He also believed that whatever science learned about the world should be used to improve the livesof people everywhere. This idea may sound like common sense today, but in Bacon’s time it wasfairly radical.

While Bacon was not a great experimenter or observer, he was, as heput it, a great “trumpeter.” He came up with ideas and then declared themas loudly as he could. He trumpeted his ideas by writing books: TheAdvancement of Learning (1605), A New Instrument (1620), and NewAtlantis (1627). The last book, a fiction about a society of naturalphilosophers funded by a wise government, was an inspiration for the twofirst scientific societies in modern Europe: the British Royal Society (1662)and the French Royal Academy (1666). These societies, so crucial to thespread of scientific knowledge in Western society, are still around today.

People in Science

Sir Francis Bacon(England 1561–1626)

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S2.C1.PO1

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

15

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 15

Explore It YourselfFew scientific events have been as important as the discovery of the structure ofthe atom. Nonetheless, science continues to make major discoveries. In thisactivity, you will research one major scientific development that has occurred in thelast decade. You will then evaluate the impact of this development on scienceand/or human society. Choose one of the following topics to research.

• avian flu (“bird flu”) • biodiversity loss around the world

• cloning of animals • collapse of the Antarctic ice shelf

• discovery of extrasolar planets • human genome project

• increased hurricane intensity • stem cell research

To guide your research, read the questions in the “What Does It Mean?” section.Then, use your school’s library and the Internet to find answers to the questions.You must find at least three sources directly related to your topic. These sourcescan be magazine articles, websites, books, science-related DVDs, and so on.

TIP: When writing about a research topic, it is often helpful to imagine that youare explaining it to a friend or a relative who knows nothing about it. Try havingsuch a person in mind as you answer the questions in the “What Does It Mean?”section.

What Does It Mean?1. Give a brief description of the scientific development you researched.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

2. List three sources you found about your topic.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

16 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science InquiryAIMS Objectives: S1.C1.PO2, S1.C3.PO7, S2.C1.PO3

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 16

3. Evaluate how the development you researched may affect human society in the21st century. The effects may be positive, negative, or both.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

4. Sources almost always have a bias—a particular opinion or viewpoint that theybring to their presentation of a topic. A bias is not necessarily a bad thing,because an important topic is worth having an opinion about.

Pick one of the sources that you found. As best you can, describe the source’sbias toward the scientific development you researched. Be sure to point outspecific things that the source does—word choices, types of examples, appealsto emotion or reason, and so on—that suggest some kind of bias.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.AIMS Objectives: S1.C1.PO2, S1.C3.PO7, S2.C1.PO3

Review 1: How Scientific Knowledge Forms

17

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 17

18 ©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

Unit 1 – Science Inquiry

AIMS Science Practice

1 In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the model of the atom underwentrapid change and much revision. What was the reason for this?

A The scientists were eager to prove each other wrong and to claim credit forthe discovery of atomic structure for themselves.

B Much of the data used to make earlier models was shown to be faulty orsometimes completely wrong.

C Many scientists working together, sharing their ideas, and building onearlier scientists’ work allowed for the rapid change.

D The invention of the electron microscope allowed scientists to doexperiments they had not been able to do before.

2 How does the scientific community confirm that the work of one scientist or agroup of scientists is valid?

A The most prominent scientists get together and take a vote.

B Scientists know that anything written in a textbook is valid.

C If the theory seems logical, the conclusion must be logical, regardless ofthe experimental results.

D Other scientists carry out the same experiment to see if they get the sameresult.

3 Which of the following is not a way in which the scientific communityminimizes the effects of bias in experimentation?

A by making sure that the procedures of an experiment are repeatable

B by checking whether the results of an experiment are reproducible

C by hiring people who have no biases whatsoever

D by training scientists to be aware of their own biases

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 18

©20

07 B

uckl

e D

own

Pub

lishi

ng.C

OP

YIN

G I

S F

OR

BID

DE

N B

Y L

AW

.

19

Review 1: AIMS Science Practice

4 Which of the following best describes a scientific theory?

A A scientific theory, once established, can never be changed.

B A scientific theory is a good guess made by very smart people.

C A scientific theory explains a broad range of observed facts.

D A scientific theory is an explanation proven beyond all doubt.

5 Which sentence best summarizes why scientific knowledge is subject tochange over time?

A Scientists are constantly changing their minds about natural processes.

B Science must explain new observations that challenge existing theories.

C As natural laws change, scientific knowledge must change with them.

D Scientific knowledge is a set of opinions, and opinions change over time.

6 Which of the following is not a way that a scientific investigator can maintainhis or her credibility with other scientists and with society in general?

A present only the data that prove a hypothesis

B communicate all data openly with other scientists

C design experiments that can be replicated by other scientists

D maintain accurate records of experiments and observations

7 For which of the following accomplishments is Francis Bacon known?

A discovering the structure of DNA, the molecule of heredity

B promoting abstract thought as a way to understand the natural world

C encouraging people to experiment and to observe phenomena

D devising the law of universal gravitation and three laws of motion

1BDAZ08SN01 U1 R1 9/15/06 12:17 PM Page 19