Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Science' started by Apple101, Jul 7, 2016.
even worse when they sat the PE department told them.
So hot air rises!
we seem to suffer from a constant clash between what food tech classify as food groups and what the science spec calls food groups
This really bugs me as do the primary colours which seem to be different across the curriculums
exactly, we teach different primary colours to art, as in we teach the real ones!
Do you not teach mixing colours by subtraction and by addition.
wanet, not sure what you mean by this, but as far as I know both science and art teach that you can make all colours by adding together their version of primary colours, but they define primary colours differently
Yes in science the mixed colours are due to addition - adding 3 primary colors gives white
But pigments absorb light - so subtraction - add 3 primary colours gives black.
Both should be taught in science - art only teaches the one applicable to art.
both are taught in science, but I've not heard them called addition and subtraction before. It isn't addition and subtraction, that implies they are opposites, but both of these phenomena are exactly the same thing!
And are contradicted by art teachers, that was my point. Art teachers say red yellow and green are primary colours, so the kids come straight from art to science, and are taught that red green and blue are the primary colours....
No in addition you are mixing coloured lights, in art you are mixing coloured pigments which absorb light i.e. subtract it. hence you can get black by mixing colours (pigments) in art, but white by mixing colours (light)
Just try searching on the Internet - it is covered well.
mixing paint is no different to using coloured filters, it is exactly the same principle as mixing light, but applied slightly differently.
i don't think that is the issue, anyway. The Issue is the arts teacher naming red/blue/yellow as primary colours, and the science teacher naming red/blue/green as primary colours
Nothing to do with teachers. When i taught Physics Text books covered this - I guess less is taught now.
Both teachers are correct, but you are talking about light and pigments!
i am not saying one is right and one is wrong, but that it is a complete nonsense to teach children contradictory "facts" in different lessons
Thats because part of the explanation (fact) is missed off - these are the primary colours of light and this is what happenns when you mix them. these are the primary colours of paint pigments and this is what happens when you mix them.
The moon comes up at night.
Not sure if it has been said yet but,
There is no gravity in space
Gravity pulls more on heavy things
The key part of this being is that a good science/art teacher will acknowledge that they are taught differently in the subjects and reinforce with the kids that they use the right 3 in the right subject.
First one we had but the second one is another great one that I didn't think of. Very nice
Currently the biggest misconception in science ( well for L3 BTEC students ) is "I don't need to learn it, I can get it from the web/Wikipedia" !
Separating fact from fiction ( or false inferences ) can be frustrating. I read some of the official Cold Research findings which stated that virtually all colds were spread by airborne droplets from coughs/sneezes and they were not able to purposely infect volunteers either via the eyes or hand/mouth by contact with live cold virus. They spent 20yrs to come to their conclusions so: were their methods faulty or do modern researches infer that because virus can live for some time on surfaces that it is still capable of infecting people ?