I begin my introductory astronomy course with a unit on critical thinking that focuses on, among other things, the differences between the “scientific method” as frequently presented in textbooks and actual scientific practice. One particular classroom activity uses a simple dice game to simulate observation of a natural phenomenon and the process of figuring out the framework, which we have previously defined as the rules that allow us to make predictions, governing the simulated phenomenon. Using games to teach scientific methodology is not new (see Maloney and Masters and Smith and references therein). I have experimented with Maloney and Masters’ games and discovered that my students found them too difficult to figure out and therefore they did not learn what I hoped they would from them. I also experimented with other card games and found that too many students already knew the rules of both well-known and obscure card games. I even tried inventing my own games with, at best, mediocre results.

1.
David P.
Maloney
and
Mark F.
Masters
, “
Learning the game of formulating and testing hypotheses and theories
,”
Phys. Teach.
48
,
22
(
Jan.
2010
) and references therein.
2.
Donald
Smith
, “
Learning the rules of the game
,”
Phys. Teach.
56
,
146
(
March
2018
) and references therein.
3.
Fuller
 et al. (eds),
College Teaching and the Development of Reasoning
(
Information Age Publishing Inc.
,
2009
).
4.
Nature says the number of petals around a rose in Figs. 1(a)-(d) are, respectively, 8, 0, 4, and 2. Only Nature knows how, or indeed whether, the presence of the colored dice in Fig. 2 affects the number of petals. Does pink take precedence over green? Does red null everything out? Assume the role of Nature in your class and you get to decide.
AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.