Book Description
"How to Think Like a Computer Scientist: Learning with Python" is an introduction to computer science using the Python programming language. It covers the basics of computer programming, including variables and values, functions, conditionals and control flow, program development and debugging. Later chapters cover basic algorithms and data structures.
Customer Reviews:
Good, but not Best.......2007-06-05
AUDIENCE: Beginning programmers. A reasonably good first text. Teaches and touches on numerous computer science ideas. Great for a high school or college level intro to programming class.
FLAWS: Not up-to-date with language features, computer science constructs seem to be somewhat randomly presented (perhaps this is the "muddle") another reviewer complains about, OOP is introduced far to late (in my humble opinion).
ULTIMATELY: Glad I bought it, would buy 2nd edition, have used it as a textbook for university classes.
This is a good guide to programming for the non-programmer. It develops basic procedural and structured software development ideas. It introduces OOP - object oriented programming - with some interesting examples. It concludes with four chapters on data structures.
This is not a systematic survey of the Python language, a book of slick examples for sophisticated programming (Programming Python, Dive Into Python, Text Processing in Python and Python Cookbook are excellent examples of wonderful Python riffs that exemplify state of the art application of Python to real-world problems. All of these assume some programming sophistication, however). This is a nuts and bolts, hand-holding exploration of some basic ideas of computer science using Python. It does this quite well.
Shortcomings include being somewhat dated. It does not cover some of the newer features in Python, such as list comprehensions or new-style classes. An additional shortcoming is that it reads too much like a traditional computer science text, and relies too much on procedural programming.
I suppose it's time for me to quit griping. I've taught many people to program using this book. It taught me the basics of Python so that I could appreciate Mark Pilgrim's Dive Into Python, which really gave me a feel for the power of the language (granted, I had been developing software professionally for over 15 years at that point).
It is not a reference manual. A second edition needs to be written. I believe that OOP should be introduced much earlier, and can then become a much more natural approach to programming.
If you want a reference manual for Python, or something more advanced than a beginner's text, or something describing up-to-date language features, then keep on searching. Or, download a copy of this and try it out. See if it serves your needs. A link to the free download can be found at the Python ORGanization site.
But unlike the free download, you can set this on your desk next to your keyboard. After the first several chapters in the soft version, I ordered the hardcopy. I have not regretted that decision.
great guide.......2006-11-05
A great study aid, using Python which is free to download, well worth the money.
Excellent.......2005-09-07
I just got the online copy of this (available free under the GNU documentation license). I had some classes in the past, programming classes, all pertained to java and i did not learn much of anything about it. It was just "type this and blarg (As someone in a previous review said" This book is amazing, it has an elegant and significant way of blending words to the point where its fun to learn programming. Stick with the book and you'll not only learn the basics of Python, but you'll learn all the logic and other implementations of computer programming as you go along! Very good read and i plan on purchasing a hardbound copy just as a keepsake becuase i enjoy this book so much.
A great text for learning Python.......2003-12-21
I don't actually own a hard copy of this book, but I read it in its entirety online, and I must say, it was all I needed to learn Python. I began programming 8 years ago in AppleSoft BASIC, and I've now been using C++ for 5 years. Prior to seeing this book, I'd looked into Python a few times, but never really got engaged enough to learn it. A few days ago, when I found a copy of the book on iBiblio, I read through it in two days flat, and now I have a really good feel for the language. The authors cover all the vital topics in a concise, consistent, and reader-friendly manner. I must say that I'm not a programming neophyte, so I don't have an objective feel for whether or not this book can teach you from scratch how to think like a computer scientist, but it certainly helped me once and for all to learn Python, and I'd recommend it to anyone without hesitation.
Excellent book for beginners!.......2003-11-10
"How to Think Like a Computer Scientist: Learning with Python" is one of the best computer programming books out there that beginners can start with! I have been enjoying this book for the past two months and I HIGHLY recommend it for the following reasons:
1) This book is designed with beginners (like you) in mind. In other words, you will not have to hire a tutor to be able to understand this book! It is very easy and clear to understand -- unlike many of the previous programming books that I have come across in the past.
2) It teaches you the necessary programming fundamentals that other programming languages require you to know. Once you have learned how to work with python, you will probably find it pretty easy (as I did) to acquire additional programming languages, such as Microsoft Visual Basic, C++ and Java.
3) This book provides the beginner with many easy-to-understand examples, in which the reader can try out. This makes the learning experience more interactive and enjoyable.
4) Python is a very easy language for beginners to work with. It is very easy to comprehend and tends to be on the "forgiving" side, especially if one makes a mistake while trying to learn to program.
5) Python is a free programming language that works with my different type of computer systems. It works beautifully with Microsoft Windows, Macintosh, Unix, Linux, Solaris, and other operating systems. With the language being free, you do not have to pay additional money to obtain the software.
I absolutely love this book and I hope that you will find it to be a fun and rewarding experience too. Give it a try -- it will open up a new world of programming to you!
Book Description
Explains the methods that rocket scientists use—expressed in a way that could be applied in everyday life. The book illustrates the methods (the 7 secrets) with anecdotes, quotations and biographical sketches of famous scientists, ideas from sci-fi, personal stories and insights, and occasionally a bit of space history. The author reveals that rocket science is just common sense applied to the extraordinarily uncommon environment of outer space and that rocket scientists are people, too.
PRAISE FOR BOOK
It’s really great!—Dr. Buzz Aldrin, Lunar Module Pilot, First Manned Landing on the Moon
"People of Earth…Attention!" Jim Longuski's book takes you on a journey of exploration to that nearly infinite space between the ears and behind the brows of that most mysterious of all creatures—the rocket scientist! Going well beyond the oft-used aphorisms, where no writer has gone before, he shows you how these gifted individuals think, feel, work, play, fantasize, rationalize, laugh and cry. From the glories of their epoch-making achievements to the tragedies of their magnificent failures, it is all here, told with insight, humor, objectivity and personal perspective. Without being preachy, lessons are offered that apply to anyone seeking to make professional or personal life just a little bit more successful and fun. I just couldn't set this book down!—Robert Cesarone, Rocket Scientist, Voyager Navigator, Space Communications Architect
This book is a must read for everyone—not just those who think they want to know how Rocket Scientists think. Do not be scared off by the title; it’s a delightful and wonderfully useful easy read.—Dr. William J. O’Neil, Galileo Project Manager, 1990-1998, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
Customer Reviews:
Inappropriate Personal Space Shuttle Vendetta.......2007-06-04
As a "rocket scientist" (or rather, "rocket engineer") myself, I find Longuski's basic pointers about how to think like a rocket scientist very accurate. In fact, I'd give this book 5 stars if it was only full of these pointers.
However, I am extremely disappointed by Longuski's use of this book to embark on a personal vendetta against the Space Shuttle. While I agree with some of Longuski's points, they are frequently made with sarcastic language and by presenting incomplete information (certainly not the objectivity one would expect from a rocket scientist).
The book's subtitle should be "or How I Learned To Continue Worrying and Hate the Space Shuttle." At least if that were the subtitle, Longuski's Shuttle discussions would be a little more appropriate.
Give yourself a Rocket Scientist makeover.......2007-05-16
This book isn't about how to make a thruster fire, or how to launch a spaceship into interstellar space. It's about the process of making the orderly, logical decisions that could get you there.
Most of us don't make decisions about million-dollar rocket designs. But anybody can make a bad decision based on faulty logic, incomplete data or simple boneheadedness. Wrong thinking can cause aspects of our careers and personal lives to veer dangerously off-course, like a fueled-up rocket with its thrusters firing sideways.
Dr. Longuski's book is full of common-sense, high-functioning rationality. It gets my enthusiastic endorsement!
Not for rocket scientists.......2007-04-05
If you are a rocket scientist (and I sort of am), you will find this book shallow and disappointing. In fact, if you are of a scientific turn of mind in any way, this book will contribute nothing to your approach to problems. And, even if you are not scientificaslly oriented, I fail to see how this book will help you. I know it is not expensive, which is why I was thinking of getting this book for my 16 year old grandson, but I never passed it along because he would just laugh at the trivial and banal examples. It isn't even amusing.
A book for all thinkers and dreamers.......2007-02-17
If you have ever wondered about the universe, been entertained by science-fiction or faced a challenging problem, then this book is for you. I found it to be both fun and informative. Most importantly, it made me smile!
Secrets of a Rocket Scientist.......2007-01-22
This is fun reading, and since I am a rocket scientist, I found the advice to be "right-on."
Book Description
Published to coincide with the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, this sparkling collection explores the impact of Richard Dawkins as scientist, rationalist, and one of the most important thinkers alive today. Specially commissioned pieces by leading figures in science, philosophy, literature, and the media, such as Daniel C. Dennett, Matt Ridley, Steven Pinker, Philip Pullman, and the Bishop of Oxford, highlight the breadth and range of Dawkins' influence on modern science and culture, from the gene's eye view of evolution to his energetic engagement in public debates on science, rationalism, and religion. This volume, which includes personal reminiscences and critical debate, as well as accessible discussions of science, is a stimulating tribute to a remarkable intellectual, written by some of the finest writers and scientists working today.
Customer Reviews:
Writings about Dawkins while he is still alive.......2007-06-16
I picked this book out of curiosity. I have found the concept of the book, namely to invite people to write about an author who is still alive, quite strange.
The various contributions that address Dawkins's selfish gene proposal, its influence on the theory of evolution, biology, philosophy of biology, sociobiology, and other areas, will help the readers learn about some modern trends in the theory of evolution.
I liked very much the chapters by Michael Ruse, "Richard Dawkins and the Problem of Progress", and by Seth Bullock, "The Invention of an Algorithmic Biology". Both contributions have quite informative end notes. I was disappointed with the chapters by Daniel Dennett, "The Selfish Gene as a Philosophical Essay", and Steven Pinker, "Deep Commonalities between Life and Mind", perhaps because I had expected some grand, earth-shaking, new revelations. Some contributions could not hold my interest, probably reflecting my own biases and limitations.
Despite the enthusiasm of many contributors for the selfish gene concept, I am not convinced that this reductionist concept alone can account for the complex phenomena such as evolution and life.
Very disappointing, quite useless, ego driven.......2007-01-24
I can't help but feel that the reviews thus far for this book have only been favorable due to the contributions that Dawkins himself has made to the field of evolutionary biology.
What was most troubling about this book was the contradictions which the editors themselves (Grafen and Ridley) managed to incorporate. They say that Dawkins uses "impeccable logic" and yet they also claim that he's "often misunderstood". Grafen claims that The Selfish Gene caused an "immediate revolution in biology". Yet, Andrew Read, one of the contributors, said he didn't encounter the book until after he completed his four year zoology degree (and yes, it had been published before that time). One also gets to read about, from the accounts of several scientists, how The Selfish Gene "taught me to think" (from Read's essay, but this is only an example). Grafen then tells us that it is noteworthy that Dawkins was elected to the Royal Society for his "contributions to the public understanding of science, not for his contribution to science itself."
The Selfish Gene is a masterful book and it's certainly worthy of praise, but 283 pages of praise with intercalary superfluous biographic accounts by the authors makes this book one for the trash bin.
It is nothing but an academic circle jerk. Very disappointing.
Dawkins appreciation.......2006-11-10
If you have read Richard's books over the years, you will enjoy reading some other prominent peoples' opinions. I am now re-reading "The selfish gene"
Misplaced tributes.......2006-11-07
The subtitle, after the title naming the subject of the tributes, says: "HOW A SCIENTIST CHANGED THE WAY WE THINK". Who is "WE"? Certainly not anyone. Rather, it may apply to the contributors to the book, and more widely to Darwinians. My drift is that if that scientist, Richard Dawkins, indeed changed the way someone thinks, it concerns those who accept Darwinism as axiomatic, the change concerning how they think Darwinism can be detailed.
To me this is like thinking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Despite the authors' absolute certainty that Darwinism is true, it is, as I have tried to show elsewhere, not only a theory, but a false one. Its refutation is in fact quite simple, but it resides in what has been a blind spot on both sides of the dispute for or against the theory.
One of the authors in the book quotes Dawkins in matters that highlight the essence of the dispute (p.233): "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist." (As an aside: What about spiritually, emotionally, fulfilled?) And "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference."
Ironically, the just spoken "blind" indicates the blind spot mentioned above. The dire views expressed in the preceding quotations are belied by an overwhelming phenomenon completely overlooked. It is the activities characterizing every live organism. Their directions toward its preservation display the opposite of "blind pitiless indifference", of "no good", of "no purpose".
I shall not go further here into the questions of theism or atheism; it should, however, be clear from the aforesaid that the presence of directedness in nature, contrary to the claim of its absence, is, in the functionings of organisms, very much part of science, as exemplified by medicine.
It is instead Darwinian aimlessness which contradicts these observations. In this respect one may take a look at a prevalent theme in the reviewed book, regarding what "changed the way we think". Dawkins proposed (p.55) that the gene, "defined as any portion of chromosomal material that potentially lasts for enough generations to serve as a unit of natural selection", must be recognized as "the fundamental unit of natural selection, and therefore the fundamental unit of self-interest."
This has to do with the microscopic unit transmitting hereditary characters and which Dawkins for the preceding reason called "the selfish gene". Of interest now is of course that the gene or anything else in organisms is called without hesitation a unit of, aimless, "natural selection". As seen above, organismic parts do act with aims and are correspondingly replicated through generations with aims.
Dawkins called the gene "the fundamental unit of self-interest" because it is so replicated, and as known, "natural selection" is to favor that which survives, and the gene appears to survive longer than other units of organisms. But in the organism's activities aimed at its survival the genes are merely instruments by which organisms propagate for that survival. In other words, genes do not act in self-interest but in the interest of organisms.
More importantly, as here again called attention to, the living do not adapt as a result of undirected effects of natural selection, but as a result of their directed activities toward self-preservation.
Scientists give Dawkins a rave notice.......2006-11-03
Richard Dawkins is brilliant. Because he writes so clearly, his colleagues and students learn from him with ease; because he writes so entertainingly, they thoroughly enjoy the learning process. In Grafen and Ridley's compendium, other scientists who have benefited from Dawkins' brilliance build on his work, and provide important commentary and instruction on how to think and reason.
Book Description
Robyn Dawes defines irrationality as adhering to beliefs that are inherently self-contradictory, not just incorrect, self-defeating, or the basis of poor decisions. Such beliefs are unfortunately common. Witness two examples: the belief that child sexual abuse can be diagnosed by observing symptoms typically resulting from such abuse, rather than symptoms that differentiate between abused and non-abused children; and the belief that a physical or personal disaster can be understood by studying it alone in-depth rather than by comparing the situation in which it occurred to similar situations where nothing bad happened. This book first demonstrates how such irrationality results from ignoring obvious comparisons. Such neglect is traced to associational and story-based thinking, while true rational judgment requires comparative thinking. Strong emotion--or even insanity--is one reason for making automatic associations without comparison, but as the author demonstrates, a lot of everyday judgment, unsupported professional claims, and even social policy is based on the same kind of irrationality.
Customer Reviews:
Get off it already.......2007-03-19
This book is about decision science. It's written by one of the most famous judgment and decision making psycholgists of all time. I do acknowledge that the title may be a tad misleading. THIS IS NOT A BOOK ABOUT HOW STUPID EVERYONE IS AND THE MISTAKES THEY MAKE IN REASONING. Rather, this book is an introduction for the lay person to decision science, a branch of experimental psychology as well as one of the only subsets of psychology that actually constitutes science. For practicing researchers, Dawes' writing will also be informative. He writes about a plethora of topics, such as the self-esteem sham, our inability to recognize the absence of something as information, our insistence that our judgments are accurate and valid when often they aren't (such as employers' insistence that interviewing the hiree is in any way informative, when really interviews DECREASE the accuracy of hiring decisions), why clinical psychology is not a science, etc. Dawes is an extraordinary writer, and I sincerely hope this will not be his last book!
Good in places but..........2004-08-12
This book covers in some detail some hows and whys of irrational thinking in adults with some excellent examples.
Dawes definition of irrationality is more broad than I suspect most people would consider. Dawes regards as irrational what most people would regard as simply sloppy thinking. In a couple of places I was unconvinced that there was irrationality per se just dodgy inferences. For example in the preface Dawes mentions a commentator who assumes because a person was a supporter of a "peace organisation" in the late 1950s that person was a communist. Perhaps a dodgy inductive inference but hardly profoundly irrational even by the author's own criteria of self-contradiction.
However this is a minor quibble. My major grief with this book is the convolutions the author occasionally seems to get himself into where simple words and concepts could be invoked to aid the reader. A book that is all about making inferences but doesn't mention "control" or "induction" is a very strange book indeed.
A Journalistic Account of Solid Psychological Research.......2004-08-06
Robyn Dawes is a distinguished psychological researcher whose personal contributions to understanding human behavior have been prescient and pathbreaking. This is very lively, informal, and humorous commentary on our society based on rigorous psychological research undertaken by Daniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky,Richard Thaler, and their coworkers over the past few decades. I know other readers found this book tedious, but I'm not sure why. Perhaps because it has some math in it? At any rate, I treated the book like pleasant light reading.
Dawes claims to hold a very tight definition of rationality, but in fact, he uses the term to describe a host of different behaviors, including holding unfounded beliefs, having weird personal moral values, or just ignoring the evidence. I use a
very narrow definition of rationality in my work (preference consistency is the substance of it), and I generally disapprove of throwing the term "rationality" around ad libidem---academics invoke rationality to justify their prejudices in the same manner clergy invoke God to justify theirs. But Dawes is sloppy in such a disarming way in his usage that it is hard to fault him.
Dawes actually relies on only a couple of well document psychological phenomena (he could have dealt with several more). One is a framing effect, in which if a choice is framed in terms of losses, people choose one way, and if in terms of gains, a very different way. It is actually closely related to loss aversion, which Dawes does not discuss.
A second phenomenon is ignoring base rates. For instance, suppose you learn that a test for HIV is 90% accurate, and you ask people what is the probability they have HIV is they test positive. Most say 90%. However, suppose only one person out of
100 is HIV positive. Take a group of 1000 people. Ten will be HIV positive (on average...) and nine will test positive. But 990 will be HIV negative and 99 of these will test positive. Thus, if you test positive, your chances of being HIV positive are only 9/(99+9)=8.33%.
This is an important phenomenon, but "irrational" is a bit strong here, as elsewhere in the book. We expect experts to know how to do conditional probabilities, but it is no more "irrational" to get this wrong than to fail to solve third order partial differential equations.
I very much liked Dawes' treatment of Sexual Abuse Hysteria. In this chapter, he really does show the aberrant reasoning of the judges and attornies associated with the incredible miscarriages of justice associated with this dark period in American history.
More an informal journal article than a book.......2001-11-12
Potential readers of this book should first of all be careful not to confuse it with the usual debunking books that tell amusing stories about how foolish we are to believe what we believe. This is a different kind of book altogether. There is only a trace of "debunking" here, regarding a few of the authors' pet peeves, such as the overemphasis on self-esteem by many psychologists, the sexual abuse/memory recovery controversies, and the usefulness of clinical experience vs. statistical predictive models. However, those are certainly not discussed sufficiently to get the book for that purpose.
This is also not a book on critical thinking, or one listing all the various ways thinking can go wrong. There are much better books on those subjects as well.
This is specifically a book describing a certain type of yet poorly understood cognitive mechanisms that the Dawes feels is at the root of much of our irrational thinking. He considers the theories that assume out emotion leads us astray, and decides that even within cold thinking processes devoid of strong emotion, there are tendencies toward irrationality. He makes the point for example that most support of Nazi fascism was not motivated by rage so much as cold cognitive processes: a suppression of sympathetic emotion more than the expression of hatred.
Dawes defines irrationality is a very specific way, as self-contradictory thinking processes and conclusions. He then points out that there are a number of easily demonstrated biases in human thinking, even when there is no strong emotions involved.
Dawes does not believe that we understand this very well yet, but his central culprit is our failure to make sufficient comparisons in our thinking. He is quick to point out that this is not usually because there are too many choices to consider; that even when we only have two options, we often fail to consider the second one. Dawes does not really offer much of a unifying explanation for cognitive irrationality biases, though he alludes to some of the theories very briefly.
What he does do is to point out that human thinking is fundamentally irrational by default in some ways, and he believes it can be corrected if we understand and pay attention to the comparisons we make in our thinking.
This book has technically solid explanations, good examples, and useful scientific content. On the other hand, I found it a pretty dull book to read, it felt a little more like it should have been an informal version of a journal article on decision theory and heuristics than a book.
I didn't give it a '1' because it could have been worse.......2001-09-20
Everyday Irrationality by Robyn Dawes was not at all what I thought it would be. I chose to purchase this book because I thought it would be an exposé (possibly entertaining) of the ridiculous, illogical behavior exhibited by everyone. That is a topic upon which I frequently harp. Unfortunately, Everyday Irrationality is a tedious book of another color.
Contrary to what the full title might suggest, this book is less about HOW pseudo-scientists, lunatics, and the rest of us systematically fail to think rationally and more of an explanation of WHY. Dawes is a psychologist, and nearly all of his examples of irrationality come from that field. While pointing out the poor logic of psychology, as with faith or astrology, is similar to shooting fish in a barrel of self-contradiction, the irony, though delicious, was barely enough to keep my attention.
Dawes defined irrationality as an argument involving self-contradictions. The author, however, frequently found his contradictory evidence for irrationality from outside the argument. If assumptions are amended to an argument, then one is no longer testing the consistency of the same reasoning. Because of this, 'irrationality' is different than 'logic,' and it is unclear to me whether or not Dawes is simply interested in the 'truth' of a statement over its internal consistency.
What were the most interesting were the self-contradictory arguments presented to explain various irrationalities. The obvious example is Chapter 7 where Dawes selects several anecdotes to explain why stories of individual incidents are not useful to describe generalities.
Another example occurs in Chapter 3 where Dawes investigates the public health argument that anyone irresponsible enough to be addicted to heroine would not be interested in using sterile needles to avoid HIV. Dawes claims that this argument is irrational because, as people "...are not paragons of consistently good - or, for that matter, bad - health practices, there is nothing contradictory about engaging in one unhealthy habit while refraining from another." (p. 31) Granted, such contradictory behavior is clearly popular - I myself have tried to reduce the saturated fats in my diet, but I have made no plans to put down my pipe or the occasional cigar. However, commonplace or not, concern over the effects of a variable on a potential undesirable outcome while ignoring other variables that could lead to the same outcome is self-contradictory and, therefore, irrational according to our working definition. Can a self-contradictory statement be used to demonstrate the irrationality of another?
Everyday Irrationality does provide a bright spot or two. There is a brief but successful introduction to hypothesis testing using statistics and limited logical symbolism. Where arithmetic is involved, it may be possible to expect 'truth.' In addition, Dawes does a fine job of suggesting the causes (incomplete specification, etc.) of irrationality that everyone should be aware of in their everyday thinking and thoughting.
Book Description
Every day you answer questions-dozens, even hundreds of them. How do you find the answers to questions? How can you be sure your answers are correct?
Scientists use questions to learn about things. Scientists have developed a way of helping make sure they answer questions correctly. It is called the scientific method. The scientific method can help you find answers to many of the questions you are curious about.
What kind of food does your dog like best? Is your sister more likely to help you with your homework if you say please? Can throwing a dead snake over a tree branch make it rain? The scientific method can help you answer these questions and many others.
Stephen Kramer's invitation to think like a scientist, illustrated by Felicia Bond's humorous and appealing pictures, will receive enthusiastic response from young readers, scientist and nonscientist alike.
Customer Reviews:
Don't let the pink cover turn you off this book!.......2007-08-15
While the bubble gum pink cover of Stephen Kramer's "How To Think Like A Scientist" may inspire you to reach for something else, pick up anyway! Between the cotton candy covers, lies a charming book which uses humor to express thought provoking ideas and to teach your child to think about science in a systematic manner.
One of the best ways to get the attention of a child is by telling a story and Kramer capitalizes on this idea. My son and I were both engaged by the stories and the lessons which flowed naturally from them.
Your child will not only learn the scientific method -- the process for exploring scientific ideas -- but also will learn the language of experimentation on which to base a lifetime of scientific study.
An excellent introduction to scientific thinking for young kids!.......2005-09-13
I often buy bulk copies of this wonderful book to give away to young kids who attend my 5-Day hands-on learning camp, aptly entitled 'Science & The Art of Discovery.' My principal objective is to teach young kids how to think scientifically, inventively & productively.
The two authors have done a great job in producing this excellent piece of work. Although it has only 44 pages, the contents are comprehensively rich. It is also very well-illustrated with a simple story format & systematically organised as follows:
How do you answer questions?
Using the scientific method
What do you want to know?
What do you think?
If you want to get your young kids to understand & appreciate the scientific method or simply 'how to think like a scientist', go for this book!
Book Description
This book is for anyone who wants to excel at a school science fair. It gives complete guidance for every stage of a successful project, from brainstorming ideas to final presentation. More than a "recipe-style" science fair book, this work promotes the understanding of real science.
Twenty prizewinning projects from top national competitions are included:
€ How to make the best chocolate-chip cookies-scientifically!
€ Do lefties have slower reaction times than right-handers?
€ Does grass grow faster if you cut it short? And more!
Kids will love the hip, engaging text, filled with fascinating trivia and wacky science jokes, as well as the very funny illustrations. Solid science presented in a compelling manner makes this a stellar addition to the category.
Customer Reviews:
It's About Time!.......2004-07-01
Finally - a book on science experiments that follows the scientic method for a traditional science fair. This is an excellent resource for any teacher (or student) involved in a science project that uses the scientific process. This book offers 20 engaging project ideas in a very user friendly format. Each project page shares the following:
1. The project title
2. The problem in the form of a question
3. An example hypothesis
4. A list of steps to follow for the procedure
5. Conclusion statement
6. How the information can be used for real world application
Although this is a great read for students, it can also be a great place for teachers to spark ideas within their students (without necessarily sharing the book with them).
Average customer rating:
|
How to Think Like a Social Scientist
Thomas F. Pettigrew
Manufacturer: Addison Wesley Publishing Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Textbook Binding
 General
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Research
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 067399709X |
Book Description
This digital document is an article from Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, published by Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc. on March 1, 2004. The length of the article is 1843 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: Mexico: worse than you know: if you think the policy of preemption is a recipe for disaster, take a look at how the National Security Strategy plans to fix the world economy.
Author: Alejandro Nadal
Publication:
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Refereed)
Date: March 1, 2004
Publisher: Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc.
Volume: 60
Issue: 2
Page: 27(3)
Distributed by Thomson Gale
Average customer rating:
|
Not Artifacts, but Acts.(Human-Built World: How to Think about Technology and Culture)(Book Review): An article from: American Scientist
Manufacturer: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital
Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
| Audiobooks
| Automotive
| Books on CD
| Books on Cassette
| Crime & Criminals
| Current Events
| Economics
| Education
| Foreign Language Nonfiction
| Government
| Holidays
| Law
| Philosophy
| Politics
| Social Sciences
| Transportation
| True Accounts
| Urban Planning & Development
| Women's Studies
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Science & Technology
| Subjects
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
General
| Nonfiction
| HTML
| Formats
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
Science
| HTML
| Formats
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
ASIN: B00084HOHA
Release Date: 2005-08-01 |
Books:
- Instant Notes in Molecular Biology (Bios Instant Notes)
- Invasive Alien Species: A New Synthesis (Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) Series)
- Islands, the Universe, Home
- Lab Manual t/a Inquiry Into Life
- Lasting Light: 125 Years of Grand Canyon Photography
- Lessons of the Rainforest
- Literature, Nature, and Other: Ecofeminist Critiques
- Macroenvironmental Analysis for Strategic Management (The West Series in Strategic Management)
- Methods for Ecological Toxicology: A Critical Review of Laboratory Multispecies Tests
- Microbiology (Cliffs Quick Review)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- International Economics
- Italy: The Best Travel Writing from the New York Times
- Encyclopedia of Associations Regional, State & Local Organizations: Great Lakes States
- History: Fiction or Science
- History: Fiction or Science
- Kitty Takes a Holiday
- Feral Future: The Untold Story of Australia's Exotic Invaders
- Unemployment Insurance: The Second Half-Century
- Financial Custody: You, Your Money, and Divorce
- The Prosperous Retirement: Guide to the New Reality
Dive Into Python
Python Programming: An Introduction to Computer Science
Learning Python (Learning)
Python Programming for the Absolute Beginner, Second Edition (For the Absolute Beginner)
Beginning Python: From Novice to Professional (Beginning: From Novice to Professional)
