Provide 135-word discussion #1 (on paragraph below).
Discussion #1:
What is considered a good theory? Theories could take a while to produce evidence and measurement. Learning this surprised me because when I was in middle school conducting a science experiment I needed more time for further analysis and my teacher told me “my theory for experimentation was a bad one because no results were seen in a week.” I now know when analysis takes a long time to show evidence the theory isn’t necessarily a bad theory. However, how long should scientists and scholars wait for their theory to show evidentiary support? If there is no evidence shown within the 1st year of experimentation should the scientist put the study on hold and try to test the theory another time? What if another scientist test the same theory and get evidence to prove the theory has evidentiary support, who would receive the recognition?
Provide 135-word discussion #2 (on paragraph below).
Discussion #2
:
Provide 135-word discussion on paragraph below.
Good theory involves a combination of the scientific method and problem solving method. First, identify the problem. Second, make a hypothesis, Third, test it. Fourth, test it again – even try to prove it wrong. Fifth – publish. This seems simple enough, but when I hear terms from scientists, like “settled science” and “licensing limitations impacting results”, I cringe. The study of criminal justice is no different. Take a problem, say, the arrest rates of minorities, correlate them with who is arrested coming from a broken home or single-parent family, and find results. The theories that may not be popular may be the best ones to believe in, as long the math and research adds up. If we could do that more, take emotion out of the results, I think a lot more problems would be solved.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]