This is a remix of https://goopenva.org/authoring/387-introduction-to-the-model-of-the-atom-mystery-box- 

Introduction to Studying Evolution - Mystery Box Scientific Method Inquiry Activity

Summary

Show students a simple mystery box that you have made in the classroom.  I stuff a small, cardboard box with a few small packages of candy and tape it shut. Offer students the box and challenge them to determine the contents without opening or looking inside. Give them the freedom to make any observations they can come up with, as long as it does not open or damage the box in any way. Most students will move the box around and listen carefully to it. Some may even get out cell phone flashlights to peek through cracks. Encourage them to talk with one another as they make their observations. Usually someone will come up with an idea about the contents based on what they hear as the items roll around, or they may even see a sliver of the packaging and guess correctly the type of candy. As the class is making observations and discussing, guide the class discussion to make the following points. 

Point 1: Science sometimes attempts to answer impossible questions. As the students make their guesses about what is inside the box, intentionally ask them questions that are impossible to answer. For example, if they correctly guess the type of candy the box contains, ask them to tell you the exact color or color(s) of the candies inside the bag inside the box. Obviously this would be impossible for them to determine, and they will point that out. At this point, acknowledge their frustration with the impossible question and remind them that paleontologists are often asked to answer impossible questions such as “What color were the dinosaurs?” Do we know what color the dinosaurs are? We all assume we do because we have seen pictures or models of dinosaurs, but how do we know they are the right color? Could we ever possibly know for sure? 

Point 2: Science answers impossible questions with inferences based on observation. These inferences will never be fully proven and sometimes they change, but they are still supported by evidence and reasonable enough to be accepted as fact with confidence. After admitting that some questions are impossible to answer, ask the students to guess the colors of the candy anyway. Inevitably, they will guess the standard colors of that candy based on their own personal experience and prior observations. When asked how they came up with their guess, they tell me they are basing it on prior observations in their own experience. I ask them to rate their confidence. Would they put money on their guess? Most are very confident and would stake money on their claim. I ask them if there's a remote possibility they could be wrong. What if a color is missing? Despite acknowledging that they could be wrong, none of them would alter their guesses. They are still confident in their guesses. Now relate this to the color of the dinosaurs. Modern paleontologists look for similarities between the fossils of dinosaurs and the skeletons of modern animals. They also look for clues surrounding the fossils (soil content, fossilized vegetation, other fossils in the surrounding vicinity) to determine what type of environment this fossil resided in. For example, a dinosaur fossil surrounded by fossilized palm trees most likely lived in a tropical forest. A fossil surrounded by seashells was probably living in an aquatic, oceanic environment. Once they have gathered as many direct observations about the fossil in question, they then make comparisons to modern organisms and habitats that are similar. If a dinosaur has skeletal similarities to modern crocodiles and is found in an area with evidence of a freshwater ecosystem, then likely this dinosaur has a similar color to modern crocodiles. This “best guess” based on concrete observations is what scientists call an inference.

Point 3: Scientific inferences based on unbiased evidence are accepted as fact. Scientific theory (such as the theory of evolution) is the most logical and unbiased conclusion based on the observable evidence. Now relate this process to a detective at a crime scene. If the perpetrator never admits guilt, can the detective still "prove" they committed the crime? Is there still a remote chance they may be wrong? How have modern advances helped increase the confidence of detectives in proving guilt in court? Why is it important for a detective to be unbiased when examining a crime scene? What could happen if the detective examined the crime scene having already decided that they know who was guilty? What if they only looked for evidence that proved guilt and ignored any evidence that proves innocence? I then relate all of this (the inability to observe directly, the gathering of evidence and comparison to modern equivalents, the possibility of future correction, and the need to be unbiased and willing to consider and include all of the evidence presented in the inference) to the study of evolutionary history and relationships. The evolution of most modern organisms happens gradually over many generations in often subtle changes that occur only in individuals. It is a process that we will never be able to directly witness with few exceptions. However, it does not mean we can't prove that it happened. This really helps them understand how the Theory of Evolution is based on solid evidence even though the majority of these organisms lived in the past. 

Point 4: Science doesn’t always get full satisfaction. At this point, many ask if they can finally open the box to satisfy their curiosity, but I don't let them. If we are truly simulating the nature of science, we have to remember that a paleontologist can never confirm their own findings. Because of this I like to make the kids sweat a little to feel that frustration. But usually I cave and let them open the box at the end of the class!

Reflection questions:

1) What are the differences and similarities between your inferences about the box contents and the inferences biologists make about fossils?

2) What observations were most useful when trying to infer what was in the box? What observations do you think would be most useful when studying fossils?

3) Given unlimited resources, what other types of observations and tests would you like to have done to determine the contents of the box? How can technology further our understanding of paleontology and evolutionary history?

4) With more evidence, do you think your inference about the contents of the box would have changed? Explain. Can more evidence change the Evolutionary Theory? If so, how?