The purpose of this study is to investigate the cognitive process of student's modeling on a modelingemphasized argument-based general chemistry experiment. The participants were twenty-one freshman students. Six topics were carried out during the first semester and semi-structured interview was implemented at the end of the semester. Semi-structured interview questions were used to elicit elements of effective model, modeling strategies, difficulties that students have experienced during modeling, and resolving the difficulties that students have experienced during modeling. All student interview data were collected and transcribed. The results of this study are summarized as follows: (1) Elements of effective model were considered to be visual expression, persuasive explanation, and rhetorical structure.(2) Modeling strategies included arranging important keywords or writing the outline, and during the modeling process, students used various data, suggested data after reconstructing, suggested definitions and explanations of core concepts, used meta-cognition, and considering rhetorical structure. (3) Difficulties students have experienced during modeling could be categorized as lack of modeling strategy and understanding. (4) Resolving difficulties students have experienced during modeling could be categorized as modeling strategy and understanding. Students learn the strategy by feedback, modeling experience, evaluation of experimental report, models which they constructed previously and references, and the understanding of contents were achieved through arguments which occurred during classes and during the process of writing the experimental reports. These results suggest that when using modeling in teaching and learning, the argument-based learning strategy can be effective in enhancing students' modeling by helping them to understand meta-modeling with scientific concepts.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of argument-based modeling strategy using scientific writing on student's modeling ability. For this study, 66 students (three classes) from the 7th grade were selected and of these, 43 students (two classes) were assigned to two experimental groups while the other 23 students (one class) were assigned to comparative group. In the experimental groups, one group (22 students) was Argument-based multimodal Representation and Modeling (AbRM), and the other group (21 students) was Argument-based Modeling (AbM). Modeling ability consisted of identifying the problem, structuring of scientific concepts, adequacy of claim and evidence and index of multimodal representation. As for the modeling ability, AbRM group scored significantly higher than the other groups, AbM group was significantly higher than comparative group. The four sub-elements of modeling ability in the AbRM group was significantly higher than the other groups statistically and AbM group scored significantly higher than comparative group. From these results, the argument-based modeling strategy using scientific writing was effective on students' modeling ability. Students organized or expressed the model and evaluated or modified it through the process of argument-based modeling using scientific writing and the exchange of opinions with others by scientific language as argument and writing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.