Developing a hypothetical multi‐dimensional learning progression for the nature of matter

Abstract

We describe efforts toward the development of a hypothetical learning progression (HLP) for the growth of grade 7-14 students' models of the structure, behavior and properties of matter, as it relates to nanoscale science and engineering (NSE). This multi-dimensional HLP, based on empirical research and standards documents, describes how students need to incorporate and connect ideas within and across their models of atomic structure, the electrical forces that govern interactions at the nano-, molecular, and atomic scales, and information in the Periodic Table to explain a broad range of phenomena. We developed a progression from empirical data that characterizes how students currently develop their knowledge as part of the development and refinement of the HLP. We find that most students are currently at low levels in the progression, and do not perceive the connections across strands in the progression that are important for conceptual understanding. We suggest potential instructional strategies that may help students build organized and integrated knowledge structures to consolidate their understanding, ready them for new ideas in science, and help them construct understanding of emerging disciplines such as NSE, as well as traditional science disciplines. Recent scientific research has revealed that matter exhibits novel, often unexpected properties as it transitions between the bulk form and that of individual atoms and molecules. This transition generally occurs at the nanoscale, where at least one dimension measures between 10 À9 and 10 À7 m. Scientists and policy-makers predict that the new information and technologies resulting from nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) research will have extensive societal implications that may be realized in a broad range of areas, including health care, agriculture, food, water purification, and energy and environmental concerns (PCAST, 2005). These predictions have created a need to incorporate ideas related to NSE into the science curriculum.A foundation for NSE literacy must include a robust model of the nature of matter, which includes the structure of matter, how it behaves and interacts, as well as its properties and what determines those properties. These ideas are also the foundation of understanding chemistry and are considered important aspects of science literacy (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993; National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Due to the extensive nature of the science content, we will focus on only a portion of it in this manuscript. We describe our efforts toward the development of a hypothetical learning progression (HLP) that characterizes a path along which grade 7-14 students may develop more sophisticated models of atomic structure, and the electrical forces that govern interactions at the nano-, molecular, and atomic scales. Each of these knowledge domains represents a significant portion of one or more big ideas of NSE (Stevens, Sutherland, & Krajcik, in press). We followed an iterative, desi...

Published research on pre-college students’ and teachers’ nanoscale science, engineering, and technology learning

“…Students placed in the most advanced levels of the progression identified the place of the element in the periodic table as related to the inter-atomic interactions. Overall, these findings as related to student learning of the structure and properties of matter suggest that many middle school and high students lack a working understanding of these concepts, limiting their ability to effectively integrate new knowledge structures needed when learning new NSETrelated concepts [31].…”

“…In a study by Stevens et al [31], the researchers identified core concepts associated with models of the structure, behavior, and properties of matter through a hypothetical learning progression. Drawing on the work of Duschl, Schweingruber, and Shouse in Taking Science to School [32], they defined learning progressions as describing how learners may potentially construct a more sophisticated understanding of a concept over time.…”

“…This might be of a sequential nature, where the progression elaborates how the understanding of one concept supports and forms the foundation for the learning of another. Alternatively, the learning progression may describe how the learner constructs a more complex model, where the knowledge of a concept becomes more sophisticated, incorporating broader ideas and connections to related topics [31]. Learning progressions qualitatively differentiate among levels of understanding, articulating the knowledge needed by students prior to developing a sophisticated understanding (herein called lower anchor) as well as expected sophisticated knowledge and ideas (herein called upper anchor).…”

“…Three students who did not fit the learning progression were able to describe a solar system model of the atom but could not identify the components of the atoms (i.e., protons and neutrons). Another student described an electron cloudlike model of the atom but could not mention the names of the sub-atomic particles [31].…”

“…Stevens et al [31] identified in their empirical progression understandings such as the type of element that determines the electron configuration (n = 8), valence electrons that are involved in interactions (n = 18), electrons as the mediating components of interactions (n = 26), electrical forces governing such interactions (n = 3), an unspecified force governing such interactions (n = 5), and do not know (n = 40). Students placed at the lower levels of the empirical progression described an unspecified force as causing interactions between atoms, while other students identified electrical forces and attraction and repulsion between particles as the mechanisms responsible for interactions between atoms.…”