Impact of the MARS curriculum: The mass unit

Abstract

ABSTRACT:The Model-based Analysis and Reasoning in Science (MARS) project is involved in developing model-centered curriculum modules for middle-school science. MARS instruction focuses on a variety of physical, pictorial, and symbolic representations of theoretical entities, providing tangible objects that students can use to think and talk about abstract concepts and links between concepts. This article examines the impact of the mass unit, the third unit of a sixth-grade curriculum module, implemented in a public school during the 1993 -1994 school year. Following an overview of the unit itself, three sections describe its impact as revealed by three aspects of evaluation: (1) classroom observations of opportunities to learn afforded students through instructional activities and interactions; (2) examination of students' written work, including worksheets and free-response test performance; and (3) analysis of protocol data from individual interviews conducted at the end of each of the three main sections of the curriculum. The article concludes with a discussion of specific implications for the MARS curriculum and general implications for science instruction. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed 82: 53 -91, 1998.

Development of Game-Based Training Systems

“…Students are able to manipulate variables, view phenomena from multiple perspectives, observe system behavior over time, draw and test hypotheses and compare their mental models with representations in the external word. These features are consistent with the model-based reasoning concepts advocated by learning researchers (Gentner, 1983;Raghavan et al, 1997;1998;Leher & Schauble , 2000;Cartier & Stewart, 2000;Zimmerman et al, 2003;Stewart et al, 2005). • Game-based tasks are expressly designed to help players progress toward goals.…”

Learners' epistemic criteria for good scientific models

“…There is promising evidence that model‐based instruction improves students' ability to construct their own models (White, 1993), develop explanations and conclusions from models (White & Frederiksen, 1998; Schwarz & White, 2005), competently coordinate and work with multiple models (Gutwill, Frederiksen, & White, 1999), synchronize models and evidence (Pluta, Buckland, Chinn, Duschl, & Duncan, 2008; Snir, Smith, & Raz, 2003; Zimmerman, Raghavan, & Sartoris, 2003), critique and revise models (Penner et al, 1997; Stewart et al, 1992), and engage in causal and analogical reasoning (Harrison & Treagust, 2000; Raghavan, Sartoris, & Glaser, 1998). Model‐based inquiry can promote conceptual change, as well (Chinn & Samarapungavan, 2009).…”

“…The study was part of a yearlong project involving seventh‐grade life science students and teachers who were implementing a model‐based inquiry program called PRACCIS (Promoting Reasoning and Conceptual Change in Science). This program of research has many features in common with other model‐based inquiry programs (e.g., Raghavan, Sartoris, & Glaser, 1998; Sandoval & Reiser, 2004; Schwarz & White, 2005; Schwarz et al, 2009; Stewart et al, 1992; White & Frederiksen, 1998). This curriculum and research project (Chinn et al, 2008) aims to develop instructional schemes and tools which teachers can easily embed within their own instructional materials as well as to develop instructional modules lasting 1–4 weeks that teachers can use flexibly within the constraints of their own state and district curricula.…”

Models and Modelling: Routes to More Authentic Science Education

“…The MARS project (Raghaven & Glaser, 1995;Raghaven, Sartoris & Glaser, 1998a, 1998b set out to develop model-building skills in grade 6 students in USA. Working on fundamental topics, e.g., 'mass,' 'force,' students did practical work, made predictions, inserted these predictions into a model constructed on a computer, 'ran' the model so produced to see how the outcomes compared with those produced by the consensus model.…”