The role of scientific modeling criteria in advancing students' explanatory ideas of magnetism

Abstract

Student construction of models is a strong focus of current research and practice in science education. In order to study in detail the interactions between students' model generation and evaluation and their development of explanatory ideas to account for magnetic phenomena, a multi-session teaching experiment was conducted with a small number of fifth grade students. Two small groups received full scaffolding, and two small groups received partial scaffolding. Students in both fully and partially scaffolded groups were asked to make their own predictions, observations, and explanations for scientific phenomena. Then they were asked to elaborate individual ideas and discuss with others in order to select or develop the best group consensus model and to compare their current group model with their previous group models. Only fully scaffolded groups were explicitly asked to consider the scientific modeling criteria of visualization and explanatory power. Through reflection on their explanations using these modeling criteria, most students in the fully scaffolded groups gradually developed, evaluated, and revised their explanations to coherent and sophisticated explanatory models. By contrast, none of the students in the partially scaffolded groups, who relied only on self-generated model evaluation criteria, revised their original fragmented ideas toward more coherent and sophisticated explanations. Through a detailed analysis of the evolution of the students' thinking in both fully and partially scaffolded groups, we explore the ways in which the explicit scaffolding of the scientific modeling criteria seemed to aid in the evolution of their ideas toward more sophisticated and coherent explanatory models. #

Representational gesturing as an epistemic tool for the development of mechanistic explanatory models

“…For example, Cheng and Brown () asked students to use the criteria of visualization and explanatory power when constructing explanations for magnetic phenomena. When students used these criteria to critique and revise their explanations, they moved toward a single coherent explanatory model for all phenomena that was similar to the target, domain model of magnetism.…”

“…Philosophers of science (e.g., M. Black, ; Campbell, ; Darden & Rada, . ; Harré, ; Hesse, ; Nersessian, ) and science educators (e.g., Cheng & Brown, , ; Chin & Brown, ; Clement, , ; Stewart, Cartier, & Passmore, ; Windschitl, Thompson, & Braaten, ) have long recognized that descriptive aspects of science, such as careful observations and articulation of patterns of observations, are necessary but not sufficient aspects of scientific knowledge. Of particular importance is the articulation of mechanisms that can provide explanations for these observations and patterns of observations (Machamer, Darden, & Craver, ).…”

“…Clement (), (), () describes explanatory models as one type of scientific model that is created by scientists to explain the hidden structures and the unobservable mechanisms behind observable phenomena. In this study, we define a student's explanatory model as an imagistic mental model in which the student visualizes the interactions of unobservable elements to explain why observable phenomena happen (Ahn, Kalish, Medin, & Gelman, ; Brown, ; Cheng & Brown, , ).…”

The Process of Facilitating Knowledge Acquisition and Retention: An Inquiry into Magnetic Poles with Challenging Questions

“…Children older than those ages link magnetic properties with gravitational phenomena (e.g., Selman, Krupa, Stone, & Jacquette, 1982;Bradamante & Michelini, 2005;Bradamante & Viennot, 2007), a kind of electricity, pressure of air, magnetic stream, a kind of lighting, rays and heat which are concepts derived from everyday life or education (e.g., Barrow, 1987;Erickson, 1994;Bar, Zinn, & Rubin, 1997;Bar & Zinn, 1998;Herrmann, Hauptmann, & Suleder, 2000;Maloney, O'kuma, Hieggelke, & Van Heuvelen, 2001;Anderson, Lucas, & Ginns, 2003;Ravanis, Pantidos, & Vitoratos, 2009). Apart from those studies, there is a focus on mental representations about magnetic field (e.g., Piaget & Chollet, 1973;Erickson, 1994;Borges, Tecnico, & Gilbert, 1998;Ravanis, Pantidos, & Vitoratos, 2009, 2010Cheng & Brown, 2015). Ravanis, Pantidos, and Vitoratos (2010) aimed to investigate students' mental representations about magnetic field in connection to the Newtonian model based on four tasks.…”

A case of successful learning about magnetism through the use of evidence

“…This paper focuses on the experiences of a single student who, through the process of model building, is able to discover the microscopic mechanism of magnetism for herself. Understanding magnetism is something that is difficult for students [1][2][3][4]. This student's success is notable due to her sophisticated use of evidence to guide her reasoning.…”