Analyzing Students’ Understanding of Models and Modeling Referring to the Disciplines Biology, Chemistry, and Physics

In this study, secondary school students’ (N = 617; grades 7 to 10) understanding of models and modeling was assessed using tasks which explicitly refer to the scientific disciplines of biology, chemistry, and physics and, as a control, to no scientific discipline. The students’ responses are interpreted as their biology-, chemistry-, and physics-related or general understanding of models and modeling. A subpopulation (N = 115; one class per grade) was subsequently asked which models they had in mind when answering the tasks referring to biology, chemistry, and physics (open-ended questions). The findings show significant differences between students’ biology-, chemistry-, and physics-related understandings of models and modeling. Based on a theoretical framework, the biology-related understanding can be seen as less elaborated than the physics- and chemistry-related understandings. The students’ general understanding of models and modeling is located between the biology- and the physics-related understandings. Answers to the open-ended questions indicate that students primarily think about scale and functional models in the context of biology tasks. In contrast, more abstract models (e.g., analogical models, diagrams) were mentioned in relation to chemistry and physics tasks. In sum, the findings suggest that models may be used in a rather descriptive way in biology classes but in a predictive way in chemistry and physics classes. This may explain discipline-specific understandings of models and modeling. Only small differences were found in students’ understanding of models and modeling between the different grade levels 7/8 and 9/10.

[1]  L. Schauble,et al.  Building Functional Models: Designing an Elbow , 1997 .

[2]  Moritz Krell,et al.  Students’ Levels of Understanding Models and Modelling in Biology: Global or Aspect-Dependent? , 2014 .

[3]  M. T. Guerra-Ramos,et al.  Teachers’ Ideas About the Nature of Science: A Critical Analysis of Research Approaches and Their Contribution to Pedagogical Practice , 2012 .

[4]  John J. Clement,et al.  Model based learning as a key research area for science education , 2000 .

[5]  B. Hofer,et al.  Domain specificity of personal epistemology: Resolved questions, persistent issues, new models , 2006 .

[6]  B. Crawford,et al.  Dynamic Assessments of Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Models and Modelling , 2005 .

[7]  Nico Verloop,et al.  Experienced teachers' knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education , 2002 .

[8]  William F. McComas,et al.  THE PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF THE NATURE OF SCIENCE: DISPELLING THE MYTHS , 1998 .

[9]  C. Fox,et al.  Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences , 2001 .

[10]  Cynthia Passmore,et al.  The Strategies of Modeling in Biology Education , 2013 .

[11]  Margaret Wu The Role of Plausible Values in Large-Scale Surveys. , 2005 .

[12]  Reuven Lazarowitz,et al.  Learning the Cell Structures with Three-Dimensional Models: Students’ Achievement by Methods, Type of School and Questions’ Cognitive Level , 2013 .

[13]  R. Harré The Principles Of Scientific Thinking , 1970 .

[14]  Using polytomous IRT models to evaluate theoretical levels of understanding models and modeling in biology education , 2012 .

[15]  Ling L. Liang,et al.  PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ VIEWS ABOUT NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE STUDY , 2009 .

[16]  STUDENTS’ EVALUATION OF THE CREDIBILITY OF SCIENTIFIC MODELS THAT REPRESENT NATURAL ENTITIES AND PHENOMENA , 2011 .

[17]  Francis G. Giesbrecht,et al.  Planning, construction, and statistical analysis of comparative experiments , 2005 .

[18]  B. White,et al.  Metamodeling Knowledge: Developing Students' Understanding of Scientific Modeling , 2005 .

[19]  Paul R. Pintrich,et al.  Beliefs About Science: How Does Science Instruction Contribute? , 2001 .

[20]  Harrie Eijkelhof,et al.  Research and the quality of science education , 2005 .

[21]  Myint Swe Khine,et al.  Models and Modeling , 2011 .

[22]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Structural equation modeling of paired-comparison and ranking data. , 2005, Psychological methods.

[23]  Ibrahim A. Halloun Modeling Theory in Science Education (Science & Technology Education Library) , 2006 .

[24]  Phil Seok Oh,et al.  What Teachers of Science Need to Know about Models: An overview , 2011 .

[25]  Ibrahim A. Halloun,et al.  Modeling Theory in Science Education , 2004 .

[26]  John Leach,et al.  Epistemological Understanding in Science Learning: The Consistency of Representations across Contexts. , 2000 .

[27]  M. Gerritsen,et al.  Current Challenges and Future Directions , 2010 .

[28]  Samia Khan,et al.  What’s Missing in Model-Based Teaching , 2011 .

[29]  The Effects of Test Length and Sample Size on the Reliability and Equating of Tests Composed of Constructed-Response Items , 2001 .

[30]  Michael L. Nering,et al.  Handbook of Polytomous Item Response Theory Models , 2010 .

[31]  Kenneth Tobin,et al.  Second international handbook of science education , 2012 .

[32]  M. Black Models and metaphors , 1962 .

[33]  Allan Collins,et al.  The Nature of Scientific Meta-Knowledge , 2011 .

[34]  G. Masters,et al.  Rating scale analysis , 1982 .

[35]  Wen-Chung Wang,et al.  Improving measurement precision of test batteries using multidimensional item response models. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[36]  Collaborative modelling of the vascular system - designing and evaluating a new learning method for secondary students , 2010 .

[37]  Lisa D. Bendixen,et al.  Domain-Generality and Domain-Specificity in Personal Epistemology Research: Philosophical and Empirical Reflections in the Development of a Theoretical Framework , 2006 .

[38]  Jan H. van Driel,et al.  Teachers' Knowledge of Models and Modelling in Science. , 1999 .

[39]  Richard K. Coll,et al.  The Role of Models, Mental Models and Analogies in Chemistry Teaching , 2006 .

[40]  Ngss Lead States Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

[41]  A. Frey,et al.  Sind Modelle der Item-Response-Theorie (IRT) das „Mittel der Wahl“ für die Modellierung von Kompetenzen? , 2013 .

[42]  B. Reiser,et al.  Models: Challenges in Defining a Learning Progression for Scientific Modeling , 2012 .

[43]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[44]  Carol L. Smith,et al.  Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts , 1991 .

[45]  L. E. Hicks,et al.  Some properties of ipsative, normative, and forced-choice normative measures. , 1970 .

[46]  Italo Testa,et al.  Improving Prospective Teachers’ Knowledge about Scientific Models and Modelling: Design and evaluation of a teacher education intervention , 2010 .

[47]  Rosária Justi,et al.  Teachers' views on the nature of models , 2003 .

[48]  Barbara C. Buckley,et al.  Examining the Relationship Between Students’ Understanding of the Nature of Models and Conceptual Learning in Biology, Physics, and Chemistry , 2011 .

[49]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Contextualization in Perspective , 2009 .

[50]  Minsu Ha,et al.  Item Feature Effects in Evolution Assessment. , 2011 .

[51]  G. Masters A rasch model for partial credit scoring , 1982 .

[52]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Students' Understanding of the Descriptive and Predictive Nature of Teaching Models in Organic Chemistry , 2004 .

[53]  E. Corte,et al.  Epistemic dimensions of students’ mathematics-related belief systems , 2006 .

[54]  Peter Aubusson,et al.  Metaphor and Analogy in Science Education , 2006 .

[55]  Sukjin Kang,et al.  Examining students' views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders , 2005 .

[56]  D. Krüger,et al.  Students’ understanding of the purpose of models in different biological contexts. , 2013 .

[57]  Michael E. Martinez A Comparison of Multiple‐Choice and Constructed Figural Response Items , 1991 .

[58]  R. M. Smith,et al.  Fit analysis in latent trait measurement models. , 2000, Journal of applied measurement.

[59]  F. Abd‐El‐Khalick Nature of Science in Science Education: Toward a Coherent Framework for Synergistic Research and Development , 2012 .

[60]  Norman G. Lederman Nature of Science: Past, Present, and Future , 2013 .

[61]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  Handbook of Research on Science Education , 2023 .

[62]  Michael E. Martinez Cognition and the question of test item format , 1999 .

[63]  Raymond J. Adams,et al.  Reliability as a Measurement Design Effect. , 2005 .

[64]  Amy Pallant,et al.  Fostering Students' Epistemologies of Models via Authentic Model-Based Tasks , 2004 .

[65]  Hans Döbert,et al.  The education systems of Europe , 2007 .

[66]  Rosária Justi,et al.  Science teachers' knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modelling in learning science , 2002 .

[67]  Eric D. Heggestad,et al.  A Silk Purse From the Sow's Ear: Retrieving Normative Information From Multidimensional Forced-Choice Items , 2005 .

[68]  Miri Barak,et al.  Integrating Model-Based Learning and Animations for Enhancing Students’ Understanding of Proteins Structure and Function , 2013 .

[69]  David F. Treagust,et al.  A typology of school science models , 2000 .

[70]  Zacharias C. Zacharia,et al.  Modeling-based learning in science education: cognitive, metacognitive, social, material and epistemological contributions , 2012 .

[71]  Bernd Mahr,et al.  Information science and the logic of models , 2009, Software & Systems Modeling.

[72]  Elwin R. Savelsbergh,et al.  The Relation between Students’ Epistemological Understanding of Computer Models and their Cognitive Processing on a Modelling Task , 2009 .

[73]  Ineke Henze,et al.  Development of Experienced Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Models of the Solar System and the Universe , 2008, Science Teachers’ Knowledge Development.

[74]  J. Gilbert,et al.  Investigating Teachers’ Ideas about Models and Modelling — Some Issues of Authenticity , 2005 .

[75]  B. Reiser,et al.  Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners , 2009 .

[76]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Students' understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science , 2002 .

[77]  M. S. Topçu PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEFS IN PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, AND BIOLOGY: A MIXED STUDY , 2013 .

[78]  Amelia Wenk Gotwals,et al.  Learning Progressions in Science , 2012 .

[79]  Relationships Between Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Scientific Modeling and the Nature of Science , 2011 .

[80]  Derek Hodson,et al.  In search of a meaningful relationship: an exploration of some issues relating to integration in science and science education , 1992 .

[81]  R. Driver,et al.  Young people's images of science , 1996 .

[82]  J. Gilbert On the Nature of “Context” in Chemical Education , 2006 .

[83]  James G. Greeno,et al.  A Theory Bite on Contextualizing, Framing, and Positioning: A Companion to Son and Goldstone , 2009 .

[84]  Hagop A. Yacoubian,et al.  The effect of reflective discussions following inquiry‐based laboratory activities on students' views of nature of science , 2010 .

[85]  G. Masters The Partial Credit Model , 2016 .

[86]  Gary Charness,et al.  Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization , 2022 .

[87]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Students’ perceptions of the role of models in the process of science and in the process of learning , 2005 .

[88]  M. Black Models and metaphors : studies in language and philosophy , 1962 .

[89]  Myint Swe Khine,et al.  Models and modeling : cognitive tools for scientific enquiry , 2011 .

[90]  William F. McComas,et al.  The Nature of Science in Science Education , 2002 .