Scientific Understandings Revealed by Students’ Computer Models of a Stream: A Trickle or a Flood?

Analysis of student constructed computer models is important in order to determine their overall educational value, identify general misconceptions or gaps in both conceptual and epistemological understandings at the classroom level, and assess students’ individual achievement levels. This study examines a set of such models constructed during a high school investigation of a local creek. Affordances for the demonstration of conceptual, epistemological and strategic understandings were identified before searching for these understandings in the models. The computer models as a set represent a substantial portion (70%) of the scientific content in the creek project. Ecological content was most strongly represented in the models and most students were able to model causal linkages between biology, earth science, physical science and/or environmental science phenomena. The models potentially represent a much smaller proportion of the epistemological and strategic content of the project. However, these understandings were more tightly scaffolded by the task, so most of the models showed evidence of these types of understandings. Analysis of the content in the models provides evidence of the veracity of students’ understandings. Students demonstrated more understandings around specific content than they did about the strategic or epistemological understandings of modeling.

[1]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Using Technology to Support Students’ Artefact Construction in Science , 1998 .

[2]  B. White ThinkerTools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education , 1993 .

[3]  John Richards,et al.  Computer simulations in the science classroom , 1992 .

[4]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments , 1996, CHI.

[5]  Michele Wisnudel Spitulnik Construction of technological artifacts and teaching strategies to promote flexible scientific understanding , 1998 .

[6]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in A Digital World , 1996 .

[7]  W. Stapp,et al.  Field Manual for Water Quality Monitoring: An Environmental Education Program for Schools , 1996 .

[8]  A. Collins,et al.  Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning , 1989 .

[9]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  New Paradigms for Computing, New Paradigms for Thinking , 1995 .

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

[11]  Harvey Mellar,et al.  Educational tools for computational modelling , 1993 .

[12]  David N. Perkins,et al.  Educating for Insight. , 1991 .

[13]  G. W. Ford,et al.  The structure of knowledge and the curriculum , 1964 .

[14]  F R Moulton,et al.  The American Association for the Advancement of Science: A Brief Historical Sketch. , 1948, Science.

[15]  David N. Perkins,et al.  Software Goes to School: Teaching for Understanding with New Technologies. , 1997 .

[16]  P. Hewson,et al.  Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change , 1982 .

[17]  J. Shea National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[18]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Secondary Students' Dynamic Modeling Processes: Analyzing, Reasoning About, Synthesizing, and Testing Models of Stream Ecosystems , 1997 .

[19]  J. Lagowski National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[20]  Gene V. Glass,et al.  Research and Evaluation in Education and the Social Sciences , 1986 .

[21]  David N. Perkins,et al.  Patterns of Misunderstanding: An Integrative Model for Science, Math, and Programming , 1988 .

[22]  Thomas W. Shiland Probing for Understanding. , 2002 .

[23]  Jere E. Brophy,et al.  Advances in research on teaching : a research annual , 1989 .

[24]  Ellen B. Mandinach,et al.  Model-Building and the Use of Computer Simulation of Dynamic Systems , 1989 .

[25]  Edgar W. Jenkins,et al.  Benchmarks for Science Literacy: a review symposium∗ , 1995 .