Forums

Preparing for the Next Generation Science Standards?Developing and Using Models that took place on September 25, 2012.



This program has been re-recorded and the archive is now available at the website below. Please copy and paste this URL into your browser:

Developing and Using Models


You can also access the PowerPoint Presentation and add the program Collection to your Learning Center Library, giving you easy access to the archive and related resources?anytime from anywhere!



We encourage you to visit the website below to register for additional free Web Seminars. Please share this information with other science teachers you know:



Web Seminar Registration


If you have questions, please send an email to [email protected].



Please note: Allow up to two weeks for your certificate to appear in your My PD Record & Certificates area of the NSTA Learning Center.



See you online!



NSTA Web Seminars Team

Thank you. This was a fantastic session, I am thrilled that you were able to re-record it.

I wasn't able to "go live" so the recording was awesome. I did have a question/opinion though. Both Christina Schwarz and Cynthia Passmore were great - very clear and passionate about modeling. I did note that they didn't consider that using analogies and building 3-d models/replicas/representations as forms of scientific modeling. I understand from their perspective that some models are not as useful for predicting or explaining a natural system or phenomena, but aren't these valid forms of modeling that teachers can use effectively to help students improve their understanding and develop their mental (internal) models? These other forms of models can really help students, especially elementary students, grasp more concrete phenomena, as well as, in engineering process and design. If you look at the K-2 and 3-5 expectations for Developing and Using Models, some of these could only be using concrete ideas, which could be tested by building replicas etc. I'd be interested in hearing other peoples thoughts. Thanks, David David Harrison The Learning Institute Hot Springs, AR

David, I am so glad that you found the archive valuable. Yes Modeling Instruction primarily refers to conceptual models. However you are correct that concrete models are also often needed. Here are a few sources on Modeling Science Instruction http://modeling.asu.edu/modeling/ModInstrArticle_NSELAspr08.pdf This next site focuses on geoscience but the principles are the same http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/models/index.html http://cuip.uchicago.edu/~cac/nlu/tie512win10/articles/ThinkerTools%20Causal%20Models%20Conceptual%20Change%20and%20Science%20Education.pdf

Pamela, Thank you for the links to further information. I appreciate it. I think what would be most useful for teachers is help in what actions they could take to help students move from one "level" to another in their understanding and use of models. Ms. Schwarz and Ms. Passmore identified a "Level" table, during the webinar, to help assess where students are, but the actual strategies to help teachers move students to the next "level" is missing. I'm planning on having a go myself, but would welcome any advice / information from any one out there. David

Pamela thank you for the resources!

David, this is from the K-12 Framework which is the basis for the new standards p. 56:
'Used in science and engineering as either structural, functional, or behavioral analogs, albeit simplified, conceptual models include diagrams,physical replicas, mathematical representations, analogies, and computer simulations. Although they do not correspond exactly to the more complicated entity being modeled, they do bring certain features into focus while minimizing or obscuring others. Because all models contain approximations and assumptions that limit the range of validity of their application and the precision of their predictive power, it is important to recognize their limitations.'

I also see that in the goals section students should be able to 'construct drawings or diagrams as representations', and 'represent and explain phenomena with multiple types of models'. some of the examples are 'simple physical models of a real-world object', and'represent molecules with 3D models.'

This would seem to support your idea that 'analogies and building 3-d models/replicas/representations' WERE valuable types of modeling, particularly when a more concrete representation is necessary to understand an abstract concept and to build a better mental model.

Here is the link to the framework, if you don't have it already. This is a link to the free PDF if you'd like to read more. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13165
Wendy