Using a Drawing, Animation, and Simulation Sequence to Scaffold Student Production of Scientific Models

• In Event: 32.029 - Supporting Science as a Modeling Practice in the Classroom Through the Lens of Next Generation Science Standards

Abstract

Objectives. Modeling is inextricably linked to the representational tools through which models are expressed. We are exploring whether having learners express, revise, and re-express scientific models across representational forms can scaffold modeling practice, supporting more mechanistic and predictive models. In a laboratory study, we found as learners constructed models of diffusion using drawing, animation, and simulation, their models and discourse became more explanatory and mechanistic. Here, we investigate the intervention in a classroom context. Our driving questions are: To what extent did students’ models progress in articulation of mechanism and predictive power across drawing, animation, and simulation? What factors influenced students’ progress, or lack of progress, in creating scientific models?
Framework. We aim for “progressive symbolization” of models whereby students work toward abstract, general model forms (Enyedy, 2005; Lehrer & Schuable, 2002). Different representational media emphasize different aspects of models, and support different modeling practices (Collins & Ferguson, 1993). Our conjecture is that working across media may provide opportunities for learners to construct more robust understandings of scientific systems (Frederikson & White, 2002), and more easily transition to disciplinary representational forms (Nemirovsky, 1996). Specifically, we expect drawing to support attention to objects and descriptions of a scientific system, animation to processes and explanation, and simulation to interactions and predictions.
Data. During a two-week 5th grade science unit at a diverse public K-8 school, students created models of evaporation and condensation in groups of 2 or 3. We captured video, screen activity, and written work from 10 consented student groups. These data were coded for evidence of mechanistic reasoning (Russ et al, 2008), modeling practices (Schwarz et al., 2009), and ideas about evaporation and condensation. Time series tables were generated to explore patterns in these codes over the course the curricular unit (Figure 1). We used these tables to identify periods of progress, stagnation, or regress in the mechanistic and predictive aspects of groups’ modeling discourse, which we then analyze further using a grounded thematic approach (Aronson, 1995).
Results. While most (8 out of 10) groups exhibited clear shifts toward mechanistic and explanatory models during the course of the activity, some did not and others did so only marginally. Our analyses revealed three key factors influencing the degree to which students’ models and model-related discourse or did not progress in explanatory and mechanistic focus: (1) Use of animation to show processes versus scenes; (2) Classroom-wide consensus regarding use of certain representational conventions; and (3) Use of anchoring objects to focus learner and facilitator discourse, and allow conventions and model progress to persist across group and task.
Significance. This study examines drawing, animation, and simulation as a representational trajectory to scaffold students’ production of explanatory, mechanistic scientific models. It uncovers social and material supports useful in helping learners navigate this trajectory. While the sequence we explore includes computational simulation, this is not our only or ultimate goal. Instead, these findings may highlight general strategies for designing trajectories that can help focus and scaffold student scientific models toward more powerful and generative forms.

Author

• Michelle Hoda Wilkerson, University of California - Berkeley