Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS’ KNOWLEDGE OF MODEL FUNCTIONS AND MODELING PROCESSES: A COMPARISON OF SCIENCE AND NON-SCIENCE MAJORS

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to: (a) understand practicing teachers’ knowledge of model functions and modeling processes, (b) compare the similarities and differences between the knowledge of science and non-science major teachers, and (c) explore the possible reasons for the similarities and differences between the knowledge of these 2 groups. A 4-point Likert scale questionnaire was developed and used to measure the knowledge of 187 practicing elementary school teachers (94 science majors and 93 non-science majors) on model functions and modeling processes. The author selected 10 target teachers to conduct think-aloud interview and to explore their ranking. One month after completing the questionnaire, 28 volunteer teachers were selected for a follow-up interview to better understand the reasons for their responses. The results show that these teachers tend to agree or strongly agree with the items about model functions and modeling processes. The only significant difference between science and non-science majors was for the item “generating new ideas.” Qualitative analyses of the follow-up interviews and think-aloud results showed that teacher education and professional development did not focus on understanding and using models. Science-major teachers tended to formulate their responses with reference to specific models, while the non-science major teachers’ responses contained acquiescence bias. Finally, implications for science education are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cartier, J., Rudolph, J., & Stewart, J. (2001). The nature and structure of scientific models. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED461513)

  • Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J. & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by expert and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, M. H. (2008). The construction of theory about model and modeling. Science Education Monthly, 306, 2–9 [in Chinese].

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism. In G. Glover, R. Ronning & C. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity, assessment, theory and research. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. & Cullin, M. (2004). Supporting prospective teachers’ conceptions of modeling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1379–1401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francoeur, E. (1997). The forgotten tool: The design and use of molecular models. Social Studies of Science, 27, 7–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fretz, E. B., Wu, H.-K., Zhang, B., Krajcik, J. S., Davis, E. A. & Soloway, E. (2002). An investigation of software scaffolds supporting modeling practices. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 567–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (1993). Models and modeling in science education. Hatfield, England: Association for Science Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2004). Models and modeling: Routes to more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2008). Visualization: An emergent field of practice and enquiry in science education. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 3–24). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. & Rutherford, M. (1998). Models in explanations: Part 1, horses for courses? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn, S. M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science meaningfully: Constructing conceptual models. In S. M. Glynn & R. Duit (Eds.), Learning science in the schools (pp. 3–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E. & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halloun, I. (1996). Schematic modeling for meaningful learning of physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 1019–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, T. (1999). A hierarchy of model and electron microscopy. In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian & P. Thagard (Eds.), Models are used to represent reality (pp. 139–148). New York: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henze, I., van Driel, J. H. & Verloop, N. (2007). Science teachers’ knowledge about teaching models and modelling in the context of a new syllabus on public understanding of science. Research in Science Education, 37(2), 99–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes, D. (1995). Modeling software for learning and doing physics. In C. Bernardini, C. Tarsitani & M. Vincentini (Eds.), Thinking physics for teaching (pp. 25–66). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ingham, A. M. & Gilbert, J. K. (1991). The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. International Journal of Science Education, 13(2), 193–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. (2008). Model building for conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 676–693). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R. S. & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenyon, L., Schwarz, C. & Hug, B. (2008). The benefits of scientific modeling: Constructing, using, evaluating, and revising scientific models helps students advance their scientific ideas, learn to think critically, and understand the nature of science. Science and Children, 46(2), 40–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H. (1983). The role of problem representation in physics. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 75–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leatherdale, W. H. (1974). The role of analogy, model and metaphor in science. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, J. W. & Chiu, M. H. (2008). Exploring senior high school students’ knowledge about model and modeling process via the perspective of cognition/ methodology. Science Education Monthly, 307, 9–14. [In Chinese].

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, J. W. & Wu, Y. L. (2010). The development and test analysis of science model functions and modeling processes scale applied for elementary school teachers. Journal of Research and Psychology, 33(4), 23–51. [in Chinese].

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59, 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education in Taiwan (2003). White paper in science education. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.

  • National Research Council (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas (H. Quinn, H. A. Schweingruber, & T. Keller, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • Peng, W. H., Lin, L. F. & Chen, C. C. (2012). A study on developing exemplary science teachers’ professional development evaluation indicators and a weighting system for Taiwanese science teachers in elementary schools. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 25(2), 131–162 [in Chinese].

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, C. (2009). Developing preservice elementary teachers’ knowledge and practices through modeling-centered scientific inquiry. Science Education, 93(4), 720–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sison, R. & Shimura, M. (1998). Student modeling and machine learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 9, 128–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasi, J. (1988). Models and modeling in theoretical chemistry. Journal of Molecular Structure, 179, 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. & Mamiala, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valanides, C. & Angeli, N. (2008). Learning and teaching about scientific models with a computer-modeling tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 220–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Driel, J. H. & Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141–1154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Driel, J. H. & Verloop, N. (2002). Experienced teachers’ knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(12), 1255–1272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia (2013). PTT Bulletin Board System. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTT_Bulletin_Board_System

  • Wu, L. C., Cheng, P. Y., Tuan, H. L. & Guo, C. J. (2011). The background analysis of mathematics and science teachers in the junior high and elementary schools in Taiwan. Research and Development in Science Education Quarterly, 63, 69–98 [in Chinese].

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Dong-Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Jing-Wen Lin

Authors
  1. Jing-Wen Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jing-Wen Lin.

Appendix

Appendix

Items of the Four-Point Likert Scale Questionnaire of Model Functions and Modeling Processes

Please answer the following questions about a scientific model from your viewpoint:

Item

Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

1. I think model functions can be for describing specific objects or phenomena.

    

2. I think model functions can offer one picture of vision and show specific objects and phenomena.

    

3. I think model functions can be used for explaining the relations of specific objects or phenomena.

    

4. I think model functions can offer a standard reference for me to follow.

    

5. I think model functions can be used for reasoning.

    

6. I think model functions can be used for solving problems.

    

7. I think model functions can be used for communicating ideas.

    

8. I think model functions can be used for predicting the future development of objects or phenomena.

    

9. I think model functions can be used for simulating or executing the actual operation of phenomena.

    

10. I think model functions can be used for generating new ideas.

    

11. For the same object or phenomenon, I think I will select different models for different purposes.

    

12. I think that building a model should include the components and structure of objects or phenomena.

    

13. I think we could use different methods to examine models. However, I must revise models when descriptions or explanations produce inconsistent results.

    

14. I think I can refer to a generally accepted model as the standard to help me judge whether other types of problem solutions are appropriate.

    

15. I think I can look for inspiration for solving problems from the existing models when facing new problem situations.

    

16. I think a model can be used for solving a problem effectively, but it still has limitations in its applications and needs further consideration.

    

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lin, JW. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS’ KNOWLEDGE OF MODEL FUNCTIONS AND MODELING PROCESSES: A COMPARISON OF SCIENCE AND NON-SCIENCE MAJORS. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 12, 1197–1220 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9446-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9446-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation