Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Competence-Oriented Approach to Models and Modelling in Lower Secondary Science Education: Practices and Rationales Among Danish Teachers

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new science curriculum, with a significant emphasis on modelling, was recently adopted in Danish lower secondary education. The theoretical intentions behind the new curriculum include substantial changes to how teachers should address models and modelling in their practice. The purpose of this study is to analyse the alignment between the intentions and arguments for integrating models and modelling into science education, on the one hand, and teachers’ practices and rationales for integrating models and modelling into their teaching practice, on the other. First, this study outlines a theoretical competence-oriented modelling framework. This framework describes what kind of knowledge and practice of models and modelling needs to be integrated into teaching to accomplish a competence-oriented approach in this regard. Second, against the background of this framework, we conducted an empirical study of three teacher-teams’ talk about modelling and their practice of integrating models and modelling in their teaching. Our findings suggest that the participating teachers’ practices and rationales for integrating models and modelling into their teaching are characterised by a product-oriented approach that is not well aligned with competence-oriented teaching. Finally, we provide ideas for improving the alignment between theoretical intentions and teachers’ practice, targeted at science educators and curriculum designers.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adriansen, H. (2012). Timeline interviews: a tool for conducting life history research. Qualitative Studies, 3(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v3i1.6272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ananiadou, K., and Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. In OECD education working papers, No. 4. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baek, H., and Schwarz, C. V. (2015). The influence of curriculum, instruction, technology, and social interactions on two fifth-grade students’ epistemologies in modeling throughout a model-based curriculum unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2–3), 216–233. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9532-6, 233.

  • Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., and Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch, H., Elf, N. F., and Horst, S. (2004). Fremtidens uddannelser: Den ny faglighed og dens forudsætninger (Future education: a new approach to content-knowledge and its prerequisites). Copenhagen, Denmark, Undervisningsministeriet. [In Danish].

  • Campbell, T., and Oh, P. S. (2015). Engaging students in modeling as an epistemic practice of science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2–3), 125–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, T., Oh, P. S., Maughn, M., Kiriazis, N., and Zuwallack, R. (2015). A review of modeling pedagogies: pedagogical functions, discursive acts, and technology in modeling instruction. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1314a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A., and Cullin, M. J. (2004). Supporting prospective teachers’ conceptions of modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1379–1401. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690410001673775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crujeiras, B., and Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2013). Challenges in the implementation of a competency-based curriculum in Spain. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullin, M., and Crawford, B. A. (2002). Using technology to support prospective science teachers in learning and teaching about scientific models. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 2(4), 408–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Evaluation Institute (2011). Evaluering af MetodeLab (Assessment of MetodeLAB). Copenhagen: Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut. [In Danish].

  • Dolin, J., Nielsen, J. A., and Tidemand, S. (2017). Evaluering af naturfaglige kompetencer (Assessment of scientific competences). Acta Didactica Norge - nasjonalt tidsskrift for fagdidaktisk forsknings- og utviklingsarbeid, 11(3), 1-28. [In Danish]. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.4702.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., and Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education. Switzerland: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gouvea, J., and Passmore, C. (2017). ‘Models of’ versus ‘models for’: toward an agent-based conception of modeling in the science classroom. Science and Education, 26(1–2), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9884-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., and Rogan-Klyve, A. (2018). Talking modelling: examining secondary science teachers’ modelling-related talk during a model-based inquiry unit. International Journal of Science Education, 40(11), 1345–1366. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1479547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grünkorn, J., zu Belzen, A. U., and Krüger, D. (2014). Assessing students’ understandings of biological models and their use in science to evaluate a theoretical framework. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1651–1684. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.873155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Günther, S. L., Fleige, J., zu Belzen, A. U., and Krüger, D. (2019). Using the case method to foster preservice biology teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge related to models and modeling. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30(4), 321–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1560208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2014). Learning science, learning about science, doing science: different goals demand different learning methods. International Journal of Science Education, 36(15), 2534–2553. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., and Doyle, W. (2014). The practical turn in teacher education: designing a preparation sequence for core practice frames. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(3), 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113518584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R. S., and Gilbert, J. K. (2002a). Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110110142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R. S., and Gilbert, J. K. (2002b). Science teachers’ knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modelling in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(12), 1273–1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210163198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R., and Gilbert, J. (2003). Teachers’ views on the nature of models. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1369–1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R., and van Driel, J. (2005). The development of science teachers’ knowledge on models and modelling: promoting, characterizing, and understanding the process. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 549–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenyon, L., Davis, E., and Hug, B. (2011). Design approaches to support pre-service teachers in scientific modeling. Journal of Science Teaching Education, 22, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, S. (2011). What’s missing in model-based teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(6), 535–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kind, P., and Osborne, J. (2017). Styles of scientific reasoning: a cultural rationale for science education? Science Education, 101(1), 8–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krell, M., and Krüger, D. (2016). Testing models: a key aspect to promote teaching activities related to models and modelling in biology lessons? Journal of Biological Education, 50(2), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2015.1028570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, D., Krell, M., and Upmeier zu Belzen, A. (2017). Competence–based view on models and modelling. Proceeding from Science Education Research Association (ESERA), 21.–25.08.2017, Dublin, Ireland.

  • Kvale, S. (2006). Interview. Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., and Schauble, L. (2015). The development of scientific thinking. In: R.M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science, 2(7), Cognitive Processes. New Jersey, USA: Wiley, pp. 671–714.

  • Miller, A. R., and Kastens, K. A. (2018). Investigating the impacts of targeted professional development around models and modeling on teachers’ instructional practice and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(5), 641–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (2009). Fælles Mål, Biologi (Common Objectives Biology). Retrieved from: https://uvm.dk/folkeskolen/fag-timetal-og-overgange/faelles-maal/historisk/historiske-faelles-maal-2009. [In Danish].

  • Ministry of Education (2014a). Folkeskoleloven (The Education Act). LBK nr. 665 af 20/06/2014. Retrieved from: https://www.retsinformation.dk/forms/r0710.aspx?id=176327.[In Danish].

  • Ministry of Education (2014b). Fælles Mål, Biologi (Common Objectives Biology). Retrieved from: www.emu.dk/omraade/gsk-l%C3%A6rer/ffm/biologi. [In Danish].

  • Ministry of Education (2015). Bekendtgørelse om uddannelsen til professionsbachelor som lærer i folkeskolen (Executive order on the schoolteacher’s Bachelor’s degree). BEK nr 1068 af 08/09/2015. Retrieved from: https://www.retsinformation.dk/forms/r0710.aspx?id=174218. [In Danish].

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core Ideas. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/13165.

  • Nicolaou, C. T., and Constantinou, C. P. (2014). Assessment of the modeling competence: a systematic review and synthesis of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 13, 52–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J.A., and Dolin, J. (2016). Evaluering mellem mestring og præstation (Assessment between competence and performance). MONA, 1, 51-62. [In Danish].

  • Nielsen, J. A., Dolin, J., and Tidemand, S. (2018). Transforming assessment research: recommendations for future research. In: J. Dolin, and R. Evans (Ed.), Transforming Assessment: Through an Interplay Between Practice, Research and Policy. Springer, Cham. Contributions from Science Education Research, 4, 279-290. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_11.

  • Nielsen, S. S. (2018). Prospects and challenges in teachers’ adoption of a new modeling orientated science curriculum in lower secondary school in Denmark. ESERA Conference Proceedings Series, 1333-1344.

  • Nielsen, S.S. (2015). Fælles Mål og modelleringskompetence i biologiundervisningen – forenkling nødvendiggør fortolkning (The common curriculum goals and modelling competence in biology teaching - simplification calls for interpretation). MONA, 4, 25–43. [In Danish].

  • Nielsen, S. S., and Gottschau, J. (2005). Cross-disciplinary consumer citizenship education. In: D. Doyle (Ed.). Consumer citizenship: promoting new responses: Taking responsibility,1, 114-125. Consumer Citizenship Network.

  • OECD (2017). PISA 2015 Assessment and analytical framework: science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving. Revised edition. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  • Oh, P. S., and Oh, S. J. (2011). What teachers of science need to know about models: an overview. International Journal of Science Education, 33(8), 1109–1130. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.502191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., and Collins, K. M. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The qualitative report, 12(2), 281–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papaevripidou, M., Nicolaou, C. T., and Constantinou, C. P. (2014). On defining and assessing learners’ modeling competence in science teaching and learning. Philadelphia: Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association (AERA).

  • Passmore, C., Stewart, J., and Cartier, J. (2009). Model–based inquiry and school science: creating connections. School Science and Mathematics, 109(7), 394–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.tb17870.x.

  • Passmore, C., Gouvea, J. S., and Giere, R. (2014). Models in science and in learning science: focusing scientific practice on sense–making. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1171–1202). London: Springer.

  • Rönnebeck, S., Nielsen, J.A., Olley, C., Ropohl, M., and Stables, K. (2018) The teaching and assessment of inquiry competences. In: Dolin J., and Evans R. (Ed.). Transforming Assessment. Contributions from Science Education Research, 4, 27-52. Springer, Cham.

  • Rasmussen, J. (2013). Competence goal-driven education in school and teacher education. Keynote lecture from International Conference on Learning and Teaching 2013: Transforming learning and teaching to meet the challenges of 21st Century education. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_2abasen.dk/catalog/2185787908.

  • Ropohl, M., Nielsen, J.A., Olley, C., Rönnebeck, S. and, Stables, K. (2018) The concept of competence and its relevance for science, technology and mathematics education. In: Dolin J., Evans R. (Ed.). Transforming Assessment. Contributions from Science Education Research, 4, 3-25. Springer, Cham. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_1. 

  • Schwarz, C. V., and Gwekwerere, Y. N. (2007). Using a guided inquiry and modeling instructional framework (EIMA) to support preservice K-8 science teaching. Science Education, 91(1), 158–186.

  • Schwarz, C. V., and White, B. Y. (2005). Metamodeling knowledge: developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165–205. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2302_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., Schwartz, Y., Hug, B., and Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sølberg, J., Bundsgaard, J., and Højgaard, T. (2015). Kompetencemål i praksis – hvad har vi lært af KOMPIS? (Competence goals in practice – what have we learned by KOMPIS?). MONA, 2015(2), 46–59. [In Danish].

  • Svoboda, J., and Passmore, C. (2013). The strategies of modeling in biology education. Science and Education, 22(1), 119–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9425-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valk, T., Driel, J. H., and Vos, W. (2007). Common characteristics of models in present–day scientific practice. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 469–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9036-3.

  • Van Driel, J. H., and Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141–1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., and 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vo, T., Forbes, C. T., Zangori, L., and Schwarz, C. V. (2015). Fostering third–grade students’ use of scientific models with the water cycle: elementary teachers’ conceptions and practices. International Journal of Science Education, 37(15), 2411–2432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1080880.

  • Windschitl, M., and Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: the impact of preservice instruction on teachers’ understandings of model–based inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783–835. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043004783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., and Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92(5), 941–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors want to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the article. We also thank the participating teachers for allowing us to study their practices and rationales.

Funding

The study is a part of the project “Facilitating Students’ Learning from Inquiry and Practical Activities in Biology through Formative Assessments” funded by the Danish Ph.D.-Council for Educational Research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University College Copenhagen, Humletorvet 3, 1799, Copenhagen V, Denmark

    Sanne Schnell Nielsen

  2. Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 3, 1350, Copenhagen K, Denmark

    Jan Alexis Nielsen

Authors
  1. Sanne Schnell Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Alexis Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanne Schnell Nielsen.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix. Examples of statements used to facilitate teachers’ reflections on why and how to integrate models and modelling into their current and forthcoming teaching

Appendix. Examples of statements used to facilitate teachers’ reflections on why and how to integrate models and modelling into their current and forthcoming teaching

• Students use models to explain a certain phenomenon.

• Students use models as a tool for hypothesis generation.

• Students choose between multiple models to solve a task or problem.

• Students compare multiple models concerning the same phenomenon.

• Students compare models with the phenomenon it represents.

• Students use models for predicting how a certain phenomenon could develop (e.g. over time or in a different context).

• Students create their own models.

• Students create models based on their own inquiries.

• Students revise their own or others’ models.

• Students reflect on why models are not fixed.

• Students evaluate the limitations and scope of certain models related to purpose.

• Students reflect on the value of models related to their own learning.

• Students reflect on when it makes sense to create a model.

• Use of models offers prospects for improving science education.

• Models can facilitate students’ abilities to work scientifically.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nielsen, S.S., Nielsen, J.A. A Competence-Oriented Approach to Models and Modelling in Lower Secondary Science Education: Practices and Rationales Among Danish Teachers. Res Sci Educ 51 (Suppl 2), 565–593 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09900-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09900-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation