Abstract
The authors are concerned with identifying and developing preservice teachers’ understandings and use of scientific models related to the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Empirical research suggests that teachers possess uninformed and/or alternative views of aspects of scientific work, in particular of the role of models and modelling in science. In this study we focus on a particular kind of scientific model: models based on mathematical equations and depicting multiple processes. Participants included graduate students and advanced undergraduates in a teacher preparation program for biology, earth and space science, physics, and chemistry in a large university in the U.S.A. The purpose of this paper is to present several assessments used to track our preservice teachers’ understandings, as they engaged in building computer models of pond ecosystems. These assessments, developed for research purposes, include 1) an open-ended questionnaire; 2) a semi-structured interview protocol used in combination with the computer models constructed by preservice teachers, and 3) a process map to track pair conversations and activities. We consider these as dynamic assessments, designed for use with the non-static work of teachers learning to build and test computer models of natural phenomena. Strengths and limitations of these assessments are discussed.
Keywords
- Preservice Teacher
- Science Teacher
- Prospective Teacher
- Modelling Task
- Teacher Preparation Program
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989 & 1993). Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Crawford, B. A. & Cullin, M. J. (2002, April 7 2–10). Engaging preservice science teachers in building, testing, and teaching about models. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
Cullin, M. & Crawford, B. A. (2003). Using technology to support preservice science teachers in learning and teaching about scientific models. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 2(4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss4/science/article1.cfm
De Jong, O. & Van Driel, J. H.. (2001). Developing pre-service teachers’ content knowledge and PCK of models and modelling. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting, St. Louis, MO.
Gilbert, J. K. (1993). Models and Modelling in Science Education. Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education.
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.
Harrison, A. G. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1011–1026.
Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D.F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atom and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80, 509–534.
Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: toward a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education (22), 85–142.
Jackson, S. L., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective. In M. J. Jacobson and R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education: Advanced Designs for Technologies of Learning. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Jungck, J. & Calley, J. (1985). Strategic simulations and post-socratic pedagogy: Constructing computer software to develop long-term inference through experimental inquiry. American Biology Teacher, 47, 11–15.
Justi, R. S. & Gilbert, J. K. (2001). Teachers’ views on models and modelling in science education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MI.
Justi, R. S. & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Science teachers’ knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modelling in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1273–1292.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 94, 517–538.
Krajcik, J. S., Simmons, E. R. & Lunetta, V. N. (1988). A research strategy for the dynamic study of students’ conception and problem solving strategies using science software. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 147–155.
Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. The Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 341–358.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Reiser, B. (2002). Characterizing and evaluating software scaffolds for scientific inquiry. An interactive poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. April 1–5, 2002.
Schwarz, C. & White, B. (1998, April 13–17). Fostering middle school students’ understanding of scientific modelling. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P. & Pine, J. (1991). Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reliability. Educational Researcher, 21, 22–27.
Smit, J. J. & Finegold, M. (1995). Models in physics: Perceptions held by final-year preservice physical science teachers studying at South African Universities. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 621–634.
Stratford, S. (1996). Investigating processes and products of secondary science students using dynamic modelling software. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Michigan.
Van Driel, J. H. & Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141–1153.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scriber, & E Souberman, Eds. and trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wisnudel-Spitulnik, M., Kracjik, J. & Soloway, E. (1999). Construction of models to promote scientific understanding. In W. Feurzeig & N. Roberts (Eds.), Modelling and simulation in science and mathematics (pp. 70–94). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Crawford, B., Cullin, M. (2005). Dynamic Assessments of Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Models and Modelling. In: Boersma, K., Goedhart, M., de Jong, O., Eijkelhof, H. (eds) Research and the Quality of Science Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_25
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3672-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3673-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawHistory (R0)