This week’s readings greatly built
off of last week’s concepts of epistemic learning and modeling. While last week laid the general foundation
the skills students take away from this teaching design, this week’s readings
provide specific examples of modeling in the classroom in addition to responsibility
of teachers.
In his article, Jackson focused on the
concept of Modeling Instruction, a program where teachers and students form
theoretical models to foster learning both individually and
collaboratively. Specific implementation
techniques were discussed, including the two stages of model cycling: model
development and model deployment. Finally,
positive evidence-based outcomes of incorporating modeling instruction within
the classroom included an actively engaged student body, who are investigators
in the world around them, both learn and understand scientific concepts and can
back up these and their own claims with evidence.
The first Lehrer article, “What
Kind of Explanation is a Model?” also delved into the definition of modeling as
an indirect form of learning, where students create simplified models to help
further their understanding of the complex world, but also focused on the
complexities associated with this form of learning. Lehrer stated that because this inquiry-based
approach is not intuitively known to students, which is due to the previous
traditional instruction they have received, their lack of a “condition of
seeing,” and their failure to see a connection between inquiry and experiment,
teachers need to be highly prepared.
The second Lehrer article further
touches upon the concept of experimentation and the fallacies commonly associated
when not used correctly in the context of inquiry. According to Lehrer, students fail to see
experiments as “representations” of the real world and claims that through the
cycle of inquiry, investigation and revision is when experimentation ultimately
takes place. Supporting his first paper,
Lehrer continues to show that modeling is an on-going process that both takes
time to develop and gains in complexity.
Themes:
- · Modeling promotes epistemic learning: Students are active agents in the classroom, using the knowledge they gained both inside and out of the classroom to make their own and collaborative inquiries, claims, and revisions.
- · Teacher Preparation: Teachers need to be well prepared, including a strong knowledge in their content areas, to effectively educate using this teaching design. Additionally, teachers need to become “facilitators,” as Jackson termed it, in guided inquiry, not just “authoritative figures,” a topic touched upon in last weeks readings.
- · Experimentation is just one component of the epistemic approach. Current sciences, classes, especially laboratories, focus solely on cookie-cutter procedures that leave little to know room for self-investigation and revision, not fostering inquiry or modeling.
Firstly, I liked the Jackson
article and his discussion on assessment, especially formative
assessments. While I do believe that
this type of assessment goes hand-in-hand with the concept of modeling, I
really liked how the researchers gave specific examples of various formative
assessments that you could give to make sure the students understood the
material and were grasping the modeling skills being discovered in the
classroom but at the same time not overwhelming them with highly
critical-thinking assessments. However, I
is important to note that they are ideal teaching scenarios, where teachers and
students would have endless supports and resources. Secondly, while the Lehrer articles did
stress that grasping modeling takes time and grows in complexity along this
timeline, I myself felt overwhelmed from a student point of view with the
amount of work presented to elementary school students. Thus, while I believe that modeling is
critical for student growth, I think it should be a big part of a greater
teaching instruction that incorporates some traditional teaching instruction
within the framework. While I did like
these Lehrer articles much more it was hard to translate some of the concepts
and complexities to the high school level where many students already have
their system of “knowing” and learning and their highly engrained beliefs. Thus, what ratio of modeling to other
teaching instruction should you use in the high school classroom or how fast should
you move from traditional teaching to modeling?
I agree with you that Lehrer's studies on modeling in the classroom does not relate to secondary education very well. The students in elementary schools do not have as big of a kowledge base to fall back on when presented with a new problem. This allows them to follow the facilitation approach teachers can offer in the modeling method. Jackson's article on modeling instruction seems to be getting close to a good ratio in a secondary level. Teachers give disciplinary knowledge as the students need the information throughout an experiment looking at a more in depth concept. On the other hand, I feel that Lehrer's model is specific to teaching students scientific inquiry and not just disciplinary knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI also commented on how I thought that Lehrer's modeling was geared more towards elementary students. Modeling is used to intrigue students with scientific phenomena and get them to start thinking about a question to answer. Modeling is a really just a way to think or process of reasoning. The process is important to know, however, I do not think that every concept or every lesson needs to be modeled. There is a lot of information in biology that sometimes you just need to know and sometimes modeling isn't needed to understand a concept or idea. Modeling seems to be ideal for abstract concepts that are difficult to imagine and for intriguing students with scientific phenomena. I'm not sure, that it needs to be used everyday or a majority of the time because some concepts are easier than others and some students already are interested in science. The most important reason for the application of modeling is to introduce a different way to reason or think about scientific phenomena
ReplyDeleteI agree that there is no way to cover every standard by modeling, however, I think that it is a bit more than just a way of thinking. Often, helping students establish a very thorough understanding of what may seem like an easy topic will make the more difficult ones easier to teach - even if they are more difficult to model. Having a model for the topic being covered can serve as an anchor as you address later points.
ReplyDeleteThis also depends on what you intend to use to replace modeling. If one of our major goals in this new science curriculum is to have students learn by doing science, then constantly reverting back to lecture when you run out of time/resources for modeling will not meet that goal.