Right but wrong: How students' mechanistic reasoning and conceptual understandings shift when designing agent‐based models using data

IF 3.1 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Science & Education Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1002/sce.21890
Tamar Fuhrmann, Leah Rosenbaum, Aditi Wagh, Adelmo Eloy, Jacob Wolf, Paulo Blikstein, Michelle Wilkerson
{"title":"Right but wrong: How students' mechanistic reasoning and conceptual understandings shift when designing agent‐based models using data","authors":"Tamar Fuhrmann, Leah Rosenbaum, Aditi Wagh, Adelmo Eloy, Jacob Wolf, Paulo Blikstein, Michelle Wilkerson","doi":"10.1002/sce.21890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When learning about scientific phenomena, students are expected to <jats:italic>mechanistically</jats:italic> explain how underlying interactions produce the observable phenomenon and <jats:italic>conceptually</jats:italic> connect the observed phenomenon to canonical scientific knowledge. This paper investigates how the integration of the complementary processes of designing and refining computational models using real‐world data can support students in developing mechanistic and canonically accurate explanations of diffusion. Specifically, we examine two types of shifts in how students explain diffusion as they create and refine computational models using real‐world data: a shift towards mechanistic reasoning and a shift from noncanonical to canonical explanations. We present descriptive statistics for the whole class as well as three student work examples to illustrate these two shifts as 6th grade students engage in an 8‐day unit on the diffusion of ink in hot and cold water. Our findings show that (1) students develop mechanistic explanations as they build agent‐based models, (2) students' mechanistic reasoning can co‐exist with noncanonical explanations, and (3) students shift their thinking toward canonical explanations after comparing their models against data. These findings could inform the design of modeling tools that support learners in both expressing a diverse range of mechanistic explanations of scientific phenomena and aligning those explanations with canonical science.","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21890","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When learning about scientific phenomena, students are expected to mechanistically explain how underlying interactions produce the observable phenomenon and conceptually connect the observed phenomenon to canonical scientific knowledge. This paper investigates how the integration of the complementary processes of designing and refining computational models using real‐world data can support students in developing mechanistic and canonically accurate explanations of diffusion. Specifically, we examine two types of shifts in how students explain diffusion as they create and refine computational models using real‐world data: a shift towards mechanistic reasoning and a shift from noncanonical to canonical explanations. We present descriptive statistics for the whole class as well as three student work examples to illustrate these two shifts as 6th grade students engage in an 8‐day unit on the diffusion of ink in hot and cold water. Our findings show that (1) students develop mechanistic explanations as they build agent‐based models, (2) students' mechanistic reasoning can co‐exist with noncanonical explanations, and (3) students shift their thinking toward canonical explanations after comparing their models against data. These findings could inform the design of modeling tools that support learners in both expressing a diverse range of mechanistic explanations of scientific phenomena and aligning those explanations with canonical science.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
正确但又错误:在利用数据设计基于代理的模型时,学生的机械推理和概念理解如何转变
在学习科学现象时,学生需要从机理上解释潜在的相互作用如何产生可观察到的现象,并从概念上将观察到的现象与经典科学知识联系起来。本文研究了利用真实世界的数据设计和完善计算模型这两个互补过程的整合如何能够帮助学生对扩散现象做出机理上和理论上准确的解释。具体来说,我们研究了学生在利用真实世界数据创建和完善计算模型时解释扩散的两种转变:向机理推理的转变和从非经典解释向经典解释的转变。我们展示了全班学生的描述性统计数据以及三个学生的作业示例,以说明六年级学生在为期 8 天的 "墨水在热水和冷水中的扩散 "单元中发生的这两种转变。我们的研究结果表明:(1) 学生在建立基于代理的模型的过程中形成了机理解释;(2) 学生的机理推理可以与非规范解释并存;(3) 学生在将他们的模型与数据进行比较后,他们的思维会转向规范解释。这些发现可以为建模工具的设计提供参考,这些工具既能支持学习者表达对科学现象的各种机理解释,又能使这些解释与经典科学相一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science & Education
Science & Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Science Education publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. In addition to original articles, the journal features the following special sections: -Learning : consisting of theoretical and empirical research studies on learning of science. We invite manuscripts that investigate learning and its change and growth from various lenses, including psychological, social, cognitive, sociohistorical, and affective. Studies examining the relationship of learning to teaching, the science knowledge and practices, the learners themselves, and the contexts (social, political, physical, ideological, institutional, epistemological, and cultural) are similarly welcome. -Issues and Trends : consisting primarily of analytical, interpretive, or persuasive essays on current educational, social, or philosophical issues and trends relevant to the teaching of science. This special section particularly seeks to promote informed dialogues about current issues in science education, and carefully reasoned papers representing disparate viewpoints are welcomed. Manuscripts submitted for this section may be in the form of a position paper, a polemical piece, or a creative commentary. -Science Learning in Everyday Life : consisting of analytical, interpretative, or philosophical papers regarding learning science outside of the formal classroom. Papers should investigate experiences in settings such as community, home, the Internet, after school settings, museums, and other opportunities that develop science interest, knowledge or practices across the life span. Attention to issues and factors relating to equity in science learning are especially encouraged.. -Science Teacher Education [...]
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Sustainability as Living Architecture Designing and leading justice‐centered informal STEM education: A framework for core equitable practices Reflection time and valuing science: Elementary teachers' science subject matter knowledge development during teaching experience Exploring how museums can support science teacher leaders as boundary spanners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1