2/9 David Bergsmith Levels

            Both Wilensky articles this week used examples found in research to show how modeling can be used to develop understanding of science on small scales to further understanding on broad views. This speaks directly to Wilensky’s view of ‘levels’ and how to effectively develop knowledge at a simpler point so that students may have a better chance at comprehending and exploring topics at a higher level. Research in both articles used examples of students and how they created models to represent scientific phenomena. Students engaging in this practice developed questions and challenged their own reasoning. They were asked to hypothesize and revise their models at least once; creating a better understanding of the process they were asked to model.

Wilensky gave many different examples at how asking students to create models may develop their understanding of a process. Students created initial lines of code to begin a model and hypothesized what would happen. In all the examples, students were then asked to revise their models after they made observations that were not expected. This type of reasoning cannot only be used in computational models, but in all practices of science and engineering. On page 172 of the “Thinking like a Wolf,” article, Wilensky speaks about how science as trended to a prescribed procedure rather than reasoning from gathered evidence. In the articles, the students developed an understanding of the material not from following a set of rules, but rather engaging in observation and investigation.

The models that the students used also had characteristics of the practices from the NGSS. Specifically, I noticed the students asking questions and defining problems in their models. While the initial rules that students created for their models were good, after the first trial students became curious as to why the model did not run completely as expected. Students defined specifically what they were curious about so that they could change the code and the outcome of the model. Some students were asked to analyze and interpret data for their models. These are some of the specific practices from NGSS.

            After reading these two articles, I began to wonder how computational literate the students from Wilensky’s research were. Specifically, questions such as what training had these students had, was this training formal or informal and if it were formal was it an elective course or required, or even at school at all? On page 17 of the “Thinking in Levels,” article, Wilensky says that model use should be used in a pluralistic approach so that strengths and weaknesses are adhered to. What approaches could be used to help students who are alienated by traditional classroom mathematics? Models could scaffold knowledge of algebra, but also be uninteresting to a student feeling academically inadequate. What strategies could be used so that students who are uninviting to a program that uses formulas and variables so that they are interested and develop an understanding of tools such as algebra and concepts such as predator-prey relationships?