Both
articles included scientific inquiry for scientific knowledge. Also, both
articles stressed using evidence to draw conclusions. Students should explain
and argue scientific content to build knowledge including vocabulary and
theories and also address misconceptions. Reiser says explanations should
describe concepts with detail and should include observations that the students
have made. These experiences of sharing and talking about science whether
between peers or peers and instructor, help to construct a shared science knowledge
between peers. Sampson and Gleim used this approach in their Argument-Driven
Inquiry strategy. This strategy should be applied throughout science teaching,
especially as students are in engaging in scientific practices. The ADI
approach has some similarities to the eight science practices laid out by the
Next Gen Science Standards. Both involve identifying a task or problem by
asking questions, the use of models or experiments to develop a theory or
argument, then explain the argument to peers or instructors and revise. Reiser
also talks about scaffolding computational use in the classroom. This should be
used so that students can develop a use for computational models and gain the
most from them. Throughout our class, we have discussed how to include things
students want to learn about in our curriculum. When students are interested in the things they study in class,
it will give ownership to the inquiry practices that will be offered. The importance of students' ideas and interests also has value in classroom ecology as well as scientific inquiry.
How
difficult would it be to construct a NetLogo model fro scratch? I cannot
remember if this has been discussed in class or not yet. When reading about
inquiry in the science classroom this week, I thought about what concepts do
not have a model in the library and how difficult would it be for my students
to try to develop a model from scratch. It would be disappointing to students
who showed a high level of interest in a particular concept but then did not
have a model available to learn more about the concept. I think that if I devoted
some time to NetLogo I could write a program (using some other models for help)
but how difficult would this be for high school students? And would students be
willing to put in the time to learn about a program so that they may learn
about one particular concept?
Yeah I think you're on to the right idea with how to deal with models with no existing analogy in the models library. In computer science classes what they do often is to give you a partially written program with some of the bones and then the students have to flesh it out, and they have to really understand the existing structure to fill in the rest. You could do that with new models.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete