The BGuILE software discussed in
Reiser et al’s paper makes me swoon.
They have created a program that incorporates writing and explanations
within it, rather than a separate worksheet a teacher might create to go along
with the program, and it makes me really wish that NetLogo could have a similar
feature. I especially like that students
can copy statements directly from their data analysis as evidence support for
their explanations. Also the BGuILE
model follows the ADI instructional model discussed in Sampson and Gleim’s
article quite well.
I was
concerned about Reiser et al’s opening statement about needing science class to
be more rigorous, because we have read many other articles discussing the need
for covering topics in a depth versus breadth way. However they saved themselves with this gem, “these
design efforts should focus more on maximizing the breadth of conceptual and
material approaches, rather than on maximizing a breadth of content topics,”
and I think that is exactly how science teachers need to be teaching their
students. Students need the tools for
thinking about various scientific problems so that when they encounter
unfamiliar topics either on tests or in their college careers they will not be
struggling to reason and evaluate the new content. I think the scaffolding apparent in BGuILE
will help students to slow down in a way that they will not be able to (or want
to) get through the science program as quickly as they can. The ExplanationConstructor is especially
great for promoting scientific literary and scientific writing skills.
My Question is:
Is there a way we can incorporate the ideas behind
ExplanationConstructor with NetLogo? (I feel that NetLogo in itself does not require
students to associate the scientific question with explanations.)
I agree that BGuILE is much stronger in supporting student's understanding of explanation and logic. I think we could create a supplement to netlogo, either physically or computationally, that would encourage students to have similar experiences. I think a lab notebook where students record data and their interpretations in a table, like in the explanationconstructor, would be really helpful in helping students visualize their experiment, uncover more astute correlations, and also establish an important practice that would serve them well in college and beyond.
ReplyDeleteI think using a handout or journaling is definitely feasible to do with NetLogo. It actually might be more beneficial to have students do on their own (or with a partner perhaps) as I think you might be hinting at. Students will need to know how to organize their analysis and thoughts about an experiment or model without the help of a program, however maybe we can use BGuILE's ExplanationConstructor as a way to scaffold and support their learning of how to do this before we have students work with NetLogo.
DeleteI really like the way that ExplanationConstructor made students explicitly link evidence and arguments and I agree that NetLogo can be made stronger by trying to resemble that. Another issue that I see with NetLogo is the coding itself (and is it reasonable to expect students to become proficient enough with it to make the program worthwhile). Perhaps there could be a way to "code" by making logical arguments about how you expect a system to act. I imagine it would look more like OneTurtle, where commands are pre-fixed.
ReplyDeleteI think one aspect that I found very beneficial was the staging activities and Reiser’s slow build up to analyzing data on computer models. While he gave examples such as worksheets and handouts, there could also be staging activities within the computer models themselves so students become more familiar with the technology. In the beginning of the school year, you may spend more time with physical models that students are familiar with, but as time progresses, use technology staging models. Furthermore, as technology and modeling becomes more widespread in classrooms, students will begin to see computer models as more familiar. Thus, should teachers keep the classroom learning environment as 50/50 between physical models and computer models or what balance should be struck?
ReplyDelete