The IPM cycle: An instructional tool for promoting students' engagement in modeling practices and construction of models

IF 3.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Anna Garrido, Digna Couso
{"title":"The IPM cycle: An instructional tool for promoting students' engagement in modeling practices and construction of models","authors":"Anna Garrido, Digna Couso","doi":"10.1002/tea.21979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The importance of models and modeling in science education is well‐recognized, yet there exists significant polysemy among these terms within the literature. This ambiguity often leads to confusion, particularly regarding whether modeling represents an expected student performance, an instructional strategy to promote such performance, or both. Moreover, the construction of models has been depicted as both the objective of modeling and a distinct phase within modeling‐based instruction. Additionally, the expression of models has often been overlooked despite its significance as a crucial modeling practice. In an endeavor to shed light into these complexities associated with modeling in science education, this paper pursues a twofold aim. First, it theoretically presents and justifies the Instruction Performance Modeling (IPM) cycle, drawing on numerous previous contributions to the field, as a practical and specific instructional tool designed to clarify some problematic concepts both regarding modeling instruction and modeling practice. Second, it provides empirical evidence regarding the type of modeling performance exhibited by students involved in instruction guided by the IPM. This study applies discourse analysis to the multimodal productions of preservice teachers attending a lab‐based workshop on the topic of flotation. The main findings reveal that students' modeling performance, while exhibiting certain patterns such as the Introductory pattern or the Evaluation‐Revision one, predominantly manifests as a disorganized sequence of modeling practices. This result is consistent with certain precedents in the modeling literature but contrasts with the expected outcomes of well‐established approaches like Generation‐Evaluation‐Modification. Furthermore, the study aims to highlight the rich, meaningful, and productive modeling practices occurring in instructional scenarios guided by the IPM cycle.","PeriodicalId":48369,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21979","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

The importance of models and modeling in science education is well‐recognized, yet there exists significant polysemy among these terms within the literature. This ambiguity often leads to confusion, particularly regarding whether modeling represents an expected student performance, an instructional strategy to promote such performance, or both. Moreover, the construction of models has been depicted as both the objective of modeling and a distinct phase within modeling‐based instruction. Additionally, the expression of models has often been overlooked despite its significance as a crucial modeling practice. In an endeavor to shed light into these complexities associated with modeling in science education, this paper pursues a twofold aim. First, it theoretically presents and justifies the Instruction Performance Modeling (IPM) cycle, drawing on numerous previous contributions to the field, as a practical and specific instructional tool designed to clarify some problematic concepts both regarding modeling instruction and modeling practice. Second, it provides empirical evidence regarding the type of modeling performance exhibited by students involved in instruction guided by the IPM. This study applies discourse analysis to the multimodal productions of preservice teachers attending a lab‐based workshop on the topic of flotation. The main findings reveal that students' modeling performance, while exhibiting certain patterns such as the Introductory pattern or the Evaluation‐Revision one, predominantly manifests as a disorganized sequence of modeling practices. This result is consistent with certain precedents in the modeling literature but contrasts with the expected outcomes of well‐established approaches like Generation‐Evaluation‐Modification. Furthermore, the study aims to highlight the rich, meaningful, and productive modeling practices occurring in instructional scenarios guided by the IPM cycle.
IPM 循环:促进学生参与建模实践和构建模型的教学工具
模型和建模在科学教育中的重要性已得到公认,但在文献中,这些术语之间却存在着 巨大的多义性。这种模糊性常常导致混淆,特别是关于建模是代表一种预期的学生表现,还是一种促进这种表现的教学策略,还是两者兼而有之。此外,模型的构建既被描述为建模的目标,也被描述为建模教学中的一个独特阶段。此外,尽管模型的表达作为一种重要的建模实践具有重要意义,但却常常被忽视。为了揭示科学教育中与建模相关的这些复杂问题,本文追求双重目标。首先,本文从理论上提出并论证了 "教学表现建模(IPM)循环",它借鉴了该领域以往的众多贡献,是一种实用而具体的教学工具,旨在澄清建模教学和建模实践中的一些问题概念。其次,本研究提供了有关学生在 IPM 指导下参与教学所表现出的建模表现类型的实证证据。本研究对参加浮选主题实验研讨会的职前教师的多模态作品进行了话语分析。主要研究结果表明,学生的建模表现虽然表现出某些模式,如介绍模式或评价-修改模式,但主要表现为建模实践的无序序列。这一结果与建模文献中的某些先例相一致,但与 "生成-评价-修改 "等成熟方法的预期结果形成了反差。此外,本研究旨在强调在 IPM 循环指导下的教学情景中出现的丰富、有意义和富有成效的建模实践。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Journal of Research in Science Teaching EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
19.60%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, the official journal of NARST: A Worldwide Organization for Improving Science Teaching and Learning Through Research, publishes reports for science education researchers and practitioners on issues of science teaching and learning and science education policy. Scholarly manuscripts within the domain of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching include, but are not limited to, investigations employing qualitative, ethnographic, historical, survey, philosophical, case study research, quantitative, experimental, quasi-experimental, data mining, and data analytics approaches; position papers; policy perspectives; critical reviews of the literature; and comments and criticism.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信