Monday, September 14, 2015

Week 4 Memo 3 readings

During our readings this week in the importance of  using Scientific Modeling in class room instruction data was very key in determining and explaining the articles. While the articles focused on a topic not new to any reader the figures from each study further solidified any doubt that the scientific modeling  method is the ideal method to teach students in this day and time.

                In the first reading  Jackson/ Dukerith/ Hestenes bring us the importance  of  scientific modeling  from a teaching aspect and point of view. One interesting quote that is very poignant is that teachers teach how they are taught. Unfortunately for many students this leads them to an academic career of failed practices from an outdated method. Research studied in  by Arizona State University 1998  pointed to this.  In a study of about 7500 high school students 26 percent before modeling training scored proficient to master of standard newtonian physics(physics that focused on Newtons 3 laws).

 After the first year of a three year study 3334 tested 10 points higher than their peers. After two years 647 students tested at a 69 percent mastery level showing a full 56 percent growth in knowledge aptitude and conformability. This growth explains and exemplifies why modeling is so effective. Hallon and Hestes attribute this growth to the teacher seeing all of the misconceptions the students have in the topic up front and being able to pinpoint, and clarify these discrepancies. While the student is allowed the chance to work though their difficulties at a desired pace and really given time to soak up the material.

                In the second article two of Peabody's own professors delve into the effects of modeling in early education. Both sat at opposite ends of the spectrum, yet in both cases students were able to quantitatively think and learn and therefore their qualitative learning was reinforced in their labs and posttest. For instance in the Wisconsin experiment once students were able to see view the problem and it became tangible with numbers and three dimensional figures their learning and comprehension of the topic skyrocketed. Yet I find it interesting that modeling also as show cased by the fifth graders brings out a certain creativeness yet weariness by the children. Often children were said to struggle with the concept of more than one answer available. This strikes me as odd because this correlates with what was said earlier in that students must first possess a basic understanding of outside factors in order to incorporate their previous knowledge into the topic at hand.

                Modeling plays a paramount role in teaching today. Future teachers are given a playbook that is versatile and effective and should be used more often. My one critique of the modeling system is how to teach the system to novice learners. These students have already learned the material, and would therefore be weary of learning it a different way. Yet I applied the ease that a teacher especially a science teacher can implement this almost fool proof way of teaching in the classroom.

1 comment:

  1. I find your critique of the modeling system interesting. You mentioned that modeling can make the students simultaneously creative and weary, which is definitely a sentiment I related to when I was in high school-- it was cool to try an come up with creative models to represent certain concepts, but, for me, it got pretty exhausting to keep working on models if I didn't have some sort of verification that I was on the right track. I think that this has to do with a classroom culture of finding "right answers," and I think modeling would definitely have been more effective if my teachers created an environment where you felt comfortable failing or coming up with alternative solutions.