"1. Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)
2. Developing and using models
3. Planning and carrying out investigations
4. Analyzing and interpreting data
5. Using mathematics and computational thinking
6. Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)
7. Engaging in argument from evidence
8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information" (NGSS Framework p. 42).
For starters, Hestenes paper is focused on modeling (theoretical and experimental games to model the Newtonian world), so the second NGSS practice is covered very thoroughly. From start to finish, the paper always come back to modeling with Hestenes even saying that "the main objective of science instruction should therefore be to teach the modeling game" (Hestenes 732). Hestenes talks about constructing explanations (NGSS practice 6) as they pertain to modeling. He states that the model is the explanation. If a phenomena can be modeled within a theory, then the theory explains the model. However, he says we don't often use modeling as explanation which leaves our explanations as merely partial or qualitative explanations. With respect to NGSS practices 3, 4, and 5, Hestenes addresses them at various points in his discussion of experimental games.
While Hestenes implemented a good number of the NGSS practices in his paper, I wished he would have addressed practices 1, 7, and 8 more thoroughly. There was little discussion about evaluating and communicating information or engaging in argument from evidence. There was a brief mention of asking questions, but I would have appreciated a discussion on asking questions with respect to phenomena and theories that are already well understood.
4. Analyzing and interpreting data
5. Using mathematics and computational thinking
6. Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)
7. Engaging in argument from evidence
8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information" (NGSS Framework p. 42).
For starters, Hestenes paper is focused on modeling (theoretical and experimental games to model the Newtonian world), so the second NGSS practice is covered very thoroughly. From start to finish, the paper always come back to modeling with Hestenes even saying that "the main objective of science instruction should therefore be to teach the modeling game" (Hestenes 732). Hestenes talks about constructing explanations (NGSS practice 6) as they pertain to modeling. He states that the model is the explanation. If a phenomena can be modeled within a theory, then the theory explains the model. However, he says we don't often use modeling as explanation which leaves our explanations as merely partial or qualitative explanations. With respect to NGSS practices 3, 4, and 5, Hestenes addresses them at various points in his discussion of experimental games.
While Hestenes implemented a good number of the NGSS practices in his paper, I wished he would have addressed practices 1, 7, and 8 more thoroughly. There was little discussion about evaluating and communicating information or engaging in argument from evidence. There was a brief mention of asking questions, but I would have appreciated a discussion on asking questions with respect to phenomena and theories that are already well understood.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Hestenes did not explicitly discuss the process of evaluating and communicating information or engaging in argumentation in his examples of models. However, do you think students could learn these principles by hearing about the process that real scientists go through to get their work prublished/accepted? Hestenes discussed how several scientists published contradictory/competing theories and on occasion used the another's work to further their own- I could see this being a good way to show students how to argue ad why it is important to communicate their findings with a real world connection.
ReplyDelete