skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Four Levels of Scientific Modeling Practices in Expert Learning
Abstract This paper describes model construction practices used by scientifically trained experts. Our work on science experts has involved analyzing data from videotaped protocols of experts thinking aloud about unfamiliar explanation problems. These studies document the value of nonformal heuristic reasoning processes such as analogies, identification of new variables, Gedanken experiments, and the construction and running of visualizable explanatory models. Although theses processes are less formal than formal deduction or induction or statistical inference procedures, the case study analyzed here shows that they can lead to real insights and conceptual change. At a larger time scale, the subject went through model evolution cycles of model generation, evaluation, and modification that utilized the heuristic reasoning processes above. In addition, the prevalence of imagistic simulation as an underlying foundation in these episodes suggests that it may be important to pay greater attention to an imagistic level of processing in the analysis of expert thinking. Larger time scale modes of model evolution and model competition were also evidenced. The analysis leads to four levels of processes or practices: IV. An overarching set of Model Construction Modes, primarily alternating between Model Evolution, in which a model is improved, and Model Competition, in which two or more models compete. III. Modeling (GEM) Cycle process of Model Generation, Evaluation, and Modification at a Macro level, as shown in Figure 10. II. Nonformal Reasoning Processes at a Micro level: e.g. analogy, running a model, identifying a new variable, and conducting a Gedanken experiment. I. Underlying Imagistic process including Imagistic Simulation that may have been occurring within all of the above processes. To our knowledge these four levels of processes have not been analyzed together in the past. They complement empirical processes of discovery, experimentation, and evaluative argumentation documented by others. Diagrams of how the above processes interact may give us some new ways to picture the roles of nonformal reasoning and imagistic processes during qualitative model construction. We call the set of processes at all four levels a 'Modeling Practices Framework'. Processes at a lower level serve as subprocesses for the level above it in this framework. Each level has multiple "things to try" to achieve tasks at the level above it. Thus the framework is an organized but flexible structure of heuristic processes. This lies between and contrasts with those who would describe theory making in science as either 'anarchistic', with no method structure, or 'algorithmic', with fairly standardized procedures.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1503456
PAR ID:
10585538
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Publisher / Repository:
NARST
Date Published:
ISSN:
0000-0000
ISBN:
000-00-00000-00-0
Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
Expert Learning Science Instruction
Format(s):
Medium: X
Location:
NSF-PAR
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Ippoliti, E; Sterpetti, F (Ed.)
    This chapter first consolidates a set of important heuristic strategies used for constructing innovative scientific models from three books, including studies in the history of genetics and electromagnetism, and an expert think-aloud study in mechanics. Twenty-four strategies are identified, most of which are field-general. Patterns in their use suggest a partially organized hierarchy of interconnected strategies and substrategies, contrary to the view that heuristics are simply tried in random order. Strategies at four different size and time scale levels are described, including larger Modeling Cycle Phases of model generation, evaluation, and modification, each of which can utilize many smaller Tactical Heuristics as substrategies, e.g., analogy, or testing predictions from the model. These in turn can utilize Grounded Imagistic Processes, such as imagistic mental simulation, an important alternative to deduction for evaluating a model by running it. The framework links higher level, serially organized processes with lower level, imagery-based processes. Its intermediate degree of organization is neither anarchistic, nor fully algorithmic. Possible benefits of organization are narrowing the search space involved and balancing sources of model construction and criticism for productive creativity. Unorganized, spontaneous processes are also discussed, along with their possible benefits. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Reasoning patterns found in Galileo’s treatise on machines, On Mechanics, are compared with patterns identified in case studies of scientifically trained experts thinking aloud, and many similarities are found. At one level the primary patterns identified are ordered analogy sequences and special diagrammatic techniques to support them. At a deeper level I develop constructs to describe patterns that can support embodied, imagistic, mental simulations as a central underlying process. Additionally, a larger hypothesized pattern of ‘progressive imagistic generalization’—Galileo’s development of a model or mechanism that becomes more and more general with each machine while still being imagistically projectable into many machines—provides a way to think about his progress toward a modern explanatory model of torque. By unpacking his arguments, we gain an appreciation of his skillful ability to foster imagistic processes underlying scientific thinking. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract: Reasoning patterns found in Galileo’s treatise on machines, On Mechanics, are compared with patterns identified in case studies of scientifically trained experts thinking aloud, and many similarities are found. At one level the primary patterns identified are ordered analogy sequences and special diagrammatic techniques to support them. At a deeper level I develop constructs to describe patterns that can support embodied, imagistic, mental simulations as a central underlying process. Additionally, a larger hypothesized pattern of ‘progressive imagistic generalization’—Galileo’s development of a model or mechanism that becomes more and more general with each machine while still being imagistically projectable into many machines—provides a way to think about his progress toward a modern explanatory model of torque. By unpacking his arguments, we gain an appreciation of his skillful ability to foster imagistic processes underlying scientific thinking. 
    more » « less
  4. Sato, Brian (Ed.)
    As biological science rapidly generates new knowledge and novel approaches to address increasingly complex and integrative questions, biology educators face the challenge of teaching the next generation of biologists and citizens the skills and knowledge to enable them to keep pace with a dynamic field. Fundamentally, biology is the science of living systems. Not surprisingly, systems is a theme that pervades national reports on biology education reform. In this essay, we present systems as a unifying paradigm that provides a conceptual framework for all of biology and a way of thinking that connects and integrates concepts with practices. To translate the systems paradigm into concrete outcomes to support instruction and assessment in the classroom, we introduce the biology systems-thinking (BST) framework, which describes four levels of systems-thinking skills: 1) describing a system’s structure and organization, 2) reasoning about relationships within the system, 3) reasoning about the system as a whole, and 4) analyzing how a system interacts with other systems. We conclude with a series of questions aimed at furthering conversations among biologists, biology education researchers, and biology instructors in the hopes of building support for the systems paradigm. 
    more » « less
  5. Models are at the heart of the emerging Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach. MBSE is motivated by the growing complexity of software, which requires multiple levels of abstraction that programming languages do not support.In MBSE, models play a central role in the software evolution process. Rich model management must rely on a unifying underlying formal framework that can support, integrate, and mediate powerful modeling services. This paper describes FOML, a Framework for Object Modeling with Logic, its realization in a modeling tool, proves the correctness of class modeling in FOML, illustrates the process of software modeling with the tool, and presents the main features of the system. The FOML framework for software modeling is compact yet powerful, formal, and is based on an underlying logic rule language called PathLP. The combination of class-based conceptualization with a formal logical base enables clean mediation and integration of a wide range of modeling activities and provides a provably correct formulation of class models. Our implementation of FOML features seamless integration of multiple modeling services that simultaneously support multiple models and provide reasoning,meta-reasoning, validation, testing, and evolution services. 
    more » « less