Cynthia Passmore

Exploring Opportunities for Argumentation in Modelling Classrooms

On several levels it can be said that the act of modelling in science is inherently an argumentative act. That is, in virtually all aspects of modelling, from developing a question to judging between competing models that might answer that question, an individual is engaged in persuasive acts. Those acts may be private or public. They may be mental, written or oral, but they are about judging ideas and making sense of them; convincing oneself or others that the ideas and ways of looking at and explaining a phenomenon are useful. These acts are what scientists find exciting. They are what make science intellectually interesting and challenging. Inviting students into this practice is one way to help them learn both the content and process of science. This paper introduces a framework that is attentive to the research on how people learn while simultaneously pushing for curriculum and instruction that engages students in elements of the practice of science. We explore how this framework can be used to foster argumentation by describing the theoretical underpinnings of the framework and using classroom examples to illustrate the utility of the framework for promoting argumentation.

Evaluating a Modeling Curriculum by Using Heuristics for Productive Disciplinary Engagement.

The BIO2010 report provided a compelling argument for the need to create learning experiences for undergraduate biology students that are more authentic to modern science. The report acknowledged the need for research that could help practitioners successfully create and reform biology curricula with this goal in mind. Our objective in this article was to explore how a set of six design heuristics could be used to evaluate the potential of curricula to support productive learning experiences for science students. We drew on data collected during a long-term study of an undergraduate traineeship that introduced students to mathematical modeling in the context of modern biological problems. We present illustrative examples from this curriculum that highlight the ways in which three heuristics—instructor role-modeling, holding students to scientific norms, and providing students with opportunities to practice these norms—consistently supported learning across the curriculum. We present a more detailed comparison of two different curricular modules and explain how differences in student authority, problem structure, and access to resources contributed to differences in productive engagement by students in these modules. We hope that our analysis will help practitioners think in more concrete terms about how to achieve the goals set forth by BIO2010.