PROMOTING CRITICAL EVALUATION ABOUT SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS USING MODEL-EVIDENCE LINK DIAGRAMS

The National Academy of Sciences has recently emphasized that students should engage in the scientific practice of evaluating explanations (e.g., scientific hypotheses, models, and theories). But students are often not critically evaluative when faced with alternative explanations about a scientific phenomenon, especially if the topic is complex and/or controversial. Such complex and controversial topics can be characterized by a plausibility gap, where students may find non-scientific explanations more plausible than those developed by the scientists. Many Earth and space science topics fit this description (e.g., the cause of current climate change). Instructors in Earth science courses are therefore challenged in promoting students’ critical evaluation and plausibility reappraisal when confronted with alternative explanations.

The model-evidence link diagram (MEL) is a particularly promising instructional scaffold for promoting critical evaluation. This MEL’s structure and mode were originally developed by educational researchers at Rutgers University for life science topics. Recently, the presenter developed a climate change MEL and found that this scaffold promoted middle school students’ plausibility reappraisal toward the scientific explanation of human-induced climate change. The climate change MEL also promoted deeper understanding of scientific principles underlying climate change, which was sustained 6 months after instruction. Significant increases in both plausibility and knowledge for students who engaged in the climate change MEL was in contrast to comparison classes that experienced no change.

Because of the climate change MEL’s success, the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the development of three additional MELs for Earth and space science, covering the topics of (a) earthquakes and fracking, (b) wetlands resources, and (c) Moon formation. This presentation will discuss these MELs and results of the project’s first year, which involved high school students in New Jersey and Nevada. Although the research detailed in this presentation is funded by the NSF under Grant No. DRL-131605, any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the presenter and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.