| Biological systems pose a challenge both for learners and teachers because they are complex systems mediated by feedback loops; networks of cause-effect relationships; and non-linear, hierarchical, and emergent properties. Teachers and scientists routinely use models to communicate ideas about complex systems. Model-based pedagogies engage students in model construction as a means of practicing higher-order reasoning skills. One such modeling paradigm describes systems in terms of their structures, behaviors, and functions (SBF). The SBF framework is a simple modeling language that has been used to teach about complex biological systems. Here, we used student-generated SBF models to assess students' causal reasoning in the context of a novel biological problem on an exam. We compared students' performance on the modeling problem, their performance on a set of knowledge/comprehension questions, and their performance on a set of scientific reasoning questions. We found that students who performed well on knowledge and understanding questions also constructed more networked, higher quality models. Previous studies have shown that learners' mental maps increase in complexity with increased expertise. We wanted to investigate if biology students with varying levels of training in biology showed a similar pattern when constructing system models. In a pilot study, we administered the same modeling problem to two additional groups of students: 1) an animal physiology course for students pursuing a major in biology (n=37) and 2) an exercise physiology course for non-majors (n=27). We found that there was no significant difference in model organization across the three student populations, but there was a significant difference in the ability to represent function between the three populations. Between the three groups the non-majors had the lowest function scores, the introductory majors had the middle function scores, and the upper division majors had the highest function scores. |
PDF Full Text Request