91-3 Third Grade Students’ Self Evaluation of Evaporation Models: Examining Model-Based Reasoning and Instruction Across Classrooms

Session: Current Advances in Geoscience Education Research

Presenting Author:

Brenda Costello

Authors:

Hulings, Melissa¹, Costello, Brenda², Forbes, Cory T.³

(1) Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, TX, USA, (2) Dept. of Earth and Environmental Science, College of Science, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA, (3) Department of Higher Education, Adult Learning, and Organizational Studies, College of Education, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA; Dept. of Earth and Environmental Sciences, College of Science, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA,

Abstract:

Water is central to Earth’s major systems and serves as a unifying theme across the biological, geological, physical, and chemical sciences. As such, water-related concepts are fundamental to school science curricula. The Next Generation Science Standards promote learning about water as early as Kindergarten and emphasize scientific modeling as a key practice through which students develop, test, evaluate, and refine explanations of natural phenomena. However, teaching model-based concepts like evaporation and condensation to young learners is complex, and little research has explored how elementary students evaluate their own scientific models. To address this gap, we studied third-grade students’ evaluations of their evaporation models across four classrooms (N=81) using an embedded mixed methods design that included student artifacts and classroom observations. Students were generally more successful at evaluating the process of evaporation than its underlying causes. They gave the highest self-evaluation scores to how well their models depicted water evaporating, and the lowest scores to how well their models showed energy as the cause. Classroom 1 students consistently gave themselves higher ratings than students in the other classrooms, especially on prompts about heat and energy. Statistical analyses confirmed significant differences in scores between Classroom 1 and Classrooms 2 and 4. Classroom 1 students also offered more conceptually grounded justifications, often referencing heat or energy, while students elsewhere gave vague or incomplete explanations. Observations revealed key instructional differences: the teacher in Classroom 1 asked more higher-order questions, prompted students to explain their thinking, and linked models to real-world contexts and prior learning. In contrast, teachers in other classrooms focused more on procedures and offered fewer opportunities for student reflection. Students in Classroom 1 also had more chances to independently revise and justify their models, while students in other classrooms received more directive support. These differences in instructional approach likely contributed to the variation in students’ model evaluations. Overall, findings illustrate the criteria students employ when evaluating their own models and suggest that high-quality teacher questioning and opportunities for student reflection play a critical role in helping elementary students evaluate and improve their scientific models of water-related phenomena.

Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program. Vol. 57, No. 6, 2025

© Copyright 2025 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved.