This article was downloaded by: [ ] On: 21 November 2011, At: 04:38 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK International Journal of Science Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: bematicnal http:// www.tandfonline.com loi/ tsed20 journal of eccen Designing and validating two —— teachingJtearning sequences about 7 particle models ic Martine Méheut * * IUFM de Créteil et LSP - Université Paris 7, France E-mail: meheut@cor.jussieu.fr Available online: 22 Feb 2007 To cite this article: Martine Méheut (2004): Designing and validating two teaching4earning sequences about particle models, International Journal of Science Education, 26:5, 605-618 To link to this article: http:// dx.doi.org/ 10, 1080/ 09500690310001614726 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 INT, J. SCI. EDUC., 16 APRIL 2004, VoL. 26, No. 5, 605-618 Special Issue Designing and validating two teaching-learning sequences about particle models Martine Méheut (e-mail: meheut@ccr.jussieu fir), IUFM de Créteil et LDSP — Université Paris 7, France This paper presents a retrospective analysis of two teaching-learning sequences about particle models. We will describe the design process for each sequence and will discuss it with respect to general frameworks such as Ingenicrie Didactique and Educational Reconstruction, We will also deseribe and compare the ways we collected data and caracterize kinds of results we could obtain in each case, This will be an opportunity to make and differences between the two methodological frameworks clearer simil Introduction The aim of this paper is not to make a review of numerous teaching-learning sequences that were developed by researchers concerning particle models; more specifically, we will not discuss here possible similarities and differences that could be found in later teaching-learning sequences about particle models. It is rather to illustrate some general issues related to the design and to various ways of validating teaching-learning sequences, analysing two sequences about particle models we developed and experimented in classrooms. Previous papers (Chomat et al. 1990, ‘Méheut 1997, Méheut and Chomat 1990, Méheut et al. 1994) provide a detailed description of each sequence so we will refer to these when necessary. We will see that the design of these sequences can be retrospectively analysed with respect to an Ingenierie Didactique framework (Artigue 1988) or to an Educational Reconstruc- tion framework (Kattan et al. 1995), even if these sequences were developed before these frameworks were made explicit. ‘The Ingenierie Didactique framework proposed guidelines for both designing and validating a sequence. In this general framework, Artigue (1988) suggested three main dimensions for a priori analyses: @ an ‘epistemological’ one: analysing the contents to be taught, the problems they answer, their historical genesis; © a ‘psycho-cognitive’ one: analysing the students’ cognitive characteristics; and © a ‘didactic’ one: analysing the functioning of the teaching institution. This general framework rests on a strong model of learning by problem-solving. Thus, the a priori analyses are interlaced in order to accurately define ‘problems’ to Inernatonal Jounal of Science Eduction ISSN 0950-0963 prinISSN 1464-5289 online © 2004 Taylor & Francis Lid -upi/winetand®.colejournals ol: 10.1080/09500890310001614725& 2 3 2 zt z 2 3 3 3 A 606 M. MEHEUT bbe managed by students and to anticipate the elaboration of knowledge by students through these ‘problems’. The comparison of the cognitive itineraries actually observed with those predicted can validate or challenge the hypotheses involved in the building up of learning situations. ‘The model of ‘educational reconstruction’ developed by Kattman et al. (1995) provides a framework for designing teaching-learning sequences that draws on planning instruction models that were developed in the German pedagogical tradition. The significant feature of the educational reconstruction approach is that its analysis of science content takes into account not only epistemic dimensions (genesis, function and meaning of the concepts), but also context, applications, and ethical and social implications. Students conceptions are taken into account in a constructive perspective in reconstructing science content structure by providing answers to questions like ‘Which are the most relevant elements of the students? conceptual framework to be respected? Which opportunities are opened by certain elements of students’ conceptions or perspectives? Which conceptions of students correspond with scientific concepts in such a way that they can be used for a more adequate and fruitful learning? (Kattmann et al. 1995). Results of the analysis of content structure (linking clarification of the core concepts and analysis of the educational significance) and preliminary ideas about the construction of instruc- tion play an important role in planning empirical studies on teaching and learning. Coming back to the main guidelines we used developing these sequences, and to the methodology we used to validate them, we will try to analyse how much it fits with one or another framework, to identify strong points and weak points in the design and in the validation of each sequence, and to characterize evolutions between the first one and the second one. This will be an opportunity to make clearer similarities and differences between these two methodological frameworks. Designing the teaching-learning sequences ‘The main lines of our strategy express a moderate and integrated constructivist point of view, to express differences with a radical constructivist approach, as adopted by Lijnse (1995) in a problem-posing approach. In a ‘radical constructivist” strategy, responsibility is given to students to elaborate problems by themselves. Our ‘integrated constructivist’ approach is based on a precise analysis of the knowledge at stake, and takes into account psycho-cognitive characteristics of learners (conceptions, spontaneous ways of reasoning) for elaborating ‘problems’ and ‘didactic situations’ in which students will find the opportunity to develop new knowledge. Taking into account difficulties and misconceptions of students in this field, we came back to the historical development of atomic models. Interlacing both points of view, we proposed a teaching-learning process that consists of putting students in the position of developing particle models by using such models first to explain, then to predict, physical events. The aim is to develop models as cognitive tools in order to unify descriptions and then to predict physical phenomena, the models becoming more and more precise in relation to the questions. ‘As a first step, we intended that students interpret physical phenomena as changes of the spacial organization of immutable particles. The kinetic aspects were scarcely brought into play. As a second step, we tried to put students in the position& 2 3 2 zt z 2 3 3 3 A TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS 607 of taking into account the kinetic aspects of particulate models in order to explain and predict some thermoelastic properties of gases, Designing a first sequence (TLS1) with the aim that students develop a particle model to explain conservation of matter through physical phenomena To define the contents of knowledge to put into play in such a first approach of particle models, we took into account difficulties and misconceptions reavealed by research that can be summarized as concerning the invariance of particles, the existence of vacuum and, more generally, the separation between the sensible properties of matter and the mechanical properties of particles (between macro- scopic properties of matter and properties of particles) (Andersson 1990, Brooks et al. 1984, Dow et al. 1978, Méheut 1982, Novick and Nussbaum 1978, Pfundt 1981). We considered at the same time some specific features of the historical development of particle models (see, for example, Bensaude-Vincent and Kounelis 1991, Pullman 1995): the particle theories of structure of matter developed from a philosophical assertion rather than from empirical evidence, namely the immut- ability of matter under transformations and its unity under various aspects. During this first sequence, we proposed to students that they could interpret physical phenomena (compression of a gas, mixing of gases by diffusion, change of state) starting from the idea that matter is made of immutable particles. The models thus elaborated remain rather simple: they provide a coherent interpretation mainly of the conservation of matter in these phenomena. Using such models, one needs to separate space and matter in order to be consistent with the existence of vacuum and the immutability of particles. We also expected that students would propose permanent and multi-directional motion of particles in order to explain the mixing by diffusion of two gases. ‘We structured these modelling activities through production and discussion of iconic representations. This method of representation implies constraints due to its static nature; on the other hand, students are given a great share of initiative in the choice of the significant features that they use. One can thus make a variety of the possible representations appear and elicit the pertinent variables of the model by discussing the meaningful or meaningless nature of the different aspects of the representations made by the students. It is an opportunity to discuss various ways to express that two types of particles are different: using two different colours, or using different shape symbols, and so on. Such activities were designed in order to make learners think about the symbolic, not real, nature of these aspects of representation of particles. Designing a second sequence (TLS2) with the aim that students develop a model for explaining and predicting thermoelastic properties of gases During this second sequence, our aims were to help students to develop kinetic and dynamic particle models (Chomat et al. 1990, Méheut 1997, Méheut et al. 1994). The expected ways of thinking require the use of relationships between the number of particles, the occupied space, the speed of particles, the frequency and the ‘force’ of impacts. Such models make possible the explanation and the prediction of phenomena related to the thermoelastic properties of gases; they give anDownloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 608 M. MEHEUT interpretation of relationships between the volume, the temperature and the pressure of a gas. In this perspective, we designed a computer simulation. This program generates images of moving entities in a rectangular box. Entities move according to the kinetic theory of gases, except for some procedures related to the low number of entities (about 100 particles) and the discrete treatment of some variables (position, speed; magnitude and direction). The dimensions of the frames are modifiable. It is possible to obtain two boxes with a common side; this side can, if desired, move in relation to the impacts of the particles. The user can set the number and the ‘speed’ (mean square speed) of the particles in each frame. He/she can also choose to display the values of parameters of the simulation and of some variables: the number of particle impacts against a side of the box (for the whole length of the side or by unit of length) for a given duration and, when the common side is moving, the position of this side at any instant, and the mean position of this side for a given length of time. ‘We chose the phenomena and the questions so that students could be in a position to bring into play progressively more and more variables of the model. We also took into account some results of didactical research about teaching pressure (Séré 1985) and specific ways of causal linear reasoning in elementary thermody- namics (Rozier and Viennot 1990). Moreover, we wanted to ensure that during this sequence models could be used to make predictions, That is the reason why we searched for phenomena about which students at this age have difficulties making predictions or explanations. So we opted for making the students work first with phenomena without variations of temperature; the variables of the model are therefore the dimensions of the frames, the number of entities in each box, and the frequency of impacts of particles on the sides of the boxes. Phenomena with variations of temperature are then proposed in order to put students into a position to bring into play more kinetic and dynamic aspects of the models: the speed of entities and the ‘force’ of impacts. We used an unsophisticated device (see figure 1) in order to make the relationship between the elements of the experimental device and those of the simulation as easy as possible. This device is made of two syringes (containing air) connected by a length of rubber tubing; a drop of coloured water is placed in this, tubing. This tubing can be blocked with a clip or a tap; the plungers of the syringes can be locked. The experiments consist of creating a difference of pressure between the two quantities of air (the tubing staying blocked) and then letting the system evolve towards a new equilibrium by removing the clip. The difference of pressure can be created by shifting one plunger (compression experiment) or by heating one syringe (heating experiment). For each phenomenon, students were asked to first predict, then to observe and to explain the features they observed, without any use of the model; the questions concerned the shifting, and the stopping of the coloured drop. 1. What will happen if the tap is opened? 2, Will the drop move? Cyes Ono OIdon’t know Why? 3. Why did the drop move? 4, Explain why it stopped. (Where did it stop? Under what conditions?)Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS 609 The « compression » expesiment rite stale Fira sate Py ie The « heating » expesment wills stale Final sate voy Fie%e PrP Par Figure 1. The device and experimental situations. A second step included the use of the computer program in order to build a model of the system and to simulate the observed phenomena. For this purpose, we asked students to discuss the validity of a simulation proposed by the teacher. The aim of these first questions was to put students into a position to consider and to choose the values of the parameters of the model (the number of entities in each frame, the dimensions of the frames, and the speed of the entities in each frame) in relation to the macroscopic parameters (quantities of gas in each syringe, volumes and temperatures). 1. Does this simulation represent the situation adequately, before the tap is opened? Clyes Ono OIdon’t know — If you say ‘yes’, please explain why it is well adapted. — If you say ‘no’, please explain what must be changed, and why. 2. Is the simulation adapted to representing the situation immediately after the drop stops? Oyes Ono 1 Idon’t know — If you say ‘yes’, please explain why it is well adapted — If you say ‘no’, please explain what must be changed, and why. After obtaining a suitable simulation, students were asked to explain the shifting and the stopping of the drop with the help of this simulation. 3. According to the simulation, why did the common side (representing the drop) move? 4, Explain why it stopped. (Where did it stop? Under what conditions?)& 2 3 2 zt z 2 3 3 3 A 610 M. MEHEUT Teachers could then opt for displaying the number of impacts or for using a simulation with a moving side in order to help students to develop the expected explanations, establishing relationships between the variables of the model. Discussing the design of the sequences Looking back at the design of these sequences, we consider that it fits partly with the Ingenierie Didactique methodological framework or with the Educational Recon- struction one (see first section). Both frameworks present common features, making the design of the teaching-learning sequences rest on two types of analyses. The first ones concern the knowledge at stake, the second ones concern the psycho-cognitive character- istics of learners. They also present some differences; Ingenierie Didactique suggested to analyse precisely and to take into account for the design institutional constraints (national programs, number of students in a class, etc.), whereas Educational Reconstruction pays great attention to the motivation of learners and the social significance of knowledge (what reveals different approaches of education). Coming back to our sequences, and using these frameworks to analyse their design, it appears that we developed the two dimensions of a priori analyses suggested by both frameworks, a psycho-cognitive one and an epistemological one, and integrated these into a process not far from an ‘educational reconstruction’ process. If we refer to an ‘ingenierie didactique’ methodology, it appears that one component of this framework is not quite explicit in our design; that is, taking into account the institutional constraints. Referring to an ‘educational reconstruction’ model makes it appear that the cognitive and epistemological meaning of knowledge to be developed by students is precisely situated but that more attention should be paid to the pragmatic and social significance of problems and questions to be solved, in relation with the motivation of learners. Experimenting with these teaching-learning sequences: with TLS1 The didactical experiment conditions We were able to repeat this experiment in each of two years with about 300 13-year- old to 14-year-old third formers (namely, 11 forms). The learning took place for an hour and a half per week over a 6-week period, in the usual form groups and in the normal timetable. Frequent meetings with our teaching colleagues taking part in the experiment allowed us to work out a precise protocol and to take into account the students’ cognitive skills and the normal operating routines of the school. ‘We defined an accurate protocol (Chomat et al. 1988 or Méheut and Chomat 1990) with the teachers in order to collect the data during the classes. Each stage of this protocol was supported by a working sheet (seven sheets for each student). The data were the students’ written productions in every tested form and tape recordings of the teachers’ interventions and of the discussions of several groups of students in three forms. After the sequence, we assessed by means of written questionnaires various aspects of the individual model building evolved during the learning sequence.Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 2011 TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS oll Some results and discussion (Our students worked on modelling physical phenomena by immutable particles. In this first step, only some limited aspects of these transformations were taken into account. Nevertheless, students were given the opportunity to discuss necessary complements to the initial hypothesis: the existence of vacuum, the variability of distances and of arrangements of particles. Analysing the working sheets produced by students during the sequence and their answers to final questionnaires, we tried to demonstrate the pedagogical effectiveness of this sequence with regard to our main objectives. We will present here some of these results. More detailed information can be found in Chomat et al. (1988) or Méheut and Chomat (1990). About the invariance of particles. We have chosen to impose invariance as a guide line in the elaboration of the model. This constraint is generally well respected by students, who were found to be able to argue about this point when discussing representations of a physical phenomenon. ‘We noticed that in the course of this sequence the students used the particle shape as a parameter of the model, so allowing the modelling of different substances. The answers to the final questionnaires show that a vast majority of students (about 80%) then had accepted and used the idea of invariant shape. Yet one can remark that a low percentage (about 10%) of students misinterpret the increase of volume during a thermal expansion process as being a swelling of the particles; a majority (about 60%) interpret it properly as an augmentation of the distances between particles. Separating space and matter. The variability of interparticulate distances makes it possible to separate mass variations from volume variations. It is put forward by a great number of students from the beginning of the sequence in order to explain the compression of a gas sample. It is then used again not only as an explanation of the greater or lesser compressibility of gases, liquids and solids, but also of the mixing of gases or liquids. It seems, however, that some students were somehow reluctant to conceive of a region devoid of matter. So, in order to model a gas, a few students draw contiguous particles, with no space between (4%), or particles superimposed upon a continuous background (7%); In order to model a solid, they focus on the properties of non-compressibility, cohesion, or non-mixing of solids in order to avoid accepting the existence of such empty spaces (15%). ‘To what extent did the sequence help to achieve a better dissociation of the two concepts of mass and volume? We can compare the answers given, before and after the sequence, with questions about a thermal expansion process, a phenomenon that was not interpreted during the sequence (see figure 2). There is a noticeable progress in the affirmation of the mass invariance and in the dissociation of the mass and volume concepts. One-third of the students use particle arguments exclusively in order to justify this invariance of mass. About motion. We also expected that students would propose a permanent and multi- directional motion of particles in order to explain the mixing by diffusion of two gases. Assessing this point, we must note that only a few students (less than 1%) met612 M. MEHEUT Somebody poured water into a long-neck balloon and weighed i; he found 1579 When he heated the baloon with hands, the level of water ised. it he weighed the ballon then, what would he find? 1 more than 157 9 ess tan 187.9 betore 1579 2 CO 179 1 Idon't know: / >) >) Please explain your answer = Somebody weighed a copper ball; he found 342 g, When heated, this copper bal got bigger. If weighed then, what would be found ? Ceres tess than 342.9 \ J KS CO 3029 before: ater: 1 dont know zg Please explain your answer & 2 3 2 zt z 2 3 3 3 5 g a Expansion of water Expansion of cop Mass Belore ter Before After (N=113) (N=181) (N=113) — (N=164) increases a anh decreases a 1% mm 1% mo variation sen aH sex 9% no answer som am Figure 2. Evaluating the effects of TLS1 on separation of mass and volume. this expectation. About one-quarter of them evoked the mobility of particles, without specifying the conditions and the nature of such a motion. This bad result made us conscious of how much we were expecting from observation and induction! It appears that such an idea of permanent and random motion is not at all spontaneous for students; it appears as contradictory with static aspects of matter, particularly for solids, and that is why we developed a more specific learning& 2 3 2 zt z 2 3 3 3 A TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS 613 sequence in order that students put into play kinetic, dynamic and thermodynamic aspects of particle models, which are necessary for more effective modelling of physical phenomena. Experimenting with these teaching-learning sequences: with TLS2 The didactical experiment conditions ‘The experiment included several stages. The first stage consisted of interviews of five pairs of students. These interviews can be considered as ‘learning interviews’; the aims are to describe as precisely as possible the cognitive pathways of students through the proposed learning situations. They were divided into two sequences of nearly three quarters of an hour each and they were tape-recorded ‘The second stage was the implementation of a 9-hour learning sequence in 16 second-year classes in French secondary schools. We gathered data all along the sequence by written work: nine sheets for each student. The analysis concerned the work of 10 randomly selected students out of each class (i.e. 160 students). In a third stage, two years after we experimented with this learning sequence, we gathered some additional information for two purposes. The first was to ascertain and to clarify some results obtained by the analysis of the data gathered during the interviews and the classroom sequence; the second was to assess the long-term effects of this learning process. Some results and discussion Post-test questionnaires, at the end of the sequence and two years later, allow one to evaluate the global short-term and longer-term effectiveness of this learning sequence. For example, in order to assess the effectiveness of the particle model built by students as the outcome of this sequence, we gave students experiments ‘expanding’ and ‘cooling’) that were a little different from those they simulated during the sequence. For both experiments, the number of students reasoning in a particulate way was a little more than one-half. Among these, the greatest number (34%) compared the frequencies of impacts. The predictions were correct for a great majority of students (more than 80%). Two years later, students who attended this learning sequence used a particle model more than students who did not attend it (about 20% more). ‘The analysis of the data collected during interviews allows us to draw up the learning pathways students followed throughout the teaching-learning situations (Chomat et al. 1990). It provides information about the way students took into account the different variables of the model, developing explanations and predictions in relation to the various phenomena and questions. Some key steps appear in these learning pathways: © Passing from a static point of view (pressure as compression) to a dynamic one (pressure as the result of particle impacts); © considering not only the action of one sample of gas, but the actions of two samples of gas and comparing them to explain or predict the shifting and the stopping of a wall;Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 614 M. MEHEUT @ interpreting an increase of temperature as an increase of the speed of particles; and @ taking into account not only the frequence, but also the ‘force’ of impacts to explain and predict pressure phenomena. These steps were more or less easily passed over by learners: for some of them, using the simulation was necessary (and sufficient); for others, it was not enough. We will illustrate these steps with interviews extracts. So, about the compression experiment, students seemed interested first in representing density variations and differences. Let us give an example. Florence and Jean-Michel Interviewer: When will it stop, in your opinion? What is needed to stop? J-M: Pressure will be equal. L.] Interviewer: On the screen, how is it represented, pressure? TM: Density, the place for the blue squares. ‘Taking into account the impacts of particles against the wall allowed them to explain the pressure actions of air: Jonathan and Sebastien Interviewer: And how does it push, the air? I Particles which move everywhere, it pushes the wall. Interviewer: And how can they push? I They go everywhere, so when they collide against the wall, the wall moves on the right ‘To explain the shifting of the drop, some of the students considered the impacts of particles against both sides of the boxes; they explained the shifting and the stopping of the drop by comparing the frequencies of impacts on both sides. Olivier and Pascal — the shifting Interviewer: And on the screen, how is the push of the air represented? oO: The air, it rebounds; the small points rebound against the wall, here more because they have less room so they collide more against the walls. We say, as they have less room, they rebound more against all the walls and as they move with the same speed, they collide more against the walls. — the stopping O: ‘They will collide as much because they will have as much space. About the heating experiment, all the students managed to translate an increase of the temperature of the air into an increase of the speed of particles. So, this was suggested by some students before the interviewer asked them to work with the computer simulation (see, for example, Olivier and Pascal). It was accepted by the other students after trying other possibilities: particles expanding, multiplying, repulsive forces between particles.Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS 615 Olivier and Pascal [They seem to feel first some difficulty in predicting what will happen. Pascal then makes a good prediction by using an idea of expansion.] The air will expand and then, when one opens it, it will push; it will push the drop more than . . [After observing, he goes from this idea to an increase of the speed of the particles.] The air was more . . . The particles were more distant in the same place, they collided much more quickly. What! They collide much more quickly. It isn’t exactly that they are more distant but ... They collide much more quickly, they move much more quickly. By heating, one speeded up the moving of particles. [Olivier says very litle until this moment. Commenting on a picture, he develops the idea that particles expanded.] O: [Before heating] There are as many particles in each syringe and they collide as much; they collide both as much against the same wall, so the wall keep still and, in the second situation (after heating), particles expand, so when they collide against the wall, it makes a bigger collision than when small particles collide against the wall. [Pascal then recalls the hypothesis of immutability of particles. Olivier then agrees with Pascal’s explanations.] [This question of interpreting an increase of temperature comes back when using the computer simulation] We should have to try to heat, what! We should have to try to recreate when heating. On the computer, would it be possible to represent when heating? [The interviewer sends back this question to the students.] Interviewer: How would it be possible to do that? If what I said is right, we would have to be able to speed up the particles in this one [box]. This relation was more or less used according to the group. Some students related the speed of particles and the frequency of impacts, but did not consider the force of impacts; so they explained the equilibrium by the equality of the frequencies of impacts on both sides. Other students succeded in considering both the frequency and the force of the impacts. Jonathan and Stanislas I As it goes faster on the left, the ‘force de frappe’ if we can call it in this way, is higher than this one on the right. But, as it’s hitting the wall more from the left, everything is balanced. Jean-Michel and Florence TM: The impacts are more violent because molecules are faster. Interviewer: So, when do you think the wall should stop?Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 616 M. MEHEUT Table 1, Testing the H1 hypothesis. Compression (a = 145) Heating (a = 160) Explaining Explaining Explaining Explaining Taking into account the shifting the stopping the shifting the topping One sample of gas 96% 69% 88% 56% Both samples of gas 4% 28% 10% 37% No answer 0% 3% 2% 1% 36.4 p< 0.001 p< 0.001 TM: For example, if an impact of a blue molecule has a value of ten and there are ten impacts, and if an impact of a blue molecule has a value of five, it should be twenty impacts of black molecules for ten impacts of blue molecules; then the wall will stop. The analysis of working sheets collected during the classroom sequences provides more quantitative information about learners passing over these different steps (Méheut 1997). It can also provide evidence about the hypotheses underlying the choice of phenomena and questions. For instance, in choosing the questions, we formulated the hypothesis that students will take into account and compare actions exerted by two systems more for a stopping than for a shifting. The analysis of the data are in accordance with this first hypothesis (table 1). In choosing the phenomena, we made the hypothesis that phenomena related to temperature were more problematic than elastic properties, when temperature is not put into play. This second hypothesis can be seen as preliminary to a third one, that the model will seem more useful to students for explaining thermoelastic properties and then they will use it more than for elastic properties. The analysis of the data is in accordance with the second hypothesis (table 2), but we did not observe the expected effect related to the third hypothesis. We now consider that the questions we chose were not sufficient for students to feel the need of such a model and use it more than alternative phenomenological types of explanation. We have to remember that a major quality of the particulate model is its unifying power. Establishing this characteristic on a secure basis is a long process! Table 2. Testing the H2 hypothesis. Compression Expanding Heating Cooling Prediction (a = 79) (a = 77) (a = 79) (a= 77) Right direction shifting 77% 53% 22% 21% No shifting 11% 12% 39% 40% Wrong direction shifting 11% 31% 22% 25% No answer 0%. 4% 17% 14%Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 2011 TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS 617 Discussing the validation of sequences Experimenting with the first sequence, we did not make our hypotheses about the effects of such or such a situation explicit and did not anticipate precisely the possible learning pathways of students through these situations. We could mainly evaluate its global effectiveness with regard to our explicit objectives. Observing students at work during this sequence and analysing working sheets made us conscious of the distance between our implicit expectations and the actual cognitive pathways of students, what led us to make our hypotheses as explicit as possible when designing the second sequence, and to anticipate more precisely learning pathways we expected. Then, using interviews, we could draw up the learning pathways students develop through these learning situations and compare, in an ‘ingenierie didactique’ point of view, these learning pathways with the expected ones. We could also test hypotheses underlying the design of learning situations: two hypotheses were reinforced by this experimentation. This was not the case for the third one; that the model will seem more useful to students for explaining thermoelastic properties and then they will use it more than for elastic properties. ‘We now consider that the questions we chose were not sufficient for students to feel the need of such a model and use it more than alternative phenomenological types of explanation. This ‘negative’ result makes us look back to what appears to be a weak point in the design of the sequence; that, is the low pragmatic and social significance of the problems we submitted to students. That is why we will now pay more attention to this dimension of didactical analysis when developing new teaching-learning sequences. Experimenting with the second sequence, we could also, by way of ques- tionnaires, obtain information about the short-term and longer-term global effectiveness of the sequence with regard to our objectives. Conclusions and perspectives This retrospective analysis demonstrates strong points and weak points of our design methodology. After this analysis, we consider that we took precisely into account much of what is known about difficulties, conceptions and ways of reasoning of students, and interlaced such a psycho-cognitive a priori analysis with a well-developed epistemological one. But, comparing with guidelines suggested by Ingenierie Didactique, we must consider that we did not make the institutional constraints these sequences are compatible with quite explicit. And comparing with the Educational Reconstruction framework, we must recognize lacks concerning the motivational dimensions and the social significance of problems; that is, the ‘contextualization’ of these problems. That is why we will reinforce these dimensions in designing future sequences. From a more general point of view, this analysis leads us to consider three different kinds of results we can obtain when experimenting with teaching-learning sequences. The first one is about the global effectiveness of a sequence with respect to some specific aims; it is usually evaluated with a pre-test/post-test methodology. The second one consists of describing actual learning pathways of students through teaching-learning situations. Third, making hypotheses about the effects of such or such a learning situation explicit, and comparing observed learning pathways with the expected ones also allows one to test ‘local’ hypotheses about learning processes.Downloaded by [ ] at 04:38 21 November 20 618 TEACHING-LEARNING SEQUENCES ABOUT PARTICLE MODELS ‘We can see here that validation issues cannot be disconnected from design issues. Developing precisely a priori analyses in different dimensions, making hypotheses underlying the design of the learning situations explicit, and anticipating expected learning pathways makes it possible to test precise hypotheses about teaching-learning processes. So, different aims can be attained; ‘production engineering’ aims evaluating the effectiveness of the process, and more ‘experi mental research’ aims describing possible learning pathways and validating hypotheses about teaching-learning processes. References Axperssox;, B. (1990) Pupils’ conceptions of matter and its transformation (age 12-16). In P. L. Lijnse et al. (eds.) Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to Microscopic Particles (Utrecht: CD8 Press), 12-35. Arricur, M. (1988) Ingéniérie didactique. Recherches en didactigue des Mathématiques, 9(3), 281-308. Bexsaupe-Vincent, B. and Kownetis, C. (1991) Les atomes. Une anthologie historigue (Paris: Presses Pocket). Brooks, A., Briccs, H. and Driver, R. (1984) Aspects of secondary students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Research Report, The University of Leeds. CHoman Ay Lancer, C. and Meneun, M. (1988) Modéle particulaire et activités de modilisation en classe de quatriéme. Aster, 9, 143-184. (Cnoman, A., Larcumr, C. and Mineun M. (1990) Modéle particulaire et démarches de modélisation (Paris: LIREST). Dow W. M., Avtp, J. and Wisox, D. J. (1978) Pupils’ Concepts of Gases, Liquids, Solids (Dundee: College of Education). Karman, U., Drs R. Groreciner, H. and Komorsx, M. (1995) A model of Educational Reconstruction. Paper presented at The NARST annual meeting, San Francisco, CA. Lasse P. (1995) ‘Developmental research’ as a way to an empirical based ‘didactical structure’ of science. Science Education, 79, 189-199, ‘Maren, M. (1982) Combustions et réaction chimique dans un enscignement destiné a des éléves de sixiéme, Unpublished Thesis, Université Paris 7. ‘Maneur, M, (1997) Designing a learning sequence about a pre-quantitative model of gases: the parts played by questions and by a computer-simulation. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 647-660. Menu, M. and Cxomat, A. (1990) The bounds of children atomism; an attempt to make children build up a particulate model of matter. In P. L. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. de Vos and A. J. Waarlo (eds.) Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to Microscopic Particles (Utrecht: CD8 Press), 266-282, Minmun, M., Costs, A. and Larcrer, C. (1994) Construction d’un modéle cinétique de gaz par des éléves de collége: jeux de questionnement et de simulation. In M. Caillot (ed.) Actes du quatriéme séminaire national de la recherche en didactique des sciences physigues (Amiens: IUFM de Picardie), 53-71. Novick, S. and Nusssavn, J. (1978) Junior high schoo! pupils’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter: an interview study. Science Education, 62, 273-281. Pruxps, H. (1981) The final link in the division process or the first building block? Pre- instructional conceptions about the structure of substances. Chimica didactica, 7, 75-94. Putxatan, B. (1995) Latome dans Vhistoire de la pensée humaine (Paris: Fayard). Rozier, S. and Visxor, L. (1990) Students reasoning in thermodynamics. In P. L. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. de Vos and A. J. Waarlo (eds.) Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to Microscopic Particles (Utrecht: CDB Press), 36-49. ‘Sine, M. G. (1985) Analyse des conceptions de état gazeucx qu’ont les enfants de 11 a 13 ans, en liaison avec la notion de pression, et propositions de stratégies pédagogiques pour en facilter Vévolution. Unpublished thesis, Université Paris 6.