The four most important evaluations: the two NSF Reports: Findings ... and the two U.S. Department of Education Expert Panels' Reports, are on the modeling homepage.
External Evaluation Report: NSF-funded, Modeling Workshop Project: July 22, 1998 site visit to UW River Falls. By Frances Lawrenz, University of Minnesota
External Evaluation Report: NSF-funded project, A Graduate Program for Secondary Physics Teachers. July 24-25, 2003 Site Visit Report. By Frances Lawrenz, University of Minnesota
Evaluation Report: Master of Natural Science Program at Arizona State University. By Eugene Judson (Sept. 2003)
Review of Evaluation
Studies of Mathematics and Science Curricula and Professional Development
Models, Clewell, Beatriz, Cosentino de Cohen, C., et al
(Feb. 20, 2005). Urban Institute study submitted to the GE Foundation in Dcember
2004.
This report found that Modeling Instruction is one of two high school physics
programs that are effective in student achievement.
Numerous evaluations of and by individual teachers are in success stories and in dissertations and master's degree theses.
Final reports:
Physics Modeling Workshops for School
Technology Infusion (Eisenhower grant, 1998-1999)
Physics Modeling for School Technology
Infusion (Arizona Community Foundation, (Arizona, 1998)
Physics Modeling for School Technology
Infusion II (Medtronic Foundation, 1999-2000)
Physics Modeling Workshop for School
Technology Infusion (Arizona Community Foundation 2000)
External Evaluation Report:
Improving the Quality of Arizona Teachers
of Physics, Chemistry, Physical Sciences, and Mathematics
(ITQ grant, 2006-2008). By Rose Shaw, Ph.D..
A Comparison between traditional and “modeling” approaches to undergraduate physics instruction, by James Vesenka et al.(1.4MB in pdf, pages 3 to 7 in Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, vol. 1, #1. June 2002. www.phy.ilstu.edu/jpteo)
Effect of Modeling Method Training on Physics Teacher Development in California’s
Central Valley
by David Andrews, Jaime Arvizu, and James Vesenka. (2004,
3MB in .doc)
Minimizing resistance to inquiry-oriented science instruction:
the importance of climate setting, by Carl Wenning and
Six years of Modeling Workshops: Three cautionary tales, by James Vesenka.
(900kB in pdf.) Both are in Journal of Physics Teacher Education
Online, vol. 3, #2. Dec. 2005. www.phy.ilstu.edu/jpteo)
The Challenges of Designing and Implementing Effective Professional Development for Out-of-Field High School Physics Teachers By Lawrence Escalada and Julia Moeller (Physics Education Research Conference 2006). Teachers learned aspects of Modeling Instruction combined with PRISMS PLUS and RealTime Physics in summers 2002 and 2003.
University Partnership to Deliver Professional Development, by Paul Adams, Earl Legleiter, Malonne Davies, Matt Selmars, Zedslav Hrepic, and Beth Waltzer (Science Scope: April/May 2008). Three-week courses in three summers. For rural middle school and high school science teachers in Kansas.
Final report: Missouri Modeling Physics and Technology Education in Science. Prof. Harold H. Harris, University of Missouri - St. Louis (Eisenhower grant, 2000-2001)
Extended Physics Community (NSF-funded, 1999-2003). Summary of findings: a section of the final report. Gerald Meisner, Principal Investigator.
External Evaluation Report:
Modeling Instruction for Physical
Science and Chemistry in Ohio, 2007-2008 (ITQ grant).
By Jan Upton, Ph.D. and Stephen Maack, Ph.D.
Appendices 3-9 Appendices
12-14
Three three-week Modeling Workshops held in summer 2007 were
studied. It was the first time the chemistry workshop was held; the 2008 chemistry
workshop was much improved. The Force Concept Inventory post-test mean score
was 80% and normalized gain was 0.54.
TIMSS Physics Achievement Comparison
Study, April 2000 (44 pages, 400kB in pdf). Conducted
for the National Science Foundation by the TIMSS International Study Center
at Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467. The author is Eugenio Gonzalez
<EGonzalez@ets.org>. The six NSF high school programs in the TIMSS study
were: Modeling Instruction, PTRA (Physics Teacher Resource Agents: an American
Assn of Physics Teachers program), Physics by Inquiry (at the University of
Washington), Constructing Physics Understanding (CPU, at San Diego State University),
C3P (at the University of Dallas, TX), and Minds-on Physics (at the University
of Massachusetts).
A synopsis of the report is at success
stories.
The C3P Project: A Study of Dissemination, Implementation, and Effects, by Kay Thomas (an external evaluation report using the FCI, 1998). (78 pages, 240kB in pdf)
