Instant Ebook Access, One Click Away – Begin at ebookball.

com

(Ebook PDF) Learning How to Teach Mathematical

Modeling in School and Teacher Education 1st
edition by Rita Borromeo Ferri 3319680722
9783319680729 full chapters
https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-how-to-
teach-mathematical-modeling-in-school-and-teacher-
education-1st-edition-by-rita-borromeo-
ferri-3319680722-9783319680729-full-chapters-23014/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookball.com

 Your digital treasures (PDF, ePub, MOBI) await
Download instantly and pick your perfect format...

Read anywhere, anytime, on any device!

Learning How to Teach Mathematical Modeling in School And

Teacher Education 1st Edition by Rita Borromeo Ferri
3319680714 9783319680712

https://ebookball.com/product/learning-how-to-teach-mathematical-
modeling-in-school-and-teacher-education-1st-edition-by-rita-borromeo-
ferri-3319680714-9783319680712-17344/

ebookball.com

(Ebook PDF) Practice Makes Practice A Critical Study of

Learning to Teach Suny Series Teacher Empowerment and
School Reform 1st edition by Deborah Britzman 0791486222
9780791486221 full chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-practice-makes-practice-a-
critical-study-of-learning-to-teach-suny-series-teacher-empowerment-
and-school-reform-1st-edition-by-deborah-
britzman-0791486222-9780791486221-full-chapters-23276/
ebookball.com

(Ebook PDF) Learning to Teach Art and Design in the

Secondary School A Companion to School Experience Second
Edition by Nicholas Addison isbn 0415168813 9780415168816
full chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-to-teach-art-and-
design-in-the-secondary-school-a-companion-to-school-experience-
second-edition-by-nicholas-addison-isbn-0415168813-9780415168816-full-
chapters-23324/
ebookball.com

(Ebook PDF) LEARNING TO TEACH ENGLISH IN THE SECONDARY

SCHOOL A companion to school experience 3rd Edition by Jon
Davison, Jane Dowson isbn 0203871146 9780203871140 full
chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-to-teach-english-in-
the-secondary-school-a-companion-to-school-experience-3rd-edition-by-
jon-davison-jane-dowson-isbn-0203871146-9780203871140-full-
chapters-23326/
ebookball.com
(Ebook PDF) Learning to Teach Mathematics in the Secondary
School 4th edition by Sue Johnston Wilder isbn 0415342821
9780415342827 full chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-to-teach-mathematics-
in-the-secondary-school-4th-edition-by-sue-johnston-wilder-
isbn-0415342821-9780415342827-full-chapters-23320/

ebookball.com

(Ebook PDF) Learning to Teach in the Primary School, 2nd

Edition by Teresa Cremin, James Arthur isbn 978-0415487900
0415487900 full chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-to-teach-in-the-
primary-school-2nd-edition-by-teresa-cremin-james-arthur-
isbn-978-0415487900-0415487900-full-chapters-23330/

ebookball.com

Learning to Teach in the Primary School Learning to Teach

in the Primary School Series 1st Edition by James Arthur,
Teresa Grainger 0415487900 978-0415487900

https://ebookball.com/product/learning-to-teach-in-the-primary-school-
learning-to-teach-in-the-primary-school-series-1st-edition-by-james-
arthur-teresa-grainger-0415487900-978-0415487900-17406/

ebookball.com

Learning to Teach in the Primary School Learning to Teach

in the Primary School Series 1st Edition by James Arthur,
Teresa Grainger 0415487900 978-0415487900

https://ebookball.com/product/learning-to-teach-in-the-primary-school-
learning-to-teach-in-the-primary-school-series-1st-edition-by-james-
arthur-teresa-grainger-0415487900-978-0415487900-17486/

ebookball.com

(Ebook PDF) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School A

companion to school experience 9th edition By Susan Capel,
Marilyn Leask, Sarah Younie, Elizabeth Hidson, Julia
Lawrence isbn 9781000591330 1000591336 full chapters

https://ebookball.com/product/ebook-pdf-learning-to-teach-in-the-
secondary-school-a-companion-to-school-experience-9th-edition-by-
susan-capel-marilyn-leask-sarah-younie-elizabeth-hidson-julia-
lawrence-isbn-9781000591330-1000591336/
ebookball.com
Rita Borromeo Ferri

Learning How to Teach

Mathematical Modeling
in School and Teacher
Education
Learning How to Teach Mathematical Modeling
in School and Teacher Education
Rita Borromeo Ferri

Learning How to Teach

Mathematical Modeling
in School and Teacher
Education
Rita Borromeo Ferri
Institute of Mathematics
University of Kassel
Kassel, Germany

ISBN 978-3-319-68071-2    ISBN 978-3-319-68072-9 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68072-9

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017954948

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Dedicated to
Dominik, Giulia and Laura
Foreword

Mathematical modeling means translating between the real world and mathematics
in both directions. This entails mathematising real world problems by choosing or
constructing suitable mathematical models (the translation from the real world into
mathematics), as well as interpreting and validating results of the solution of corre-
sponding mathematical problems in real world contexts (the translation from math-
ematics into the real world). Mathematical modeling is an important competency
that students of all ages ought to acquire. Among the reasons why modeling is so
important is its role as a method for better understanding the world around us which
is full of mathematics, often hidden in technology. Furthermore, links to the real
world may support the understanding of mathematical content and motivate students
to engage with it. In addition, connections between reality and mathematics are an
indispensable ingredient for an adequate picture of mathematics. So, mathematics
teachers at all levels have to be prepared to teach modeling in an effective way.
There is a lot of literature on learning and teaching modeling, in journals for
researchers or for teachers and in conference proceedings, and there is an ICMI
Study Volume on “Modelling and Applications in Mathematics Education” which
represents the state of the art in the first decade of the 21st century. However, there
is no book on teaching mathematical modeling which can be used by teachers to
find theory- and evidence-based ideas for their teaching, and at the same time be
used by teacher educators for preparing future or practicing teachers in pre- or
in-service courses for high-quality teaching of mathematical modeling.
It is the intention of the present book by Rita Borromeo Ferri to fill this gap and
present a book with suggestions and ideas for theory- and evidence-based teaching
of mathematical modeling. Consequently, the audience of this book consists of prac-
ticing and future mathematics teachers at all levels, as well as teacher educators. The
starting point is a list of professional competencies that teachers have to have in
order to be able to teach modeling in an appropriate way. The model of teacher
competencies that the author uses comprises four “dimensions”: a theoretical dimen-
sion, a task dimension, an instructional dimension, and a diagnostic dimension.
Of course, these dimensions are not independent and interact with one another.

vii
viii Foreword

This model constitutes the structure of the current book. After the introductory
Chap. 1, the following four Chaps. 2, 3, 4 and 5 deal in detail with those four dimen-
sions. In each chapter, there are concrete examples of relevant aspects of these top-
ics (tasks and problems, student solutions, teaching scenarios, and exercises for the
reader), based on research findings and experience. The aim is to provide the reader
with the most important tools for teaching and, at the same time, to involve him/her
actively, since not only student learning but also teacher learning has to take place
according to the crucial balance between guided and independent working.
In Chap. 6, the book deals with modeling days or weeks and modeling projects,
activities which in most countries will be outside the regular school curriculum.
Such activities allow consideration of more complex and authentic modeling tasks
and problems for which one or two school lessons would not be sufficient. Thus,
this chapter substantially broadens the spectrum of modeling examples that teachers
ought to know.
Although there are good reasons for teaching modeling and although an increas-
ing number of countries include modeling explicitly in their standards and curricula,
there is still a considerable gap between official regulations and the educational
debate, on the one hand, and everyday teaching practice, on the other hand. We hope
that this book contributes to reducing this gap and to implementing mathematical
modeling in everyday classrooms all over the world.

Werner Blum
University of Kassel
Kassel, Germany
Henry Pollak
Columbia University
New York, NY, USA
Preface: Goal of This Book

The teaching and learning of mathematical modeling has become a key competency
within school curricula and educational standards in many countries of the world. It
happens very often, when someone is confronted with a “new thing” and does not
know a lot about this “new idea”, that they are doubtful and then perhaps neglect this
innovation. This is what has happened with the educational standards for mathemat-
ics in Germany since 2003 (Blum et al. 2006) and in Chile since 2012. This could
happen now with the Common Core State Standards in the United States (2010),
which have a more extensive guidelines than NCTM-Standards concerning the
goals and abilities that learners have to achieve from kindergarten up to high school,
which then help them to be successful at college, university and in their life.
Mathematical modeling is now explicitly exposed in the Common Core State
Standards: “Students can apply the mathematics they know to solve problems aris-
ing in everyday life, society, and the workplace.” (NGA Center and CCSSO 2010,
pp. 6–8). This means concretely that extra-mathematical contexts and real life situ-
ations have to be solved with the help of mathematics (while taking into account the
ages of the students). A true mathematical modeling activity involves processes that
transition back and forth between reality and mathematics.
Not only in the United States, but in other countries all over the world, teachers
now face the challenge of teaching mathematical modeling. During my workshops
on the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling in many countries I was
confronted with many questions and doubts from teachers concerning this new part
of education. My experience shows, that as well as motivation for teaching model-
ing, you also need knowledge and competency.
One central goal of this book is to show researchers, teacher educators and teach-
ers of all grades that mathematical modeling can be taught and learnt, on the basis
of several examples and teaching concepts. Mathematical modeling activities will
change the minds of your students at middle, high-school and university concerning
(the subject) mathematics. On the basis of my experiences as a former school

ix
x Preface: Goal of This Book

teacher and a university professor, I am aware that it will also change your own way
of thinking and understanding mathematics. So further goals of this book are:
• to give you a theoretical background about mathematical modeling.
• to make connections between theoretical concepts or results of empirical studies
and what you actually do in school.
• to analyze and make transparent what is meant by modeling in the Common
Core standards and in the syllabus.
• to give examples of how modeling can be taught and why it is necessary to have
well-defined criteria for effective teaching.
• to train and qualify you in basic competencies for the teaching and learning of
mathematical modeling with some integrated exercises, so that you are able to
equip your colleagues.
Learning and teaching go hand in hand, but the focus on this book lies specifi-
cally on how to teach mathematical modeling to your students. The structure of this
book follows a model of teaching modeling competencies for that has four dimen-
sions (Borromeo Ferri and Blum 2009): theoretical, task, instructional and
diagnostic.
So Chap. 1 starts with a short overview of research into teacher education in
mathematical modeling and presents an example of a well-evaluated course concept
for pre-service and in-service teacher education and training. The aim is to show
how educators can be taught how to teach mathematical modeling. Furthermore, the
four competencies needed to teach modeling are briefly explained.
Chapter 2 builds the necessary theoretical basis for your practical work at school
or in teacher education, which means, for example, that you understand the goals
and aims of mathematical modeling, and how you can use the modeling cycle as a
multi-purpose learning instrument.
Appropriate modeling problems are the key instruments for reality-based lessons
and understanding the criteria for modeling tasks is important. In Chap. 3 the ‘Task’
competency is highlighted. Different aspects of handling multiple solutions to mod-
eling problems are shown and discussed. To support the importance of cognitive
analysis of modeling problems for assessment, you will start a mini project and
develop a modeling problem for your class the next day.
Chapter 4 starts by presenting concepts of mathematical modeling lesson plan-
ning and execution. During modeling activities, which can be complex at first, it is
important that students of all grades do not lose their motivation and stay focused on
their modeling problem; especially when you start with modeling activities. This
means that the teacher must understand how to intervene, support students and give
feedback. Theoretical background concerning these aspects and practical examples
are presented, to indicate how you could do this in school. While you are working
on Chap. 5 you will recognize that topics you have covered earlier in this book
become important and make sense. The basis for diagnosis and assessment in math-
ematical modeling is your knowledge and experiences with modeling cycles or the
development of modeling problems, and the way you are able to differentiate
between phases of the modeling process/cycle.
Preface: Goal of This Book xi

Finally in Chap. 6 we go for more – mathematical modeling not only in single,

short mathematics lessons, but three whole days concentrating on one complex real
life problem. Goals, aims and structure of these days are presented, as well as how
teacher education on mathematical modeling can be effectively linked with this
activity. The book ends with reflections and an outlook in Chap. 7.
Each chapter contains some exercises to help you reflect and apply your under-
standing and knowledge of the topics. Ideas for directly implementing the examples
and methods presented in your own lessons are given throughout all chapters.
My wish is to arouse your interest in a new and important part of the mathemat-
ics standards and curriculum, as well as in mathematics education overall, and to
provide a new view of mathematics for you and your students.
He who wants to get new answers has to ask new questions.
– Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

University of Kassel Rita Borromeo Ferri

Kassel, Germany
Acknowledgments

This book presents a huge part of my research and experiences in the field of math-
ematical modeling education. Since I finished my habilitation about “Ways to the
inner world of mathematical modeling – cognitive analysis of modeling processes”
in 2005, my goal was to know more about the teaching and learning of mathemati-
cal modeling in school and teacher education. In the last 12 years I have done a lot
of research, often jointly with colleagues from all over the world and I learned so
much from teachers and students in every country. I tried to address about their
motivations and doubts about modeling activities in the classroom. The university
students who attended my modeling seminars in Germany and United States over
the last decade were also good inspirations. They raised many questions and ideas
for how mathematical modeling can be taught from their perspective, so I super-
vised Master and PhD theses, the results of which enriched this book. At a certain
point it ultimately became my vision to write a book about learning how to teach
mathematical modeling.
During the few last years I have had the opportunity to work together with many
great people from the mathematical modeling scene. I’m grateful for the in-depth
discussion with my ‘scientific grandfather’ Werner Blum about nearly all aspects
concerning the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling. Dozens of joint
presentations and articles demonstrate our fruitful collaboration. I thank Gabriele
Kaiser who introduced me the field of mathematics education. My research in cog-
nitive modeling was and is influenced by Dick Lesh and I thank him for our creative
discussions. My thanks also go to Henry Pollak, and through many conversations I
learned about the beginnings of mathematical modeling as a discipline for teaching
and learning in school and university.
Furthermore I thank my dear colleague Andreas Meister for showing me in detail
his perspective of mathematical modeling as an applied mathematician. The real life
problems Andreas is dealing with in his research or for industry purposes led me
think much more about goals, aims and possibilities of teaching and learning math-
ematical modeling in school.
I thank Elizabeth Lim for proofreading my book. Her smart and critical comments
as a high school teacher were very helpful during writing and finalizing the book.

xiii
xiv Acknowledgments

My wonderful daughters Laura and Giulia know how important it is for me to

write this book. Thank you both for making me often laugh with your singing and
dancing and for your happiness you bring in my life. Finally my deep thanks to my
husband Dominik for his everlasting support, patience, love, and his easy attitude
towards life.
Mathematical modeling activities showed where, why, and how mathematics plays a role in
real life, and also solving such real life questions in a team motivated me to understand
more mathematics!
– Chris, 15 years old
Contents

1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling��������������������    1

1.1 Research in Teacher Education on Mathematical Modeling:
Short Background ������������������������������������������������������������������������������   1
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators:
An Evaluated Module ������������������������������������������������������������������������   3
1.2.1 Guiding Principle and “Pedagogical Double-Decker” ����������   4
1.2.2 Structure of a Modeling Course for Teacher Education:
Theory-Practice-Balance��������������������������������������������������������   4
1.2.3 Mathematical Modeling and Cooperative Learning ��������������   6
2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work������������������������������ 13
2.1 What Does Mathematical Modeling Mean?:
Goals and Aims���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
2.1.1 Real Situation (RS) ���������������������������������������������������������������� 15
2.1.2 Mental Representation of the Situation (MRS)���������������������� 15
2.1.3 Real Model (RM)�������������������������������������������������������������������� 15
2.1.4 Extra-Mathematical Knowledge (EMK)�������������������������������� 16
2.1.5 Mathematical Model (MM)���������������������������������������������������� 16
2.1.6 Mathematical Results (MR)���������������������������������������������������� 16
2.1.7 Real Results (RR) ������������������������������������������������������������������ 17
2.1.8 Goals and Justifications for the Inclusion Mathematical
Modeling in Everyday Teaching �������������������������������������������� 17
2.1.9 International Perspectives on Mathematical Modeling���������� 18
2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument ���������������� 20
2.2.1 Modeling Cycle from Applied Mathematics�������������������������� 21
2.2.2 Didactical or Pedagogical Modeling Cycle���������������������������� 22
2.2.3 Psychological Modeling Cycle ���������������������������������������������� 23
2.2.4 Diagnostic Modeling Cycle/Modeling Cycle
from a Cognitive Perspective�������������������������������������������������� 24

xv
xvi Contents

2.2.5 Modeling Cycles Presented in Mathematics Standards:

Exemplified Along the Common Core State Standards
Mathematics of the United States of America������������������������ 25
2.2.6 Mathematical Modeling Cycle as a Multi-purpose
(and Metacognitive) Learning Instrument������������������������������ 27
2.3 Far from Linearity: Individual Modeling Routes�������������������������������� 30
2.3.1 Visible Modeling Routes and the Influence of Extra-­
Mathematical Experience������������������������������������������������������� 31
2.3.2 Mathematical Thinking Styles and Modeling Routes
of Learners and Teachers�������������������������������������������������������� 34
2.3.3 Teachers’ Behavior While Modeling Activities
in the Classroom �������������������������������������������������������������������� 36
2.3.4 Mr. P.: The “Retrospective Formalizer”���������������������������������� 37
2.3.5 Mrs. R.: The “Realistic Validator”������������������������������������������ 38
3 Task Competency: For Your Instructional Flexibility��������������������������   41
3.1 Criteria of (Good) Modeling Problems���������������������������������������������� 43
3.1.1 What Characterizes a Modeling Problem? ���������������������������� 43
3.1.2 Criteria of Modeling Problems ���������������������������������������������� 46
3.1.3 Developing a Modeling Problem: From Brainstorming
to a Challenge for Students in School������������������������������������ 47
3.1.4 Ready for a Change?: From a Problem
to a Modeling Problem����������������������������������������������������������� 56
3.1.5 The Potential of Modeling Problems:
One for All and All for One���������������������������������������������������� 58
3.2 Mathematical Modeling Competencies: Fostering
and Eliciting���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 65
3.2.1 Fostering and Eliciting Modeling Competencies�������������������� 67
3.3 Influence of the Real Context of the Task
on an Individual’s Modeling Processes���������������������������������������������� 70
4 Instructional Competency: For Effective and Quality Lessons����������   77
4.1 Quality Criteria for Good Lessons������������������������������������������������������ 77
4.1.1 Effective and Learner-Oriented Classroom
Management���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 78
4.1.2 Cognitive Activation of Learners�������������������������������������������� 78
4.1.3 Meta-Cognitive Activation of Learners���������������������������������� 79
4.1.4 Encouraging Multiple Solutions �������������������������������������������� 79
4.1.5 Mathematical Modeling as a Long-Term
Learning Process�������������������������������������������������������������������� 79
4.2 Planning and Executing Mathematical Modeling Lessons ���������������� 80
4.2.1 First Part: 8 Principles for Planning and Executing
Mathematical Modeling Lessons�������������������������������������������� 80
4.2.2 Second Part: Lesson Plan for the Modeling Problem
“Moving House” �������������������������������������������������������������������� 83
4.3 Interventions During Modeling Activities������������������������������������������ 86
Contents xvii

4.4 Ways of Accustoming Students to Modeling Problems

and the Role of Technology���������������������������������������������������������������� 94
4.4.1 First Aspect: Introducing Modeling Problems
to Students������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 94
4.4.2 Second Aspect: The Role of Technologies ���������������������������� 100
5 Diagnostic Competency: Basis for Your Assessment
and Grading���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 103
5.1 From Recognizing Progress and Difficulties
to the Right Feedback (and Intervention) ������������������������������������������ 104
5.1.1 Diagnose: Definitions and Theoretical Background �������������� 104
5.1.2 Diagnostic Sheet as a Tool for Diagnosing Modeling
Competency During the Solving Process ������������������������������ 105
5.1.3 Written Feedback for Written Solutions
of Modeling Problems������������������������������������������������������������ 109
5.2 Assessing Modeling Through Tests���������������������������������������������������� 111
6 Mathematical Modeling Days and Projects: Go for More �������������������� 121
6.1 How to Plan Mathematical Modeling Days���������������������������������������� 121
6.1.1 Structure of the Modeling Days���������������������������������������������� 122
6.1.2 Which Spacing of Bus Stops Along a Bus Route
Is Optimal?������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 124
6.1.3 Students’ Solution������������������������������������������������������������������ 127
6.2 Building Bridges Between University and School ���������������������������� 128
6.2.1 Pre-service Teachers’ Reflections After Students’
Modeling Activities���������������������������������������������������������������� 129
7 Reflections and Outlook���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 135

Appendix ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 139

References �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 141

Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 149
Chapter 1
Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical
Modeling

1.1  esearch in Teacher Education on Mathematical

R
Modeling: Short Background

In the last 10 to 15 years, a lot of empirical research was done with the aim of inves-
tigating the teaching and learning processes of mathematical modeling, first of all in
secondary school, high-school and university, but also, in primary school to some
extent. Learning and teaching go hand in hand and so they often were and are inves-
tigated together, in order to get a whole picture of the inter-connected processes.
Looking at the research within mathematical modeling, one can pragmatically dis-
tinguish between two groups of studies, from the teacher’s point of view:
• Group a) Studies with a focus on answering questions about effective or ade-
quate teaching of mathematical modeling in classroom or laboratory settings.
• Group b) Studies with a focus on answering questions about how mathematical
modeling in teacher education at university and teacher training can be devel-
oped, optimized and evaluated.
In a few cases research studies can be classified in both groups. The number of
research studies is much larger in Group 1 than in Group 2. Some central studies of
Group 1 and their results are summarized here, in order to show that clearly defined
teaching competencies did not exist until the model of Borromeo Ferri and Blum
(2009a) was developed.
The extensive research work done by the US-researcher Richard Lesh (Lesh and
Doerr 2003) has to be mentioned. The Model-Eliciting-Activity Approach (MEA)
can be seen as an important outcome from the debate on modeling in the United
States, and from Lesh and his “MEA-group”. According to Lesh, Model Eliciting
Activities should start in kindergarten, so learners can experience problems typical
of various professions, like engineering or economics. This helps them to understand
how mathematics is needed in real life. As well as the learner’s perspective, Lesh

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1

R. Borromeo Ferri, Learning How to Teach Mathematical Modeling in School
and Teacher Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68072-9_1
2 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

always had in mind the important role that teachers play during modeling activities.
For example, his research focus lies on teachers’ Modeling Eliciting Activities or on
teachers’ understanding and interpretation of real-life contexts, and finally their
reflection on this, which also has effects for the learners (Schorr and Lesh 2003).
An important research question was, and still is, which kinds of teacher interven-
tions are appropriate while modeling. The results of the German DISUM-project
showed that in everyday classrooms nearly no strategic interventions take place and
most interventions are not adaptive. The diagnosis of a learner’s problems while
modeling is the first step before giving teacher intervention or a feedback. But diag-
nosis is only possible if the teacher has enough content knowledge and pedagogical
content knowledge, concerning the modeling task he or she had given the students,
together with a strong focus on modeling. The results of the CoCA-project, refer-
ring to the DISUM-project, make it clear that firstly, most teachers are not able to
diagnose the needs of their learners and give feedback, and secondly, teachers who
received education in the theoretical background about diagnosis and feedback per-
formed better with their learners (Leiß 2007; Blum 2011).
The fact that trainee math teachers at University can become more accustomed
to modeling through complex modeling tasks was investigated in several studies.
Most of them are best practice reports about a modeling course together with their
reflections (see Blomhøj and Kjeldsen 2007; Schwarz and Kaiser 2007; Maaß and
Gurlitt 2011). However the results of these studies show a change in the university
students’ or in-service teachers’ view of mathematics, simply through dealing with
modeling problems. Furthermore, an improvement in modeling competencies was
observed. The three essential barriers for primary and secondary teachers teaching
modeling are material, time and assessment. For expert teachers in mathematical
modeling, time was not such a strong barrier as it was for the inexperienced teachers
(Schmidt 2009; Borromeo Ferri 2014).
Another interesting and important aspect was, and still is, the development of uni-
versity courses or teacher training workshops for the teaching and learning of model-
ing in different grades. This was the central point of several design-based research
studies by Lesh and others and is also a research field within the “Modeling Group” at
the University of Kassel in Germany. The approach of Lesh’s multi-tier professional
development is that teachers learn to understand how their students think while mod-
eling. Multi-tier professional development is designed to focus teachers’ attention on
students’ modeling behavior (Lesh and Doerr 2003). I use a similar approach when
designing courses: always including video sequences of students’ modeling processes
or their written solutions to make it as concrete for trainee teachers as possible. The
evaluation of these courses and workshops with questionnaires, interviews or learning
diaries throughout the whole semester is equally important. Reflecting on their own
learning processes and developing an understanding of what teaching modeling
means, helps the teacher to implement it in the next lesson.
We would like to emphasize once again the necessity of trainee mathematics teachers hav-
ing vast opportunities to deal with mathematical modeling, both on a theoretical and on a
practical level, including experiences with modeling at school. (Borromeo Ferri and Blum
2010, p. 2047)
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators: An Evaluated Module 3

Fig. 1.1 From teaching competencies to student learning

More research is needed in the whole field of teacher education within mathe-
matical modeling: for example, long-term studies, which investigate how in-service
teachers’ knowledge about how to teach modeling, which they learned at university,
affects the modeling competency of their students. This could be compared with
teachers who did not have the opportunity to receive training in at least basic com-
petencies for teaching modeling.
A brief look at the results of two large-scale studies that investigated secondary
mathematics teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Content Knowledge
(CK) shows interesting aspects for teaching mathematics in general, which have impli-
cations for the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling specifically.
The COACTIV-project (Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and
Professional Competence of Teachers) comprised a representative sample of sec-
ondary teachers and their students from the PISA study in Germany in 2003 and
2004. The central result was that teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge is a
significant predictor for his or her student achievement gains (Kunter and Baumert
2011). For example, the more a teacher is able to use cognitive activating mathemat-
ical tasks in their lessons, which allow multiple solutions, the better the mathemati-
cal performance of the students will be. Knowledge about mathematical tasks is one
important part of Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The international TEDS-study
(Teacher Education Development Study; e.g. Blömeke et al. 2016) got similar
results, which means without doubt that teachers matter most. The outcome or the
effects of teachers’ competencies in general is represented in the model below.
Quality teaching is also a main impact factor on students’ learning. Why well-­
defined criteria for teaching are so important is discussed in Sect. 3.1 (Fig. 1.1).
As well as a strong mathematical background (Content Knowledge) Pedagogical
Content Knowledge is necessary for teaching modeling and applications.

1.2  athematical Modeling Course for Educating

M
the Educators: An Evaluated Module

In the previous section it became clear that a lot of empirical studies in the last few
years have dealt with the question of how modeling can be taught in school or how
students at University can become accustomed to modeling through complex model-
ing tasks. The results of these studies opened new ways of thinking about modeling
and the way it can be integrated into school mathematics in an effective way. However,
the question of how these aspects can be integrated into teacher education and training
is still not answered. One reason for this, as mentioned earlier, is that there are no
4 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

well-defined criteria for the competencies that teachers should have, in order to effec-
tively teach modeling. In the following sections a course module for educating teach-
ers on how to teach mathematical modeling is presented, which was developed by the
author of this book. This course has been evaluated and modified over the last 8 years
in response to the various needs of the university or of the in-service teachers during
teacher training. These courses were taught in Germany, in the United States, and in
several other countries around the world. When I first conceived the course, the ques-
tion was: how can university courses prepare future teachers for teaching modeling in
school, and which contents and methods are appropriate?

1.2.1 Guiding Principle and “Pedagogical Double-Decker”

The first didactical approach or guiding principle for these courses was, and is still:
If we want our university students and in-service teachers to teach modeling in an
appropriate way (with matching content and method, cognitive activation of pupils,
reflection on learning and integration of summative assessment) we as lecturers
have to conceive our own teaching in exactly the same way (matching content and
method, cognitive activation, reflection, summative assessment).
This way of planning seminars, courses or workshops gives the participants the
opportunity to learn about the content and to have the experience of a teaching method
they can use in their lessons at the same time. Within Higher Education you can find
this way of course planning called a “pedagogical double-decker” (Geissler 1985).
But independent of the time you have for a course on teaching and learning of math-
ematical modeling, always keep in mind what I call the Theory-Practice-Balance.

1.2.2  tructure of a Modeling Course for Teacher Education:

S
Theory-Practice-Balance

Based on the fact that you have, for example, 32 h for a university course and at least
2 days for a teacher training workshop, the overall structure of the course should be
the same. As an exemplar, a university course is outlined below, to give you an idea of
the required time. The seminars take place once a week for 90 min over one semester,
which means 14 lessons (21 h) altogether. According to the meaning of a university
seminar, which is the same for teacher training, the participants are expected to be
actively involved in all activities and to cover a major part of the course by their own
presentations. Mathematical Modeling as a crucial part of teacher education may, of
course, be structured in many different ways because it is a vast field and contains a
lot of important aspects. But in the considerations for planning and structuring a mod-
eling seminar in a new way, the content and the methods should fit to each other. This
is also a challenge for the lecturer. Concerning content, I regard the following teaching
competencies as particularly important when teaching modeling:
• Theoretical: knowledge about modeling cycles, about goals/perspectives for
modeling and about types of modeling tasks.
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators: An Evaluated Module 5

Fig. 1.2 Model for competencies needed in teaching mathematical modeling (Borromeo Ferri and
Blum 2009; Borromeo Ferri 2014)

• Task-related: ability to solve, analyze and create modeling tasks.

• Teaching: ability to plan and execute modeling lessons and knowledge of appro-
priate interventions during the pupils’ modeling processes.
• Diagnostic: ability to identify phases in pupils’ modeling processes and to diag-
nose pupils’ difficulties during such processes.
In the beginning, these four teaching competencies were and are the basis for the
structure of the course, and after several evaluations it is consolidated into the fol-
lowing model (Fig. 1.2):
The course is subdivided in the following five parts, in order to have an appropri-
ate balance between the more theoretical and the more practical phases. The above
dimensions are included in the different parts:
• Part 1 (Theory): Theoretical background about modeling (3 lessons)
• Part 2 (Practice): Solving and developing modeling problems (3 lessons)
• Part 3 (Theory and Practice): (1) Students analyze transcripts of pupils’ work on
modeling problems and video sequences; (2) Competencies are needed for mod-
eling1; (3) Types of teacher interventions while modeling; (4) Methods for teach-
ing modeling in school (4 lessons)
• Part 4 (Presentations): Groups of students present modeling tasks that they have
developed and discuss how pupils in school solved these tasks. (3 lessons)
• Part 5: Last lesson – reflection on the work over the whole semester or the whole
workshop and evaluation

1
At the end of this part there is an intermediate evaluation of the course up to that point on the basis
of a questionnaire.
6 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

1.2.3 Mathematical Modeling and Cooperative Learning

One important goal of the course is that participants do not only solve or develop
modeling tasks (Part 2), but also learn methods of teaching modeling (Part 4). For
me as the educator, it seems important not to merely say which methods could be
useful, but to integrate them directly into the work in the seminar. Thus, in the style
of the “pedagogical double-decker” I use “Cooperative Learning” teaching strate-
gies (e.g. Johnson and Johnson 1999; Kagan 1990) throughout the whole course.
This is also because I found these strategies effective when I was teaching modeling
to all grades in school. Mathematical Modeling content fits very well with
Cooperative Learning as a teaching strategy. Research has shown (e.g. Johnson and
Johnson 1999) that cooperative learning techniques promote pupils’ learning and
academic achievement, increase pupils’ retention, enhance pupils’ satisfaction with
their learning experience, help pupils develop skills in oral communication, develop
pupils’ social skills, and promote pupils’ self-esteem. Several studies on modeling
have made it clear that modeling is better done as a group activity (Ikeda et al. 2007),
because this encourages students to discuss mathematics and extra-mathematical
aspects, trains them to engage in logical debates and gives them the chance to profit
from group synergy. That is why in the first lesson of the course or during work-
shops, the participants have to build so-called “basis-groups” of four to five people,
which are supposed to work together over the whole semester or during the work-
shop time. However, working in groups is only more productive than competitive
and individualistic efforts under certain conditions. Those conditions are (Kagan
1990): Positive Interdependence, Face-to-Face-Interaction, Individual & Group
Accountability, Interpersonal & Small-Group Skills and Group Processing.
Within my courses I take care that all group activities fulfil these conditions.
These activities are finally combined with the content aspects of the seminar:
Part 1: It is important to clarify what is meant by mathematical modeling at the
beginning, especially within mathematics education (see Sect. 2.1 for further details).
To involve the participants, who mostly have different levels of knowledge, I often use
the method “placemat”. This method is simple to understand and to conduct. For
“placemat” the participants build groups of four people. They have to divide one piece
of paper into five sections, with one section in the middle of the paper (see Fig. 1.3).
The group members sit around this paper. When thinking about the question
“what mathematical modeling means”, each person writes their thoughts in their

Fig. 1.3 Placemat-method

for question “what is Student 1
Writes here
mathematical modeling?”
Student Student
4 Group idea 2
Writes goes here. Writes
here here
Student 3
Writes here
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators: An Evaluated Module 7

own part. After this, the group discusses about the different outcomes and then they
have to find a consensus on what mathematical modeling is and write this in the
middle of the paper. Take care that you inform the groups about the time for this
activity. Based on my experience, 10 min are enough, which means that most groups
will have reached a consensus in this time. The ideas have to be shared with the
plenum afterwards. If you want all groups to work effectively, tell them that you will
chose one group once the time is over. Time limits are important for method-
activities in general, for both teachers and docents, because good time-management
is one criterion of high-quality teaching (see Sect. 4.1). Another thing you have to
keep in mind is your physical presence during the group-work activities. It is neces-
sary to be aware of the discussions in the group, so go around and choose a group to
make the first presentation. In using this “placemat” method you are training the
pre-service teachers how to teach using group activities at the same time:
Positive Interdependence The group members aim to finish their work in 10 min,
so they can present their main idea of what mathematical modeling is, how it can be
described etc. Since no group knows whether they will be chosen for presentation,
each group likes to be prepared as best as they can. So each person in the group now
has a positive interdependence with the other members of the group in some way.
This means in practice that they began to know that their success depends on the
participation of all the members, in particular when you as a teacher or docent ini-
tially start using cooperative learning methods in class.
Face-to-Face-Interaction It sounds simple, but is often neglected in every day
communication in the classroom or in university courses or workshops: look into
the eyes of your partner or your group members actively. Learning to listen to what
someone is saying and then to react appropriately and vice versa is important.
Before the group idea can be written on the paper, every person has to be listening.
Face-to-Face means that people show their interest in others’ opinions and work
together on a solution. If someone’s conception of mathematical modeling is the
geometrical forming of fire clay, the other group members should not interrupt them
immediately, even though it is not correct. Face-to-Face-Interaction involves
appraising what other individuals are saying.
Individual and Group Accountability The purpose of the cooperative groups, like
here for the “placemat group”, is to make each member stronger as an individual.
Individual accountability ensures that all group members take responsibility for
their share of the work. Team members are also responsible for the work of their
teammates. In the placemat activity “the work” means to present a consensus on
what mathematical modeling means for them.
Interpersonal and Small Group Skills The following social skills are included in
this aspect: Leadership, Decision-making, Trust-building, Communication and
Conflict-management skills. Without going into detail on every point, it is clear with
the placemat-activity. When the basis-groups work together throughout a workshop
or a whole semester, then usually one person takes the leadership role. A group
without a leader would be lost. This means, if the team members do not come to a
8 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

consensus about what mathematical modeling is, the leader has to make a decision.
Trust-building takes time for a group and is not achieved with one activity. Also,
communication and conflict-management have to be taught, and one cannot expect
that school students are able to do this naturally.
Group Processing The placemat-activity is a simple method to initiate group pro-
cessing, because team members learn the all the different aspects of cooperative
learning step by step, through the following methods. During group processing,
reflection about the group behavior is of great importance, so that changes can be
made if necessary. This includes describing which members’ actions are helpful and
which are not. In particular, members discuss how well they are achieving their
goals and maintaining effective working relationships.
After this activity you get an overview of how the participants understand what
is meant by mathematical modeling. Pre-service and in-service teachers will be
taught about different opinions/points of focus in the international discussion on
mathematical modeling (see e.g. Kaiser et al. 2006). In particular, they need deep
knowledge about the modeling cycle(s) (Borromeo Ferri 2006) and their impor-
tance and application in school (see details in Sect. 2.3). Usually I decide to use the
method “Jigsaw” to engage them with the topic of different modeling cycles:
In a Jigsaw activity, each group member is assigned some particular material to
learn and then teach to his group members. Each member of the basis-group gets a
different model of a modeling cycle to study, for example “The diagnostic modeling
cycle” or “The modeling cycle from Applied Mathematics”. After a time deter-
mined by the teacher or docent, members with the same topic work together in
“expert-groups”; the basis-groups are divided. After working in these expert-groups,
the original basis-groups re-form and each member teaches the others about his/her
particular modeling cycle. So at the end of Part 1 of the course they mostly learn the
content on their own. It is, of course, important that participants can also ask all
kinds of questions, especially in the last lesson of this part, and that is reflected in
both the theory and the Jigsaw method.
Normally my pre-service teachers have to write learning diaries in order to reflect
on their process of understanding the teaching and learning of mathematical model-
ing. Pre-service teacher Swetlana wrote in her learning diary:
Sometimes it was not easy to understand the goal of this special modeling cycle in the expert-
groups, because of the shortness of the text. But this Jigsaw method is perfect! Everyone in
the group has to explain something and so we discussed till I understood it better.

The importance of the Theoretical dimension of the model of competencies for

teaching is also illustrated with a quotation from Catherine (pre-service teacher):
This was my first insight into the topic “modeling”. There it became apparent for me that
this topic is very wide and is not just the modeling cycle I know from the curriculum.

Part 2 starts with the question “What is a good modeling task?” For that I like to
use the method “Think-pair-share”. This involves a three-step cooperative structure.
During the first step, individuals think silently about a question posed by the instruc-
tor. Individuals pair up during the second step and exchange their thoughts. In the
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators: An Evaluated Module 9

third step, the pairs share their responses with the entire group. After that, the
basis-­groups solve a modeling problem (e.g. “Lighthouse task”; see Sect. 5.1).
Without ever working on modeling problems you will not get a full understanding
of which cognitive barriers or problems can come up while solving, or how motivat-
ing it is to have a satisfactory solution at the end. For a better understanding I show
my participants a possible solution process by means of the “Diagnostic modeling
cycle” that I use in my work (Blum and Leiß 2007; Borromeo Ferri 2007). This
helps them to communicate which part of their solution can be regarded as a real
model or a mathematical model and so on (see Sect. 2.2).
Based on my experience and empirical research on the learning progress of uni-
versity students (Borromeo Ferri and Blum 2009), I observed a strong progress
during Part 2. The pre-service teachers reflected that they finally understood the
“Diagnostic modeling cycle” through the modeling task “Lighthouse”, which I pre-
sented to them in detail after they solved the problem. Furthermore, they felt that
now the background from Part 1 would help them to create their own modeling task.
So for them, theory and practice connected together here.
It was good that we went through the modeling cycle with an exemplar task. Through this,
one became aware how complex a modeling task can be […]. Now it will be easier for us to
create our own modeling task. (Sandra, pre-service teacher)

The groups need time for sharing ideas in order to develop a modeling task that
will ultimately be used for teaching mathematical modeling at school. For the “cre-
ating part” at the beginning I use the method “Round Robin Brainstorming” in my
courses. One person of each group is appointed to be the “recorder”. A question or
an idea is posed with many answers, and participants are given time to think about
the answers. After the “thinking time”, members of the team share responses. The
recorder writes down the various answers of the group members. The person next to
the recorder starts, and one person after the other in the group gives an answer until
time is called. On the basis of the first ideas, the group starts to create a modeling
task for a specific grade, in relation to a mathematical topic.
When analyzing my participants’ written reflections on Part 2, it was very clear
that creating modeling tasks is as important for learning and understanding model-
ing as solving modeling problems. The pre-service teachers have to think about the
school level that they want to teach the problem to, how complex the task should be,
how much time the pupils would probably need, and so on. The Round Robin
Brainstorming method was helpful for them in this context, as Anna comments:
It was good that we had the chance to create our own modeling task in our basis-group.
However we recognized that this would be a difficult undertaking. But the method Round
Robin was exactly the right thing to get helpful suggestions from other basis-groups. (Anna,
pre-service teacher)

Looking at the model of competencies for teaching, it is clear that the goal of the
Task competency, which is included in Part 2, is also to work and discuss the criteria
for (good) modeling tasks with teachers. They also learn to carry out cognitive anal-
yses of modeling tasks. In practice, this means classifying the solution steps in the
different phases of the modeling process on the basis of students’ solution or their
10 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

own solutions. This is non-trivial. Thus the three lessons of Part 2 are once again a
link between theory and practice for the pre-service teachers. Furthermore, they
have to deal with the question of authenticity and complexity while creating their
own modeling task.
Part 3 contains a lot of interesting aspects which belong to the Task and Instruction
dimensions of the competency model. In general I start each aspect with a short theo-
retical input and the participants then do an activity on their own, or in their basis-­
group. In Aspect 1, the basis-groups work on transcripts of pupils’ modeling processes
for the modeling task “Lighthouse”. Afterwards a discussion is necessary, especially
about how to distinguish the phases. Analyzing transcripts of pupils’ modeling pro-
cesses is very helpful for the teachers to distinguish different modeling phases:
The transcripts of the pupils helped me in some part to distinguish several modeling steps.
(Heidy, pre-service teacher)

Before I start with my input for Aspect 2 (Competencies are needed for model-
ing), I use the method “silent writing conversation”:
Every group gets a big sheet of paper. In the middle of the paper they write down
“modeling competencies”. The participants have to do a brainstorm about what
modeling competencies could be, without saying a word. For this they have to com-
ment on the ideas of the other team members in a written way.
After a discussion in the plenum about the results of the groups I give my input
on modeling competencies. During the discussion in the plenum the focus is on how
teachers can support modeling competencies and how they can assess these in
school. The aspect of modeling competencies is always interesting for the partici-
pants and most of them like the question of how modeling competencies can be
supported. In the written reflections they commented that one lesson was not enough
for this content, and that they would like to know more about this topic.
The silent-writing-conversation was very fruitful at the beginning concerning the meaning
of modeling competencies. Of high interest for me was the question of how modeling com-
petencies can be supported. This is an important question, especially for a teacher. (Jan,
pre-service teacher)

As before, I start Aspect 3 (Types of teacher interventions while modeling) with

an activity, which is called “Inside-Outside-Circle”, before I give a theoretical input
about the meaning of “intervention” and “self-regulated learning”. The activity
“Inside-Outside Circle” follows the principle that everyone is integrated in the
learning process. The students form an inner and an outer circle. Those in the inner
circle look out, those in the outer circle look in. Then the whole group is given the
question:
• “What do you think a teacher has to know when teaching modeling, so as to be
able to intervene appropriately in case of students’ difficulties?”
The students are standing opposite to each other and discuss this question in
pairs. After 2 or 3 min, the outside circle moves on and the new pairs exchange their
thoughts. The same can be done with the next question, addressing Aspect 4 (“What
do you think are good or bad methods for teaching modeling?”). This aspect I use
1.2 Mathematical Modeling Course for Educating the Educators: An Evaluated Module 11

as a chance to discuss and reflect on the methods of cooperative learning that I have
used so far, and how they fit the contents of the seminar. This is meant to be a meta-­
reflection on different levels simultaneously:
1. The participants have to think about each cooperative learning method and about
how they could be used to teach modeling in school;
2. As a lecturer I have to reflect on whether the chosen activities were useful to
teach the contents of the seminar.
Starting Aspect 3 with the method Inside-Outside-Circle can be a good begin-
ning for the topic of teacher interventions. Most of the participants start to see them-
selves in the role of a teacher, and also like to have more time for this topic.
After the discussion in the Inside-Outside-Circle I think that a teacher must be well pre-
pared when he has a modeling problem for his lesson, because he has to analyze and to
diagnose his pupils quickly to help them. (Carolin, pre-service teacher)
Today I learned a lot about different kinds of teacher interventions, firstly theoretically
and then practically through group work with a case study of a teacher. But I take much
more out of this lesson today: The case study showed me how invasive a teacher’s interven-
tions can be, even though the interventions are focused on the content. But I will look to
how I intervene myself, in order to correct my interventions. (Andreas, pre-service teacher)

In Part 4, all groups present their modeling tasks and the experiences they had
using these tasks in school as the course was going on. In doing this, the balance
between theory and practice is reinforced. With their theoretical knowledge about
teacher interventions and feedback, teachers are able to act strongly on a metacogni-
tive level:
Teaching the modeling task in Grade 9 was important and helpful for my understanding of
modeling and the practical application in school. […] It was good to have a chance to
implement the modeling problems at school. (Birgit, pre-service teacher)

So as my empirical studies show, teaching the modeling task at school and then
presenting the results is particularly important for the learning process of the par-
ticipants modeling. While the students struggled with the process of understanding
modeling in Part 3, due to the diversity of the aspects, in Part 4 they focused on the
progress they had made. The reflections indicate that they learned and understood
more about what modeling means on a theoretical level and also how to teach it.
Today my group and I had our presentation. I think it was good! […] Overall the testing was
helpful for me as a teacher, because I could see where pupils had problems while modeling.
Also to get the self-awareness to walk between a small level of intervention and non-­
intervention was important for me. Furthermore, it showed me that the task should be
phrased precisely and to allow enough extra time. (Benjamin, pre-service teacher)

Stressing the diagnostic dimension, the participants are asked to mark solutions
of the modeling problems that several students bring to the course from their lessons
at school. Chapter 5 contains details of how important it is to have a clear guideline
for marking pupils’ solutions, which follows the phases of the modeling cycle and
must be tailored to the individual problem. For another modeling problem this over-
view could look different.
12 1 Key Competencies for Teaching Mathematical Modeling

The final Part 5 rounds off the course with a summary of all aspects, in particular
with the methods of cooperative learning used in the style of the “pedagogical
double-­decker”. Thus the reflection on the methods is always very constructive,
because the participants are able to decide on the advantages and disadvantages,
based on how they experienced the methods, as learners, throughout the course. All
of the participants also agreed that these methods can be integrated while teaching
modeling, but they have to be practiced.
It is good that we are not only learning modeling as a subject in this seminar, but also the
methods we can use to teach this at school! (Katja, pre-service teacher)

This shows that these modeling courses have been successful not only in the
sense that it follows the principle of integrating cooperative learning into modeling
activities, but they also successfully balance the modeling theory with methods of
teaching and practical experience in schools.
Chapter 2
Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical
Work

After teaching the modeling task, I know why we learned the

theoretical background about the perspectives and cycles: you
need it to get the whole picture.
Chris, in-service teacher.

This chapter includes a necessary and important theoretical background for your
practical work in school. Furthermore several aspects based on theoretical concep-
tualization and empirical research within the international mathematical modeling
discussion in the last decade are discussed in the chapter.

2.1  hat Does Mathematical Modeling Mean?:

W
Goals and Aims

Mathematical Modeling became a well-established research field within mathemat-

ics education over the last 40–50 years. Particularly over the past 10 years, the
research on mathematical modeling has shown a strong increase in the number of
empirical studies conducted: both qualitative and quantitative studies. The results of
these empirical studies from all over the world have given strong insights, and par-
tially answer how mathematical modeling can be taught and learned effectively.
Looking at the international debate, one can find different notions of mathematical
modeling beneath others because of various educational approaches in several
countries (Borromeo Ferri 2014). However there is a strong consensus that mathe-
matical modeling can be described as an activity involves transitioning back and
forth between reality and mathematics, because this is an essential feature of math-
ematical modeling (Fig. 2.1).
Mathematical modeling does not mean having a “pseudo realistic problem”, in
which all data are given, or you only have to exercise algorithms. Mathematical
modeling is a challenge for students on several levels, because the students work on
questions out of the reality, to which they have to apply mathematics. As you solve
the following modeling task, “Bale of straw” (Blum and Leiß 2007b), you will be

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 13

R. Borromeo Ferri, Learning How to Teach Mathematical Modeling in School
and Teacher Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68072-9_2
14 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

Fig. 2.1 Mathematical

modeling: making
transitions between reality
and mathematics

able to better understand the ways in which a modeling problem can be a challenge,
and the process of transitioning between reality and mathematics will become clear.
Please work on this problem first, before you read further. Take notes of possible
difficulties and questions your students could raise when they work on the problem.

• Do you have one or more than one result?

• What kind of mathematics did you use to model the real world situation?
• How do you know if your result is correct or not?
For getting a better understanding what mathematical modeling means, a deeper
view into the different phases of the modeling cycle is needed. In the modeling
problem “Bale of straw” the process is illustrated according to phases of the
“Diagnostic modeling cycle” (Borromeo Ferri 2007) used in teacher education
(more details in Sect. 2.2) (Fig. 2.2).
2.1 What Does Mathematical Modeling Mean?: Goals and Aims 15

Fig. 2.2 Mathematical modeling cycle from a cognitive perspective (Borromeo Ferri 2007)

2.1.1 Real Situation (RS)

The real situation of the “Bale of straw” problem is clear through the picture.
Therefore the problem, taken from reality (represented through pictures or text), is
called the real situation.

2.1.2 Mental Representation of the Situation (MRS)

The mental representation of the situation is very individually and consists of two parts:
1. Associations of the individual, because of the given real problem: If you think
back at your solving process perhaps you thought of things associated with sum-
mer, referring to your own experiences with straw bales etc.
2. Understanding of the problem: The individuals have to understand the task (that
they have to determine the height of the straw bale mountain).

2.1.3 Real Model (RM)

To get a real model you have to simplify and structure your mental picture, and thus
specify the real situation further. You can think of circles instead of straw bales and
perhaps you can draw them as a real model. If you think about the woman sitting on
the straw bales and take into account that you need the woman for solving the prob-
lem, then she can be simplified as a line. It is important to simplify the real situation
and make assumptions; otherwise it is difficult to use or to “find” the mathematics
16 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

that help you to solve the problem. One assumption is that the height of the woman
is approximately 1.7 m. This can be used to estimate the diameter of a straw bale.

2.1.4 Extra-Mathematical Knowledge (EMK)

As you recognized, a lot of relevant data are not given in the task (e.g. the height of
the woman or the diameter of a straw bale), therefore extra-mathematical knowl-
edge is needed. The level of extra-mathematical knowledge in this task is not very
high compared to other modeling problems, but this always depends on the personal
experience one has with the given real context. You can assume that a lot of pupils
(living in the city) have seen these straw bales from a distance while driving in the
car, but sitting on or touching them is probably not common. Perhaps it is easier to
estimate the height of a woman than the height of a straw bale. Both aspects can be
used as a step to build a real model and then a mathematical model. You see that
modeling problems require everyday knowledge. And if pupils do not know the
height of the woman, then they have to learn how to get this information. In this case
they can, for example think, about their Mom – how tall is she? Doing this they
exercise their competency in estimating and measurement. Using, applying and
generating extra-mathematical knowledge makes modeling problems very interest-
ing for pupils. The connection between reality and mathematics and the usefulness
of mathematics become apparent.

2.1.5 Mathematical Model (MM)

Because of its complexity, it is necessary to have more than one mathematical model
in order to reach a solution of a real problem. For the problem “Bale of straw”, two
possible mathematical models are:
• Model 1 (Multiple addition of the height of the woman):
Woman’s height of approximately 1.7 m can be piled and then added up to get
the height of the straw bale mountain.
• Model 2 (Pythagoras Theorem):
Using the estimated height of the woman (1.7 m) to get the approximate height
of one straw bale (1.5 m), one can use Pythagoras Theorem.
Mathematical competencies such as Pythagoras Theorem, fractional arithmetic,
estimating are needed to get mathematical results.

2.1.6 Mathematical Results (MR)

According to the mathematical models, the mathematical results are for both very
close with approximately 7 m.
2.1 What Does Mathematical Modeling Mean?: Goals and Aims 17

2.1.7 Real Results (RR)

These results must be interpreted concerning the given problem to get real results.
In the context of this problem, interpretation means that we are talking not about
7 kg, but about 7 m. Therefore the context of the real problem has to be in the focus,
because with the real results, you transition back from mathematics to reality.
Validating means comparing real results with your mental representation and
the real model, and thus the assumptions you made at the beginning. The phase of
validating is extremely important and has to be guided by the teacher when they
first start to use modeling in class. Learners have to think about the question:
whether 7 m is the right answer on the basis of their assumptions they made before
to formulate a mathematical model. Usually students stop their modeling process
with their mathematical results, because this is what they know from solving other
mathematical tasks. But mathematical modeling is different. If the reality of the
mathematical result is not questioned by the students, then mathematical modeling
makes no sense.
Some secondary school students were happy with their result that the height of
the straw bale was 123 m and they thought it was a good solution. When I asked
them about their assumptions it became clear very quickly, that they made a mis-
take in their calculation, even though they had made correct assumptions (height
of the woman and height of a straw bale). After the students reflected on this
aspect they recognized that their mathematical result was complete nonsense and
not realistic in the context of the real problem they had to solve. This is why it is
necessary to guide your pupils through this whole process very carefully when
you first start using modeling activities. Your students have to learn to take the
context seriously.

2.1.8  oals and Justifications for the Inclusion Mathematical

G
Modeling in Everyday Teaching

Goals for implementing mathematical modeling in everyday teaching were formu-

lated early on. Everyone who did research in this field or practiced it at school was
aware of the chance to offer students and teachers the possibility to get another,
larger perspective on mathematics as a school subject. Because of the fact that it took
a long time to eventually include mathematical modeling as part of educational stan-
dards in many countries around the world, the necessity to promote it more than
other “regular” mathematical topics like algebra or statistics is clear. Kaiser (1995)
and Blum (1996) formulated goals for teaching modeling, which included multiple
dimensions. These goals do not focus on a specific age or grade, but can be used from
primary through high school, and for teacher education, in order to improve individu-
als’ modeling competencies. The following four justifications (see Blum 2011) show
18 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

the importance of modeling for learning or gaining a deeper understanding of

mathematical content, as well as making a contribution to general education:
1. The “pragmatic” justification includes ordering, understanding and mastering
real world situations, which means working on applications and modeling exam-
ples explicitly and continuously;
2. The “formative” justification means to improve competencies by engaging in
modeling activities;
3. The “cultural” justification focuses on the contributions that the real world can
make in providing a broader picture of mathematics;
4. The “psychological” justification means that real-world examples should make a
contribution towards raising students’ interest in mathematics, to motivate them
or help them to understand mathematical content better.
The “Straw bale” problem fits nearly all of the above justifications. However,
they only can be achieved for students if mathematical modeling is really a frequent
part of their education in mathematics. This means in practice that mathematical
modeling should not just be an activity once a year, but at least once a week. How
this can work will be demonstrated in Chap. 4.

2.1.9 International Perspectives on Mathematical Modeling

Similar to the question “What does mathematical modeling mean?” one can ask “What
does the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling mean?” There is a clear con-
sensus that mathematical modeling involves transitions back and forth between reality
and mathematics; for more, see also Garfunkel et al. (2016) (GAIMME report) and
Hirsch and McDuffie (2016). What is interesting is how mathematical modeling is
interpreted in several countries, which have different educational traditions.
The following classification system for different perspectives on modeling was
developed during several European Conferences by the group “Mathematical Modeling
and Applications”, and has gone through several modifications. This is not just the
European perspective, because participants came from all over the world. It follows
then, that many of the views and the approaches of mathematical modeling are also
influenced by researchers from non-European countries. Although these theoretical
perspectives are clearly defined as research perspectives, they also help you to under-
stand and to analyze modeling problems much more deeply, and think about the lesson
planning and instruction (see Chap. 4).
Theoretical perspectives on mathematical modeling (Kaiser and Sriraman 2006;
Borromeo Ferri et al. 2011) include:
• Realistic or applied modeling
• Educational modeling
• Epistemological or theoretical modeling
• Socio-critical modeling
2.1 What Does Mathematical Modeling Mean?: Goals and Aims 19

• “Model-Eliciting Activity” approach (MEA)

• Cognitive and affective modeling (as a meta-perspective)
The realistic or applied modeling perspective has a strong focus on using realistic
and authentic real world examples. Of course there is no modeling without realistic
problems and it does not mean that the other perspectives no not use such problems.
The “Bale of straw” task is a wonderful problem for a 90 min session, including work-
ing in groups, presentations and discussion in the plenum. But the characteristic of this
perspective is that the real problems are very complex and generally they can be used
for project work, such as modeling days or modeling weeks (see Chap. 6). Examples
of complex modeling problems presenting this characteristic are:
• How can the mixture of chemicals in swimming pools be optimized?
• A belt equipped with technical devices to send and detect impulses is fixed to a tree.
By means of this equipment we would like to predict the health status of the tree.
The educational modeling perspective focuses on two modeling sub-­perspectives:
didactical and conceptual modeling. The didactical perspective means structuring
learning processes for modeling activities. Thus the goal of several research studies
was to develop and evaluate lesson units on mathematical modeling. The philosophy
for planning and executing lessons with mathematical modeling is in fact different
from “normal mathematics lessons”, but this depends on the time spent working on
modeling problems (see Chap. 4). The conceptual modeling perspective focuses on
the introduction or strengthening of a mathematical concept (in the “Bale of straw”
task, Pythagoras Theorem) through modeling and meta-level development, such as
introducing and clarifying the terms “real model,” “mathematical model,” and “vali-
dation” within the modeling cycle. The educational modeling perspective has strong
pedagogical and subject-related goals. Both aspects mentioned are in the focus of
many research studies. They represent the goals one has for teaching modeling.
Epistemological modeling (or theoretical modeling) has more theory-oriented
goals. The Romance language speaking countries in Europe, primarily, have a unique
view on the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling. These countries start
from a theory-related background described as epistemological modeling. The focus
in lessons based on this perspective does not specifically lie on the transitions from
reality to mathematics and back, but on the inner mathematical structures of the prob-
lem. Referring to the “Bale of straw” problem, the goal would be to work especially
on Pythagoras Theorem, as well as on other concepts like length, angles etc. The dif-
ference from the pedagogical modeling perspective is that modeling is used as a tool
to work mathematically, rather than to learn and to promote modeling competencies.
The socio-critical modeling perspective has pedagogical goals, but is particu-
larly concerned with seeing and understanding the surrounding world critically (see
Barbosa 2006; Rosa and Orey 2013). Thoughts underlying this perspective origi-
nated primarily from researchers of South-America, in particular from Brazil. Even
the “Bale of straw” task, like every kind of modeling problem can be interpreted
socio-critically. As well as the question of the height of the straw bales, one could
ask how much money a farmer in the USA, in Germany or in Brazil earns with
20 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

nearly the same size of a field. A lot of questions would be raised by the students
comparing different cultures. Additionally they would do a lot of mathematics, such
as searching and analyzing data (size of fields, prices of straw, etc.). Based on my
experiences teaching modeling at school or in my workshops, both the students and
the teachers liked these socio-critical questions. Usually an interesting phenomenon
happens, especially with students at school: the involvement in the socio-critical
questions is so high that they are doing mathematics without realizing it. This is, of
course, a result of the real context and is sometimes to do with their own experi-
ences in life. The meaningfulness of mathematics becomes apparent for them.
Comparing the epistemological modeling and the socio-critical modeling the dif-
ferences becomes clear, but a very interesting theoretical approach, which seems to
combine these two perspectives, is the socioepistemologial approach (Cordero
2008; Buendía and Cordero 2005). On the one hand this approach has the focus on
the reconstruction of mathematical knowledge, for example during modeling activi-
ties by using tools and on the other hand the role of the people and the social context
in which they performed are from great interest.
The Model-Eliciting Activity (MEA) approach/perspective can be seen as an
important outcome from the debate on modeling in the United States, and from the
extensive work of Lesh and his “MEA-group” (see, e.g., Lesh and Doerr 2003).
According to Lesh, Model Eliciting Activities should start in the kindergarten, so
learners can experience problems typical of various professions, like engineering or
economics. This helps them to understand how mathematics is needed in real life.
Finally the meta-perspective – cognitive and affective modeling – deserves a men-
tion. It is labeled as “meta-perspective” because in most of the research studies this
approach is an integral part of the investigation. Hence, the research aim from the
cognitive perspective is the analysis of cognitive processes of learners and teachers
while undertaking modeling activities (see Borromeo Ferri 2010). Looking at math-
ematical modeling processes from a cognitive perspective is important for teaching
and learning. The cognitive view helps you to analyze cognitive barriers in model-
ing problems and is thus a basis for diagnosis (see Sects. 2.3 and 5.1).
Although these perspectives are considered as research perspectives, they
evolved from the interplay of theory, practical experiences, and empirical research,
around the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling. Additionally, it
becomes clear how these perspectives are mirrored in the different modeling cycles
presented in the next section.

2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument

Looking at the literature on modeling and applications one can find many different
modeling cycles. These cycles are different, because they are dependent on various
perspectives on modeling and, in some cases, whether complex or non-complex tasks
are used (Borromeo Ferri 2006). In the past few years the relevance of the modeling
cycle for the teaching and learning of modeling has been investigated theoretically
2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument 21

and empirically. On the basis of these results the modeling cycle should be a central
part of teacher education and training, and explicitly integrated when starting to use
modeling activities in school. A modeling cycle is not only a theoretical model which
characterizes the modeling processes, but it is a multi-purpose (meta-) learning instru-
ment for students and a diagnostic instrument for teachers. Similar to the perspectives,
a modified classification of modeling cycles is presented based on an earlier classifica-
tion by Borromeo Ferri (2006). The following classification similarly shows the dif-
ferent aims and purposes of these cycles for research and practice:
• Modeling cycle from applied mathematics
• Didactical or pedagogical modeling cycle
• Psychological modeling cycle
• Diagnostic modeling cycle/modeling cycle from a cognitive perspective

2.2.1 Modeling Cycle from Applied Mathematics

In nearly all books on mathematical modeling you can find modeling cycles which
have one thing in common: real situation and mathematical model are the same thing,
which directly contradicts what comes after (where there is a clear distinction between
the real world and mathematics). This is partly to do with the kind of modeling prob-
lems which are used in this context. Mostly these are “realistic and complex” prob-
lems (e.g. from industry or economics) in the sense described in the “realistic and
applied modeling perspective” mentioned earlier. The complexity of the real problems
influences the number of phases within the modeling cycle to some extent, because
there is no need to make more distinctions. A prominent researcher, in the field of
modeling in general, but especially in the way of considering modeling as a way to
understand the real world better, is of course Pollak (1979). Below you can see his
modeling cycle, which was used as a prototype for cycles in this group (Fig. 2.3).

Fig. 2.3 Modeling cycle of Pollak (1979, p. 233)

22 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

Pollak’s modeling cycle strongly influenced the development of modeling cycles

in research on modeling in mathematics education. Thus, most cycles clearly show
both worlds: reality and mathematics and the transition processes. In order to under-
stand what mathematical modeling means, it is very helpful, and important, that
these two worlds are presented separately. You can find a lot of modeling cycles with
four or more steps that are very similar to this three step model of Pollak’s (“rest of
the world”(step 1) -> “Classical Applied Mathematics” (step 2)-> “Applicable
Mathematics” (step 3)-> “rest of the world”), which also have their origin in Applied
Mathematics.
When looking at the different cycles, you must always keep in mind the purposes
they are used for. An applied mathematician uses and understands Pollak’s cycle or
the following cycle completely differently to a mathematics teacher or a researcher.

2.2.2 Didactical or Pedagogical Modeling Cycle

In this model, reality and mathematics are separated as “two worlds” like in Pollak’s
model. More transparency is given concerning the steps. Beginning with the real
situation, which is the given through the real problem/task, you have to idealize this
real situation to build a real model. Referring to the “bale of straw” problem, this
means for example, simplifying the straw bales as circles and estimating the height
of the woman on the picture. Doing this, you are able to mathematize and building
a mathematical model. Investigation of the model simply means inner-mathematical
working, such as using the Pythagoras Theorem correctly and so getting mathemati-
cal results. The important final step is the interpretation of the mathematical result(s)
and, as described in the previous section, this has to be explicitly guided by the
teacher (Fig. 2.4).
But why is this cycle named didactical or pedagogical? One focus of research on
the teaching and learning of mathematical modeling in the past 10 years was: if, and

a) Idealizing
b) Mathematising
c) Investigation of the model
d) Interpretation

Fig. 2.4 Modeling cycle from Blum (1996) and Kaiser (1995). (a) Idealizing. (b) Mathematising.
(c) Investigation of the model. (d) Interpretation
2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument 23

how, the modeling cycle can be a tool to promote modeling competencies, and the
understanding of modeling in general, of students in middle school, high-school and
university (see Blum 2015; Maaß 2007). Firstly, the implementation of the cycle
within the modeling lessons offered the students the opportunity to reflect what they
had done while solving real problems. Secondly, the students, in this case seven
graders within the empirical study of Maaß’, learned the notions of “real model” or
“mathematical model”. Furthermore, this meta-level and the visualization of the
modeling process through the cycle is helpful to get an idea of how modeling prob-
lems are different from routine problems, because of the transitions between reality
and mathematics. Under a didactical and pedagogical viewpoint this cycle is a
meaningful tool for modeling lessons: in particular because of the four clearly-­
arranged steps. The modeling cycle presented in Sect. 2.1 has seven steps and would
be too difficult to understand for younger students, as would the “Psychological
modeling cycle” shown afterwards.

2.2.3 Psychological Modeling Cycle

These kinds of cycles have their origin research in psychology rather than in applied
mathematics or in mathematics education. The following cycle illustrates the proto-
type of a modeling cycle created by the psychologists Verschaffel et al. (2000).
When you look at the cycle I would like to draw your attention to the “situation
model” (Fig. 2.5).
The well-known term “situation model” is mainly used in connection with non-­
complex modeling problems, specifically with word problems (see Kintsch and
Greeno 1985; Nesher et al. 2003 and a lot more), and has its origin in text linguis-
tics. A situation model can be briefly described as a mental representation of the
situation that is given in the problem. In Kintsch’ and Greeno’s work for example
(1985), one can find the notion of the situation model, sometimes called the “prob-
lem model”, described as:
The situation model includes inferences that are made using knowledge about the domain of
the text information. It is a representation of the content of a text, independent of how the text
was formulated and integrated with other relevant experiences. Its structure is adapted to the
demands of whatever tasks the reader expects to perform. (Kintsch and Greeno 1985, 110)

Fig. 2.5 Modeling cycle from Verschaffel et al. (2000)

24 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

The phenomenon of the situation model was transferred to the modeling context
and brought out modeling cycles (see Blum and Leiß 2007a; Borromeo Ferri 2006)
which include the situation model as a further step between the real situation and the
real model (see the next cycle). What becomes clear from the cycle presented above
is that there is no distinction made between mathematics and reality. This cycle is
not used in school and it was not an intention of the developers to do so. But the
relevance for including the situation model in the diagnostic modeling cycle offered
new ways for research, for practice and particularly for teacher education and train-
ing on mathematical modeling.

2.2.4  iagnostic Modeling Cycle/Modeling Cycle

D
from a Cognitive Perspective

The researchers who “work” with this kind of modeling cycle focus especially on the
cognitive processes of individuals during modeling processes. This is one reason why
the situation model was included in this cycle, because the researchers suppose that
this phase is more or less run through by all individuals during modeling (Fig. 2.6).
Blum and Leiß understand the situation model as an important phase during the
modeling process: even as the most important one. That is because they describe the
transition between real situation and situation model as a phase of understanding the
task. A similar approach (Borromeo Ferri 2007) in the COM2-project uses the phase of
the situation model in an adaptation of the modeling cycle of Blum and Leiß. However
I used the name “mental representation of the situation” (MRS) instead of situation
model, because this term better describes the kind of internal processes an individual
goes through to obtain a corresponding mental picture while/after reading the (complex)
modeling task. Besides this aspect, I used this modeling cycle with these different phases
to describe and to reconstruct these phases empirically (see next chapter) (Fig. 2.7).
Through the situation model and the mental representation of the situation, a cognitive
view of modeling processes is given, which is supported a number of the steps (six and
seven). Thus for diagnostic purposes this cycle is a good instrument (see Sect. 5.1).

Fig. 2.6 Modeling cycle by Blum and Leiß (2007a)

2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument 25

Fig. 2.7 Mathematical modeling cycle from a cognitive perspective (Borromeo Ferri 2007)

If teachers are able to name and to distinguish steps within the modeling cycle then
they can diagnose possible cognitive barriers students have while modeling.
In addition to the classification above, you can find further descriptions of mod-
eling cycles, which are used in school or higher education (Cirillo et al. 2016).

2.2.5  odeling Cycles Presented in Mathematics Standards:

M
Exemplified Along the Common Core State Standards
Mathematics of the United States of America

The above classification showed you different kinds of modeling cycles. Perhaps
you have not seen these cycles before, because it was not a part of your teacher
education or teacher training. Also, in those countries in which mathematical mod-
eling has become a central part of the mathematics standards and the curriculum
(e.g. United States, Germany, Chile, etc.) different cycles are used to explain the
process and the term of mathematical modeling. When analyzing the mathematics
standards or curriculum of countries concerning the aspects on modeling, it becomes
clear that the outcomes of research results in the field of modeling are generally not
ignored. However, the mathematics standards build a basis for writing school books
and are an important guideline for teachers to implement this into practice. Thus a
new teaching field such as mathematical modeling should preferably be presented
coherently and in connection with the research. Hence it is important to know that
there is not only the one modeling cycle presented in the present mathematics stan-
dard of your country. If you have read the book up to this point you know some
modeling cycles and you have an idea what mathematical modeling means, pre-
sented on the basis of international research on modeling.
26 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

Fig. 2.8 Modeling cycle presented in the CCSSM

In the following I would like to illustrate how mathematical modeling is charac-

terized and which modeling cycle is presented in the Common Core State Standards
Mathematics (CCSSM) in the United States. The reason why I use the United States
as an example is because the CCSSM are brand new in a lot of States (since 2013),
highly discussed and, of course, mathematical modeling is a completely new part.
Mathematical Modeling, standards and assessment are not mutually exclusive. This
will be explicitly shown in Sect. 5.2 with several examples.
Looking at the NCTM Standards you can see that Mathematical Modeling is not
explicitly endorsed as it is now in the Common Core State Standards. Mathematical
Modeling, when thinking about the characterization mentioned in Sect. 2.1, was
more or less implicitly included in the NCTM-Standards within the expression
“connections”. Of course, this description is not satisfying for me as a researcher
and teacher educator in mathematical modeling, but the CCSSM shows that math-
ematical modeling is a central standard now:
Students can apply the mathematics they know to solve problems arising in everyday life,
society, and the workplace. (NGA Center and CCSSO 2010, pp. 6–8)

This citation makes clear, that the extra-mathematical contexts and situations and real
problems have to be solved with the help of mathematics. Transitions take place back
and forth between reality and mathematics. Learners should go through the whole mod-
eling cycle as they work on a real life problem. But what does this mean in the context
of the modeling cycle described in the CCSSM? Where is the “reality” or the “rest of the
world” and where is the “mathematics” you have seen in the other cycles? (Fig. 2.8).
As mentioned earlier, the distinction between reality and mathematics within a
cyclic model could be helpful to understand what mathematical modeling means.
The cycle presented in the CCSSM does not make clear that problems from real life
are the basis for modeling activities. Neither the words “interpret” nor “validate”
explain that this cycle deals with modeling. Also, inner-mathematical problems can
be interpreted and validated without having any real context. Referring to the above
characterization on modeling in the CCSSM one can assume that reality and math-
ematics are implied in the cycle. It becomes more obvious through the colors green
and red:
The problem is always a part of the reality (marked in green) and is called the
“real situation” in the other cycles. Learners have to think about the given problem
and make assumptions. Then they simplify and structure the real situation (process
is shown by the arrow ->) and finally they formulate it. This formulation can be
2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument 27

Fig. 2.9 Modeling cycle (CCSM) – green (“reality”) and red (“mathematics”)

characterized as a mathematical model and so this is a part of mathematics (marked

in red). As you see there is no “real model” shown as a step within this cycle and it
goes directly from Problem to Formulate. Within the process from formulation to
computation (process is shown by ->) learners use their mathematical competencies
and abilities for finally computing the model. To compute is a mathematical step.
The mathematical result is included in the step “Compute” in the above model and
this result has to be interpreted. For example, if x = 10 is the result and should rep-
resent a distance in the context of the problem, then the interpretation is x = 10 miles
and not x = 10 kg. According to this we have both mathematics and reality in the
Interpretation step. Validating goes one step further than interpretation and is a part
of the real world. The term “real result” (as it is called in the other cycles) is included
in the step “validate” in the CCSSM cycle. If the result makes sense and if learners
also checked their computing process, then they report their results. A report can be
verbal expressions or of course written solutions with appropriate reasoning.
Another way of looking at the CCSSM modeling cycle is to compare it to the num-
bered steps in the diagnostic modeling cycle. For example, comparing to Fig. 2.9,
Steps 1–3 are included in “Formulate”, then Steps 4–6 are Compute, Interpret,
Validate respectively.
As long as you know the steps of the modeling process, independent of a specific
modeling cycle, then you are well prepared for modeling activities with your stu-
dents. The importance of the modeling cycle as a learning instrument is described
in the following chapter.

2.2.6  athematical Modeling Cycle as a Multi-purpose

M
(and Metacognitive) Learning Instrument

On the basis of practical experiences with school students it became clear that cycles
with four steps give a better overview in terms of helping them to understand the
process of mathematical modeling. Cycles with more steps, which offer a deeper
view into cognitive processes, are helpful for teachers. So far, there have been no
empirical studies that have investigated which cycle is the best for helping students
to learn mathematical modeling. Nevertheless, within the DISUM-project (Blum
and Leiß 2007b) one question was, whether or not students’ modeling competencies
28 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

Fig. 2.10 Solution plan (DISUM-project)

increase when they use a modeling cycle during modeling lessons. An experimental
and a control group worked on several modeling problems. The experimental group
was given one version of a modeling cycle (the solution plan; see Fig. 2.10), and it
was integrated in the lessons and students should work with it. The control group
did not get the solution plan or any kind of modeling cycle. The results of this inter-
vention study showed that the modeling competencies of the experimental group
increased more than the control group.
The solution plan from the DISUM-project tries to make the language used in the
other modeling cycles (real model, validation, etc.) more understandable for stu-
dents in secondary school. At the same time, students get less direction on how they
should proceed when working on a modeling problem. This makes sense at the
beginning for developing solving strategies. Similar to the modeling cycle of the
CCSSM, reality and mathematics are not explicitly shown as two “worlds”, and this
is a disadvantage of it. Students should become aware of transferring a real world
problem into mathematics and backwards. This cycle could be helpful for learners
as an introduction when working on modeling problems. Later on cycles that include
the concepts “real model”, “mathematical model” and so on should be used.
There are three main reasons why the modeling cycle must be a part of the learn-
ing and teaching process on mathematical modeling: Modeling cycles
• offer individuals an understanding of what mathematical modeling means (What
does it mean?)
• give individuals orientation within their modeling process (Where I am in the
process?)
• allow individuals to think about their modeling process retrospectively and on a
metacognitive level (Which phases did I go through and which are missing?)
2.2 Modeling Cycle(s): A Multi-faceted Learning Instrument 29

It is not helpful to teach the cycle during the first modeling activity, because for
students this kind of model is too complex. They are not familiar with the concepts
and thus it will not be motivating for them. Before being introduced to the cycle,
they should have worked on at least two modeling problems. Doing this, they get a
feeling for this new kind of problem and ultimately you as a teacher will decide
when the best point will be for introducing the modeling cycle. There are different
teaching approaches for implementing the cycle. I practised them in my workshops
with my pre-service and in-service teachers, and finally observed teachers while
they were teaching this at school:
• isolated or theoretic approach
• example bounded approach
• process bounded approach
The isolated teaching approach describes a procedure that introduces the model-
ing cycle in isolation rather than in connection to a real problem. The teacher pres-
ents a visualization of the cycle on a map, on the board or with a projector and asks
the students what they see and understand. Students are able to connect their experi-
ences with the modeling activities they have done before. First give them the model
on a sheet of paper and let the students think on their own. While using the teaching
method Think-Pair Share, students can share their thoughts after a few minutes in
pairs to discuss what the different concepts mean and what the cycle represents.
After 10 min you can choose a team to present the results. Other teams should add
their thoughts as well. Learners often have no problem recognizing that the real
problem or question comes out of the “real world”, that they need “mathematics” to
solve it and then transfer it back to reality. More problems arise with the concepts
“real model” or “mathematical model” and with the different arrows explaining the
phases like “simplification”, “interpretation” or “validation”. This phenomenon also
comes up with university students or in-service teachers, so is not only a problem
for learners at school. One reason is the concept of “model” itself. It helps to clarify
first in a practical way that a “model” represents a reduced image of a complex situ-
ation. For a better understanding you should directly refer to the modeling activities
they have done in the lessons before. This does not means the real problems they
solved, but the whole process they went through. In the following modeling lessons,
the modeling cycle should always be used in combination with a modeling problem.
The learners now have an instrument which gives them orientation during the mod-
eling process and helps them to reflect and to think on a metacognitive level. At the
beginning the teacher should explicitly encourage learners to reflect their modeling
process and then they will do it more independently.
In the example bounded teaching approach, the modeling cycle is introduced by
the teacher with a new real problem. The goal is to make the different steps of the
cycle transparent while working on the problem. First the students have to think
about the problem. Then, on the basis of a plenary discussion, the teacher presents
the solving process according to the steps of the cycle. While describing each step of
the cycle, the concepts of “real model” or “validation” become more transparent for
the learners. After the explanation you should give students time to explain the mod-
eling cycle to each other, and make a second round if things are still unclear for them.
30 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

The process bounded teaching approach is different from the previous in that
learners get a modeling problem first and then while the students start working on a
solution. After a while the teacher asks the students to pause and shows the model-
ing cycle on the board. Then the teacher gives a short explanation only, saying that
this cycle represents the modeling process. Then as they continue to work, the stu-
dents have to brainstorm what the steps, and thus the concepts of the modeling
cycle, could mean and which phase they currently are in. During the process the
students reflect and understand what the different steps of the cycle are about. At the
end, one group can present their results showing the solution process and their ideas,
with each step classified according to which part of the modeling cycle it relates to.
Thus on a school level the learners do a subject matter analysis of the modeling
problem.
It is clear that the modeling cycle is not only used within research but is also
important for every day teaching in modeling. There are no specific rules how the
modeling cycle should be introduced for learners, but the three teaching approaches
described above were successful and can give you ideas on how to do it in your own
school.

2.3 Far from Linearity: Individual Modeling Routes

Modeling cycles represent on the one hand a model of a modeling process, and on
the other, an idealized and linear description of how the process of modeling should
proceed.
In reality the modeling processes of individuals are not linear. This is supported
by empirical evidence from several studies (see e.g. Borromeo Ferri 2007, 2010,
2011; Matos and Carreira 1997; Galbraith and Stillman 2006). Investigating these
micro processes of learners’ modeling activities means taking a cognitive view, to
look more deeply into the thinking processes of individuals. Modeling is a complex
process – this was mentioned several times, but this aspect is getting more important
when analyzing certain steps of the process or especially individual modeling
routes. On the basis of an empirical study (COM2-project – Cognitive-psychological
analysis of modeling processes in mathematics lessons, Borromeo Ferri 2007,
2010) with students of Grade 9 and 10 the reconstruction of the phenomenon indi-
vidual modeling routes was a central result of the investigation, which I describe as
“an individual modeling process on an internal or external level. The individual
starts this process during a certain phase, according to his or her preferences, and
then goes through different phases several times or only once, focusing on certain
phases and/or ignoring others. To be more precise from a cognitive viewpoint, one
ought to speak of visible modeling routes, as one can only refer to verbal utterances
or external representations for the reconstruction of the starting-point and the course
of a modeling route.” (Borromeo Ferri 2007, p. 265).
2.3 Far from Linearity: Individual Modeling Routes 31

2.3.1  isible Modeling Routes and the Influence of Extra-

V
Mathematical Experience

One main research question of the COM2-project (Cognitive-psychological analysis

of Modeling processes in Mathematics lessons) was, if differences between mental
representation of the situation, real model, mathematical model and the other phases
(as described in the didactic literature on modeling) can be reconstructed from the
learners’ way of proceeding?
COM2-project was a qualitative study which combined classroom research and
analysis of single individuals and corresponding groups of pupils within these classes.
For the investigations, three 10th grade classes from different German Grammar
Schools were chosen. The sample included 86 pupils (65 pupils in the first phase and
additional 26 pupils in the second phase of data collection) and three teachers (two
female, one male). The modeling problems used (e.g. “Bales of straw”) were of cen-
tral importance. They were analyzed from three viewpoints: subject matter, cognitive
processes, and the (“diagnostic”) modeling cycle. All lessons were videotaped and
transcribed. Statements of the pupils were analyzed concerning the aspect, in which
phase of the modeling cycle they worked on. For every single pupil the statements
were coded (Strauss and Corbin 1990), so that an individual modeling route could be
reconstructed. For the modeling problem “Bale of straw” (introduced in Sect. 2.1) I
will now describe what is meant by an individual modeling route in more detail, and
with an example of two pupils from the study (Daniel and Andreas), and also how the
influence of extra-mathematical knowledge becomes clear.
Daniel and Andreas worked together in a group of five pupils and were very active
within this group. Both made a lot of annotations, although they had less experience
with modeling problems. This is why Daniel said at the beginning: “It is not possible
to solve it, because we have no numbers to calculate!” Shortly after Daniel made that
remark, he had a key idea, and was the first person in the group to formulate it:
You have to think about the height of the woman.

In this statement one can reconstruct the mental representation he had of the situa-
tion. He had not simplified the problem at this point. Then he said to a girl in the group:
The woman is perhaps as tall as you.

This can be called a real model, because he had a clear idea of how the problem
was structured. The interesting thing after this was that Daniel stated: “Yes, but we
don’t have any numbers!”
As a person with a preference for analytic and formal thinking, he focused on
facts and numbers, which were not given in the problem. This was not a problem for
Andreas, even in the first few minutes of working on the task. As an integrated
thinker, he combined elements of visual and analytic thinking styles. A short time
after Daniel repeated the statement, Andreas said to the group members:
Say, can you imagine that the woman is now standing up? Yes?
32 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

This is really a wonderful example for the phase of the mental representation of
the situation (MRS). Andreas continued:
You have to think about the woman, that she stands up now, that means, she must be as big
as the straw bale.

It is interesting how Andreas made his mental representation so visual for all group
members. Directly after that, Daniel came to an estimated mathematical result:
I would estimate that the height is 10m altogether, because a straw bale has a diameter of 2m.

So he built a mathematical model on an implicit level and used addition as an

inner-mathematical competency. But most of the group members were of the opinion
that the height of a bale must be less than 2 m. The group rejected Daniel’s result in
what was essentially a Validation step and he made again a comparison: “How tall are
you Julia?” and started a new modeling process, beginning with a real model. Julia
said that she was 1.65 m tall. Daniel concludes that the woman must be 10 cm taller
than Julia and tried to convince the others that one straw bale is higher than the woman.
Andreas did not share that opinion and answered: “No!” This “No” was the beginning
of Andreas’ verbalised knowledge about straw bales, which he did not express at first.
He then began to measure the straw bale with his ruler. Although Andreas was in the
phase of mathematical model, his arguments were on a visual level:
“If you imagine that it is 10 cm then it is 1.50 m.” Daniel answered with a good
idea and switched back to real situation:
“You have to think that these straw bales sink down! They don’t really lie on top
of each other, they slide in the gaps.” This was again a prompt for Andreas to tell
more about his extra-mathematical knowledge. Andreas responded:
Yes, air must come through the straw bales and they are not stiff! If you cut the straw bale
here that will be a quarter.

On the basis of this statement Andreas and Daniel and some of the other group
members calculated and discussed about rounding up their results. But Andreas
wanted to determine the height more exactly and tried to convince the others that is
must be less because of the fact that the straw bales sink down. His knowledge was
on an implicit level up to now. The following conversation makes clear that his
experiences had an influence on his modeling route and therefore on his transitions
between the phases of reality and mathematics:
Julia: “I’m not sure what effect it really has, if these straw bales sink down.”
Susi: “I don’t think that straw bales sink down so heavily.”
Daniel: “Have you ever been on top of one straw bale?”
Julia: “In Grade 5 we made an excursion and I climbed on top of a straw bale
like that.”
Julia wanted to make clear, that she had “real life experiences”. But Andreas had
other kinds of experiences and argued: “I grew up on a farm, don’t tell me anything!”
After that, Daniel got another result, 6 m, which was not interesting for Andreas.
He wanted to talk about what happens if these straw bales become wet. Later on he
2.3 Far from Linearity: Individual Modeling Routes 33

Fig. 2.11 Individual modeling routes of pupils (Borromeo Ferri 2010)

explained to other group members the difference between hay and straw. Through
this knowledge and experience it became clear why he wanted to determine the
height of the straw bale in such an exact way. For him these were real results, far
more than for the others.
These statements and actions of Andreas and Daniel while modeling are illustrated
as individual modeling routes within the modeling cycle in Fig. 2.11. The routes dem-
onstrate the changes in the phases, but not the time a student spent within a phase.
Remind that only a small part of the whole solving process is shown in the figure.
Due to the time of the solving process, of course further statements were made by
Daniel and Andreas while modeling the problem, which could not be integrated into
the figure. With the statements of both students in mind, it becomes clear when look-
ing at Andreas’ modeling route, that he spent a long time in reality at the beginning by
switching from mental representation of the situation (MRS) to the real model (RM)
and again to the real situation (RS) before he went into mathematics. However Daniel
switched fast from the real model (RM) to mathematical model (MM) and even to
mathematical results (MR), as described previously. Then he needed time back in
reality to modify his real model for creating a new mathematical model.
Extra-mathematical knowledge/experience can be an influence on the modeling
routes of pupils. Andreas often switched back to reality, because he had additional
experiences. His clear mental image of the real situation let him determine the result
very exactly. Daniel, as an analytic thinker, was more focused on estimating a result.
He had fewer experiences with straw bales and didn’t have such a clear picture as
Andreas. The effect that the context of the task can also have on solving modeling
problems is shown more in detail in Sect. 3.3.
34 2 Theoretical Competency: For Your Practical Work

2.3.2  athematical Thinking Styles and Modeling Routes

M
of Learners and Teachers

Within the COM2-project another focus lay on the analysis of the modeling pro-
cesses of the learners and teachers, and the research question was:
• What influences do the mathematical thinking styles of the learners’ and teach-
ers’ have on modeling processes in mathematics lessons?
In the description of the modeling routes of Daniel and Andreas, their preferred
mathematical thinking styles were mentioned. Daniel was an analytic thinker and
Andreas was an integrated thinker.
But what is a mathematical thinking style and why is this important to know for
teaching and learning mathematical modeling?
On the basis of several empirical studies I have done with secondary school stu-
dents (Borromeo Ferri 2004, 2007, 2010), I characterize a mathematical thinking
style as “the way in which an individual prefers to present, to understand and to
think through, mathematical facts and connections, by certain internal imaginations
and/or externalized representations. Hence, a mathematical style is based on two
components: 1) internal imaginations and externalized representations, 2) wholist
and dissecting way of proceeding” (Borromeo Ferri 2004, 2010).
A central characteristic of the construct “mathematical thinking style” is the dis-
tinction between abilities and preferences. Mathematical thinking styles are about
how a person likes to understand and to learn mathematics and not about how well
this person understands mathematics. This approach is based on Sternberg’s theory
of “thinking styles” (1997). Thus according to Sternberg (1997), “A style is a way
of thinking. It is not an ability, but rather, a preferred way of using the abilities one
has.” That means that thinking styles are not viewed as being unchangeable, but
they may change depending on time, environment and life demands. If you think
about the term preference in connection with modeling then an interesting question
is: how you and your students like to model or proceed along the modeling cycle.
Mostly you do this on an unconscious level and normally you cannot easily recog-
nize another person’s preferred way of modeling. However, I would like to give you
ideas for a deeper view into modeling processes of students and teachers who prefer
analytic, visual and integrated thinking styles.
In my empirical studies on mathematical thinking styles (Borromeo Ferri 2004),
the goal was to reconstruct and characterize the analytic, visual and integrated
thinking styles of students from Grades 9 and 10 during their pair-problem-solving
process. The design of the study was very complex, in order to grasp the concept of
the construct “style” (preference) itself, as well as the representation (visual, ana-
lytic, conceptual) and the way of proceeding (holistic, dissecting). This information
was obtained from using stimulated recall and interview. The aim was not only to
reconstruct these preferences, but to find explanations of what it means to be a
visual or an analytic thinker, inspired by the concepts or classifications of thinking
found in the literature (e.g. Hadamard 1945; Skemp 1987; Burton 1995).
2.3 Far from Linearity: Individual Modeling Routes 35

Based on this first and follow up studies, an empirically grounded description of the
characteristics of the visual, analytic and integrated thinking style could be developed:
• Visual thinking style: Visual thinkers show a preference for distinctive internal
pictorial imaginations and externalized pictorial representations, as well as a
preference for the understanding of mathematical facts and connections through
holistic representations. The internal imaginations are mainly affected by strong
associations with situations they have experienced.
• Analytical thinking style: Analytic thinkers show preferences for internal formal
imaginations and for externalized formal representations. They are able to com-
prehend mathematical facts preferably through existing symbolic or verbal rep-
resentations and prefer to proceed in a sequence of steps.
• Integrated thinking style: These people combine visual and analytic ways of think-
ing and are able to switch flexibly between different representations or ways of
proceeding.
Individuals had preferences for certain mathematical thinking styles, these gave
a strong indication that the modeling behavior of individual learners also can be
very different because of the influence of the styles. However, the degree to which
this is true with more complex modeling tasks and within regular mathematics les-
sons instead of a laboratory design was still an open question. Answering these
questions was one major goal of the COM2-project.
The individual modeling routes of Daniel and Andreas illustrate parts of the pat-
terns which could be reconstructed for the visual, analytic and integrated thinkers of
the study when they worked on the three modeling problems. The results of the
micro-analysis showed the following structural characteristics:
• Analytic thinkers usually change to the mathematical model immediately and
return to the real model only afterwards when the need arises to understand the
task better. They work mainly in a formalistic manner and are better at “perceiv-
ing” the mathematical aspects of a given real situation.
• Visual thinkers mostly imagine the situation in pictures and use pictographic
drawings. Their reasoning during the modeling process is usually very vivid,
even while they are working within the mathematical model. They often follow
the given modeling cycle.
• Integrated thinkers showed a balance between reality and mathematics.
The knowledge about these different modeling behaviors, depending on the learn-
ers’ preferred mathematical thinking styles, helps the teacher to understand why a
student, for example, has difficulties building a real model or has problems with vali-
dating. Both are necessary sub-competencies for modeling. If an analytic thinker
shows very strong inner-mathematical competencies and sees the mathematical
model very quickly after reading the task, but cannot imagine the real situation at all,
then you, as the teacher, will know how to support this student. Of course you have
to know about your students’ mathematical thinking styles. In the Appendix you find
the scales on mathematical thinking styles which you can use with your class and
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
the Furniture and Gilding, is preserved from Smoke and damp Air;
which are the chief Causes of the one and the other’s being spoiled.
Sixthly, I t will be obvious to every Person, who examines the
Construction of this Machine, that the Chimney will not require
sweeping in less than two or three Years; and that it is morally
impossible the Chimney can ever take Fire.
Seventhly, I t has been already observed, that no part of the current
of Air, that passes continually through the Fire, is supplied from the
Doors, Windows, or Crevices of the Room: For the same Reason, the
Candles, in all sorts of Weather, will burn clear; the Light will be
pleasant, equal, and steady; and there will be a considerable Saving
in that Article.
Eighthly, W h e n the Room is thoroughly warmed in the Day-time, it
will cool but a few Degrees during the Night; and by shutting up the
Fire-Place over Night, and excluding the external Air, the Fire will be
found in the Morning without any sensible Diminution, ready to blaze
out, by the Addition of a Stick of Wood, or a few Coals; which every
body knows is an Advantage, that never could be obtained in
common Chimnies, with a Coal Fire, without a great Expence, and
much Danger.
T h e s e , and many other Advantages, that would be tedious to
enumerate at present, will be found to result from this useful
Invention. Several of the Stove-Grates are already set up; and Orders
given for the erecting others in many Houses in London and the
Country.
S o m e are of Cast Iron, in its plain, natural Colour; and others have a
Case, richly ornamented, that is put on, and taken off, at Pleasure.
The Inventor hopes he shall be permitted to publish the Names and
Places of Abode, of those Noblemen and Gentlemen, who have
encouraged this undertaking.
B y this Method it will be in the Power of those who incline to become
Purchasers, to inform themselves of the Truth of every Particular, by
Persons of undoubted Credit and Veracity; and to know, with
Certainty, what they are to expect, without laying out their Money,
upon what they might suppose, an unexperimented Project; the
Success whereof might otherwise be uncertain.
T h e r e are Three Sizes of these Stove-Grates, adapted to the
Dimensions of the Rooms where they are set up. They are all made
of Cast Iron, which will endure longer, and come much cheaper, than
if they were made of wrought Iron.
Ft. In. Pts.
The smallest Size, High 2 3 0 over all
Price 7l. 7s. set up Broad in Front 1 5 0
Depth from 1 0 0
Front to Back
The Space that contains the Fire within this Stove,
Broad in Front 1 3 0
Depth of the Bars 0 5 6
From Front to Back 0 5 6
Middle Size, Pr. 10l. High 2 4 6 over all
10l. set up Broad in Front 1 9 0
Depth from 1 0 0
Front to Back
The Space that contains the Fire within this Stove,
Broad in Front 1 7 6
Depth of the Bars 0 8 0
From Front to Back 0 8 0
Largest Size, Pr. High 2 10 0 over all
13l. 13l. set up Broad in Front 0 2 4
Depth from 1 4 6
Front to Back
The Space that contains the Fire within this Stove,
Broad in Front 2 3 0
Depth of the Bars 0 10 6
From Front to Back 1 0 0
I f i n d , by my own Experience, that the smallest Size of these
Stoves, will warm a Room of Twelve or Fourteen Foot Square, or the
largest Dressing Closet. The Middle-sized Grate will warm a Room of
20 Feet + 26, and 12 or 14 Feet high. The largest Size will warm a
Room of 50 Feet by 25, and about 20 or 22 Feet high.
A s I have not advanced any thing, but what I have proved from my
own Experience, I shall omit what might be said from the Testimony
of others, to Time, and the real Merit of the Machine; which, in all
Respects, will answer for itself. For the Beginning of this Attempt was
founded upon Theory and Mechanick Principles, supported by
Observation and Experience of what had happened before.
B u t had not the same Observation and Experience, likewise
confirmed the Use of this, and all the Advantages mentioned, I
should not have offered it to the Publick.
Jermyn-Street, March 22, 1753.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T.

T he Inventor of this Stove-Grate has contrived a Stove for a

Laundry, which answers all the Ends desirable, without any other
Fire, and at one Third part of the usual Expence that keeps a Fire in
the common Way. It is moveable to any part of the Room; and stands
on a boarded Floor with the greatest Safety. It likewise may be
placed in a Room where there is no Chimney, and will serve for Airing
large Rooms, far preferable to the common Braziers; it warms a
Room sooner, with greater Safety, and much less Expence: For Half a
Bushel of Coals will go farther than a Bushel of Charcoal in the
common Way.
FINIS.
 Transcriber’s Notes:
Punctuation has been made consistent.
Variations in spelling and hyphenation were retained as they appear in the original
publication, except that obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A DESCRIPTION OF
A NEW-INVENTED STOVE-GRATE ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying
copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of
Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything
for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund
from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law
in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated
with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this
agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached
full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the
terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears,
or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning
of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or
expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or
a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original
“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must
include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in
paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for

the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3,
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim
all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL
NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF
YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving
it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or
entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation,

the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation,
anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with
the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or
any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to
maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about books and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!

ebookball.com