This research study aimed to improve the ability of students to prove concepts in nerve impulse generation and transmission topic using the model-based learning approach. The objectives of this research were to explain the neuron’s structure, and location and relate this with its functions and to describe how mechanoreceptors react to the stimulus pressure and how nerve impulses are transmitted along the PNS and CNS using the Modeling Based Learning approach (MbL).

This is a descriptive research study at Nazarbayev Intellectual School in Karaganda where two groups with a total of forty grade 11 Biology students were asked what they would expect from studying the human nervous system using the model-based learning approach. The students all indicated that they expected to gain a thorough understanding of the topic as well as broaden their perspective on its significance. They also hoped to increase their analytical reasoning and abilities to prove and connect concepts in nerve impulse transmission topic.

The learning process was done with the MbL approach for six lessons. During the first lesson, students learned the concepts about neuron’s structures, functions, and location in the human body from the handbook they usually use in biology class. They learned of the mechanoreceptors (Pacinian corpuscles) and their reaction to changing stimulus, and pressure. In the second lesson, they learned the initiation and transmission of the action potential in myelinated neurons and the connection between the structure and function of the cholinergic synapse. In the next three lessons, using the guidelines of the rubric, the students discussed, prepared, and presented their models on the transmission of nerve impulses in the human nervous system. In the last lesson, they answered the formative assessment questions and filled in the questionnaire. The other group was taught without the model-based approach and formative assessment given.

For the group that went through the model-based lessons, the results showed that fifteen students out of twenty (75 %) had 70 % or above marks on their work on the worksheet. For the group that did not study by model-based learning, the results showed that seven students out of twenty (35 %) had 70 % or above marks on their work on the formative assessment worksheet. This was an indication that this group of students could not answer questions that required them to prove the concepts of the neuron’s structures, functions, location; and nerve impulse transmission along the PNS and CNS.

According to the research study, the majority of the students’ capacity to prove concepts of the human nervous system was in a good category and above. Therefore, if the concept taught has a higher complexity than the lower complexity concept, MbL can allow a strong association between thinking level and the ability to verify concepts.

Some recommendations for Biology teachers, for example, must be creative in order to diversify instructional aids based on current scientific research and technology. For example, using animation and video or modeling-based learning to explain abstract and microscopic concepts. Stand-alone learning utilities allow students to study at their own pace either in or out of school hours and gain knowledge beyond the textbook content. This pedagogical technique should begin in preschool or elementary school. If necessary, the modeling-based learning technique can be repeated in the following classes with minimal customization.

This descriptive research study used random sampling of two groups of a total of forty A-level Biology students of grade 11, in Nazarbayev Intellectual School, Karaganda, who are learning the human nervous system as their Biology curriculum requirement. This study involved students answering the questionnaire and rubric on their level of understanding of the topic of Nerve impulse generation and transmission and a formative test of the topic which contains eight structured questions following bloom’s taxonomy higher order thinking levels. The two grade 11 class groups are randomly sampled from four grade 11 class groups to answer both research instruments. The learning process was done with the MbL approach for 6 lessons. During the first lesson, students learned the concepts about neuron structures, functions, and location in the human body from the handbook they usually use in biology class. They learned of the mechanoreceptors (Pacinian corpuscles) and their reaction to changing stimulus, and pressure. In the second lesson, they learned the initiation and transmission of the action potential in myelinated neurons and the connection between the structure and function of the cholinergic synapse. In the following three lessons, they discussed, prepared, and presented their models on the transmission of nerve impulses in the human nervous system. In the last lesson, they answered the formative assessment questions and filled in the questionnaire. For modeling, students were offered rubrics with criteria for evaluation. With rubrics, students could evaluate not only themselves but also the work of other students and give 2 suggestions for improvement and 1 good point. This allowed students to properly organize their work and simulate the mechanism of formation and transmission of a nerve impulse successfully, linking everything into a single whole. Rubrics are used for both formative assessment (in-process feedback to be used for improvement) and summative assessment (evaluation of student learning at the conclusion of an assignment or project). Essentially, a rubric is a tool for communication between instructor and student. Students assess their own work using the rubric more effectively and submit the rubric with their assignment. This is a great basis for deep discussion about which aspects they can improve or change.

The questionnaire results for students taught with the Modeling based lessons from the Very poor to Very good categories were 3.33%, 26.67%, 46.67%, 23.33%, and 10.00%. Those taught without were 6.67%, 43.33%, 26.67%, 13.33%, and 0.00%. In the group that went through the model-based lessons, the formative assessment results show that fifteen out of twenty (75 %) got 70 % or above marks on their work on the worksheet. For the group that did not study by model-based learning, the results show that seven students out of twenty (35 %) got 70 % or above marks on their work on the formative assessment worksheet. This is an indication that this group of students could not answer questions that required them to prove the concepts of the neuron’s structures, functions, location; and nerve impulse transmission along the PNS and CNS. In the control group, students were not offered the use of rubrics and they went through the whole mechanism in parts and did not do the simulation at the end, which would help to visualize and see the relationship between the work of the parts of the neuron. They could not answer questions where it was asked to provide evidence. We believe that it was rubric modeling that helped students demonstrate the ability to present evidence. We recommend using rubric modeling to improve students' understanding of different concepts so that they can bring evidence to their answers through analysis and evaluation. Not to give topics separately, but to study in relation to other topics and sections, as is done in the reverse design method, to offer different ways of modeling to show exactly their understanding.

[1] Owens M.T., Tanner K.D. Teaching as Brain Changing: Exploring Connections between Neuroscience and Innovative Teaching. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2017 Summer; 16(2). [2] Marzano R. J. and Heflebower T. Grades that show what know. 2011 69 34-9 [3] Goff E, Reindl K, Johnson C, McClean P, Offerdahl J, Schroeder N, and White A 2017 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 45 226 – 34 [4 Lazarowitz R and Penso S 1992 J. Of Biological Education, 26 215–23 [5] Lestari D, Mulyani S E S, and Susanti R 2016 J. of Innovative Science Education 5 83–93 [6]Cavalho J C Q, Beltramini L M, and Bossolan N R S 2018 J. of Biological Education 53 205-16 [7]Louca L T, and Zacharia Z C 2012 Educational Review 64 471-92 [8]Fretz E B, Wu H K, Zhang B, Davis E A, Krajcik J S, and Soloway E 2002 Res. in Sci. Education 32 567–89 [9]Penner D E 2001 Review of Research in Education 25 20 [10]Grosslight L, Unger C, Jay E and Smith C L 1991 J. of Res. in Scie. Teach. 28 799–822 [11]Harrison A G and Treagust D F 2000 Int. J. of Science Education 22 1011–26 [12]Gilbert J K and Justi R 2016 Modelling Based Teaching (Switzerland: Springer) pp 123-126 [13]Van Meter P, Cameron C, and Waters J 2017 Learning and Instruction 49 188 – 98 [14]Paivio, A 1990 Mental Representation: A Dual Coding Approach (New York: Oxford University Press, Inc) [15]Adodo S O 2013 Mediterranean J. of Social Sciences 4 163-72 [16]Balim A G 2013 Int. Res. in Geographical and Environmental Education 22 337-52