Evaluation of Models and Experiments
Analyze and evaluate scientific models and experimental designs
Evaluation of Models and Experiments (ACT Science)
Understanding Scientific Models
A model is a simplified representation of a system or phenomenon used to:
- Explain observations
- Make predictions
- Test hypotheses
- Understand complex processes
Types of models on ACT:
- Physical models (diagrams, structures)
- Mathematical models (equations, graphs)
- Conceptual models (theories, frameworks)
Evaluating Models
Questions to Ask About Models
1. Does the model match the data?
- Compare model predictions to actual observations
- Look for agreement or discrepancies
2. What are the model's assumptions?
- What does it simplify or ignore?
- Are assumptions reasonable?
3. What are the model's limitations?
- Under what conditions does it work?
- Where does it break down?
4. Can it make testable predictions?
- Does it generate hypotheses?
- Can predictions be verified?
ACT Question Types
Type 1: "According to the model..."
Strategy:
- Find the relevant model (graph, diagram, equation)
- Read what it predicts for given conditions
- Don't overthink — answer is in the model
Type 2: "The model is supported by which observation?"
Strategy:
- Check each observation against model predictions
- Choose observation that matches/confirms model
Type 3: "Which result would contradict the model?"
Strategy:
- Understand what model predicts
- Find result that goes against that prediction
Understanding Experiments
Components of an Experiment
1. Hypothesis: Testable prediction
2. Variables:
- Independent variable: What experimenter changes
- Dependent variable: What's measured/observed
- Control variables: What's kept constant
3. Control group: Baseline for comparison
4. Experimental group: Receives treatment/manipulation
5. Procedure: Steps taken
6. Results: Data collected
7. Conclusion: What data shows about hypothesis
Experimental Design Principles
Control:
- Keep all variables constant except the one being tested
- Use control group for comparison
Randomization:
- Random assignment reduces bias
- Ensures groups are similar
Replication:
- Repeat trials for reliability
- Larger sample sizes are better
Precision:
- Use appropriate measuring tools
- Minimize measurement error
Evaluating Experiments
Quality of Experimental Design
Good experiments:
✓ Test one variable at a time
✓ Include adequate controls
✓ Have sufficient sample size
✓ Use precise measurements
✓ Can be replicated
✓ Minimize confounding variables
Poor experiments:
❌ Change multiple variables
❌ Lack proper controls
❌ Have too small sample size
❌ Use imprecise methods
❌ Can't be repeated
Interpreting Results
Questions to consider:
1. Do results support the hypothesis?
- Compare prediction to actual results
- Look for patterns in data
2. Are results consistent?
- Check for variability
- Look for outliers or anomalies
3. What can be concluded?
- State what data shows
- Avoid over-generalizing
4. What are alternative explanations?
- Could something else explain results?
- What other factors might be involved?
ACT Science Strategies
Strategy 1: Identify Variables
Always identify:
- What's being changed (independent)
- What's being measured (dependent)
- What's being controlled
Example passage might say: "Students tested how temperature affects reaction rate. They performed reactions at 20°C, 30°C, 40°C, and 50°C and measured time to completion."
- Independent: Temperature
- Dependent: Time to completion
- Controls: Amount of reactants, pressure, etc.
Strategy 2: Compare Experiments
When passage has multiple experiments:
- What's different between them?
- What's the same?
- What does each test?
Common pattern:
- Experiment 1: Tests variable A
- Experiment 2: Tests variable B
- Experiment 3: Tests variables A + B together
Strategy 3: Use Graphs and Tables
For model/experiment questions:
- Locate relevant graph or table
- Find the specific data point or trend
- Read directly from visual — no complex reasoning needed
Strategy 4: Evaluate Claims
"Which statement is supported by the data?"
Test each choice:
- Does data show this?
- Is there evidence for this claim?
- Or is this assumption/extrapolation?
Choose: Statement directly supported by results
Common Question Patterns
Pattern 1: Design Improvement
"How could the experiment be improved?"
Look for:
- Increasing sample size
- Adding control group
- Controlling additional variables
- Using more precise measurements
- Repeating trials
Pattern 2: New Hypothesis
"Based on these results, which hypothesis could be tested next?"
Strategy:
- Must relate to results
- Should extend/expand on findings
- Must be testable
Pattern 3: Model Prediction
"According to Model 1, what would happen if X increased?"
Strategy:
- Find trend in model
- Extend that trend to new condition
- No outside knowledge needed
Pattern 4: Comparing Models
"Models 1 and 2 agree that..."
"Models 1 and 2 differ in..."
Strategy:
- Check what each model says about the topic
- Find similarities (for "agree")
- Find differences (for "differ")
Common Mistakes
❌ Using outside knowledge instead of passage
ACT Science tests reading comprehension, not content knowledge
❌ Overthinking simple questions
Most answers are directly stated in graphs/tables
❌ Not identifying variables
Misunderstanding what's being tested leads to wrong answers
❌ Confusing correlation and causation
Data may show relationship without proving cause
❌ Ignoring control groups
Control is essential for valid conclusions
❌ Not reading axis labels
Graphs are useless if you don't know what they show!
Quick Tips
✓ Read the introduction — sets context for experiments/models
✓ Identify variables first — what changes, what's measured, what's constant
✓ Use process of elimination — often 2-3 choices clearly wrong
✓ Stick to the data — answer is in passage, not your head
✓ Check units — make sure you're reading right scale
✓ Look for trends — increasing, decreasing, or no relationship
✓ Compare controls — what's different tells you what's being tested
Practice Approach
- Skim passage — identify type (experiment description, competing models, etc.)
- Note variables — circle independent/dependent
- Go to questions — read what they're asking
- Find relevant data — locate graph, table, or description
- Answer based on passage — not outside knowledge
- Check reasonableness — does answer make sense?
Remember: ACT Science isn't a test of scientific knowledge — it's a test of your ability to read and interpret scientific information. Focus on understanding what's presented, not what you already know!
📚 Practice Problems
1Problem 1easy
❓ Question:
A scientist proposes that increasing temperature increases reaction rate. Which experiment would BEST test this hypothesis?
A) Measure reaction rates at 20°C, 30°C, and 40°C B) Measure reaction rate at 25°C only C) Test different chemicals at the same temperature D) Change both temperature and concentration together E) Measure temperature but not reaction rate
💡 Show Solution
A good experiment tests ONE variable while controlling others.
Hypothesis: Temperature increase → Reaction rate increase
Independent variable: Temperature Dependent variable: Reaction rate
Step 1: Evaluate each experimental design
A) "Measure reaction rates at 20°C, 30°C, and 40°C" • Multiple temperature values ✓ • Can see if rate changes with temp ✓ • Tests the hypothesis directly ✓ BEST!
B) "Measure reaction rate at 25°C only" • Only one temperature ✗ • Can't see relationship ✗
C) "Test different chemicals at the same temperature" • Temperature not varied ✗ • Doesn't test hypothesis ✗
D) "Change both temperature and concentration together" • Two variables changing ✗ • Can't isolate temperature effect ✗
E) "Measure temperature but not reaction rate" • Doesn't measure dependent variable ✗ • Can't test hypothesis ✗
Answer: A) Measure reaction rates at 20°C, 30°C, and 40°C
Good experimental design: ✓ Multiple values of independent variable ✓ Measure dependent variable at each ✓ Keep all other factors constant ✓ Have enough data points to see patterns
This design: • 3 temperatures (independent variable) • Measure rate at each (dependent variable) • Same chemical, same concentration, same volume • Can graph temp vs. rate to see relationship
2Problem 2medium
❓ Question:
A model predicts that doubling CO₂ concentration will increase plant growth by 50%. Actual experiments show only a 20% increase. What is the best conclusion?
F) The model is completely wrong and useless G) The experiments were done incorrectly H) The model overestimates the effect and needs revision J) CO₂ has no effect on plant growth K) The model is perfect and the data is wrong
💡 Show Solution
Scientific models are simplified representations - rarely perfect matches to reality.
Model prediction: 50% increase Actual result: 20% increase Discrepancy: Model predicted too much growth
Step 1: Analyze the discrepancy • Model shows positive effect (increase) • Experiment shows positive effect (increase) • Direction matches! ✓ • Magnitude differs (50% vs 20%)
Step 2: Evaluate conclusions
F) "The model is completely wrong and useless" • Too extreme - direction is correct ✗ • Model shows the right trend ✗
G) "The experiments were done incorrectly" • No evidence of experimental error ✗ • Experiments could be valid ✗
H) "The model overestimates the effect and needs revision" • Correctly identifies overestimation ✓ • Acknowledges model needs adjustment ✓ • Scientific approach! ✓ BEST!
J) "CO₂ has no effect on plant growth" • Data shows 20% increase ✗ • Clearly false ✗
K) "The model is perfect and the data is wrong" • Dismisses experimental evidence ✗ • Unscientific ✗
Answer: H) The model overestimates the effect and needs revision
Scientific model evaluation: • Models are simplified representations of reality • Rarely 100% accurate • Discrepancies help improve models • Models are revised based on experimental data • Direction matters more than exact numbers
Why might the model overestimate? • May not account for limiting factors • Could ignore other variables (water, nutrients) • Simplified assumptions • Need to add complexity to improve accuracy
3Problem 3hard
❓ Question:
Two conflicting hypotheses about bird migration:
Hypothesis 1: Birds navigate using Earth's magnetic field. Hypothesis 2: Birds navigate using star positions.
Which experiment would BEST distinguish between these hypotheses?
A) Observe birds flying during daytime B) Test if birds can navigate in a planetarium with artificial stars but no magnetic field, and in darkness with magnetic field but no stars C) Count how many birds migrate each season D) Track birds using GPS E) Study bird anatomy
💡 Show Solution
To distinguish hypotheses, design an experiment where they predict DIFFERENT outcomes.
Hypothesis 1: Magnetic field navigation Hypothesis 2: Star navigation
Key: Create conditions where only ONE cue is available!
Step 1: Determine what each hypothesis predicts
If H1 is correct (magnetic navigation): • Birds should navigate with magnetic field, even without stars • Birds should NOT navigate without magnetic field
If H2 is correct (star navigation): • Birds should navigate with stars, even without magnetic field • Birds should NOT navigate without stars
Step 2: Evaluate experimental designs
A) "Observe birds flying during daytime" • Both stars and magnetic field present ✗ • Can't distinguish ✗
B) "Test navigation with artificial stars (no magnetic) AND with magnetic field (no stars)" • Separates the two cues! ✓ • Can see which one birds actually use ✓ • Different predictions for each hypothesis ✓ PERFECT!
Results would show:
- If birds navigate with stars only: H2 correct
- If birds navigate with magnetic only: H1 correct
- If birds need both: new hypothesis!
C) "Count how many birds migrate each season" • Doesn't test navigation mechanism ✗
D) "Track birds using GPS" • Tells WHERE they go, not HOW they navigate ✗
E) "Study bird anatomy" • Might find magnetic sensors or good eyes • But doesn't test which they actually USE ✗
Answer: B) Test if birds can navigate in a planetarium with artificial stars but no magnetic field, and in darkness with magnetic field but no stars
Crucial experimental principle: To choose between competing hypotheses, design conditions where they make DIFFERENT predictions!
Control vs. Experimental conditions: • Condition 1: Stars only (no magnetic) • Condition 2: Magnetic only (no stars) • Condition 3: Both (control) • Condition 4: Neither (control)
This isolates each factor and tests its necessity!
Practice with Flashcards
Review key concepts with our flashcard system
Browse All Topics
Explore other calculus topics