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

  1. Skim passage — identify type (experiment description, competing models, etc.)
  2. Note variables — circle independent/dependent
  3. Go to questions — read what they're asking
  4. Find relevant data — locate graph, table, or description
  5. Answer based on passage — not outside knowledge
  6. 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!