The general objective of the task proposed to students within the framework of the App Checkers project was to promote scientific critical thinking through the evaluation of the reliability of everyday mobile applications. Through classroom experiences focused on inquiry, argumentation, and the development of mental models, the aim was for students to analyze the technical functioning and quality of the results of various Apps, reflecting on the limitations and potentials of digital technologies, as well as the development of inquiry, argumentation, and mental modeling skills. The didactic sequence was implemented on three different occasions, which gave rise to three studies with specific objectives, but articulated in a common purpose of characterizing how school scientific practices manifest themselves in tasks focused on the reliability of mobile technologies. Study 1, conducted at the Pau Vila Institute (Spain), aimed to analyze students' performance in scientific inquiry practices when evaluating freely selected Apps. The focus was on identifying levels of performance in data collection and in the analysis of App reliability. Study 2, carried out at the Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia Institute (Spain), sought to identify the validation strategies employed by high school students when evaluating Apps through the creation of scientific posters, with special attention to the articulation of inquiry practices. Study 3, conducted in various educational centers in Chile, analyzed the development of students' mental models of the technical functioning of Apps, based on individual templates in which students represented their understanding of how the Apps work. In terms of methodology, all three studies adopted a qualitative approach with content analysis. Specific rubrics were designed to evaluate each scientific practice (inquiry, argumentation, and development of mental models), and student-produced artifacts such as videos, posters, and templates were analyzed. The comparison between implementations made it possible to identify some common patterns and differences associated with context, student age, and the type of App selected. In Study 1, it was observed that students demonstrated varying levels of inquiry, with frequent use of validity criteria such as data contrast, although with low explicitness of the operational limits of the Apps. Links were identified between experimental rigor and argument quality. In Study 2, four main strategies were recognized to evaluate App reliability: comparison with an expected value, instrumental comparison, triangulation, and direct testing of the App. These strategies revealed that students prioritized validity over reliability. In Study 3, it was found that the mental models developed tended to focus on visible outputs, omitting technical entities, behaviors, and internal relationships. Apps perceived as more credible or with observable results (such as pedometers or metal detectors) favored more complete models, while those perceived as arbitrary or playful (such as the love calculator) generated more fragmented representations. Taken together, the three studies showed that school scientific practices do not operate in isolation, but are interwoven: the way students inquire conditions what they argue or justify, and what they represent in mental models; and understanding the technical functioning of a system reinforces both critical judgment and the ability to functionally structure knowledge. The project also demonstrated the potential of everyday technologies and how they can be used as educational tools for developing scientific thinking in real classroom contexts.
| Date of Award | 15 Sept 2025 |
|---|
| Original language | Spanish |
|---|
| Supervisor | Víctor López Simó (Director) |
|---|