As you construct your own explanation, or evaluate an explanation written by others, you should keep the usual criteria in mind.

 

Well-Constructed:

Your diagram should be clear and easy to read and your narrative should be well written and easy to follow. Also, the diagrams and narrative should be consistent with each other. Your explanation should be relevant and focus on the phenomenon that is to be explained. (Other things that happened either before or after, or are not important for the particular phenomenon to be explained, may be briefly mentioned, but should not be a major part.)  

Accurate:

Your diagram and narrative should incorporate the basic assumptions of the energy model in a way that is consistent with ideas covered in class.  

Well-Reasoned:

Reasons should be given for why any energy changes occur as they do. For example, energy changes for particular objects should always be explicitly connected to a transfer or transformation of energy during an interaction. Any changes in observable properties of an object should also be explicitly connected to changes in the appropriate type of energy.  

If all the criteria are met, the explanation should be considered “good.” If at least one of the criteria is not met, then the explanation should be considered “problematic” and in need of revision.

Explanations Using Energy Ideas – Evaluating an Explanation