Dear Students, Kindly note, we do not have any external representatives, branches or agents for BillTech Labs, Mohali. We neither have the official associative partnership with any college, university in India and abroad areas. We donot issue any kind of certificate for M.Tech and Ph.D thesis guidance. Billtech Labs, Mohali is a technical research and development laboratory support run by innovative, creative, passionate and dedicated research and development team. All works are carried out in our lab premises located in mohali. We do not outsource your works. If you find any deviations or misuse of our brand (BillTech Labs). Kindly intimate us at info@billtechcoding.com Thank you.

By now, you're probably familiar with the modelling cycle released in the Common Core State Standards. Today, I would like to explore this notion of modelling cycle a bit and urge you to believe a bit differently relating to this idea. One trend Ive noticed from the maths schooling community is the deconstruction of the cycle or the record of the parts like this: Problem - Formulate - Compute - Interpret - Validate - Report - The point is normally made these are all associated with key skills the mathematical modeler must have and I fully agree with that idea. Now, that sounds somewhat humorous, so allow me to say it another way. The modelling cycle is merely a model of the practice of mathematical modelling and as with all models, we've to make certain not to confuse the simulate with thing alone. Like all models the modelling cycle is incomplete, diligent, rests on hypotheses that are open to question, and must be used carefully, with any of these points in mind. If you've ever Googled mathematical modelling bicycle you've probably gotten an inkling of the point and encountered other modelling cycles similar to the one by of the Stepping Stones project at Indiana University: this one from Rita Borromeo Ferri: Hopefully, seeing these distinct modelling cycles brings home the purpose that there is no single modelling cycle that's sense in any respect the modelling cycle, but instead, they're all just different ways of modeling the process of mathematical modeling. Recognizing this differentiation, or failing to recognize this differentiation, has implications for how we teach of the art of mathematical modeling. Dont fall into of the trap of believing this the modelling practice can be deconstructed into just a list of steps to follow. Just as when scientists are doing science, they are not holding some poster version of the scientific method in their head and going through a linear process, of the mathematical modeler is not going through a simple check-list either. More likely, they're moving fluidly between stages in a wide range of orders, skipping steps, creating new steps, and doing just a whole bunch of things which are represented merely as lines connecting stages in a typical modelling cycle. The main implication then for teaching and learning is the do not attempt to teach of the art of mathematical modelling by having your students mechanically plod throughout the stages in some modelling cycle. The modelling cycle as a tool to involve them from meta thinking about what they did and didnt do during their investigation.