The purpose of this study was to explore four elementary preservice teachers' (PSTs) learning outcomes based on "affective characteristics," "science knowledge," and "pedagogical content knowledge" during a science methods course that incorporated "explicit instruction on drawing-to-reason" about force-related phenomena. Drawing-to-reason was defined as the creation, evaluation, and revision of hand-sketched visual representations to build science knowledge and considered a form of science modeling. The explicit instruction on drawing-to-reason was guided by Quillin and Thomas's (2015) instructional intervention framework that targets affect, visual literacy, and modeling. This study used a mixed methods case study design with embedded subunits. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected during the semester and analyzed concurrently to explore the PSTs' learning outcomes, including: a) "affective characteristics" towards drawing, physical science and science teaching, b) "science knowledge" about force and motion concepts and the practice of drawing-to-reason, and c) "pedagogical content knowledge" about drawing as an instructional strategy for science teaching in the elementary grades. The PSTs, who were part of the case study, were undergraduate students in their 1st year of a STEM-focused elementary education program and had various prior knowledge about force and motion, drawing attitudes and experience, and science teaching efficacy beliefs (STEB). For learning outcomes based on "affective characteristics," the primary data included a semantic differential attitude (SDA) survey (Bauer, 2008), T-STEM instrument (Unfried et al, 2022) to measure STEB, and semi-structured interviews. Primary data for "science knowledge" learning outcomes included a series of PST-generated drawings and written explanation of a force-related phenomenon. Primary data for "pedagogical content knowledge" learning outcomes included lesson plans generated by the PSTs prior to and following explicit instruction on drawing-to-reason and end-of-course, semi-structured interview responses about lesson facilitation during field experiences. At the end of the course, PSTs' self-reported "affective characteristics" were more positive toward drawing and science teaching. However, they appeared to perceive physical science as more difficult at the end of the semester. PSTs also built "science knowledge" about force and motion-related concepts and "drawing-to-reason" as a science practice. During the iterative drawing cycles, PSTs included more force and motion-related concepts to explain the phenomena and demonstrated changes in their drawing practices based on model use aspects defined as model relationships, purpose and salient features, and metacognition (Quillin &Thomas, 2015). Their final drawings included a greater variety of representational translations, including visual-text, vertical between scales, and horizontal within scale. The purpose of the PST-generated drawings progressed from primarily depicting observable features to including more salient features, such as non-observable structures, processes, and relationships, which reflected their understanding of the force-related phenomenon. Their final drawings served as the basis for their written explanation. While data to assess learning outcomes regarding "pedagogical content knowledge" of science instructional strategies was limited, PSTs did incorporate drawing in their lesson planning and facilitation in more ways that would support elementary students' more expert modeling use of drawing as a tool for reasoning (Quillin &Thomas, 2015). This study has implications for building PSTs' "affective characteristics," "science knowledge," and "pedagogical content knowledge" during teacher education programs to support future implementation of drawing as a science instructional strategy in the elementary classroom. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]