The purpose of this study is to identify the epistemological features and model qualities depending on model evaluation levels and to explore the reasoning process behind high-level evaluation through small group interaction about blood circulation. Nine groups of three to four students in the eighth grade participated in the modeling practice. Their group models, which were represented by discourse and blood circulation diagrams, were analyzed for the development of the framework that informed the model evaluation levels and epistemological features. The model evaluation levels were categorized into levels one to four based on the following evaluation criteria: no evaluation, authoritative sources, superficial criteria, and more comprehensive criteria. The qualities of group models varied with the criteria of model evaluation. While students who used authoritative sources for evaluating the group model appeared to have an absolutist epistemology, students who evaluated according to the superficial criteria and more comprehensive criteria appeared to have an evaluative epistemology. Furthermore, groups with Level four showed a chain reaction of cognitive reasoning during the modeling practice concerning practical epistemology. The findings have implications for science teachers and education researchers who want to understand the context for developing students' practical epistemologies.