Scoring student-drawn models is time-consuming. Recently released GPT-4V provides a unique opportunity to advance scientific modeling practices by leveraging the powerful image processing capability. To test this ability specifically for automatic scoring, we developed a method NERIF (Notation-Enhanced Rubric Instruction for Few-shot Learning) employing instructional note and rubrics to prompt GPT-4V to score students' drawn models for science phenomena. We randomly selected a set of balanced data (N = 900) that includes student-drawn models for six modeling assessment tasks. Each model received a score from GPT-4V ranging at three levels: 'Beginning,' 'Developing,' or 'Proficient' according to scoring rubrics. GPT-4V scores were compared with human experts' scores to calculate scoring accuracy. Results show that GPT-4V's average scoring accuracy was mean =.51, SD = .037. Specifically, average scoring accuracy was .64 for the 'Beginning' class, .62 for the 'Developing' class, and .26 for the 'Proficient' class, indicating that more proficient models are more challenging to score. Further qualitative study reveals how GPT-4V retrieves information from image input, including problem context, example evaluations provided by human coders, and students' drawing models. We also uncovered how GPT-4V catches the characteristics of student-drawn models and narrates them in natural language. At last, we demonstrated how GPT-4V assigns scores to student-drawn models according to the given scoring rubric and instructional notes. Our findings suggest that the NERIF is an effective approach for employing GPT-4V to score drawn models. Even though there is space for GPT-4V to improve scoring accuracy, some mis-assigned scores seemed interpretable to experts. The results of this study show that utilizing GPT-4V for automatic scoring of student-drawn models is promising.