Within recent history, both science research and science education have been largely reductionist in perspective. While the reductionist approach has resulted in a significant increase in our knowledge of the natural world and in great technological advances, it is not sufficient for addressing global world challenges, such as sustainability, pollution, climate change, and poverty. We, as members of the Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education (STICE) project, argue that for science in general, and chemistry in specific, to continue to advance and for citizens to be prepared to participate knowledgeably and democratically in science-related policy decisions, the reductionist approaches that are commonly used in chemistry research and chemistry education must be complemented with a more holistic approach. Systems thinking is such an approach. This article discusses the historical development, describes the key characteristics, and presents some skills and competencies associated with systems thinking. Our intention is to provide chemical educators with enough basic information about systems thinking that they can consider why and how such an approach might be applied in the education of both future chemists and future global citizens.

Recently, there have been calls to integrate systems thinking approaches into chemistry education in order to strengthen students' conceptual understanding, build their problem-solving capabilities, and prepare them to make informed, ethical decisions about globally relevant issues, such as sustainability. Unfortunately, implementation of systems thinking approaches in chemistry classrooms currently poses challenges. Exemplar systems thinking materials with a STEM focus are limited, particularly at the tertiary level. Moreover, the science education community has yet to agree upon a systems thinking definition or develop a comprehensive list of systems thinking skills that students should develop. Thus, a current priority for the advancement of systems thinking in chemistry education is the development of resources for instructors and students alike. In the current project, we constructed a tool that provides an operational definition for systems thinking in chemistry education and serves as guide for the design, analysis, and optimization of systems thinking activities. The Characteristics Essential for designing or Modifying Instruction for a Systems Thinking approach (ChEMIST) table identifies five essential characteristics of a systems thinking approach, along with corresponding systems thinking skills through which students can demonstrate their engagement in each essential characteristic. Here, we describe the inspiration and development of the tool. We also provide examples of how the tool might be used to support chemistry teaching and learning from a systems thinking approach. Finally, we present some initial ideas about the relationship between systems thinking and other approaches to chemistry education reform.

Science instructors and textbook authors often use analogies to help their students use information they already understand to develop an understanding of new concepts. This study reports the results of an analysis of the use of analogies in eight biochemistry textbooks, which included textbooks written for one‐semester survey biochemistry courses for non‐majors; two‐semester courses for chemistry or biochemistry majors; and biochemistry courses for medical school students. We present an analysis of how analogies are used and presented in biochemistry textbooks, and we compare the use of analogies in biochemistry textbooks to the use of analogies in other science textbooks. We also compare the use of analogies in biochemistry textbooks with the factors known to promote spontaneous transfer of attributes and relations from analog concept to target concept. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 43: 1040–1060, 2006

Systems thinking is a holistic approach for examining complex problems and systems that focuses on the interactions among system components and the patterns that emerge from those interactions. Systems thinking can help students develop higher-order thinking skills in order to understand and address complex, interdisciplinary, real-world problems. Because of these potential benefits, there have been recent efforts to support the implementation of systems thinking approaches in chemistry education, including the development of the IUPAC Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education (STICE) Project and this Special Issue of the Journal of Chemical Education: "Reimagining Chemistry Education: Systems Thinking, and Green and Sustainable Chemistry". As part of these efforts, our purposes in this paper are to describe some of the potential benefits associated with systems thinking approaches, to identify the STEM education fields that have employed systems thinking approaches, to summarize some of the major findings about the applications of systems thinking in STEM education, and to present methods that have been used to assess systems thinking skills in STEM education. We found that, in general, systems thinking approaches have been applied in life sciences, earth sciences, and engineering but not in the physical or mathematical sciences. We also found that the primary emphasis of peer-reviewed publications was on the development of students', rather than teachers', systems thinking abilities. Existing tools for the assessment of systems thinking in STEM education can be divided into (a) assessment rubrics, (b) closed-ended tools, and (c) coding schemes, with each type of assessment tool having its own unique advantages and disadvantages. We highlight one particular case in which researchers applied an interdisciplinary framework for comprehensive assessment of systems thinking. Although systems thinking has not been widely researched or applied in chemistry education, many of the conceptual frameworks applied to systems thinking in other STEM education disciplines could potentially be applied in chemistry education. We argue that the benefits observed when applying systems thinking approaches in other STEM education disciplines could facilitate similar results for chemistry education. Finally, we provide considerations for future research and applications of systems thinking in chemistry education.

No abstract