Interactions between reasoning about complex systems and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry

Abstract

Complex systems" is a general-purpose reasoning scheme, used in a wide range of disciplines to make sense of systems with many similar entities. In this paper, we examine the generality of this approach in learning chemistry. Students' reasoning in chemistry in terms of emergent complex systems is explored for two curricula: a normative and a complexity-based one, so that the interaction could be examined under both the conditions. A quasi-experimental pretest-intervention-posttest comparison group design was used to explore student's learning, complemented with interview data. The experimental group (n = 47) studied the topic of gases with a complexity-based curriculum. A comparison group (n = 45) studied with a normative curriculum for the same duration. Students' answers to questionnaires were coded with a complexity-based approach that included levels (distinguishing micro-and macro-levels), stochastic particle behaviors, the emergence of macro-level patterns from micro-level behaviors, and the source of control in the system. It was found that students' reasoning about chemistry concepts in terms of complex systems falls into three distinct and coherent mental models. A sophisticated mental model included most of the above-described complexity features, while the nonsophisticated model included none.The intermediate model is typified by distinguishing between levels, but not by stochastic and emergent

ChEMIST Table: A Tool for Designing or Modifying Instruction for a Systems Thinking Approach in Chemistry Education

“…The most basic of the essential characteristics involves a system thinker’s recognition that a system is more than just a collection of parts. ,,,,,,,,,,,− Although it is important to examine the components of a system, it is also important to examine the system as a whole, as the system may have properties and behaviors that could not have been predicted on the basis of a study of the component parts alone . Behaviors that occur at the system level are typically affected by (1) the components of the system, (2) the organization of the components within the system, and (3) the interactions between the components of the system. ,,,,, Essential characteristic 1 focuses on the parts of a system and their organization, while essential characteristic 2 focuses on the interactions between the parts of the system.…”

The impact of system specifics on systems thinking

“…Many studies have described the individual skills necessary to understand complex systems in various fields or contexts, for example natural systems (Ben‐Zvi Assaraf & Orion, 2005; Hmelo‐Silver & Azevedo, 2006; Hmelo‐Silver & Pfeffer, 2004; Lee et al, 2019; Wilensky & Resnick, 1999), geographical systems (Mehren et al, 2018; Mehren, Rempfler, Ulrich‐Riedhammer, Buchholz, & Hartig, 2015, 2016; Rempfler & Uphues, 2012), chemical systems (Samon & Levy, 2019), and biological systems (Boersma, Waarlo, & Klaassen, 2011; Booth Sweeney & Sterman, 2007; Hokayem & Gotwals, 2016; Riess & Mischo, 2010; Sommer & Lücken, 2010; Verhoeff et al, 2008). While all these conceptualizations of systems thinking describe the essential cognitive skills involved in understanding complex systems, in some cases, these individual skills exist side by side (Riess & Mischo, 2010; Sommer & Lücken, 2010) and, in others, as skills acquired in a developmental order (Ben‐Zvi Assaraf & Orion, 2010; Booth Sweeney & Sterman, 2000).…”

Fostering Students’ Understanding of Complex Biological Systems

“…In recent education-related literature, various articles can be found that focus on students' systems thinking in subjects ranging across geography (Mehren et al, 2018;Cox et al, 2019), technology (Barak, 2018), chemistry (Orgill et al, 2019;Samon and Levy, 2020), and biology education (Tripto et al, 2018). However, differences can be found in the definitions that are used to describe systems thinking for the different educational domains (Bergan-Roller et al, 2018;Yoon et al, 2018).…”

“…, 2019 ), technology ( Barak, 2018 ), chemistry ( Orgill et al. , 2019 ; Samon and Levy, 2020 ), and biology education ( Tripto et al. , 2018 ).…”