Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development

Danish, Joshua A.; Saleh, Asmalina; Andrade, Alejandro; Bryan, Branden

doi:10.1007/s11251-016-9391-z

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study highlights (1) undergraduate students' systems thinking-based reasoning about water systems [31], (2) advances in research focused on students' use of systems thinking to reason about water systems [2], and (3) students' ability to critically evaluate drawn systems thinking models [20,28]. The study findings suggest that teaching students to use systems thinking to reason about an SHS is only one part of the challenge.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Providing students with the specific instruction in this skill [1] and opportunities to practice systems thinking with increasingly challenging scenarios can be an effective way to address this need. Engaging students in generating models of a system is a method to scaffold learning about complex issues [2,31], including sociohydrologic issues. This study provides valuable insights into students' use of models, written descriptions, and evaluations of a real-world water-related issue using systems thinking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the interlinking nature of systems thinking, it is helpful to teach students to systems think with increasingly difficult systems, or by increasing the complexity of a single system. Second, models students generate by hand or digitally can be used as scaffolds to student learning and thinking about systems [13,31]. The ability to see the system helps students by alleviating some of the mental burden of simultaneously thinking about and visualizing the components of a system.…”

Section: Supporting Students' Systems Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sociohydrologic Systems Thinking: An Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Operationalization and Modeling of Coupled Human-Water Systems

Lally

Forbes

2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the keys to science and environmental literacy is systems thinking. Learning how to think about the interactions between systems, the far-reaching effects of a system, and the dynamic nature of systems are all critical outcomes of science learning. However, students need support to develop systems thinking skills in undergraduate geoscience classrooms. While systems thinking-focused instruction has the potential to benefit student learning, gaps exist in our understanding of students’ use of systems thinking to operationalize and model SHS, as well as their metacognitive evaluation of systems thinking. To address this need, we have designed, implemented, refined, and studied an introductory-level, interdisciplinary course focused on coupled human-water, or sociohydrologic, systems. Data for this study comes from three consecutive iterations of the course and involves student models and explanations for a socio-hydrologic issue (n = 163). To analyze this data, we counted themed features of the drawn models and applied an operationalization rubric to the written responses. Analyses of the written explanations reveal statistically-significant differences between underlying categories of systems thinking (F(5, 768) = 401.6, p < 0.05). Students were best able to operationalize their systems thinking about problem identification (M = 2.22, SD = 0.73) as compared to unintended consequences (M = 1.43, SD = 1.11). Student-generated systems thinking models revealed statistically significant differences between system components, patterns, and mechanisms, F(2, 132) = 3.06, p < 0.05. Students focused most strongly on system components (M = 13.54, SD = 7.15) as compared to related processes or mechanisms. Qualitative data demonstrated three types of model limitation including scope/scale, temporal, and specific components/mechanisms/patterns excluded. These findings have implications for supporting systems thinking in undergraduate geoscience classrooms, as well as insight into links between these two skills.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Supporting Students' Systems Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sociohydrologic Systems Thinking: An Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Operationalization and Modeling of Coupled Human-Water Systems

Lally

Forbes

2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Encouragingly, many undergraduate students do experience some SMST (Forbes et al, 2018;Gunn, Mohtar, & Engel, 2002;McNeal, Miller, & Herbert, 2008;Williams, Lansey, & Washburne, 2009), but introductory geoscience courses do not tend to incorporate SMST; instead, students receive exposure to SMST in other courses (Macdonald et al, 2005). SMST skills encourage students to think about relationships between interacting components and the ability to demonstrate what those components and interactions look like (Baumfalk et al, in press;Bawden et al, 1984;Danish, et al, 2017;Schwarz et al, 2009;Troy et al, 2015). However, despite these advancements made in faculty preparation and student learning, gaps remain in what we know about effective teaching and learning in undergraduate geoscience courses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These skills work together as a system." Systems thinking in geoscience education is beneficial because students learn to think about a system from multiple viewpoints (Danish, Saleh, Andrade, & Bryan, 2017). As students develop geoscience understanding, the complexity of these systems can be explored with increasing depth, demonstrating the interconnectedness of systems and spheres of Earth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Survey of Geoscience Teaching Practices 2016: Current Trends in Geoscience Instruction of Scientific Modeling and Systems Thinking

Lally¹,

Forbes²,

McNeal³

et al. 2018

Geological Society of America Abstracts With Programs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific modeling and systems thinking (SMST) is central to the geosciences, yet few studies have documented how and to what extent undergraduate geoscience courses emphasize SMST, as well as factors that might help explain or predict these trends. Here, we present research based on data (n ¼ 2056) from the most recent (2016) administration of the National Geoscience Faculty Survey, administered to a national sample of postsecondary geoscience instructors in the United States. We investigated instructor-and course-related variables as they relate to a set of 9 survey items that serve as a composite measure for SMST. Significant variation was observed in reported frequencies of individual SMST practices in undergraduate geoscience courses. The highest levels of reported SMST were associated with faculty from atmospheric and environmental sciences, those who emphasized research-based, studentcentered pedagogical practices, those who recently made changes to both course content and teaching methods, and those who reported high levels of engagement in instructional improvement activities (workshops, presentations, seminars). Reported SMST practices were similar for faculty identifying as geoscientists and geoscience education researchers, and both were significantly higher than for teaching-focused faculty who do not conduct research. A linear regression model including variables found to be significant in the analyses was able to predict 17% of the overall variance in reported SMST practices. These findings illustrate the importance of instructors' disciplinary orientation and active engagement in instructional innovation as related to SMST, and provide important points of impact for enhancing SMST in undergraduate geoscience courses through course design and faculty development. However, the relatively modest predictive power of the regression model indicates there are many other factors influencing SMST that warrant future research.

show abstract

Commentary: Promoting systems understanding

Chinn

2017

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development

Cited by 27 publications

References 24 publications

Sociohydrologic Systems Thinking: An Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Operationalization and Modeling of Coupled Human-Water Systems

Sociohydrologic Systems Thinking: An Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Operationalization and Modeling of Coupled Human-Water Systems

National Survey of Geoscience Teaching Practices 2016: Current Trends in Geoscience Instruction of Scientific Modeling and Systems Thinking

Commentary: Promoting systems understanding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About