Promoting Systems Thinking through Biology Lessons

Rieß, Werner; Mischo, Christoph

doi:10.1080/09500690902769946

Cited by 132 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Se trata 49 de sistemas dinámicos que cambian, se auto-organizan y se adaptan continuamente (Jacobson y Wilensky, 2006). Es más, por sí solos los seres vivos son sistemas complicados que, a su vez, forman parte de sistemas de poblaciones, comunidades, ecosistemas y finalmente, de toda la biosfera (Riess y Mischo, 2010). Tal vez sea este el motivo por el cual resulta difícil introducir el concepto de ecosistema en las aulas, ya que no se trata de un concepto exclusivamente descriptivo, no admite simplificaciones y necesita la consideración no solo de los aspectos espaciales sino también de los temporales (Del Carmen, 1999).…”

Section: Contexto Y Participantesunclassified

Del dicho al hecho en una propuesta sobre ecosistemas contextualizada en el huerto escolar

Bondía

López

Giménez³

et al. 2017

Apice Rev Educ Cient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Contexto Y Participantesunclassified

Del dicho al hecho en una propuesta sobre ecosistemas contextualizada en el huerto escolar

Bondía

López

Giménez³

et al. 2017

Apice Rev Educ Cient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Current definitions of system thinking (e.g. Assaraf & Orion, 2005Evagorou, Korfiatis, Nicolaou, & Constantinou, 2009;Riess & Mischo, 2010;Sommer & Lücken, 2010;Verhoeff, 2003) share two fundamental aspects: (1) the ability to organise the system's elements within a system's framework and (2) the ability to understand the relationships between these elements. Brandstädter and colleagues (2012) expanded this groundwork by describing two domains of system thinking.…”

Section: Students' Science Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Using doubly latent multilevel analysis to elucidate relationships between science teachers’ professional knowledge and students’ performance

Mahler

Großschedl

Harms

2017

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers make a difference for the outcome of their students in science classrooms. One focus in this context lies on teachers' professional knowledge. We describe this knowledge according to three domains, namely (1) content knowledge (CK), (2) pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and (3) curricular knowledge (CuK). We hypothesise a positive relationship between these three domains and students' performance in science. Students' science performance was conceptualised by system thinking performance in the context of biology teaching. In order to test our hypothesis, we examined the relationship between the knowledge triplet CK, PCK, and CuK and students' performance. 48 biology teachers and their students (N = 1036) participated in this study. Teachers' content-related professional knowledge and students' performance were measured by paper-and-pencil tests. Moreover, we used concept maps to further assess students' performance. By specifying doubly latent models, we found a significant positive relationship between biology teachers' PCK and students' performance. On the contrary, the results reveal no relationship between CK and CuK and students' performance. These findings are discussed in respect to modelling the interrelationship of teachers' content-related professional knowledge and students' learning in science, as well as concerning their relevance for further research and teacher education programmes. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…This means that the broader the construct, the lower the reliability of its measures. Relatively low internal consistency was also calculated for conceptually related, complex constructs such as problem solving competence assessed in the PISA study in Germany (Klieme, Funke, Leutner, Reimann, & Wirth, 2001) or systems thinking (Riess & Mischo, 2009). Thus, when accounting for the complexity of the theoretical construct, lower internal consistency can be considered as acceptable and in consequence, the reliability of our measurement is in line with other research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Teacher Beliefs on Student Competence in Mathematical Modeling – An Intervention Study

Mischo

Maaß²

2013

Journal of Education and Training Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an intervention study whose aim was to promote teacher beliefs about mathematics and learning mathematics and student competences in mathematical modeling. In the intervention, teachers received written curriculum materials about mathematical modeling. The concept underlying the materials was based on constructivist ideas and findings from mathematics education. Teacher beliefs about mathematics, learning and self-efficacy were expected to have a major impact on their classroom practices. We therefore assessed teacher beliefs about the usefulness of mathematics, learning (constructivist and socio-constructivist beliefs) and teacher self-efficacy when teaching modeling (teacher or class level variable). The student level variables assessed were modeling competence and other individual factors, such as basic mathematical skills and cognitive abilities.The effectiveness of the intervention was measured in a pre-post control group design using multilevel structural equation modeling. The results showed no direct effect of the intervention on student modeling competence. However, they did reveal that the intervention had a significant effect on teacher beliefs about learning (constructivist and socio-constructivist view) and an effect of these teacher beliefs about learning on student modeling competence. Further, the results showed that students' gains in modeling competence is not only mediated by teacher beliefs, but also influenced by individual factors. Implications for teaching as well as limitations of the study are discussed.Keywords: teacher beliefs, teacher education, mathematical modeling, teacher training Theoretical Background IntroductionMathematical modeling means solving complex, realistic and open problems with the help of mathematics. Although mathematical modeling became part of the national German curriculum in 2004 and has been discussed among mathematics educators for decades, it is still rare in day-to-day teaching practice (Blum, 2002).In the present study, we wanted to know whether specially designed (written) curriculum materials for teachers support the development of students' modeling competences. We focused on the design of curriculum materials because materials -other than long-term teacher training -can reach many teachers easily and effectively. We designed mathematical modeling teaching materials for the target group of six grade students (age 11) because modeling is part of the curriculum for this grade. Teachers were asked to use these materials over a period of one school year. The effectiveness of the materials was evaluated in a pre-post control group design by means of a standardized test to assess student competences in mathematical modeling. We also assessed teacher beliefs before and after the intervention because it was expected that their beliefs play a mediating role in the effectiveness of the written materials.The main research questions of the study were:1. Does teacher use of curriculum materials directly influence student modeling competen...

show abstract

Promoting Systems Thinking through Biology Lessons

Cited by 132 publications

References 15 publications

Del dicho al hecho en una propuesta sobre ecosistemas contextualizada en el huerto escolar

Del dicho al hecho en una propuesta sobre ecosistemas contextualizada en el huerto escolar

Using doubly latent multilevel analysis to elucidate relationships between science teachers’ professional knowledge and students’ performance

The Effect of Teacher Beliefs on Student Competence in Mathematical Modeling – An Intervention Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About