Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 137–172 | Cite as

Teaching Systems Thinking in the Context of the Water Cycle

  • Tammy D. LeeEmail author
  • M. Gail Jones
  • Katherine Chesnutt
Article

Abstract

Complex systems affect every part of our lives from the ecosystems that we inhabit and share with other living organisms to the systems that supply our water (i.e., water cycle). Evaluating events, entities, problems, and systems from multiple perspectives is known as a systems thinking approach. New curriculum standards have made explicit the call for teaching with a systems thinking approach in our science classrooms. However, little is known about how elementary in-service or pre-service teachers understand complex systems especially in terms of systems thinking. This mixed methods study investigated 67 elementary in-service teachers’ and 69 pre-service teachers’ knowledge of a complex system (e.g., water cycle) and their knowledge of systems thinking. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of participants. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of content assessment data and questionnaires were conducted. Results from this study showed elementary in-service and pre-service teachers applied different levels of systems thinking from novice to intermediate. Common barriers to complete systems thinking were identified with both in-service and pre-service teachers and included identifying components and processes, recognizing multiple interactions and relationships between subsystems and hidden dimensions, and difficulty understanding the human impact on the water cycle system.

Keywords

Systems thinking Elementary teachers Water cycle Teacher education 

References

  1. Achieve, Inc. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By StatesGoogle Scholar
  2. Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2004). Learning about Earth as a system: a new approach of designing environmental curricula. Website:stwww.weizmann.ac.il/g-earth.
  3. Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skill in the context of Earth System education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 518–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2010). System thinking skills at the elementary school level. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 540–563.Google Scholar
  5. Boardman, J., & Sauser, B. (2008). Systems thinking coping with 21st century problems. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Booth Sweeney, L. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory. Web mail: http://web.mit.edu.jsterman/www/bathtub.pdf.
  7. Booth Sweeney, L., & Sterman, J. D. (2007). Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems. System Dynamics Review, 23, 285–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brazelton, T. B. (1992). Touchpoints: your child’s emotional and behavioral development. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.Google Scholar
  9. Covitt, B., Gunckel, K., & Anderson, C. (2009). Students’ developing understanding of water in environmental systems. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Dickerson, D., & Dawkins, K. (2004). Eighth grade students’ understandings of groundwater. Journal of Geoscience Education, 52, 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dickerson, D., Penick, J. E., Dawkins, K., Van Sickel, M., & Hay, G. (2005). Students’ conceptions of scale regarding groundwater. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 374–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dickerson, D., Callahan, T. J., & Van Sickel, M. (2007). Groundwater in science education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1), 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. English, L.D. (2006). Introducing young children to complex systems through modeling. In: P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen, & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities, cultures, and learning spaces (pp. 195–202). Adelaide: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.Google Scholar
  15. Evagorou, M., Korfiatis, K., Nicolaou, C., & Constantinou, C. (2009). An investigation of the potential of interactive simulations for developing system thinking skills in elementary school: a case study with fifth-graders and sixth-graders. International Journal of Science Education, 31(5), 655–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Forrester, J. (2007). System dynamics—a personal view of the first fifty years. System Dynamics Review, 23, 245–358.Google Scholar
  17. Frank, M. (2000). Engineering systems thinking and systems thinking. Systems Engineering, 3, 63–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer complex systems principles. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 465–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grotzer, T. A., & Bell-Basca, B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 247–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Azevedo, R. A. (2006). Understanding complex systems: some core challenges. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Pfeffer, M. G. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions. Cognitive Science, 28, 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Marathe, S., & Liu, L. (2007). Fish, swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Science, 16, 307–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hogan, K., & Fisherkeller, J. (1996). Representing students’ thinking about the nutrient cycling in ecosystems: bidimensional coding of a complex topic. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 941–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hogan, K., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cognitive comparison of students’ systems modeling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jacobson, M., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. The Journal of the Learning Science, 15, 11–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jones, M. G., & Taylor, A. R. (2009). Developing a sense of scale: looking backward. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 460–475.Google Scholar
  29. Jones, M. G., et al. (2008). Experienced and novice teachers’ concepts of spatial scale. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 409–429.Google Scholar
  30. Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. (2003). Effect of knowledge integration activities on students’ perception of the earth’s crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 545–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research and Science Teaching, 35(3), 249–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kim, D.H. (1999). Introduction to system thinking. In: System Thinking Tools and Applications. ASA: Pegasus Communications, Inc.Google Scholar
  33. Klopfer, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (2003). Technologies to support the creation of complex systems model: using Starlogo software with students. Biosystems, 71, 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1996). Children’s ideas about ecology 2: ideas found in children aged 5–16 about cycling of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lee, O., Lewis, S., Adamson, K., Maerten-Rivera, J., & Secada, W. G. (2007). Urban elementary school teachers’ knowledge and practices in teaching science to English language learners. Science Education, 92, 733–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lesh, R. (2006). Modeling students modeling abilities: the teaching and learning of complex systems in education. Journal of Learning Sciences, 15(1), 45–51.Google Scholar
  38. Mandinach, E. B. (1989). Model-building and the use of computer simulation of dynamic systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  40. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  41. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  42. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  43. Orion, N. (2002). An Earth Systems curriculum development model. In V. J. Mayer (Ed.), Global Science Literacy (pp. 159–168). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Orion, N., & Ault, C. (2007). Learning earth sciences. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 653–688). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Ossimitz, G. (2000). Teaching system dynamics and systems thinkng in Austria and Germany. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of System Dynamics Society, Bergen, Norway.Google Scholar
  46. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Penner, D. (2000). Explaining systems: investigating middle school students’ understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 784–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Perkins, D.N., & Grotzer, T.A. (2000, April). Models and moves: focusing on dimensions of casual complexity to achieve deeper scientific understanding. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  49. Reiner, M., & Eilam, B. (2001). Conceptual classroom environment: a systems view of learning. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 551–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rempfler, A., & Uphues, R. (2011). System competence in geography education development of competence models, diagnosing pupils’ achievement. European Journal of Geography, 3(1), 6–22.Google Scholar
  51. Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  52. Roth, W. M. (1995). Affordances of computers in teacher-student interactions: the case of Interactive PhysicsTM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 329–347. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660320404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schaffer, D.L. (2013). The Development and Validation of a Three-tier Diagnostic Test Measuring Pre-service Elementary Education and Secondary Science Teachers’ Understanding of the Water Cycle (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri—Columbia).Google Scholar
  54. Schwartz, K., Thomas-Hilburn, H., & Haverland, A. (2011). Grounding water: building conceptual understanding through multimodal assessment. Journal of Geoscience Education., 59, 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sheehy, N. P., Wylie, J. W., McGuinness, C., & Orchard, G. (2000). How children solve environmental problems: using computer simulations to investigate system thinking. Environmental Education Research, 6, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Steed, M. (1992). Stella, a simulation construction kit: cognitive processes and educational implications. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science, 11, 39–52.Google Scholar
  57. Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemistry: incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 285–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ullmer, E. J. (1986). Work design in organizations: comparing the organizational elements models and the ideal system approach. Educational Technology, 26, 543–568.Google Scholar
  60. Verhoeff, R. P., Waarlo, A. J., & Boersma, K. T. (2008). Systems modeling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 171–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tammy D. Lee
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. Gail Jones
    • 2
  • Katherine Chesnutt
    • 2
  1. 1.East Carolina UniversityGreenvilleUSA
  2. 2.North Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations