Secondary Student Mentorship and Research in Complex Networks: Process and Effects
There is increasing interest in rethinking approaches to K-12 education that better prepare students to face an adult world and work life of data-driven and interdisciplinary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The science of complex networks, also known as network science, is the application of advanced graph theory to characterize, visualize, and analyze complex connected social, biological, technological, and physical systems. It is an important approach to study many problems in data-driven STEM and provides an intuitive pathway for students of any age to understand complex systems. This paper describes the development of a successful mentorship model that combines deep engagement with team research, enabling high school students and teachers to perform successful research projects in the science of complex networks.
KeywordsNetSci High NGSS High school Educators Teacher professional development Network science
The authors would like to acknowledge the National Science Foundation (BCS Award #1027752 and DRL Award #1139478) for supporting this important work. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
- 1.Euler, Leonhard (1736). Solutio problematis ad geometriam situs pertinentis. Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae 8. 128.Google Scholar
- 2.Moreno, J. (1934). Who Shall Survive? A new Approach to the Problem of Human Interrelations. Beacon House.Google Scholar
- 4.Barabási A.-L., Albert R. (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks, Science, Vol. 286, No. 5439. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. 509.Google Scholar
- 5.Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means. New York: Plume.Google Scholar
- 6.Pastor-Satorras, R. and Vespignani, A. (2001) Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks, Physical Review Letters 86. Ridge NY: American Physical Society. 3200.Google Scholar
- 7.Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabàsi, A-L., Brewer, D., Christakis, N., Contractor, N., Fowler, J., Gutmann, M., Jebara, T., King, G., Macy, M., Roy, D., and Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Computational social science. Science, 323. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. 721.Google Scholar
- 8.Forrester, Jay W (1976) Moving into the 21st Century: Dilemmas and Strategies for American Higher Education. Liberal Education, Vol. 62, No. 2. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities. 158.Google Scholar
- 9.Hart, E., Maltas, J. and Rich, B. (1990) Teaching Discrete Mathematics in Grades 7–12. Mathematics Teacher Vol. 83, No. 5. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 362.Google Scholar
- 10.Bollobas, B. (1998) Modern Graph Theory. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 184. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- 11.Wilson, S. and Rivera-Marrero, O. (2004) Graph Theory: A Topic for Helping Secondary Teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.Google Scholar
- 13.Smithers, D. (2005) Graph Theory for the Secondary School Classroom. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1015. http://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1015. Accessed 1/1/18.
- 14.Lessner, D. (2011), Graph Theory at Czech Grammar Schools, in WDS’11 Proceedings of Contributed Papers: Part I - Mathematics and Computer Sciences (eds. J. Safrankova and J. Pavlu), Prague, Matfyzpress. 78.Google Scholar
- 15.Casey, N., Fellows, M., and Hawylycz, M. (1993) This Is MEGA Mathematics: Stories And Activities For Mathematical Problem Solving And Communication, The Los Alamos Workbook. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory.Google Scholar
- 16.Siegel, E., and Uzzo, S. (2010) Connections: The Nature of Networks, Communicating Complex and Emerging Science. In Science Exhibitions, Communication and Evaluation. Edited by Anastasia Filippoupoliti. Edinburgh: MuseumsEtc.Google Scholar
- 17.Rothenberg, M. and Hart, J. (2006) Analysis of Visitor Experience in the Exhibition Connections: the Nature of Networks at the New York Hall of Science. Northampton, MA: People, Places & Design Research.Google Scholar
- 18.Dancu, T., Gutwill, J., and Sindorf, L. (2009) Geometry Playground Pathways Study. San Francisco, CA: Exploratorium.Google Scholar
- 19.Laibowitz, M. (2004) Meaning Density and Other Attributes of Deep Engagement MIT Media Lab report. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
- 20.Pugh, K., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Koskey, K., Stewart, V. and Manzey, C. (2010), Motivation, learning, and transformative experience: A study of deep engagement in science. Science Education, 94. New York: Wiley and Sons. 1.Google Scholar
- 22.Cohen, B., & Cohen, E. (1991). From groupwork among children to R&D teams: Interdependence, interaction and productivity. In E. Lawler, B. Markovsky, C. Ridgeway, & H. Walker (Eds.), Advances in group processes,Vol. 8. West Yorkshire: Emerald Publishing. 205.Google Scholar
- 23.Webb, N. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. 102.Google Scholar
- 24.Garland, D., O’ Connor, M., Wolfer, T., and Netting, F. (2006) Team-based Research Notes from the Field. Qualitative Social Work Volume: 5 No. 1. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 93.Google Scholar
- 25.Hsu, L., Lee, K. and Lin, C, (2010) A comparison of individual and team research performance: A study of patents in III, Picmet 2010 Technology Management For Global Economic Growth, Phuket. 1.Google Scholar
- 28.Faux, R. (2014) Summer Workshop Evaluation Report. Boston, MA: Davis Square Research Associates.Google Scholar
- 29.Faux, R. (2015) Evaluation of the NetSci High ITEST Project: Summative Report. Boston, MA: Davis Square Research Associates.Google Scholar
- 30.Daniel, Wayne W. (1990). “Kolmogorov–Smirnov one-sample test”. Applied Nonparametric Statistics (2nd ed.). Boston: PWS-Kent. pp. 319–330.Google Scholar
- 31.Harrington, H., Beguerisse-Díaz, M., Rombach, M., Keating L, and Porter, M. (2013) Teach network science to teenagers. Network Science, Vol.1, No. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 226.Google Scholar
- 32.Sanchez, A., Brandle, C. (2014). More network science for teenagers. arXiv:1403.3618.Google Scholar
- 33.NetSciEd (2018) NetSciEd Symposia (https://sites.google.com/a/binghamton.edu/netscied/events/netscied-symposia) Accessed 1/1/18.
- 34.Cramer, C., Porter, M., Sayama, H., Sheetz, L. and Uzzo, S. (2015) What are essential concepts about networks? Journal of Complex Networks. Vol. 3 No. 4 Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 35.NetSciEd (2015) Network Literacy: Essential Concepts and Core Ideas. (http://tinyurl.com/networkliteracy) Accessed 1/1/18.
- 36.NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar