Summary
The paper describes a study that aims to investigate elementary teachers’ and elementary pre-service teachers’ knowledge of the water cycle and the application of systems thinking toward this complex system. The literature review revealed that systems thinking has been defined as being complex, capable of providing multiple explanations, involving various amounts of judgment and uncertainty, employing self-regulation, finding structure in disorder, and being productive. Researchers have questioned the grade level that is appropriate for teaching systems thinking since these skills have been characterized as higher order and difficult to master. Therefore, it has been suggested that teachers of all academic levels should engage students in tasks that involve these higher order thinking skills. Based on the hierarchical view of systems thinking, it has been proposed that the development of a systems perspective would take less time if started in elementary school since children at this age have an inquisitive and open mind that has not been taught to think in terms of unidirectional cause and effect. In terms of pedagogy, a systems thinking approach provides learners with a more holistic view of systems, problems, and events than traditional ways of teaching. Therefore, there is a need to know more about how teachers think about complex systems in science contexts and how they use systems thinking in instructional planning.
Authors adopted the System Thinking Hierarchical (STH) Model, which has been used to illustrate the development of systems thinking with elementary, middle, and high school students studying the topic of the water cycle.
The STH model has eight characteristics of systems thinking that include three hierarchical levels: Level 1 (the analysis level, which includes the ability to identify the system’s components and processes); Level 2, the synthesis level (which includes the ability to identify relationships between separate components, the ability to identify dynamic relationships between the system’s components, the ability to understand the cyclic nature of systems, and the ability to organize components and place them within a network of relationships); and Level 3, (the implementation level, which includes the ability to make generalizations and to understand the hidden components of the system and the system’s evolution in time (prediction and retrospection)). These levels are proposed as a structure for implementing teaching interventions within curriculum development, with each group of skills serving as a basis for developing the next level of systems thinking. It has been suggested that these levels are hierarchical in the development of systems thinking, stating that elementary, middle, and high school students did not demonstrate growth in higher levels until they first accomplished the initial levels.
Research in systems thinking has identified three developmental barriers students must overcome if individuals are to reach higher levels of systems thinking. These barriers include (1) identifying multiple levels of interactions and relationships, (2) explaining the functions and behavior of the system, and (3) identifying the hidden dimensions of a system (the invisible parts of the system). These skills work together when developing a more comprehensive understanding of systems. As an example, to distinguish and understand more elaborate relationships within the system, an individual must comprehend the functions and behaviors of the structural aspects of the system while also recognizing the impact of the hidden dimensions of the system. These barriers should not be viewed as separate elements but instead as overlapping areas to be addressed in classroom instruction to assist in the development of systems thinking skills. To develop the most sophisticated of these skills, students need explicit classroom instruction and scaffolding to develop the foundation needed for these systems thinking skills. With a careful selection of instructional strategies, tools (representations), and purposeful selection of system contexts (environmental problems), students’ systems thinking will be enhanced. For these reasons, it is imperative to understand the knowledge of complex systems that elementary teachers and elementary pre-service teachers have and if they think about a complex system in terms of systems thinking.
A 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.
Both teacher groups had similar problems applying systems thinking as reported in other studies. The barriers identified in this study included the following: difficulty identifying components and processes, difficulty identifying multiple relationships and interactions within subsystems, difficulty understanding the hidden dimensions of the system, and difficulty understanding the impact of humans on the subsystems of the water cycle. A common problem emerged across topics, which was the discussion of interactions between only two subsystems (e.g., atmosphere and hydrosphere). It was also found that teachers tended to only focus on atmospheric components about the water cycle, describing limited interactions between the atmosphere and hydrosphere, leaving out the geosphere and biosphere components that impact this system. This incomplete recognition of the multiple interactions between the subsystems signifies a lack of systems thinking, which could create a real challenge for implementation of these ideas in the classroom.
The results presented in this paper show that teachers were uncertain about conservation of matter. They talked about conservation of matter in various ways but also indicated some misinterpretations of the principle especially when applied in system contexts.
Relevance for Complex Systems Knowledge
Τhe paper deals with “systems thinking” and “complex systems”
Authors argue that a systems thinking approach requires individuals to view the whole (whether problem, system, event, or entity) from multiple perspectives, while recognizing the interactions, patterns, and inter-relationships between the components, and considering the cause and effect relationships of the components in terms of temporal and spatial dimensions. Systems thinking is essential for increasing individuals’ ability to understand the social challenges, to develop solutions, and, more importantly, to act as global citizens.
Authors claim that an understanding of complex systems requires an individual to have an understanding and recognition of concepts and principles about a particular domain represented by key (often dynamic) phenomena and their inter-relationships.
