Summary
This paper seeks to provide some insights into the assessment of student understanding within a systems thinking perspective.
Based on a variety of systems thinking definitions and its core characteristics descriptions from diverse disciplines, author suggests that adopting a mechanistic-reasoning approach in the modeling of complex systems is one of the core elements of chemical systems thinking, but it is not the only feature. A chemical systems thinking approach to chemistry education shares the context-based focus, emphasizing the importance of preparing citizens and scientists who are informed about and can responsibly act on the global challenges facing modern societies and our planet (e.g., climate change, clean water access, clean energy supplies). A third important element of the proposed system thinking approach is also the effort to educate individuals who look at the world with a sustainable-action perspective, critically analyzing the complex interactions between human and earth systems and engaging in responsible action toward global sustainability.
This conceptualization of chemical systems thinking is used as a guide in the definition of core learning objectives or performance expectations that they help evaluate students’ major competencies. Students with advanced systems thinking are able to (a) trigger and manifest different types of chemical knowledge, practices, and ways of reasoning that are productive in the analysis of complex systems or phenomena of relevance to modern societies; (b) integrate relevant chemical knowledge, practices, and ways of reasoning in the construction or application of mechanistic models to make sense of targeted problem systems or phenomena; (c) apply chemical knowledge, practices, and ways of reasoning to make informed decisions taking into consideration existing constraints and potential benefits, costs, and risks in different dimensions (e.g., individual, social, environmental, economic).
Results of a qualitative study using an assessment tool of systems thinking are presented and used to highlight potentialities and challenges in teaching and assessing student understanding using a systems thinking framework. Although a majority of study participants expressed sophisticated ways of reasoning based on the properties and interactions of relevant components and processes in the system under consideration, they could not easily connect and apply their understanding of theoretical chemical models and practices to the realities of the system. Therefore, author concludes that when the focus of the course is rather academic, working with rather simplified models of relevant systems and without much consideration of real effects and constraints imposed by the actual spatial and temporal scale of the systems under analysis, students’ performance is far from systematic.
Author also suggests that for most students in introductory chemistry courses the development of the type of mechanistic reasoning that systems thinking demands will require time, multiple opportunities to engage in it with proper formative feedback, and well-thought out scaffolding. It is pointed out that more authentic and performance-based tools will have to be considered to properly assess chemical systems thinking. Author also consider as critical for curricula which are developed under a systems thinking perspective to create multiple opportunities for students to engage in argumentation and decision-making, evaluating the feasibility of their ideas in real settings.
Since none of the actions suggested by the participants in the study seemed to consider their impacts on human health or the environment, author consider that it is difficult to find the right balance between a focus on the analysis of critical chemical concepts and the consideration of important environmental, sociological, and economical factors. Assessing students’ ability to reasonably take these types of factors into consideration when making and justifying decisions may also be challenging for chemistry instructors typically not trained in the evaluation of socioscientific argumentation.
The author claims that adopting a systems thinking framework in curriculum development, instruction, and assessment in chemistry courses at all educational levels would help us prepare individuals more adept at understanding and making decisions concerning the complex problems facing the world. This shift is a challenging attempt since changing old habits and ingrained conceptions about what chemistry education ought to be, is not easy, even for those with the best disposition.
Relevance for Complex Systems Knowledge
This paper deals with systems thinking, complex systems, and sustainable development.
The paper firstly summarizes various definitions of systems thinking and proposes a teaching approach in order to infuse systems thinking into chemistry education. Next, it describes the types of performance expectations that assessments of student understanding could target in educational environments infused with the proposed systems thinking perspective.
The author presents description of systems thinking as “the ability to understand and interpret complex systems” and he points out that the way in which systems thinking has been characterized shares many similarities with how authors interested in developing students’ complex systems reasoning describe their object of interest, as well as how philosophers and educational researchers have defined mechanistic reasoning. This suggests that adopting a mechanistic-reasoning approach in the modeling of complex systems is one of the core elements of chemical systems thinking.
The author claims that one of the three elements of the proposed system thinking approach is also the quest to educate individuals who look at the world with a sustainable-action perspective, critically analyzing the complex interactions between human and earth systems and engaging in responsible action toward global sustainability.
