"Authors","Author full names","Author(s) ID","Title","Year","Source title","Volume","Issue","Art. No.","Page start","Page end","Page count","Cited by","DOI","Link","Affiliations","Authors with affiliations","Abstract","Author Keywords","Index Keywords","Molecular Sequence Numbers","Chemicals/CAS","Tradenames","Manufacturers","Funding Details","Funding Texts","References","Correspondence Address","Editors","Publisher","Sponsors","Conference name","Conference date","Conference location","Conference code","ISSN","ISBN","CODEN","PubMed ID","Language of Original Document","Abbreviated Source Title","Document Type","Publication Stage","Open Access","Source","EID"
"Lavi R.; Dori Y.J.","Lavi, Rea (57211607944); Dori, Yehudit Judy (7004099746)","57211607944; 7004099746","Systems thinking of pre- and in-service science and engineering teachers","2019","International Journal of Science Education","41","2","","248","279","31","39","10.1080/09500693.2018.1548788","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85058214009&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2018.1548788&partnerID=40&md5=d7df859856fe463e9cbed3e61905176d","Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel; Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy Research, Haifa, Israel","Lavi R., Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel; Dori Y.J., Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel, Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy Research, Haifa, Israel","Systems thinking is an important skill in science and engineering education. Our study objectives were (1) to create the basis for a systems thinking language common to both science education and engineering education, and (2) to apply this language to assess science and engineering teachers’ systems thinking. We administered two assignments to teacher teams: first, modelling the same adapted scientific text, and second, modelling a synthesis of peer-reviewed articles in science and engineering education, with teams selecting a topic from a list and summarising them. We assessed those models using a rubric for systems thinking we had developed based on our literature review of this topic. We found high interrater reliability and validated the rubric’s theoretical construct for the system aspects of function, structure and behaviour. We found differences in scores between the assignments in favour of the second assignment, for two attributes of systems thinking: ‘expected outcome/intended purpose’ and ‘main object and its sub-objects’. We explain the first attribute difference as stemming from the modellers’ domain expertise as science or engineering teachers, rather than as scientists or engineers, and the second attribute difference–from the larger amount of information available for modelling the articles synthesis assignment. The theoretical contribution of this study lies in the definition of the systems thinking construct as a first step in establishing a common language for the science education and engineering education communities. The study's methodological contribution lies in the rubric we developed and validated, which can be used for assessing the systems thinking of teachers and potentially also of undergraduate students. © 2018, © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","assessment; in-service teachers; pre-service teachers; systems thinking","","","","","","Bernard B. Gordon Center for Systems Engineering at the Tech-nion; Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, (2023427)","Funding text 1: This work was supported by the Bernard B. Gordon Center for Systems Engineering at the Technion [grant number 2023427].; Funding text 2: This work was supported by the Bernard B. Gordon Center for Systems Engineering at the Tech-nion [grant number 2023427].","Andreucci C., Chatoney M., Ginestie J., The systemic approach to technological education: Effects of transferred learning in resolving a physics problem, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22, 3, pp. 281-296, (2012); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Barak M., Williams P., Learning elemental structures and dynamic processes in technological systems: A cognitive framework, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17, 3, pp. 323-340, (2007); Barlex D., Design and technology in England: An ambitious vision thwarted by unintended consequences, Handbook of technology education, x, pp. 109-124, (2018); Barlex D., Philosophy of technology: Themes and topics, Handbook of technology education, x, pp. 7-16, (2018); Batzri O., Assaraf O.B.Z., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cyclic thinking among university students, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 6, pp. 761-775, (2015); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Grosschedl J., Assessing system thinking through different concept-mapping practices, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 14, pp. 2147-2170, (2012); Caprile M., Palmen R., Sanz P., Dente G., Encouraging STEM studies for the labour market, (2015); Carberry A.R., McKenna A.F., Exploring student conceptions of modeling and modeling uses in engineering design, Journal of Engineering Education, 103, 1, pp. 77-91, (2014); Chiu J.L., Linn M.C., The role of self-monitoring in learning chemistry with dynamic visualizations, In Metacognition in science education, pp. 133-163, (2012); Checkland P., Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, pp. S11-S58, (2000); Crawley E., Cameron B., Selva D., Systems architecture: Strategy and product development for complex systems, (2015); Daugherty M.K., Carter V., The nature of interdisciplinary STEM education, (2018); de Vries M.J., Media in technology education: Section introduction In M, (2018); Donovan B.M., Mateos D.M., Osborne J.F., Bisaccio D.J., Revising the economic imperative for US STEM education, PLoS biology, 12, 1, (2014); Dori D., Object-process analysis: Maintaining the balance between system structure and behavior, Journal of Logic and Computation, 5, 2, pp. 227-249, (1995); Dori D., Object-process methodology: A holistic systems paradigm, (2011); Dori D., Model-based systems engineering with OPM and SysML, (2016); Dori Y.J., Avargil S., Kohen Z., Saar L., Context-based learning and metacognitive prompts for enhancing scientific text comprehension, International Journal of Science Education, 40, 10, pp. 1-23, (2018); Dori D., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Systems thinking: Foundation, uses and challenges, (2016); Dori Y.J., Sasson I., Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 2, pp. 219-250, (2008); Dori D., Sillitto H., What is a system? An ontological framework, Systems Engineering, 20, 3, pp. 207-219, (2017); Dori D., Thipphayathetthana S., Model-based guidelines for user-centric satellite control software development, International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking, 34, 2, pp. 295-319, (2016); Dugger W.E., Naik N., Clarifying misconceptions between technology education and educational technology, Technology Teacher, 61, 1, pp. 31-35, (2001); Duit R., Treagust D., Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 6, pp. 671-688, (2003); Dym C.L., Agogino A.M., Eris O., Frey D.D., Leifer L.J., Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning, Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 1, pp. 103-120, (2005); Edstrom K., Kolmos A., PBL and CDIO: Complementary models for engineering education development, European Journal of Engineering Education, 39, 5, pp. 539-555, (2014); Frank M., Engineering systems thinking and systems thinking, Systems Engineering, 3, 3, pp. 163-168, (2000); Frank M., Knowledge, abilities, cognitive characteristics and behavioral competences of engineers with high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST), Systems Engineering, 9, 2, pp. 91-103, (2006); Gero A., Zach E., High school programme in electro-optics: A case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking, International Journal of Engineering Education, 30, pp. 1190-1199, (2014); Glenberg A.M., Langston W.E., Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models, Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 2, pp. 129-151, (1992); Herscovitz O., Kaberman Z., Saar L., Dori Y.J., The relationship between metacognition and the ability to pose questions in chemical education, Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research, pp. 165-195, (2012); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hung W., Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 6, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); The Kuching declaration, Final proceeding of the world conference on science and technology education (WorldSTE2013), (2013); Ifenthaler D., Bridging the gap between expert-novice differences: The model-based feedback approach, (2010); Izadi I., Stewart M.E.S., Penlidis A., Role of contact electrification and electrostatic interactions in gecko adhesion, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 11, 98, (2014); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, (2006); Jonassen D.H., Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes, Educational Technology Design and Development, 45, 1, pp. 1042-1629, (1997); Kaberman Z., Dori Y.J., Metacognition in chemical education: Question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment, Instructional Science, 37, 5, pp. 403-436, (2009); Koral Kordova S., Ribnikov G., Frank M., Developing systems thinking among engineers: Recent study findings, In 9th annual IEEE international systems conference (SysCon), (2015); MacGregor D., Predictions and realities: The influences that shape beginning design and technology teachers' professional identity, (2018); Mayer R.E., Multimedia learning, (2009); Moore T.J., Miller R.L., Lesh R.A., Stohlmann M.S., Kim Y.R., Modeling in engineering: The role of representational fluency in students’ conceptual understanding, Journal of Engineering Education, 102, 1, pp. 141-178, (2013); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Novak J.D., Canas A.J., Theoretical origins of concept maps, how to construct them, and uses in education, Reflecting Education, 3, 1, pp. 29-42, (2007); Novak J.D., Gowin D.B., Learning how to learn, (1984); Phillips D.C., The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism, Educational researcher, 24, 7, pp. 5-12, (1995); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 6, pp. 705-725, (2010); Roschelle J., Teasley S.D., The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving, (1995); Roth K.J., Developing meaningful conceptual understanding in science, Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, pp. 139-175, (1990); Ruiz-Primo M.A., Shavelson R.J., Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 6, pp. 569-600, (1996); Schweingruber H., Beatty A., Seeing students learn science: Integrating assessment and instruction in the classroom, (2017); Segalas J., Ferrer-Balas D., Mulder K.F., Conceptual maps: Measuring learning processes of engineering students concerning sustainable development, European Journal of Engineering Education, 33, 3, pp. 297-306, (2008); Svensson M., Learning about systems. In M, (2018); Somekh J., Haimovich G., Guterman A., Dori D., Choder M., Conceptual modeling of mRNA decay provokes new hypotheses, PLoS ONE, 9, 9, pp. 1-14, (2014); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B.Z., Amit M., Mapping what they know: Concept maps as an effective tool for assessing students’ systems thinking, American Journal of Operations Research, 3, 1a, pp. 1-15, (2013); van Lacum E.B., Ossevoort M.A., Goedhart M.J., A teaching strategy with a focus on argumentation to improve undergraduate students’ ability to read research articles, CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13, 2, pp. 253-264, (2014); Venville G.J., Dawson V.M., The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 8, pp. 952-977, (2010); Watson M.K., Pelkey J., Noyes C.R., Rodgers M.O., Assessing conceptual knowledge using three concept map scoring methods, Journal of Engineering Education, 105, 1, pp. 118-146, (2016); Wengrowicz N., Dori Y.J., Dori D., Meta-assessment in a project-based systems engineering course, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 4, pp. 607-624, (2016)","R. Lavi; Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, 3200003, Israel; email: realavi@campus.technion.ac.il","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85058214009"
"Levy A.R.; Mensah F.M.","Levy, Amanda R. (57221255889); Mensah, Felicia Moore (35119191600)","57221255889; 35119191600","Learning through the experience of water in elementary school science","2021","Water (Switzerland)","13","1","43","","","","8","10.3390/w13010043","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85098630120&doi=10.3390%2fw13010043&partnerID=40&md5=2bb2a85405e1fb6ae54984cbea8cac8d","Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology (MST), Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, P.O. Box 210s, New York, 10027, NY, United States","Levy A.R., Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology (MST), Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, P.O. Box 210s, New York, 10027, NY, United States; Mensah F.M., Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology (MST), Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, P.O. Box 210s, New York, 10027, NY, United States","To date, limited research has been done on the implementation of experiential learning among elementary school students. The current mixed-methods study examines the capacity of elementary science students to develop water literacy through the application of an experiential learning framework. From 2016–2017, two sections of 6th-grade science students (n = 56) from a gifted and talented school in Queens, NY, were introduced to an experiential-based water curriculum designed to meet the needs of elementary science standards through the use of authentic learning environments, physical and conceptual modeling, and systems thinking. Multiple research instruments were used as formative and summative assessments to determine baseline understanding and quantify the consequences of student learning: pre-and post-tests and pre-and post-drawing assessments, science notebooks, field journals, reflections, and observations. After participation in the experiential water unit, most students increased their conceptual understanding of water cycle components and processes from surface to groundwater, physical properties of matter, and hydrogeological concepts of permeability and porosity. Systems thinking skills progressed over the unit from structural thinking to dynamic thinking. Implications of this study indicate that the experiential learning framework is an effective pedagogical tool for elementary science students to develop water literacy and science and engineering practices. © 2020 by the authors. Liensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.","Elementary school science; Experiential education; Geoscience; Next generation science standards; Systems thinking skills; Water","New York [United States]; Queens County; United States; Computer aided instruction; Groundwater; Students; System theory; Authentic learning environment; Conceptual understanding; Elementary schools; Elementary science; Experiential learning; Formative and summative assessments; Permeability and porosities; Science and engineering; curriculum; learning; literacy; spatiotemporal analysis; student; Learning systems","","","","","","","Ben-zvi-Assarf O., Orion N., A Study of Junior High Students’ Perceptions of the Water Cycle, J. Geosci. Educ, 53, pp. 366-373, (2005); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Eshach H., Orion N., Alamour Y., Cultural differences and students’ spontaneous models of the water cycle: A case study of Jewish and Bedouin children in Israel, Cult. Stud. Sci. Educ, 7, pp. 451-477, (2012); New York State P-12 Science Learning Standards, (2016); Next Generation Science Standards; Achieve, Inc. behalf twenty-six states partners that Collab, (2013); Singer J., Marx R.W., Krajcik J., Clay Chambers J., Constructing Extended Inquiry Projects: Curriculum Materials for Science Education Reform, Educ. Psychol, 35, pp. 165-178, (2000); Dickerson D., Dawkins K., Eighth Grade Students’ Understandings of Groundwater, J. Geosci. Educ, 52, pp. 178-181, (2004); Reinfried S., Conceptual Change in Physical Geography and Environmental Sciences through Mental Model Building: The Example of Groundwater, Int. Res. Geogr. Environ. Educ, 15, pp. 41-61, (2006); Grotzer T.A., Basca B.B., How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding?, J. Biol. Educ, 38, pp. 16-29, (2003); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 31, pp. 655-674, (2009); Cardak O., Science Students’ Misconceptions of the Water Cycle According to their Drawings, J. Appl. Sci, 9, pp. 865-873, (2009); Draper F., A proposed sequence for developing systems thinking in a grades 4–12 curriculum, Syst. Dyn. Rev, 9, pp. 207-214, (1993); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish Swim, Rocks Sit, and Lungs Breathe: Expert-Novice Understanding of Complex Systems, J. Learn. Sci, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Kali Y., Orion N., Eylon B.-S., Effect of knowledge integration activities on students’ perception of the earth’s crust as a cyclic system, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 40, pp. 545-565, (2003); Shepardson D.P., Wee B., Priddy M., Schellenberger L., Harbor J., What is a watershed? Implications of student conceptions for environmental science education and the National Science Education Standards, Sci. Educ, 91, pp. 554-578, (2007); Covitt B.A., Gunckel K.L., Anderson C.W., Students’ Developing Understanding of Water in Environmental Systems, J. Environ. Educ, 40, pp. 37-51, (2009); Dove J.E., Everett L.A., Preece P.F.W., Exploring a hydrological concept through children’s drawings, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 21, pp. 485-497, (1999); Dickerson D., Callahan T.J., Van Sickle M., Hay G., Students’ Conceptions of Scale Regarding Groundwater, J. Geosci. Educ, 53, pp. 374-380, (2005); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Cultivating Model-Based Reasoning in Science Education, The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, pp. 371-388, (2005); Dewey J., Summary for Policymakers, Climate Change 2013—The Physical Science Basis, 50, pp. 1-30, (1938); Joplin L., On Defining Experiential Education, J. Exp. Educ, 4, pp. 17-20, (1981); Moore G.T., Piaget J., Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child, J. Archit. Educ, 25, (1971); Roberts J., Disney, Dewey, and the Death of Experience in Education, Educ. Cult, 21, pp. 12-30, (2005); Dewey J., Experience and Education, Educ. Forum, 50, pp. 241-252, (1986); Maloof J., Experience This! The Experiential Approach to Teaching Environmental Issues, Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun, 5, pp. 193-197, (2006); Kolb D.A., Experiential Learning-Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, (2015); Koutsoukos M., Fragoulis I., Valkanos E., Connection of environmental education with application of experiential teaching methods: A case study from Greece, Int. Educ. Stud, 8, pp. 23-28, (2015); Cobern W.W., Loving C.C., Defining ‘science’ in a multicultural world: Implications for science education, Sci. Educ, 85, pp. 50-67, (2001); Senge P.M., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization [Kindle Paperwhite Edition], (2006); Kuhn D., Children and adults as intuitive scientists, Psychol. Rev, 96, pp. 674-689, (1989); Science Scope & Sequence 2015–2016, (2015); Lachapelle C.P., Cunningham C., Eng. Educ, (2007); Dashoush N., Establishing a Community of Practice between an Elementary Educator and a Scientist as a Means of Professional Development, (2015); Levy A., Investigating the Experience of Water: A Case Study of Teaching and Learning in Elementary School Science, (2018); Hudson River Snapshot Day; Akkus M., The Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, Int. J. Res. Educ. Sci, 2, (2015); McMillan J., Schumacher S., Research in Education Evidence-Based Inquiry, (2014); Creswell J.W., Plano Clark V.L., Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, (2017); Merriam S.B., Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, (1998); Rennie L.J., Jarvis T., Children’s choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology, Res. Sci. Educ, 25, pp. 239-252, (1995); Landis J.R., Koch G.G., The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data Data for Categorical of Observer Agreement The Measurement, Biometrics, 33, pp. 159-174, (2011); Kuckartz U., Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice & Using Software, (2014); Libarkin J.C., Anderson S.W., Assessment of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience Concept Inventory, J. Geosci. Educ, (2005); Creswell J.W., Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Aproaches, (2007); Bogner F.X., The Influence of Short-Term Outdoor Ecology Education on Long-Term Variables of Environmental Perspective, J. Environ. Educ, 29, pp. 17-29, (1998); Kuo F.E., Faber Taylor A., A Potential Natural Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Evidence From a National Study, Am. J. Public Health, 94, pp. 1580-1586, (2004); Kuo M., Browning M.H.E.M., Penner M.L., Do lessons in nature boost subsequent classroom engagement? Refueling students in flight, Front. Psychol, 8, (2018); Kirschner P.A., Epistemology, practical work and Academic skills in science education, Sci. Educ, 1, pp. 273-299, (1992); Di Sessa A.A., Knowledge in pieces, Converging Perspectives on Conceptual Change, pp. 7-16, (2017); Chang N., The Role of Drawing in Young Children’s Construction of Science Concepts, Early Child. Educ. J, 40, pp. 187-193, (2012); Bar V., Travis A.S., Children’s views concerning phase changes, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 28, pp. 363-382, (1991); Zangori L., Forbes C.T., Schwarz C.V., Exploring the Effect of Embedded Scaffolding Within Curricular Tasks on Third-Grade Students’ Model-Based Explanations about Hydrologic Cycling, Sci. Educ, 24, pp. 957-981, (2015); Forbes C.T., Zangori L., Schwarz C.V., Empirical validation of integrated learning performances for hydrologic phenomena: 3rd-grade students’ model-driven explanation-construction, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 52, pp. 895-921, (2015); Agelidou E., Balafoutas G., Gialamas V., Interpreting how third grade junior high school students represent water, Environ. Educ. Inf, 20, pp. 19-36, (2001); Wiggins G.P., McTighe J., Understanding by Design, (2005); Bransford J.D., Brown A.L., Cocking R.R., How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, (2000); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Lucas D., Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry, Cogn. Dev, 23, pp. 512-529, (2008); Boud D., Keogh R., Walker D., Promoting reflection in learning: A model, Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning, pp. 18-40, (1985); Chawla L., Participation and the Ecology of Environmental Awareness and Action, Participation and Learning, pp. 98-110, (2008); Padilla K., Visualization: Theory and practice in science education, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 31, pp. 1417-1420, (2009); Waldrip B., Prain V., Carolan J., Using Multi-Modal Representations to Improve Learning in Junior Secondary Science, Res. Sci. Educ, 40, pp. 65-80, (2010); Quillin K., Thomas S., Drawing-to-Learn: A Framework for Using Drawings to Promote Model-Based Reasoning in Biology, CBE—Life Sci. Educ, 14, (2015); Pierson A.E., Clark D.B., Sherard M.K., Learning progressions in context: Tensions and insights from a semester-long middle school modeling curriculum, Sci. Educ, 101, pp. 1061-1088, (2017); Kelly G.J., Chen C., Crawford T., Methodological considerations for studying science-in-the-making in educational settings, Res. Sci. Educ, 28, pp. 23-49, (1998); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Shwartz Y., Hug B., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 632-654, (2009); Lave J., Wenger E., Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Situated Learning, pp. 27-44, (1991); Johnsonlaird P., Mental models in cognitive science, Cogn. Sci, 4, pp. 71-115, (1981); Hanson C., Indigenous Research Methodologies, Int. J. Crit. Indig. Stud, 5, pp. 93-95, (2012); Kuhn D., Pease M., What needs to develop in the development of inquiry skills?, Cogn. Instr, 26, pp. 512-559, (2008); Kuhn D., Black J., Keselman A., Kaplan D., The Development of Cognitive Skills To Support Inquiry Learning, Cogn. Instr, 18, pp. 495-523, (2000); Driver R., Guesne E., Tiberghien A., Children’s Ideas and the Learning of Science, Child. Ideas Sci, pp. 1-9, (1985); Aikenhead G.S., Science Education: Border Crossing into the Subculture of Science, Stud. Sci. Educ, 27, pp. 1-52, (1996); Roberts D.A., Bybee R.W., Scientific Literacy, Science Literacy, and Science Education, Handbook of Research on Science Education, II, (2014)","A.R. Levy; Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology (MST), Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, 525 West 120th Street, P.O. Box 210s, 10027, United States; email: arl2163@tc.columbia.edu","","MDPI AG","","","","","","20734441","","","","English","Water","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85098630120"
"Easterbrook S.","Easterbrook, Steve (6603689305)","6603689305","From computational thinking to systems thinking: A conceptual toolkit for sustainability computing","2014","ICT for Sustainability 2014, ICT4S 2014","","","","235","244","9","72","10.2991/ict4s-14.2014.28","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84928005133&doi=10.2991%2fict4s-14.2014.28&partnerID=40&md5=b5ef572393d3ce849944c2dcc4ce1467","Dept. of Computer Science, University of Toronto, 140 St George Street, Toronto, ON, Canada","Easterbrook S., Dept. of Computer Science, University of Toronto, 140 St George Street, Toronto, ON, Canada","If information and communication technologies (ICT) are to bring about a transformational change to a sustainable society, then we need to transform our thinking. Computer professionals already have a conceptual toolkit for problem solving, sometimes known as computational thinking. However, computational thinking tends to see the world in terms a series of problems (or problem types) that have computational solutions (or solution types). Sustainability, on the other hand, demands a more systemic approach, to avoid technological solutionism, and to acknowledge that technology, human behaviour and environmental impacts are tightly inter-related. In this paper, I argue that systems thinking provides the necessary bridge from computational thinking to sustainability practice, as it provides a domain ontology for reasoning about sustainability, a conceptual basis for reasoning about transformational change, and a set of methods for critical thinking about the social and environmental impacts of technology. I end the paper with a set of suggestions for how to build these ideas into the undergraduate curriculum for computer and information sciences. © 2014. The authors.","Computational Sustainability; Computer Science Education; Computers and society","Behavioral research; Economic and social effects; Education computing; Engineering education; Environmental impact; Environmental technology; System theory; Computational sustainability; Computational thinkings; Computer Science Education; Computers and societies; Information and Communication Technologies; Social and environmental impact; Sustainability practices; Undergraduate curricula; Sustainable development","","","","","Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada","","Teehan P., Kandlikar M., Comparing embodied greenhouse gas emissions of modern computing and electronics products, Environmental Science & Technology, 47, pp. 3997-4003, (2013); Wager P.A., Lang D.J., Wittmer D., Bleischwitz R., Hageluken C., Towards a more sustainable use of scarce metals: A review of intervention options along the metals life cycle, Gaia, 21, 4, pp. 300-309, (2012); Robinson B.H., E-waste: An assessment of global production and environmental impacts, The Science of the Total Environment, 408, 2, pp. 183-191, (2009); Dickerson K., Torres D., Canet J.-M., Smiciklas J., Faulkner D., Bueti C., Vassiliev A., Using ICTs to tackle climate change, Global E-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI), (2010); Notter D.A., Meyer R., Althaus H.-J., The western lifestyle and its long way to sustainability, Environmental Science & Technology, 47, 9, pp. 4014-4021, (2013); Guiltinan J., Creative destruction and destructive creations: Environmental ethics and planned obsolescence, Journal of Business Ethics, 89, S1, pp. 19-28, (2008); Morozov E., To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, (2013); Perkins R., Technological lock-in, Online Encyclopaedia of Ecological Economics. International Society for Ecological Economics, FEBRUARY, pp. 1-8, (2003); Braun V., Herstatt C., The freedom-fighters: How incumbent corporations are attempting to control user-innovation, International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), 12, 3, pp. 543-572, (2008); Madrigal A., Bruce sterling on why it stopped making sense to talk about 'the internet' in 2012, The Atlantic, (2012); Sterman J.D., Sustaining sustainability: Creating a systems science in a fragmented academy and polarized world, Sustainability Science: The Emerging Paradigm and the Urban Environment, pp. 21-58, (2012); Wing J., Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 49, 3, pp. 33-35, (2006); Lee I., CSTA Computational Thinking Task Force, (2014); Denning P.J., Beyond computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 52, 6, (2009); Jones E., The Trouble with Computational Thinking, (2011); Maslow A., The Psychology of Science: A Reconnaissance, (1966); Mann S., Costello K., Lopez M., Lopez D., Smith N., An ethical basis for sustainability in the worldviews of first year students, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on ICT for Sustainability (ICT4S'2014), (2014); Goguen J.A., The dry and the wet, Information Systems Concepts, pp. 1-17, (1992); Easterbrook S.M., Negotiation and the role of the requirements specification, Social Dimensions of Systems Engineering: People, Processes, Policies and Software Development, JULY, pp. 144-164, (1991); Easterbrook S.M., Resolving requirements conflicts with computer-supported negotiation, Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues, pp. 41-65, (1994); Koomey J., Separating fact from fiction: A challenge for the media [Soapbox], IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 3, 1, pp. 9-11, (2014); Holling C.S., Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems, Ecosystems, 4, 5, pp. 390-405, (2001); Manson S.M., Simplifying complexity: A review of complexity theory, Geoforum, 32, 3, pp. 405-414, (2001); Walker B.H., Salt D., Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World, (2006); Hasty R.T., Garbalosa R.C., Barbato V.A., Valdes P.J., Powers D.W., Hernandez E., John J.S., Suciu G., Qureshi F., Popa-Radu M., Jose S.S., Drexler N., Patankar R., Paz J.R., King C.W., Gerber H.N., Valladares M.G., Somji A.A., Wikipedia vs peer-reviewed medical literature for information about the 10 most costly medical conditions, The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, 114, 5, pp. 368-373, (2014); Rittel H.W.J., Webber M.M., Dilemmas in a general theory of planning, Policy Sciences, 4, pp. 155-169, (1973); Daly H., Steady-state Economics, (1977); Jackson T., Prosperity Without Growth, (2011); Davoudi S., Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end?, Planning Theory & Practice, MAY, pp. 299-333, (2012); Randers J., Global collapseFact or fiction?, Futures, 40, 10, pp. 853-864, (2008); Feygina I., Jost J.T., Goldsmith R.E., System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of ""system-sanctioned change, Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 3, pp. 326-338, (2010); Brooks H., Can technology assure unending material progress?, Progress and its Discontents, pp. 281-300, (1981); Davis S.J., Caldeira K., Matthews H.D., Future CO2 emissions and climate change from existing energy infrastructure, Science, 329, 5997, pp. 1330-1333, (2010); Sterman J.D., Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world, Climatic Change, 108, 4, pp. 811-826, (2011); The Four System Conditions of a Sustainable Society, (2014); Meadows D.H., Thinking in Systems: A Primer, (2008); Nuseibeh B., Easterbrook S.M., Requirements engineering: A roadmap, The Future of Software Engineering. (Companion Volume to the Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE2000), pp. 35-46, (2000); Chitnis M., Sorrell S., Druckman A., Firth S.K., Jackson T., Turning lights into flights: Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for UK households, Energy Policy, 55, pp. 234-250, (2013); Lewandowsky S., Ecker U.K.H., Seifert C.M., Schwarz N., Cook J., Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 3, pp. 106-131, (2012); Arthur W.B., Durlauf S., Lane D., Lane D.A., Introduction: Process and emergence in the economy, The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II, (1997); Meadows D.H., Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system, The Sustainability Institute, Tech. Rep., (1999); Dai L., Vorselen D., Korolev K.S., Gore J., Generic indicators for loss of resilience before a tipping point leading to population collapse, Science, 336, 6085, pp. 1175-1177, (2012); Gundersson L., Holling C.S., Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, (2002); Winograd T., Flores F., Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design, (1986); Checkland P., Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective a, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, pp. 11-58, (2000); Flood R.L., Liberating systems theory: Toward critical systems thinking, Human Relations, 43, 1, pp. 49-75, (1990); Weinberg G.M., An Introduction to General Systems Theory, (2001); Heylighen F., Joslyn C., Cybernetics and second-order cybernetics, Encyclopedia of Phyiscal Science and Technology, (2001); Midgley G., Munlo I., Brown M., The theory and practice of boundary critique: Developing housing services for older people, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49, 5, pp. 467-478, (1998); Warren K., Why has feedback systems thinking struggled to influence strategy and policy formulation? Suggestive evidence, explanations and solutions, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 21, 4, pp. 331-347, (2004); Booth Sweeney L., The Systems Thinking Playbook: Exercises to Stretch and Build Learning and Systems Thinking Capabilities, (2010); Sweeney L.B., Meadows D., Mehers G.M., The Systems Thinking Playbook for Climate Change: A Toolkit for Interactive Learning, (2011); Riemer K., The Beer Game Portal, (2012); Downey A.B., Think Complexity, (2011); Stroulia E., Bauer K., Craig M., Reid K., Wilson G., Teaching distributed software engineering with UCOSP: The undergraduate capstone open-source project, Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Community Building Workshop on Collaborative Teaching of Globally Distributed Software Development, pp. 20-25, (2011)","S. Easterbrook; Dept. of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, 140 St George Street, Canada; email: sme@cs.toronto.edu","Hojer M.; Lago P.; Wangel J.","Atlantis Press","Ericsson; NCC; Sweco; TeliaSonera","2nd International Conference on ICT for Sustainability, ICT4S 2014","24 August 2014 through 27 August 2014","Stockholm","111677","","978-946252022-6","","","English","ICT Sustain., ICTS","Conference paper","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-84928005133"
"Curwen M.S.; Ardell A.; MacGillivray L.; Lambert R.","Curwen, Margaret Sauceda (16024064200); Ardell, Amy (35386219800); MacGillivray, Laurie (14832834900); Lambert, Rachel (56496242400)","16024064200; 35386219800; 14832834900; 56496242400","Systems Thinking in a Second Grade Curriculum: Students Engaged to Address a Statewide Drought","2018","Frontiers in Education","3","","90","","","","5","10.3389/feduc.2018.00090","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85092086933&doi=10.3389%2ffeduc.2018.00090&partnerID=40&md5=b5938c922b9279f77683a62bc07a2d93","Attallah College of Educational Studies, Chapman University, Orange, CA, United States; College of Education, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, United States; University of California Santa Barbara Gervitz Graduate School of Education, Isla Vista, CA, United States","Curwen M.S., Attallah College of Educational Studies, Chapman University, Orange, CA, United States; Ardell A., Attallah College of Educational Studies, Chapman University, Orange, CA, United States; MacGillivray L., College of Education, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, United States; Lambert R., University of California Santa Barbara Gervitz Graduate School of Education, Isla Vista, CA, United States","Faced with issues, such as drought and climate change, educators around the world acknowledge the need for developing students' ability to solve problems within and across contexts. A systems thinking pedagogy, which recognizes interdependence and interconnected relationships among concrete elements and abstract concepts (Meadows, 2008; Senge et al., 2012), has potential to transform the classroom into a space of observing, theorizing, discovering, and analyzing, thus linking academic learning to the real world. In a qualitative case study in one school located in a major metropolitan area in California, USA teachers and their 7- and 8-year-old students used systems thinking in an interdisciplinary project-based curriculum. Through reflection and investigations, students devised solutions and used innovative approaches to publicly engage peers and family members in taking action to address an environmental crisis. © Copyright © 2018 Curwen, Ardell, MacGillivray and Lambert.","contructivism; critical pedagogy; critical thinking; ecoliteracy; elementary school children; literacy; primary grades; systems thinking","","","","","","","","Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); Boersma K., Waarlo A.J., Klaassen K., The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education, J. Biol. Educ, 45, pp. 190-197, (2011); Bowers C.A., Educational reforms that foster ecological intelligence, Teach. Educ. Q, 37, pp. 9-31, (2010); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Grobschedl J., Assessing system thinking through different concept-mapping practices, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 34, 2147, (2012); Capra F., The Web of Life: A New Understanding of Living Systems, (1996); Capra F., Luisi P.L., The Systems View of Life, (2014); Cassell J., Nelson T., Visions lost and dreams forgotten: environmental education, systems thinking, and possible futures in American public schools, Teach. Educ. Quart, 37, pp. 179-197, (2010); Comber B., Thomson P., Wells M., Critical literacy finds a “place”: Writing and social action in a low-income Australian 2/3 classroom, Elementar. School J, 101, pp. 451-464, (2001); Creswell J.W., Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd Edn, (2012); Danish J., Saleh A., Andrade A., Bryan B., Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development, Instruct. Sci, 45, pp. 5-24, (2017); Davis B., Sumara D., Luce-Kapler R., Engaging Minds: Cultures of Education and Practices of Teaching, 3rd Edn, (2015); Desimone L.M., Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures, Educ. Res, 38, pp. 181-199, (2009); Elliott L., (2017); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., An investigation of the potential of interactive simulations for developing systems thinking skills in elementary school: a case study with fifth-graders and sixth graders, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 31, pp. 655-675, (2009); Freire P., Pedagogy of the Oppressed, (1970); Garrick D., Hall J., Dobson A., Damania R., Grafton R.Q., Hope R., Et al., Valuing water for sustainable development: measurement and governance must advance together, Science, 358, pp. 1003-1005, (2017); Gero A., Zach E., High school programme in electro-optics: a case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking, Int. J. Eng. Educ, 30, pp. 1190-1199, (2014); Giroux H., The Violence of Organized Forgetting: Thinking Beyond America's Disimagination Machine, (2014); Goldman D., Ecoliterate: How Educators are Cultivating Emotional, Social, and Ecological Intelligence, (2012); Habiba U., Abedin M., Shaw R., Defining water insecurity, Water Insecurity: A Global Dilemma, pp. 3-22, (2013); Heath S.B., Theories of reading in the worlds of childhood and adolescence, Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, 6th Edn, pp. 204-227, (2013); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hokayem H., Gotwals A.W., Early elementary students' understanding of complex ecosystems: a learning progression approach, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 53, pp. 1524-1545, (2016); Hokayem H., Ma J., Jin H., A learning progression for feedback loop reasoning at lower elementary level, J. Biol. Educ, 49, pp. 246-260, (2015); Koski M., deVries M., An exploratory study on how primary pupils approach systems, Sci. Educ. Commun, 23, pp. 835-848, (2013); Lammi M., Becker K., Engineering design thinking, J. Technol. Educ, 24, pp. 55-77, (2013); Layton L., (2015); Sarah, Plain and Tall (1985), Patricia MacLachlan, (1985); Caleb's Story (2001) Patricia MacLachlan, (2001); Mambondiyani A., As Droughts Lengthen, Zimbabwe's Medicinal Plants Disappear. In Reuters, (2017); (2018); McKibben B., (2012); Meadows D.H., Thinking in systems: A primer, (2008); Montana-Hoyos C., Lenmire F., Systems thinking, disciplinarity, and critical thinking in relation to creativity within contemporary arts and design education, Stud. Learn. Eval. Innov. Dev, 8, pp. 12-25, (2011); Opfer V.D., Pedder D., Conceptualizing teacher professional learning, Rev. Educ. Res, 81, pp. 376-407, (2011); Senge P., Give me a Lever long enough…and single-handed I can move the world, Educational Leadership, 2nd Edn, (2007); Senge P., Cambron-McCabe N., Lucas T., Smith B., Dutton J., Kleiner A., Schools that Learn: A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents, and Everyone Who Cares About Education, (2012); Sheehy N.P., Wylie J.W., McGuinness C., Orchard G., How children solve environmental problems: using computer simulations to investigate system thinking, Environ. Educ. Res, 6, pp. 109-126, (2000); Skelton G., Coalition Forms to Manage California's Groundwater. Los Angeles Times, (2014); Strachan G., Systems thinking: the ability to recognize and analyse the interconnections within and between systems, The Handbook of Sustainability Literacy, pp. 84-88, (2009); Stribbe A., The Handbook of Sustainability Literacy, (2009); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, Syst. Dyn. Rev, 23, pp. 285-312, (2007); Tharp R., Gallimore R., Rousing Minds to Life, (1988); Vygotsky L.S., The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1, Problems of General Psychology, (1938); Wheatley M.J., Leadership and the New Science, 3rd Edn, (2006); Charlotte's Web (1952), (1952); Wolf A., Water Wars and Peace, Ecoliterate: How educators are Cultivating Emotional, Social, and Ecological Intelligence, pp. 65-75, (2012); World Leaders and Thousands of Experts Gather at the Opening of the 8th World Water Forum; Yin R.K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th Edn, (2014); Yoon S.A., Goh S.-E., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K−12 science education: a review of empirical studies 1995–2015, Rev. Educ. Res, 88, (2017)","M.S. Curwen; Attallah College of Educational Studies, Chapman University, Orange, United States; email: mcurwen@chapman.edu","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","2504284X","","","","English","Front. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85092086933"
"Nordby A.; Øygardslia K.; Sverdrup U.; Sverdrup H.","Nordby, Anders (57070131900); Øygardslia, Kristine (57022216000); Sverdrup, Ulrik (57190285410); Sverdrup, Harald (55909456800)","57070131900; 57022216000; 57190285410; 55909456800","The art of gamification; teaching sustainability and system thinking by pervasive game development","2016","Electronic Journal of e-Learning","14","3","","152","168","16","21","","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84978864120&partnerID=40&md5=90dfee4152609798ee26e2a4592f4064","Department of Fine Arts and Computer Science, Hedmark University College, Norway; Institute for Digital Media and Computer Science, Norges Tekniske og Naturvitenskaplige Universitet, På Toppen av Haugen, Trondhjem, Norway; Lund University, Sweden; Industrial Engineering, University of Iceland, Iceland","Nordby A., Department of Fine Arts and Computer Science, Hedmark University College, Norway; Øygardslia K., Institute for Digital Media and Computer Science, Norges Tekniske og Naturvitenskaplige Universitet, På Toppen av Haugen, Trondhjem, Norway; Sverdrup U., Lund University, Sweden; Sverdrup H., Industrial Engineering, University of Iceland, Iceland","In 2013 Hedmark University College conducted a research project where students from a game development project/study program developed and tested a Pervasive Game for learning as part of a class in System Thinking. The overall game goal was to teach Sustainability through System Thinking, and to give the students a real world experience with their game;. It was tested on 5th and 7th graders in elementary school, spending one school day in each of the classes. This article focuses on the design of the project: how the game was developed, how the children played it and how research was designed and data collected. © ACPIL.","Game development; Games and learning; Gamification; Pedagogy; Pervasive games; Sustainability; System thinking","","","","","","","","Barrows H.S., Tamblyn R., Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education, (1980); Churchland P.S., Neuophilosophy: Towards a Unified Science of the Mind/Brain., (1986); Cochra-Smith M., Lythle S.L., Inquiry as Stance. Practitioners Research for the Next Generation, (2009); Costanza R., Daly H.E., Natural capital and sustainable development, Conservation Biology, 6, pp. 1-10, (1992); Costanza R., Daily G., Ehrlich P., Population, sustainability and the earths carrying capacity. A framework for estimating population sizes and lifestyles that could be sustained without undermining future generations, Journal of Bioscience, pp. 1-19, (1992); Damasio A.R., Decartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain, (1994); Deterding S., Dixon D., Khaled R., Nacke L., From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “gamification”, pp. 9-15, (2011); Dewey J., Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, (1916); Elkington J., Cannibals with Forks – Triple Bottom Line of 21St Century Business, (1997); Annexes to Impact Assessments Guidelines, (2008); Sustainability Policies E.U., WEB Public Sites, (2014); Forrester J., World Dynamics, (1971); Gee J.P., Situated Language and Learning: A Critique of Traditional Schooling, (2004); Gee J.P., Good Video Games and Good Learning, (2007); Gee J.P., New Digital Media and Learning as an Emerging Area and ""Worked Examples"" as One Way Forward, (2010); Haraldsson H.V., Introduction to systems thinking and causal loops diagrams. Reports in ecology and environmental engineering, Report, 1, (2004); Haraldsson H.V., Sverdrup H., Finding Simplicity in Complexity in Biogeochemical Modelling, pp. 211-223, (2004); Kolb D.A., Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, (1983); Zero K., Universe Chart Q4 2011: Avg User Age 10 to 15, (2011); Lave J., Wenger E., Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation, (1991); Lyneis D., Stuntz L., System Dynamics in K-12 Education:Lessons learned, The Creative Learning Exchange, 17, 2, (2007); Problem Based Learning Preparatory Website, (2013); Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens W., Limits to Growth, (1972); Pettersen R.C., Kvalitetslæring I høgere Utdanning: Innføring I Problem-og Praksisbasert Didaktikk [Eng: Quality Learning in Higher Education: A Primer in Problem- and Practise Based Didactics], (2005); Schlyter P., Stjernquist I., Sverdrup H., Handling Complex Environmental issues—Formal Group Modelling as a Deliberative Platform at the Science-Policy-Democracy Interface, (2012); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline, the Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation, (1990); Shaffer D.W., How Computer Games Help Children Learn, (2008); Sverdrup H., System Thinking, System Analysis and System Dynamics: Modelling Procedures for Communicating Insight and Understanding by Using Adaptive Learning in Engineering for Sustainability, (2014); Sverdrup H., Svensson M., Defining sustainability, Developing Principles for Sustainable Forestry, Results from a Research Program in Southern Sweden, 5, pp. 21-32, (2002); Sverdrup H., Svensson M., Defining the concept of sustainability, a matter of systems analysis, Revealing Complex Structures -- Challenges for Swedish Systems Analysis, pp. 122-142, (2004); Sterman J.D., Business Dynamics, System Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, (2000); Tapscott D., The Net Generation is the Smartest Generation, (2011); Wenger E., Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, (1998); Wenger E., Learning for A Small Planet: A Research Agenda, (2006)","","","Academic Publishing Ltd","","","","","","14794403","","","","English","Electron. J. e-Learning","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-84978864120"
"Uskola A.; Puig B.","Uskola, Araitz (6508016235); Puig, Blanca (56461096500)","6508016235; 56461096500","Development of Systems and Futures Thinking Skills by Primary Pre-service Teachers for Addressing Epidemics","2023","Research in Science Education","53","4","","741","757","16","7","10.1007/s11165-023-10097-7","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85146262567&doi=10.1007%2fs11165-023-10097-7&partnerID=40&md5=3c9173a65d59248bb6ba27cb97159870","Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), B. Sarriena S/N, Leioa, 48940, Spain; Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Santiago de Compostela (USC), Santiago de Compostela, Spain","Uskola A., Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), B. Sarriena S/N, Leioa, 48940, Spain; Puig B., Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Santiago de Compostela (USC), Santiago de Compostela, Spain","Science educators highlight the importance of developing systems thinking (ST) and futures thinking (FT) for students to make decisions and to be active citizens that address socioscientific problems. The dimensions related to FT take in this study were three implied in ST and two in the appropriation of the future. The aim of this study is to analyse the level of FT-related dimensions developed by a group of pre-service elementary teachers and how far different activities designed to foster them were effective. Written explanations presented by the participants about the origin of pandemics and possible ways to prevent them, as well as videos developed by small groups with the goal to present a campaign for avoiding future pandemics, were analysed. Based on the literature, five dimensions and up to four levels of performances were identified. After completing the activities, participants were able to relate the three spheres of the “One Health” notion to explain the causes of pandemics. Moreover, they established complex cause-effect relationships between the different factors, although they only constructed monocausal relationships when proposing measures. Participants improved their performance in anticipating the future and identifying themselves as agents of change. The elaboration of concept maps facilitated the development of components and behaviour ST dimensions, and the design of the campaign allowed participants to identify themselves as agents of change. The use of these strategies in science education can contribute to the development of a citizenry capable of understanding and acting on systems. © 2023, The Author(s).","Agency; Futures thinking; One health; Primary pre-service teachers’ training; Systems thinking","","","","","","ESPIGA; KOMATZI, (GIU19/008); Spanish Ministry of Science, Education, and Universities; Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, MCIU; Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, EHU, UPV/EHU; European Regional Development Fund, ERDF, (PGC2018-096581-B-C22)","Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This research was developed within RODA (Ref. ED431C2021/05) and KOMATZI (GIU19/008) research groups, and was supported by ESPIGA project, funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Education, and Universities, partly funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). Grant code PGC2018-096581-B-C22. ","Atance C.M., Meltzoff A.N., My future self: Young children’s ability to anticipate and explain future states, Cognitive Development, 20, pp. 341-361, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Knippels M.-C.P.J., Lessons learned: Synthesizing approaches that foster understanding of complex biological phenomena, Fostering Understanding of Complex Systems in Biology Education, pp. 249-278, (2022); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of Earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Chi M.T.H., Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 3, pp. 271-315, (1997); Cuzzocrea V., Mandich G., Students’ narratives of the future: Imagined mobilities as forms of youth agency?, Journal of Youth Studies, 19, 4, pp. 552-567, (2016); Erickson F., Qualitative methods in research on teaching, Handbook of research on teaching, pp. 119-161, (1986); (2019); Granit-Dgani D., Kaplan A., Flum H., Theory-based assessment in environmental education: A tool for formative evaluation, Environmental Education Research, 23, 2, pp. 269-299, (2017); Gray J., Williams J., Hagare P., Lopes A.M., Sankaran S., Lessons learnt from educating university students through a trans-disciplinary project for sustainable sanitation using a systems approach and Problem-Based Learning, Systems, 2, pp. 243-272, (2014); Hipkins R., Teaching for complex systems thinking, (2021); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, pp. 127-138, (2004); Hodson D., Time for action. Science education for an alternative future, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 6, pp. 645-670, (2003); Hofman-Bergholm M., Could education for sustainable development benefit from a systems thinking approach?, Systems, 6, (2018); Jensen B.B., Schnack K., The action competence approach in environmental education, Environmental Education Research, 3, 2, pp. 163-178, (1997); Johanson E.L., Participatory futures thinking in the African context of sustainability challenges and socio-environmental change, Ecology and Society, 26, 4, (2021); Jones K.E., Patel N.G., Levy M.A., Storeygard A., Balk D., Gittleman J.L., Daszak P., Global trends in emerging infectious diseases, Nature, 451, pp. 990-994, (2008); Jones A., Buntting C., Hipkins R., McKim A., Lindsey C., Saunders K., Developing students’ futures thinking in science education, Research in Science Education, 42, pp. 687-708, (2012); Levrini O., Fantini P., Barelli E., Branchetti L., Satanassi S., Tasquier G., The present shock and time re-appropriation in the pandemic era: Missed opportunities for science education, Science & Education, 30, pp. 1-31, (2020); Levrini O., Tasquier G., Barelli E., Laherto A., Palmgren E., Branchetti L., Wilson C., Recognition and operationalization of Future-Scaffolding skills: Results from an empirical study of a teaching–learning module on climate change and futures thinking, Science Education, 105, pp. 281-308, (2021); Lincoln Y.S., Guba E.G., Naturalistic inquiry, (1985); Mambrey S., Schreiber N., Schmiemann P., Young students’ reasoning about ecosystems: The role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research in Science Education, 52, pp. 79-98, (2022); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Ulrich-Riedhammer E.M., System competence modelling: Theoretical foundation and empirical validation of a model involving natural, social and human-environment systems, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, pp. 685-711, (2018); Melles G., Lodewyckx S., Sukumar H.T., COVID 19: Causal loop diagramming (CLD) of social-ecological interactions for teaching sustainable development., pp. 311-330, (2021); Oliveira A.W., Patterson R., Quigley C.F., SambursKiy D., Barss K., Rivera S., Environmental agency in read-alouds, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 2, pp. 247-274, (2015); Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Education, (2018); Ossimitz G., Teaching system dynamics and systems thinking in Austria and Germany, Proceedings of the 18Th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2000); Palmberg I., Hofman-Bergholm M., Jeronen E., Yli-Panula E., Systems thinking for understanding sustainability? Nordic student teachers’ views on the relationship between species identification, biodiversity and sustainable development, Education Sciences, 7, (2017); Rempfler A., Systemdenken. Schlüsselkompetenz für zukunftsorientiertes Raumverhalten [Systems thinking. Key competence for future-oriented spatial behaviour], Geographie Und Schule [Geography and School], 32, 184, pp. 11-18, (2010); Rieckmann M., Future-oriented higher education: Which key competencies should be fostered through university teaching and learning?, Futures, 44, pp. 127-135, (2012); Roth W.-M., Doing Teacher-Research: A Handbook for Perplexed Practitioners, (2007); Sass W., Boeve-de Pauw J., De Maeyer S., Van P., Development and validation of an instrument for measuring action competence in sustainable development within early adolescents: The action competence in sustainable development questionnaire (ACiSD-Q), Environmental Education Research, 27, 9, pp. 1284-1304, (2021); Snapir Z., Eberbach C., Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Hmelo-Silver C., Tripto J., Characterising the development of the understanding of human body systems in high-school biology students — a longitudinal study, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 15, pp. 2092-2127, (2017); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C.L., Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, 2, pp. 203-218, (2011)","A. Uskola; Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Leioa, B. Sarriena S/N, 48940, Spain; email: araitz.uskola@ehu.eus","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","0157244X","","","","English","Res. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85146262567"
"Finnerty M.","Finnerty, Michelle (57191065733)","57191065733","Making connections: The use of ethnographic fieldwork to facilitate a model of integrative learning","2014","Integrative Learning: International Research and Practice","","","","107","116","9","0","10.4324/9781315884769-16","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85086541666&doi=10.4324%2f9781315884769-16&partnerID=40&md5=e453978c3e7bb0d47c40800d3fc3a939","University College Cork, Ireland","Finnerty M., University College Cork, Ireland","Zoller highlights the critical need in science education for global sustainability, stating: A sound, meaningful education in science requires a revolutionized change in the guiding philosophy, rationale, and models of our thinking, behavior, and action. Science literacy for sustainability means developing the capability of evaluative system thinking in the context of science, technology, environment, and society, which in turn requires the development of students' higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS), system critical thinking, question-asking, decision-making, and problem solving. The adoption of an integrative learning approach with its associated attributes such as supporting students in becoming self-directed learners who are reflective of their own learning. The concept of integrative learning focuses on integrating and interpreting knowledge from different disciplines and applying knowledge through real-world engagement. This is inherently important in a modern science education which should also include the development of students' skills such as problem solving, critical thinking, question-asking, and decision-making. © 2015 Daniel Blackshields, James G. R. Cronin, Bettie Higgs, Shane.","","","","","","","","","Barz G.F., Cooley J.C., Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives for Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology, (1997); Boyer E.L., Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, (1990); Brewer J.D., Ethnography, (2000); Campbell P.S., Teaching Music Globally, (2004); Emerson R.M., Fretz R.I., Shaw L.L., Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes, (2011); Green L., How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education, (2002); Green L., Music, Informal Learning and the School: A New Classrooms Pedagogy, (2008); Green L., Learning, Teaching, and Musical Identity: Voices across Cultures, (2011); Huber M.T., Hutchings P., Integrative Learning: Mapping the Terrain, (2004); Kruger S., Ethnography in the Performing Arts: A Student Guide, (2008); McCarthy M., Passing It On: The Transmission of Music in Irish Culture, (1999); Myers H., Ethnomusicology: An Introduction, (1992); Pugh K.J., Newton’s laws beyond the classroom walls, Science Education, 88, pp. 182-196, (2004)","","","Taylor and Francis","","","","","","","978-113464850-4; 978-041571107-4","","","English","Integr. Learning: International Res. and Practice","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85086541666"
"Raycroft M.A.R.; Flynn A.B.","Raycroft, Mark A. R. (55440504900); Flynn, Alison B. (15843222200)","55440504900; 15843222200","What works? What's missing? An evaluation model for science curricula that analyses learning outcomes through five lenses","2020","Chemistry Education Research and Practice","21","4","","1110","1131","21","6","10.1039/c9rp00157c","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85094837727&doi=10.1039%2fc9rp00157c&partnerID=40&md5=2608ffa396d51affb6d04a62935083d9","Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada","Raycroft M.A.R., Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Flynn A.B., Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada","Science is rapidly changing with vast amounts of new information and technologies available. However, traditional instructional formats do not adequately prepare a diverse population of learners who need to evaluate and use knowledge, not simply memorize facts. Moreover, curricular change has been glacially slow. One starting goal for curricular change can be identifying the features of a current curriculum, including potential areas for improvement, but a model is needed to accomplish that goal. The vast majority of studies related to curricular change have been conducted in K-12 environments, with an increasing number in post-secondary environments. Herein, we describe a model for science curriculum evaluation that we designed by integrating a number of different approaches. That model evaluates the intended, enacted, and achieved components of the curriculum, anchored by analyzing learning outcomes through five lenses: (i) a scientific Framework reported by the US National Research Council, (ii) systems thinking, (iii) equity, diversity, and inclusion, (iv) professional skills, and (v) learning skills. No curriculum evaluation models to date have used the five learning outcomes lenses that we describe herein. As a proof of principle, we applied the evaluation model to one organic chemistry course, which revealed areas of strength and possible deficiencies. This model could be used to evaluate other science courses or programs. Possible deficiencies may be addressed in other courses, in the course at hand, or may not be deemed necessary or important to address, demonstrating the potential for this evaluation to generate areas for discussion and ultimately, improvements to post-secondary science education. © 2020 The Royal Society of Chemistry.","","","","","","","","","Advance HE's Equality Charters; Teaching Chemistry to Students with Disabilities: A Manual for High Schools, Colleges, and Graduate Programs; Int. J. Dev. Educ. Glob. Learn., 11; Pew Res. Cent.; The Act (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act); J. Furth. High. Educ., 40; J. Libr. Adm., 55; Procedia Comput. Sci., 44, pp. 669-678; J. Res. Sci. Teach., 42; College Learning for the New Global Century; Australian Qualifications Framework; Encyclopedia of Evaluation; High. Educ. Res. Dev., 18; J. Chem. Educ., 93; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17; From College to Careers: Fostering Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Stem; Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract., 8; Am. J. Public Health, 98; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 21, pp. 582-596; Sci. Educ. Resour. Cent; Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.2, (2018); CSC President's Event fosters brainstorming session, Community Connect, (2018); CSC President's Event fosters brainstorming session, Community Connect, (2018); J. Chem. Educ., 86; The Handbook for Smart School Teams; J. Chem. Educ., 90; J. Chem. Educ., 90; Et Al., 350; Chang. Mag. High. Learn., 47; Can. Soc. Chem; Smart Goals: Everything You Need to Know about Setting S.M.A.R.T. Goals; Educ. Psychol., 33; Mindset: The New Psychology of Success; Carol Dweck Revisits the ""growth Mindset; J. Res. Sci. Teach., 32; J. Vocat. Educ. Train., 65; Making Chemistry Inclusive; Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation; J. Chem. Educ., 94; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 15; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 16, pp. 198-211; Online Approaches to Chemical Education; Growth & Goals: A Module to Help Students Take Greater Control of Their Learning; Flynn A.B., Flynn Research Group, (2019); Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 18; J. Chem. Educ., 92; Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 111; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 20; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 18; J. Chem. Educ., 95; J. Res. Sci. Teach., 55; Think. Ski. Creat., 28, pp. 110-130; Med. Teach., 23; J. Res. Sci. Teach., 53; Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 71; Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., 6; Breaking the Barriers; Diversity Landscape of the Chemical Sciences; Et Al., 95; J. Chem. Educ., 96; Train. Dev., 50; Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Training Evaluation; Developing Effective Learning Outcomes: A Practical Guide; Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ., 40; Computing Krippendorff's Alpha-Reliability; Stud. High. Educ., 41; J. Res. Sci. Teach., 57; Et Al., 11; Nat. Rev. Chem., 2; Curriculum: Alternative Approaches, Ongoing Issues; Science, 347; Nat. Chem., 8; Et Al., 96; Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology; Adv. Health Sci. Educ., 21, pp. 541-559; Rising above the Gathering Storm, Revisited; On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations; A Framework for K-12 Science Education; Dimensions: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Canada; Equity, Divers. Incl; Can. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn.; Structure, Pilot, and Evaluation of a New Self-regulated Learning, Growth Mindset, and Metacognition Module That Is Integrated in Postsecondary Courses in Any Level and Discipline; Qual. Assur. Framew; J. Chem. Educ., 96; J. Chem. Educ., 96; Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 71; Sci. Educ., 66; Educ. Assess., Eval. Acc., 22; Research and Practice in Chemistry Education; Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., 47; J. Chem. Educ., 78; Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 113-133; Syst. Thinker, 8; J. Furth. High. Educ., 29; University Course Guide, (2020); Sci. Educ., 89; Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong-and the New Research That's Rewriting the Story; Et Al.; Resour. Community.; J. Chem. Educ., 92; Cbe Life Sci. Educ., 12; High. Educ. Res. Dev., 31; Et Al., 359; Teach. Coll. Rec., 68, pp. 523-540; J. Chem. Educ., 92; Evaluation Models; High. Educ. Res. Dev., 23; Talanquer V., Controlling intuition, The Cerg Webinar Series #CERGiner, (2018); Chem. Educ. Res. Pr., 11; J. Chem. Educ., 94; Guidance Note: Course Design (Including Learning Outcomes and Assessment); Higher Education Standards Framework, (2015); Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action; Operationalizing the Science and Engineering Practices; Innov. High. Educ., 33; Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17, pp. 365-380; J. Chem. Educ., 95; Education Design Research; J. Chem. Educ., 89; Stud. High. Educ., 40; J. Chem. Educ., 90; J. Chem. Educ., 98; Understanding by Design; J. Chem. Educ., 92; The Future of Jobs: Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution; The Future of Jobs Report 2018 Insight Report Centre for the New Economy and Society, (2018); Yurtseven M.K., Decision Making and Systems Thinking: Educational Issues, (2016); J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46; Educ. Psychol., 25; Theory Pract., 41","A.B. Flynn; Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; email: alison.flynn@uOttawa.ca","","Royal Society of Chemistry","","","","","","11094028","","","","English","Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85094837727"
"Shen J.; Lei J.; Chang H.-Y.; Namdar B.","Shen, Ji (55903576800); Lei, Jing (27368136500); Chang, Hsin-Yi (7407523680); Namdar, Bahadir (55903401300)","55903576800; 27368136500; 7407523680; 55903401300","Technology-enhanced, modeling-based instruction (TMBI) in science education","2014","Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology: Fourth Edition","","","","529","540","11","26","10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_41","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84929837430&doi=10.1007%2f978-1-4614-3185-5_41&partnerID=40&md5=680bcba7ae269003b7a23cee6bf57f50","Department of Mathematics and Science Education, College of Education, The University of Georgia, 212 Aderhold Hall, Athens, 30602, GA, United States; Department of Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation, School of Education, Syracuse University, 336 Huntington Hall, Syracuse, 13244, NY, United States; Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Kaohsiung Normal University, No. 62, Shenjhong Road, Yanchao District, Kaohsiung, 824, Taiwan","Shen J., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, College of Education, The University of Georgia, 212 Aderhold Hall, Athens, 30602, GA, United States; Lei J., Department of Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation, School of Education, Syracuse University, 336 Huntington Hall, Syracuse, 13244, NY, United States; Chang H.-Y., Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Kaohsiung Normal University, No. 62, Shenjhong Road, Yanchao District, Kaohsiung, 824, Taiwan; Namdar B., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, College of Education, The University of Georgia, 212 Aderhold Hall, Athens, 30602, GA, United States","In this chapter, we review recent research and development in technology-enhanced, modeling-based instruction (TMBI) in science education. We describe the cognitive, social, and curriculum-design aspects of science learning promoted in these environments. We emphasize the continuum of qualitative to quantitative modeling, the computational mind, and the system thinking that are critical for scientific modeling. We illustrate typical collaborative learning in TMBI science education settings. We highlight scaffolding strategies relevant to TMBI in science curricula. © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014. All rights reserved.","Computational modeling; Model; Model-based reasoning; System thinking","","","","","","","","Adams W.K., Paulson A., Wieman C.E., What levels of guidance promote engaged exploration with interactive simulations? PERC Proceedings, (2009); Ardac D., Akaygun S., Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, pp. 317-337, (2004); Barab S.A., Hay K.E., Barnett M., Keating T., Virtual solar system project: Building understanding through model building, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 7, pp. 719-756, (2000); Birchfield D., Megowan-Romanowicz C., Earth science learning in SMALLab: A design experiment for mixed reality, International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 4, pp. 403-421, (2009); Bransford J.D., Brown A.L., Cocking R.R., How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, (2000); Bravo C., Van Joolingen W.R., De Jong T., Using Co-Lab to build system dynamics models: Students' actions and on-line tutorial advice, Computers in Education, 53, 2, pp. 243-251, (2009); Bredeweg B., Forbus K., Qualitative modeling in education, AI Magazine, 24, 4, pp. 35-46, (2003); Chang H.-Y., Linn M.C., Scaffolding learning from molecular visualizations, Journal of Research in Science Teaching; Chang H.-Y., Quintana C., Krajcik J.S., The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter, Science Education, 94, pp. 73-94, (2010); Clark D.B., Longitudinal conceptual change in students' understanding of thermal equilibrium: An examination of the process of conceptual restructuring, Cognition and Instruction, 24, 4, pp. 467-563, (2006); Clark D.B., Sampson V., Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation, International Journal of Science Education, 29, 3, pp. 253-277, (2007); Clark D.B., Sampson V., Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, pp. 293-321, (2008); Clement J., Model based learning as a key research area for science education, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 9, pp. 1041-1053, (2000); Collins A., Brown J.S., Newman S.E., Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics, Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser, pp. 453-494, (1990); Forbus K.D., Qualitative process theory, Artificial Intelligence, 24, 1-3, pp. 85-168, (1984); Frederiksen J.R., White B.Y., Gutwill J., Dynamic mental models in learning science: The importance of constructing derivational linkages among models, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 7, pp. 806-836, (1999); Gilbert J.K., Models & modeling in science education, (1993); Gilbert J.K., Boulter C.J., Learning science through models and modeling, International handbook of science education, Part 1, pp. 53-66, (1998); Gilbert J., Pietrocola M., Zylbersztajn A., Franco C., Science education: Notions of reality, theory and models, Developing models in science education, pp. 19-40, (2000); Gobert J.D., Pallant A., Fostering students' epistemologies of models via authentic model-based tasks, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13, 1, pp. 7-22, (2004); Hannafin M.J., Land S., The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced, student-centered learning environments, Instructional Science, 25, pp. 167-202, (1997); Hart C., Models in physics, models for physics learning, and why the distinction may matter in the case of electric circuits, Research in Science Education, 38, 5, pp. 529-544, (2008); Hestenes D., Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction, American Journal of Physics, 55, pp. 440-454, (1987); Ioannidou A., Repenning A., Webb D., Keyser D., Luhn L., Daetwyler C., Mr. Vetro: A collective simulation for teaching health science, International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 2, pp. 141-166, (2010); Jonassen D., Reeves T., Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools, Handbook of research in educational communications and technology, pp. 693-719, (1996); Kauffman S., At home in the universe: the search for the laws of self-organization and complexity, (1995); Ketelhut D.J., The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in River City, a multiuser virtual environment, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 1, pp. 99-111, (2007); Ketelhut D.J., Dede C., Assessing inquiry learning, (2006); Ketelhut D.J., Dede C., Clarke J., Nelson B., A multi-user virtual environment for building higher order inquiry skills in science, (2006); Ketelhut D.J., Nelson B., Dede C., Clarke J., Inquiry learning in multi-user virtual environments, (2006); Khan S., Model-based inquiries in chemistry, Science Education, 91, pp. 877-905, (2007); Komis V., Ergazaki M., Zogza V., Comparing computersupported dynamic modeling and ""paper & pencil"" concept mapping technique in students' collaborative activity, Computers in Education, 49, 4, pp. 991-1017, (2007); Kozma R.B., Chin E., Russell J., Marx N., The role of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 3, pp. 105-144, (2000); Krange I., Ludvigsen S., What does it mean? Students' procedural and conceptual problem solving in a CSCL environment designed within the field of science education, International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 1, pp. 25-51, (2008); Kress G., Van Leeuwen T., Reading images: The grammar of visual design, (1996); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education, The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 371-388, (2006); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Inventing a ""mid-level"" to make ends meet: Reasoning through the levels of complexity, Cognition and Instruction, 26, pp. 1-47, (2008); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Students' learning with the Connected Chemistry (CC1) Curriculum: Navigating the complexities of the particulate world., Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 3, pp. 243-254, (2009); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Crossing levels and representations: The Connected Chemistry (CC1) Curriculum., Educational Technology, 18, 3, pp. 224-242, (2009); Li S.C., Law N., Lui K.F.A., Cognitive perturbation through dynamic modeling: A pedagogical approach to conceptual change in science, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 6, pp. 405-422, (2006); Linn M.C., The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction, The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 243-264, (2006); Linn M.C., Clark D., Slotta J.D., WISE design for knowledge integration, Science Education, 87, 4, pp. 517-538, (2003); Linn M.C., Davis E.A., Eylon B.-S., The scaffolded knowledge integration framework for instruction, Internet environments for science education, pp. 47-72, (2004); Linn M.C., Eylon B.-S., Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration, (2011); Linn M.C., Hsi S., Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners, (2000); Linn M.C., Lee H.S., Tinker R., Husic F., Chiu J.L., Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science, Science, 313, pp. 1049-1050, (2006); Liu X., Effects of combined hands-on laboratory and computer modeling on student learning of gas laws: A quasi-experimental study, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15, 1, pp. 89-100, (2006); Lowe R., Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning, Learning and Instruction, 14, pp. 257-274, (2004); Manlove S., Lazonder A.W., de Jong T., Collaborative versus individual use of regulative software scaffolds during scientific inquiry learning, Interactive Learning Environments, 17, 2, pp. 105-117, (2009); Mayer R.E., Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, (2005); McElhaney K.W., Linn M.C., Investigations of a complex, realistic task: Intentional, unsystematic, and exhaustive experimenters, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 7, pp. 745-770, (2011); Metcalf S.J., Tinker R.F., Probeware and handhelds in elementary and middle school science, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13, 1, pp. 43-49, (2004); Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning, (2000); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2011); Nelson B., Ketelhut D.J., Clarke J., Bowman C., Dede C., Design-based research strategies for developing a scientific inquiry curriculum in a multi-user virtual environment, Educational Technology, 45, 1, pp. 21-27, (2005); Pallant A., Tinker R.F., Reasoning with atomic-scale molecular dynamic models, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13, 1, pp. 51-66, (2004); Papaevripidou M., Constantinou C.P., Zacharia Z.C., Modeling complex marine ecosystems: An investigation of two teaching approaches with fifth graders, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 2, pp. 145-157, (2007); Papert S., Situating constructionism., Constructionism, (1991); Papert S., An exploration in the space of mathematics educations, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1, 1, pp. 95-123, (1996); Parnafes O., What does fast mean? Understanding the physical world through representations, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 415-450, (2007); Passmore C., Stewart J., A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high school, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, pp. 185-204, (2002); Penner D.E., Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modelling, Review of Research in Education, 25, pp. 1-37, (2001); Penner D.E., Gilles N.D., Lehrer R., Schauble L., Building functional models: Designing an elbow, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 2, pp. 125-143, (1997); Perkins K., Adams W., Dubson M., Finkelstein N., Reid S., Wieman C., Et al., PhET: Interactive simulations for teaching and learning physics, The Physics Teacher, 44, 1, pp. 18-23, (2006); Podolefsky N.S., Perkins K.K., Adams W.K., Factors promoting engaged exploration with computer simulations, Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 6, pp. 0201171-02011711, (2010); Quintana C., Zhang M., Krajcik J., A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through softwarebased scaffolding, Educational Psychologist, 40, 4, pp. 235-244, (2005); Reiser B.J., Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 3, pp. 273-304, (2004); Schwartz R.S., Lederman N.G., What scientists say: Scientists' views of models, (2005); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Et al., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Schwarz C.V., White B., Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students' understanding of scientific modeling, Cognition and Instruction, 23, 2, pp. 165-205, (2005); Sell K.S., Herbert B.E., Stuessy C.L., Schielack J., Supporting student conceptual model development of complex Earth systems through the use of multiple representations and inquiry, Journal of Geoscience Education, 54, 3, pp. 396-407, (2006); Shen J., Nurturing students' critical knowledge using technology-enhanced scaffolding strategies in science education: A conceptual framework, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 1, pp. 1-12, (2010); Shen J., Confrey J., From conceptual change to constructive modeling: A case study of an elementary teacher in learning astronomy, Science Education, 91, 6, pp. 948-966, (2007); Shen J., Confrey J., Justifying alternative models in learning the solar system: A case study on K-8 science teachers' understanding of frames of reference, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 1, pp. 1-29, (2010); Shen J., Linn M.C., Connecting scientific explanations and everyday observations: A technology enhanced curriculum on modeling static electricity, International Journal of Science Education, 33, 12, pp. 1597-1623, (2011); Simpson G., Hoyles C., Noss R., Exploring the mathematics of motion through construction and collaboration, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, pp. 114-136, (2006); Sins P.H.M., Savelsbergh E.R., Van Joolingen W.R., Van HoutWolters B.H.A.M., The relation between students' epistemological understanding of computer models and their cognitive processing on a modelling task, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 9, pp. 1205-1229, (2009); Slotta J.D., Linn M.C., WISE science: Inquiry and the internet in the science classroom, (2009); Songer N.B., Digital resources versus cognitive tools: A discussion of learning science with technology., Handbook of research on science education, (2007); Stern L., Barnea N., Shauli S., The effect of a computerized simulation on middle school students' understanding of the kinetic molecular theory, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 4, pp. 305-315, (2008); Stratford S.J., Krajcik J., Soloway E., Secondary students dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7, 3, pp. 215-234, (1998); Tobin K., The practice of constructivism in science and mathematics education, (1993); Tomasi J., Models and modeling in theoretical chemistry, Journal of Molecular Structure (THEOCHEM), 179, pp. 273-292, (1988); White B., ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education, Cognition and Instruction, 10, 1, pp. 1-100, (1993); Wieman C., Adams W.K., Loeblein P., Perkins K.K., Teaching physics using PhET simulations, The Physics Teacher, 48, 4, pp. 225-227, (2010); Wieman C., Adams W.K., Perkins K.K., PhET: Simulations that enhance learning, Science, 322, pp. 682-683, (2008); Wilensky U., Rand W., An introduction to agent-based modeling: Modeling natural, social and engineered complex systems with NetLogo, (2009); Wilensky U., Reisman K., Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a fire fly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories-An embodied modeling approach, Cognition and Instruction, 24, 2, pp. 171-209, (2006); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems perspective to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 1, pp. 3-19, (1999); Windschitl M., Thompson J., Braaten M., Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations, Science Education, 92, 5, pp. 941-967, (2008); Wing J.M., Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 49, 3, pp. 33-35, (2006); Wu H.-K., Modeling a complex system: Using novice-expert analysis for developing an effective technology-enhanced learning environment, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 2, pp. 195-219, (2010); Wu H.-K., Krajcik J.S., Soloway E., Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 7, pp. 821-842, (2001); Xie C., Computational experiments for science and engineering education, (2010); Xie Q., Tinker R., Molecular dynamics simulations of chemical reactions for use in education, Journal of Chemical Education, 83, 1, pp. 77-83, (2006); Xie C., Tinker R., Tinker B., Pallant A., Damelin D., Berenfeld B., Computational experiments for science education, Science, 332, 6037, pp. 1516-1517, (2011); Zhang B., Liu X., Krajcik J.S., Expert models and modeling processes associated with computer-modeling tool, Science Education, 90, 4, pp. 579-604, (2006)","J. Shen; Department of Mathematics and Science Education, College of Education, The University of Georgia, Athens, 212 Aderhold Hall, 30602, United States; email: j.shen@miami.edu","","Springer New York","","","","","","","978-146143185-5; 978-146143184-8","","","English","Handb. of Res. on Educ. Commun. and Technol.: Fourth Ed.","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-84929837430"
"Peppler K.; Thompson N.; Danish J.; Moczek A.; Corrigan S.","Peppler, Kylie (23005878600); Thompson, Naomi (56375182900); Danish, Joshua (16027612700); Moczek, Armin (6701552693); Corrigan, Seth (56728026900)","23005878600; 56375182900; 16027612700; 6701552693; 56728026900","Comparing first- and third-person perspectives in early elementary learning of honeybee systems","2020","Instructional Science","48","3","","291","312","21","7","10.1007/s11251-020-09511-8","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85084050727&doi=10.1007%2fs11251-020-09511-8&partnerID=40&md5=4502fc45efdbcff12ba0e58ce4ee900d","University of California, Irvine, 5206 Bren Hall, Irvine, 92697, CA, United States; Indiana University, 201 N. Rose Ave., Rm 2054, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; Indiana University, 201 N. Rose Ave., Rm 4040, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; Indiana University, 915 E 3rd St, Rm 102D, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; SNHU, 2500 N. River Road, Manchester, 03106, NH, United States","Peppler K., University of California, Irvine, 5206 Bren Hall, Irvine, 92697, CA, United States; Thompson N., Indiana University, 201 N. Rose Ave., Rm 2054, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; Danish J., Indiana University, 201 N. Rose Ave., Rm 4040, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; Moczek A., Indiana University, 915 E 3rd St, Rm 102D, Bloomington, 47405-1006, IN, United States; Corrigan S., SNHU, 2500 N. River Road, Manchester, 03106, NH, United States","Prior literature has begun to demonstrate that even young children can learn about complex systems using participatory simulations. This study disentangles the impacts of third-person perspectives (offered by traditional simulations) and first-person perspectives (offered by participatory simulations) on children’s development of such systems thinking in the context of the emergent complexity of honeybee nectar foraging. Specifically, we worked with three first-grade classrooms assigned to one of three conditions—instruction through use of a first-person perspective only, third-person perspective only, and integrated instruction—to engage ideas of complex systems thinking. In each condition, systems concepts were targeted through instruction and assessment. The integrated and third-person classrooms demonstrated significant gains while the first-person classroom showed gains that were not statistically significant, suggesting that third-person perspectives play a critical role in how children learn systems thinking. This work also puts forth a novel assessment design for young children using multiple-choice questions. © 2020, Springer Nature B.V.","Early elementary; Role-play; Science learning; Systems thinking; Technology","","","","","","Armin Moczek; National Science Foundation, NSF, (1324047)","This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1324047 awarded to Kylie Peppler, Joshua Danish, and Armin Moczek. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Thank you to Janis Watson as well as the many teachers and students who made this work possible. An earlier version of this paper was published in the 2018 International Conference of the Learning Sciences Proceedings. ","Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Bergan-Roller H.E., Galt N.J., Chizinski C.J., Helikar T., Dauer J.T., Simulated computational model lesson improves foundational systems thinking skills and conceptual knowledge in biology students, BioScience, 68, pp. 612-621, (2018); Berkson J., Application of the logistic function to bio-assy, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 39, 227, pp. 357-365, (1994); Blikstein P., Fuhrmann T., Salehi S., Using the bifocal modeling framework to resolve “discrepant events” between physical experiments and virtual models in biology, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 4, pp. 513-526, (2016); Cohen J., Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, (1988); Cole M., Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline, (1996); Colella V., Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 4, pp. 471-500, (2000); Danish J.A., Applying an activity theory lens to designing instruction for learning about the structure, behavior, and function of a honeybee system, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23, 2, pp. 100-148, (2014); Danish J., BeeSign: A design experiment to teach Kindergarten and first grade students about honeybees from a complex systems perspective, Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, (2009); Danish J., Peppler K., Phelps D., BeeSign: Designing to support mediated group inquiry of complex science by early elementary students, Proceedings of the 9Th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (2010); Danish J., Peppler K., Phelps D., Washington D., Life in the hive: Supporting inquiry into complexity within the zone of proximal development, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 5, pp. 454-467, (2011); Danish J., Saleh A., Andrade A., Bryan B., Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 5-24, (2017); Deliema D., Saleh A., Lee C., Enyedy N., Danish J., Illum R., Dahn M., Humburg M., Mahoney C., Looi C.K., Polman J.L., Cress U., Reimann P., Blending play and inquiry in augmented reality: A comparison of playing a video game to playing within a participatory model, Transforming Learning, Empowering Learners: The International Conference of The Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2016, 1, (2016); Collective D.-B.R., Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry, Educational Researcher, 32, 1, pp. 5-8, (2003); Engestrom Y., Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research, (1987); Engestrom Y., From teams to knots: Activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work, (2008); Goldstone R.L., Wilensky U., Promoting Transfer by Grounding Complex Systems Principles, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 4, pp. 465-516, (2008); Greeno J.G., Learning in activity, The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 79-96, (2006); Grotzer T.A., Bell Basca B., How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding?, Journal of Biological Education, 38, pp. 16-29, (2003); Grotzer T.A., Powell M.M., Derbiszewska K.M., Courter C.J., Kamarainen A.M., Metcalf S.J., Dede C.J., Turning transfer inside out: The affordances of virtual worlds and mobile devices in real world contexts for teaching about causality across time and distance in ecosystems, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 20, 1, pp. 43-69, (2015); Grotzer T.A., Solis S.L., Tutwiler M.S., Cuzzolino M.P., A study of students’ reasoning about probabilistic causality: Implications for understanding complex systems and for instructional design, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 25-52, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, pp. 53-62, (2006); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Eberbach C., Jordan R., Technology-supported inquiry for learning about aquatic ecosystems, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10, 5, pp. 405-413, (2014); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, 1, pp. 127-138, (2004); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 1, pp. 11-34, (2006); Klopfer E., Yoon S., Perry J., Using palm technology in participatory simulations of complex systems: A new take on ubiquitous and accessible mobile computing, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14, 3, pp. 285-297, (2005); Nelson D., Design based learning delivers required standards in all subjects, K12, Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, (2004); Neulight N., Kafai Y.B., Kao L., Foley B., Galas C., Children's participation in a virtual epidemic in the science classroom: Making connections to natural infectious diseases, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 1, pp. 47-58, (2007); Peppler K., Danish J., Zaitlen B., Glosson D., Jacobs A., Phelps D., BeeSim: Leveraging wearable computers in participatory simulations with young children, In Proceedings of the 9Th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (2010); Peppler K., Thompson N., Danish J., Moczek A., Comparing first- and third-person perspectives in early elementary learning of honeybee systems, Rethinking Learning in The Digital Age: Making The Learning Sciences Count: The International Conference of The Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2018, 3, pp. 512-518, (2018); Resnick M., Decentralized modeling and decentralized thinking, Modeling and simulation in precollege science and mathematics, pp. 114-137, (1999); Roth W.-M., On mediation: Toward a cultural-historical understanding, Theory & Psychology, 17, 5, pp. 655-680, (2007); Sandoval W., Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational design research, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23, 1, pp. 18-36, (2014); Sandoval W.A., Developing learning theory by refining conjectures embodied in educational designs, Educational psychologist, 39, 4, pp. 213-223, (2004); Seeley T.D., The wisdom of the hive: The social physiology of honey bee colonies, (1995); Skrondal A., Rabe-Hasketh S., Generalized Latent Variable Modeling, (2004); Stroup W.M., Wilensky U., On the embedded complementarity of agent-based and aggregate reasoning in students' developing understanding of dynamic systems, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19, 1-2, pp. 19-52, (2014); Thompson N., Peppler K., Danish J., Designing BioSim: Playfully encouraging systems thinking in young children, Handbook of research on serious games for educational applications, 100, pp. 149-167, (2017); Vygotsky L.S., Mind in society: The development of higher mental process, (1978); Wertsch J.V., Mediated action, A companion to cognitive science, pp. 518-525, (2017); Wilensky U., Reisman K., 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, pp. 171-209, (2006); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 1, pp. 3-19, (1999); Wilensky U., Stroup W., Learning through participatory simulations: Network-based design for systems learning in classrooms, Paper Presented at the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL), (1999); Wilson M., Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach, (2004); Witte S.P., Haas C., Research in activity: An analysis of speed bumps as mediational means, Written Communication, 22, 2, pp. 127-165, (2005); Yoon S.A., Goh S.-E., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K–12 science education: A review of empirical studies 1995–2015, Review of Educational Research, (2018); Youngquist J., Pataray-Ching J., Revisiting “play”: Analyzing and articulating acts of inquiry, Early Childhood Education Journal, 31, 3, pp. 171-178, (2004)","K. Peppler; University of California, Irvine, Irvine, 5206 Bren Hall, 92697, United States; email: kpeppler@uci.edu","","Springer","","","","","","00204277","","","","English","Instr. Sci.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85084050727"
"Vargas F.K.; Kong F.","Vargas, Felipe Karelovic (58062503600); Kong, Felipe (57200417421)","58062503600; 57200417421","Articulation Between Environmental Education and Scientific Education: A Perspective From the Sustainability Competencies Developed in Initial Teacher Training; [Articulación entre educación ambiental y educación científica: una mirada desde las competencias en sostenibilidad desarrolladas en la formación inicial docente]","2022","Pensamiento Educativo","59","1","","","","","2","10.7764/PEL.59.1.2022.8","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85146175834&doi=10.7764%2fPEL.59.1.2022.8&partnerID=40&md5=03fbd7bd9370a3ccb6d3c67c2509d955","Universidad de Chile, Chile; Universidad Diego Portales, Chile","Vargas F.K., Universidad de Chile, Chile; Kong F., Universidad Diego Portales, Chile","This paper addresses the association between socio-scientific controversies and key competencies in sustainability from science education (SE) and environmental education (EE), specifically in initial teacher training (ITT). It is suggested that new research opportunities are also obtained from the articulation between SE and EE, with those on the factors that affect the development of the key competencies outlined by Wiek et al. (2011) being particularly relevant. In order to verify this proposal, quantitative methodologies were used, which investigate the concepts of socio-scientific controversies and the relative degree of deployment of key competencies for sustainability. In order to achieve this, the BIOHEAD-citizen questionnaire and a case study test evaluated with rubrics were applied to trainee teachers to collect evidence of conceptions of controversies in various topics and the relative degree of development of three competencies, namely, systems-thinking, strategic, and normative competencies. The association of both sets of data was done with linear models, based on the score for each competency as a dependent variable. The best model obtained shows a statistically significant explanation of systems-thinking on the part of two systems of conceptions: socio-environmentally negative and socio-political religious; whereas for the other two competencies (strategic and normative) no independent variable resulted in a relevant model. These results suggest that conceptions are important for the development of key competencies, supporting the importance of a symbiotic relationship between SE and EE, the’implications of which are discussed for ITT. © 2022 PEL, http://www.pensamientoeducativo.org - http://www.pel.cl.","environmental education; scientific education; socio-scientific controversies; sustainability competencies","","","","","","","","Archambault L., Warren A., Hartwell L., Preparing Future Educators: Sustainability Education Framework for Teachers (SEFT), Proceedings of SITE 2013 – Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, pp. 174-179, (2013); Bautista J. M., Gata M., Mora B., La construcción del espacio europeo de la educación superior: entre el reto y la resistencia, Revista Aula Abierta, 82, pp. 173-189, (2003); Beck U., Risk society: Towards a new modernity, (1992); Bogner F. X., Wiseman M., Toward measuring adolescent environmental perception, European Psychologist, 4, 3, pp. 139-151, (1999); Braun T., Dierkes P., Evaluating three dimensions of environmental knowledge and their impact on behaviour, Research in Science Education, 49, 5, pp. 1347-1365, (2019); Bruguiere C., Tiberghien A., Clement P., Topics and Trends in Current Science Education: 9th ESERA Conference Selected Contributions, 1, (2014); Carvalho G.S., Clement P., Construction and validation of the instruments to compare teachers’ conceptions and school textbooks of 19 countries: the European Biohead-Citizen project, (2007); Castillo-Retamal F., Cordero-Tapia F., La educación ambiental en la formación de profesores en Chile, UC Maule, 56, pp. 9-28, (2019); Castro L., Cifuentes P., Marco Normativo de la educación ambiental, (2014); Cebrian G., Junyent M., Mula I., Competencies in Education for Sustainable Development: Emerging Teaching and Research Developments, Sustainability, 12, 2, (2020); Clement P., Conceptions, représentations sociales et modèle KVP, Skholê: cahiers de la recherche et du développement, 16, pp. 55-70, (2010); Clement P., Caravita S., Diversity of teachers’ conceptions related to environment and human rights. A survey in 24 countries, ESERA 2011 Conference: Science Learning and Citizenship, pp. 42-48, (2011); Clement P., Quessada M. P., Castera J., Creationism and innatism of teachers in 26 countries, Science & Technology Education for Development, Citizenship and Social Justice (IOSTE-14), 1, 1, (2012); Clement P., Quessada M. P., Munoz F., Laurent C., Valente A., Carvalho G. S., Creationist conceptions of primary and secondary school teachers in nineteen countries, Contemporary Science Education Research: International Perspectives, pp. 447-452, (2010); Colman A. M., A dictionary of psychology, (2015); Corney G., Reid A., Student teachers’ learning about subject matter and pedagogy in education for sustainable development, Environmental Education Research, 13, 1, pp. 33-54, (2007); Delors J., Learning: The Treasure Within, (1997); Eilam E., Trop T., Environmental attitudes and environmental behavior-which is the horse and which is the cart?, Sustainability, 4, 9, pp. 2210-2246, (2012); Head B. W., Forty years of wicked problems literature: forging closer links to policy studies, Policy and Society, 38, 2, pp. 180-197, (2019); Hilser S., Key Competencies to Action Transdisciplinary Learning of Key Competencies for Sustainability, (2016); Hodson D., Looking to the future – building a curriculum for social activism, (2011); Hung W., Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modeling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 6, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); Jickling B., Wals A. E., Globalization and environmental education: Looking beyond sustainable development, Journal of curriculum studies, 40, 1, pp. 1-21, (2008); Jourdan D., Pironom J., Berger D., Carvalho G., Factorsinfluencingteachers’viewsofhealthandhealtheducation: A study in 15 countries, Health Education Journal, 72, 6, pp. 660-672, (2012); Kong F., La construcción de escenarios de futuro como aportación didáctica y metodológica para una educación ambiental creativa, global y sostenible, El caso de un grupo de estudiantes de Barcelona y Santiago de Chile, (2015); Legardez A., Simonneaux L., L’école à l’épreuve de l’actualité – Enseigner les questions vives, (2006); Lozano-Garcia F. J., Gandara G., Perrni O., Manzano M., Hernandez D. E., Huisingh D., Capacity building: a course on sustainable development to educate the educators, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9, 3, pp. 257-281, (2008); Martinez M., Esteban F., Una propuesta de formación ciudadana para el EEES, Revista Española de Pedagogía, 230, pp. 63-83, (2005); Martinez-Mesa J., Gonzalez-Chica D. A., Duquia R. P., Bonamigo R. R., Bastos J. L., Sampling: how to select participants in my research study?, Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, 91, 3, pp. 326-330, (2016); Monroe M. C., The co-evolution of ESD and EE, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6, 1, pp. 43-47, (2012); Moscovici S., La conciencia social y su historia, Representaciones sociales. Problemas teóricos y conocimientos infantiles, (2003); Munoz F., Bogner F., Clement P., Carvalho G. S., Teachers’ conceptions of nature and environment in 16 countries, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 4, pp. 407-413, (2009); Murphy R., Sustainability: A wicked problem, Sociologica, 6, 2, (2012); PISA 2009 Assessment Framework - Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science, (2009); Ramirez N., ¿Cuáles son las carreras dominadas por los hombres y las mujeres y qué sueldos reciben? emol.com, (2016); Remington-Doucette S. M., Hiller Connell K. Y., Armstrong C. M., Musgrove S. L., Assessing sustainability education in a transdisciplinary undergraduate course focused on real-world problem solving, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 14, 4, pp. 404-433, (2013); Revelle W., psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research [Software], (2018); Ripple W. J., Wolf C., Newsome T. M., Barnard P., Moomaw W. R., Grandcolas P., World scientists’ warning of a climate emergency, BioScience, (2019); Sadler T. D., Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice, Studies in Science Education, 45, 1, pp. 1-42, (2009); Santer B. D., Bonfils C. J., Fu Q., Fyfe J. C., Hegerl G. C., Mears C., Zou C. Z., Celebrating the anniversary of three key events in climate change science, Nature Climate Change, 9, 3, pp. 180-182, (2019); Schlottmann C., Educational ethics and the DESD: considering trade-offs, Theory and Research in Education, 6, 2, pp. 207-219, (2008); Scholz R. W., Lang D. J., Wiek A., Stauffacher M., Transdisciplinary case studies as a means of sustainability learning: historical framework and theory, International Journal in Sustainability in Higher Education, 7, 3, pp. 226-251, (2006); Scrucca L., Fop M., Murphy T. B., Raftery A. E., mclust 5: clustering, classification and density estimation using Gaussian finite mixture models, The R Journal, 8, 1, pp. 289-317, (2016); Sijtsma K., On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha, Psychometrika, 74, 1, pp. 107-120, (2009); Simonneaux J., Legardez A., The epistemological and didactical challenges involved in teaching socially acute questions. The example of globalization, JSSE-Journal of Social Science Education, 9, 4, pp. 24-35, (2010); Smith T. C., Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives, Emerging Infectious Diseases, 16, 4, pp. 749-750, (2010); Tastle W. J., Wierman M. J., An information theoretic measure for the evaluation of ordinal scale data, Behavior Research Methods, 38, 3, pp. 487-494, (2006); Torres-Rivera L. B., Benavides-Pena J. E., Vollouta L., Jose C., Contreras N., Rafaela E., Presencia de una Educación Ambiental basada en conocimiento, actitudes y prácticas en la enseñanza de las ciencias naturales en establecimientos municipales de la ciudad de Los Ángeles, Chile, Estudios pedagógicos (Valdivia), 43, 3, pp. 311-323, (2017); Ver Steeg G., Galstyan A., Maximally Informative Hierarchical Representations of High-Dimensional Data, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), pp. 1004-1012, (2015); Wals A. E., Brody M., Dillon J., Stevenson R. B., Convergence between science and environmental education, Science, 344, 6184, pp. 583-584, (2014); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C. L., Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, 2, pp. 203-218, (2011); Zeidler D. L., Herman B. C., Sadler T. D., New directions in socioscientific issues research, Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1, 1, (2019); Zeidler D. L., Sadler T. D., Simmons M. L., Howes E. V., Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education, Science Education, 89, 3, pp. 357-377, (2005); Zohar A., Aharon-Kravetsky S., Exploring the effects of cognitive conflict and direct teaching for students of different academic levels, Journal of research in science teaching, 42, 7, pp. 829-855, (2005)","F.K. Vargas; Facultad de Educación, Universidad Diego Portales Vergara, Santiago, 210, Chile; email: felipe.kong@udp.cl","","Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile","","","","","","07171013","","","","English","Pensamiento Educativo","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85146175834"
"Blatti J.L.; Garcia J.; Cave D.; Monge F.; Cuccinello A.; Portillo J.; Juarez B.; Chan E.; Schwebel F.","Blatti, Jillian L. (54948420200); Garcia, John (57211617083); Cave, Danyal (57212031260); Monge, Felix (57212035099); Cuccinello, Anthony (57212036166); Portillo, Jennifer (57201280114); Juarez, Betsy (57212035023); Chan, Ellen (57212030807); Schwebel, Frieda (57212036258)","54948420200; 57211617083; 57212031260; 57212035099; 57212036166; 57201280114; 57212035023; 57212030807; 57212036258","Systems Thinking in Science Education and Outreach toward a Sustainable Future","2019","Journal of Chemical Education","96","12","","2852","2862","10","42","10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00318","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85075801140&doi=10.1021%2facs.jchemed.9b00318&partnerID=40&md5=bd4daf93acbc7e9db1f34d1cce4cb01e","Department of Chemistry, Pasadena City College, 1570 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 91106, CA, United States; NanoEngineering Department, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, San diego, 92093, CA, United States; Mork Family Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, 3650 McClintock Avenue, Los Angeles, 90089, CA, United States; Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, 90095, CA, United States; Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, University of California Irvine, Irvine, 92697, CA, United States; Department of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis, 95616, CA, United States","Blatti J.L., Department of Chemistry, Pasadena City College, 1570 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 91106, CA, United States; Garcia J., Department of Chemistry, Pasadena City College, 1570 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 91106, CA, United States; Cave D., Department of Chemistry, Pasadena City College, 1570 East Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 91106, CA, United States; Monge F., NanoEngineering Department, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, San diego, 92093, CA, United States; Cuccinello A., Mork Family Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, 3650 McClintock Avenue, Los Angeles, 90089, CA, United States; Portillo J., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, 90095, CA, United States; Juarez B., Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, University of California Irvine, Irvine, 92697, CA, United States; Chan E., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, 90095, CA, United States; Schwebel F., Department of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis, 95616, CA, United States","Systems thinking, interdisciplinary research projects, and creative problem solving are ways to frame modern chemistry curricula to inspire the next generation of scientists, engineers, teachers, and citizens to use their skills and education to create a sustainable future. By integrating planetary boundaries, green chemistry, and the UN sustainable development goals, we use a systems thinking approach in undergraduate education and outreach to a range of diverse populations to drive discussion, exploration of scientific principles, and teach students how they can use chemistry to solve the distinctive challenges of the anthropocene. Interdisciplinary research projects employ critical thinking, problem solving, and creativity as part of the scientific method. Translating undergraduate research in nanotechnology, renewable energy, and sustainability into lesson plans and engaging in outreach to diverse populations promotes equity in science education and encourages underrepresented groups to seek careers in a scientific field. Community college students act as role models in outreach as they teach chemistry using a systems thinking approach, connect sustainability to STEM careers that can make a positive impact on local communities, and show underrepresented groups that they are needed in these disciplines. Engaging, interdisciplinary laboratories used in outreach, such as the synthesis of algae biodiesel, making paints from natural resources, sustainable agriculture and engineering, and DNA origami, access all aspects of systems thinking. Using systems thinking as a framework in science education and outreach teaches students the significance and relevance of chemistry while creating a platform for women and underrepresented groups to learn how important their representation is to contribute to a sustainable, equitable future. Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.","Collaborative/Cooperative Learning; Environmental Chemistry; Green Chemistry; Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning; Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary; Public Understanding/Outreach; Student-Centered Learning; Sustainability; Systems Thinking; Undergraduate Research","","","","","","Caltech Science for March; Compton High School, Mt. San Antonio College; NSF-ATE, (:1601813); National Science Foundation ATE program; National Science Foundation, NSF","Funding text 1:  We are extremely grateful to Profs. Mamadou Diallo and Julie Kornfield for the invitation to participate in the Sustainability Science and Engineering course at Caltech, which inspired use of the planetary boundaries framework in our outreach efforts and courses at PCC. Naneh Vartan, Jiaqi Liu, Jason Hernandez, and Edward Garcia helped develop and implement outreach lessons. Jiaqi Liu created the planetary boundaries graphic design and artwork. Dr. J. Blatti’s Environmental Science courses at PCC are recognized for their efforts in the projects and discussions. All students involved in outreach activities are acknowledged for their enthusiastic participation: APEX Academy in Hollywood, ALC in Downtown, Los Angeles, Compton High School, Mt. San Antonio College, Caltech Science for March, K–12 LAUSD teachers, Tech Savvy Girls Science Day, the Girl Scouts, and Girls STEAM Academy. We appreciate Ashwin Gopinath (MIT), Paul Rothemund (Caltech), and Greg Tikhomirov (Caltech) for invaluable guidance with DNA origami experiments. Jared Ashcroft and Veronica Jaramillo were instrumental partners in establishing and growing the Early Career Undergraduate Research Experience (eCURe) program at PCC. The Natural Sciences Division at PCC is acknowledged for support of the eCURe program. Research funding was provided by the National Science Foundation ATE program (NSF-ATE, #:1601813). ; Funding text 2: We are extremely grateful to Profs. Mamadou Diallo and Julie Kornfield for the invitation to participate in the Sustainability Science and Engineering course at Caltech, which inspired use of the planetary boundaries framework in our outreach efforts and courses at PCC. Naneh Vartan, Jiaqi Liu, Jason Hernandez, and Edward Garcia helped develop and implement outreach lessons. Jiaqi Liu created the planetary boundaries graphic design and artwork. Dr. J. Blatti?s Environmental Science courses at PCC are recognized for their efforts in the projects and discussions. All students involved in outreach activities are acknowledged for their enthusiastic participation: APEX Academy in Hollywood, ALC in Downtown, Los Angeles, Compton High School, Mt. San Antonio College, Caltech Science for March, K?12 LAUSD teachers, Tech Savvy Girls Science Day, the Girl Scouts, and Girls STEAM Academy. We appreciate Ashwin Gopinath (MIT), Paul Rothemund (Caltech), and Greg Tikhomirov (Caltech) for invaluable guidance with DNA origami experiments. Jared Ashcroft and Veronica Jaramillo were instrumental partners in establishing and growing the Early Career Undergraduate Research Experience (eCURe) program at PCC. The Natural Sciences Division at PCC is acknowledged for support of the eCURe program. Research funding was provided by the National Science Foundation ATE program (NSF-ATE, #:1601813).","Mahaffy P.G., Krief A., Hopf H., Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Reorienting Chemistry Education through Systems Thinking, Nat. Rev. Chem., 2, 4, (2018); Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Hopf H., Krief A., One-World Chemistry and Systems Thinking, Nat. Chem., 8, pp. 393-396, (2016); Orgill M., York S., Mackellar J., Introduction to Systems Thinking for the Chemistry Education Community, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of Systems Thinking in STEM Education, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); Steffen W., Richardson K., Rockstrom J., Cornell S.E., Fetzer I., Bennett E.M., Biggs R., Carpenter S.R., De Vries W., De Wit C.A., Folke C., Gerten D., Heinke J., Mace G.M., Persson L.M., Ramanathan V., Reyers B., Sorlin S., Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development on a Changing Planet, Science, 347, 6223, pp. 736-747, (2015); The Nine Planetary Boundaries, (2019); Anastas P.T., Warner J.C., Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice, (1998); United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, (2019); Anastas P.T., Zimmerman J.B., The United Nations Sustainability Goals: How Can Sustainable Chemistry Contribute?, Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem., 13, pp. 150-153, (2018); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Holme T.A., Mackellar J., Systems Thinking for Education about the Molecular Basis of Sustainability, Nature Sustainability., 2, pp. 362-370, (2019); Holme T.A., Hutchison J.E., A Central Learning Outcome for the Central Science, J. Chem. Educ., 95, pp. 499-501, (2018); Kirchhoff M.M., Education for a Sustainable Future, J. Chem. Educ., 87, (2010); High-Impact Practices, (2019); Hewlett J.A., Broadening Participation in Undergraduate Research Experiences (UREs): The Expanding Role of the Community College, CBE Life Sci. Educ., 17, 3, (2018); Dewey J., Experience and Education, (1938); Freeman S., Eddy S.L., McDonough M., Smith M.K., Okoroafor N., Jordt H., Wenderoth M.P., Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 111, 23, pp. 8410-8415, (2014); Ballen C., Wieman C., Salehi S., Searle J., Zamudio K., Enhancing Diversity in Undergraduate Science: Self-efficacy Drives Performance Gains with Active Learning, CBE Life Sci. Educ., 16, 4, (2017); Ho F.M., Turning Challenges into Opportunities for Promoting Systems Thinking through Chemistry Education, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); Blatti J.L., Garcia J., Liu J.K., Schwebel F., Chan E., Monge F., Vartan N., Hernandez J., Cave D., Garcia E., Buwanekabahu A., Chang S., Imagining a Sustainable Future: Inspiring Creativity in Science Education and Outreach, J. Sust. Educ., 17, (2018); Gurnon D., Voss-Andreae J., Stanley J., Integrating Art and Science in Undergraduate Education, PLoS Biol., 11, 2, (2013); Root-Bernstein R., Siler T., Brown A., Snelson K., ArtScience: Integrative Collaboration to Create a Sustainable Future, Leonardo, 44, 3, (2011); Brownell S.E., Price J.V., Steinman L., Science Communication to the General Public: Why We Need to Teach Undergraduate and Graduate Students This Skill as Part of Their Formal Scientific Training, J. Undergrad. Neurosci. Educ., 12, pp. E6-E10, (2013); Clark G., Russell J., Enyeart P., Gracia B., Wessel A., Et al., Science Educational Outreach Programs That Benefit Students and Scientists, PLoS Biol., 14, 2, (2016); Blatti J.L., Burkart M.D., Releasing Stored Solar Energy within Pond Scum: Biodiesel from Algal Lipids, J. Chem. Educ., 89, 2, pp. 239-242, (2012); Blatti J.L., Colorful and Creative Chemistry: Making Simple, Sustainable Paints from Natural Pigments and Binders, J. Chem. Educ., 94, 2, pp. 211-215, (2017); Smestad G.P., Gratzel M., Demonstrating Electron Transfer and Nanotechnology: A Natural Dye-sensitized Nanocrystalline Energy Converter, J. Chem. Educ., 75, 6, pp. 752-756, (1998); Engaging Science Outreach Lessons for A Sustainable Planet Earth, (2019); Rothemund P.W.K., Folding DNA to Create Nanoscale Shapes and Patterns, Nature, 440, pp. 297-302, (2006); Understanding Science, (2019); Holmes N.G., Wieman C.E., Bonn D.A., Teaching Critical Thinking, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 112, 36, pp. 11199-11204, (2015); Kim Y.E., Morton B.G., Gregorio J., Rosen D.S., Edouard K., Vallett R., Enabling Creative Collaboration for All Levels of Learning, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 116, 6, pp. 1878-1885, (2019); Whitesides G.M., Reinventing Chemistry, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 54, 11, pp. 3196-3209, (2015); Constable D., The Practice of Chemistry Still Needs to Change, Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem., 7, pp. 60-62, (2017); Blatti J.L., Cuccinello A.F., Juarez B., Liang W., Lu J., Massine N., Portillo J., Pourmand E., Ramirez A., Sanchez V., Sepulveda-Torres C., The City of Roses - Pasadena City College and the Chemistry Research Laboratories, J. Sust. Educ., 11, (2016); Vallett D.B., Annetta L., Re-visioning K-12 Education: Learning through Failure - Not Social Promotion, Psychol. Pop. Media Cult., 3, 3, pp. 174-188, (2014); Dweck C., Mindset: A New Psychology of Success, (2006); Claro S., Paunesku D., Dweck C., Growth Mindset Tempers the Effects of Poverty on Academic Achievement, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 113, 31, pp. 8664-8668, (2016); Duckworth A.L., Seligman M.E.P., Self-discipline Outdoes IQ in Predicting Academic Performance of Adolescents, Psychol. Sci., 16, pp. 939-944, (2005); Duckworth A.L., Peterson C., Matthews M.D., Kelly D.R., Grit: Perseverance and Passion for Long-Term Goals, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 92, 6, pp. 1087-1101, (2007); Goodwin B., Miller K., Research Says Grit plus Talent Equals Student Success, Resilience and Learning, 71, 1, pp. 74-76, (2013); Christensen N., The Environment and You, (2019); Writing Effective Letters to the Editor, (2019); Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet, (2019); Brunning A., Ocean Acidification: The Other Carbon Dioxide Problem, Compound Interest, (2019); Deweerdt S., Sea Change, Nature, 550, pp. S54-S58, (2017); Measure the Impact of Your Energy Use on the Environment, (2019); JouleBug Sustainability App, (2019); Waters C.N., Et al., The Anthropocene is Functionally and Stratigraphically Distinct from the Holocene, Science, 351, 6269, (2016); Mahaffy P.G., Telling Time: Chemistry Education in the Anthropocene Epoch, J. Chem. Educ., 91, pp. 463-465, (2014); Warren A.E., Archambault L.M., Foley R.W., Sustainability Education Framework for Teachers: Developing Sustainability Literacy through Futures, Values, Systems, and Strategic Thinking, J. Sust. Educ., 6, (2014); Wals A.E.J., Brody M., Dillon J., Stevenson R.B., Convergence between Science and Environmental Education, Science, 344, 6184, pp. 583-584, (2014); Mahaffy P.G., Martin B.E., Kirchhoff M., McKenzie L., Holme T.A., Versprille A., Towns M., Infusing Sustainability Science Literacy through Chemistry Education: Climate Science as a Rich Context for Learning Chemistry, ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., 2, 11, pp. 2488-2494, (2014); Mahaffy P.G., Holme T.A., Martin-Visscher L., Martin B.E., Versprille A., Kirchhoff M., McKenzie L., Towns M., Beyond ""inert"" Ideas to Teaching General Chemistry from Rich Contexts: Visualizing the Chemistry of Climate Change (VC3), J. Chem. Educ., 94, 8, pp. 1027-1035, (2017); Finkenstaedt-Quinn S.A., Hudson-Smith N.V., Styles M.J., Maudal M.K., Juelfs A.R., Haynes C.L., Expanding the Educational Toolset for Chemistry Outreach: Providing a Chemical View of Climate Change through Hands-On Activities and Demonstrations Supplemented with TED-Ed Videos, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 6, pp. 985-990, (2018); TED-Ed: Our Changing Climate, (2019); Robelia B., McNeill K., Wammer K., Lawrenz F., Investigating the Impact of Adding an Environmental Focus to a Developmental Chemistry Course, J. Chem. Educ., 87, 2, pp. 216-220, (2010); Murphy K.C., Dilip M., Quattrucci J.G., Mitroka S.M., Andreatta J.R., Sustainable Consumer Choices: An Outreach Program Exploring the Environmental Impact of Our Consumer Choices Using a Systems Thinking Model and Laboratory Activities, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); Lasker G.A., Connecting Systems Thinking and Service Learning in the Chemistry Classroom, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); Van Eijck M., Roth W.M., Improving Science Education for Sustainable Development, PLoS Biol., 5, 12, (2007); Kouzu M., Hidaka J., Transesterification of Vegetable Oil into Biodiesel Catalyzed by CaO: A Review, Fuel, 93, SUPPL. C, pp. 1-12, (2012); Douglas S.M., Marblestone A.H., Teerapittayanon S., Vazquez A., Church G.M., Shih W.M., Rapid prototyping of 3D DNA-origami shapes with caDNAno, Nucleic Acids Res., 37, 15, pp. 5001-5006, (2009); Kim D.N., Kilchherr F., Dietz H., Bathe M., Quantitative prediction of 3D solution shape and flexibility of nucleic acid nanostructures, Nucleic Acids Res, 40, 7, pp. 2862-2868, (2012); PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, (2019); Nanosurf NAIO Atomic Force Microscope: The Leading AFM for Nanoeducation, (2019); Deslauriersa L., McCartya L.S., Millerc K., Callaghana K., Kestin G., Measuring Actual Learning Versus Feeling of Learning in Response to Being Actively Engaged in the Classroom, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., (2019); Education for Persistence and Innovation Center (EPIC) at Teachers College, (2019); Yeager D.S., Hanselman P., Walton G.M., Murray J.S., Crosnoe R., Muller C., Tipton E., Schneider B., Hulleman C.S., Hinojosa C.P., Paunesku D., Romero C., Flint K., Roberts A., Trott J., Iachan R., Buontempo J., Yang S.M., Carvalho C.M., Hahn P.R., Gopalan M., Mhatre P., Ferguson R., Duckworth A.L., Dweck C.S., A National Experiment Reveals Where a Growth Mindset Improves Achievement, Nature, 573, pp. 364-369, (2019); Mahaffy P.G., Brush E.J., Haack J.A., Ho F.M., Journal of Chemical Education Call for Papers - Special Issue on Reimagining Chemistry Education: Systems thinking, and Green and Sustainable Chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 2, pp. 1689-1691, (2018); Systems Thinking in Chemical Education, (2019); Systems Thinking and Green and Sustainable Chemistry., (2019)","J.L. Blatti; Department of Chemistry, Pasadena City College, Pasadena, 1570 East Colorado Boulevard, 91106, United States; email: jblatti@pasadena.edu","","American Chemical Society","","","","","","00219584","","JCEDA","","English","J Chem Educ","Article","Final","All Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85075801140"
"Bielik T.; Krell M.","Bielik, Tom (45460965100); Krell, Moritz (55812296600)","45460965100; 55812296600","Developing and evaluating the extended epistemic vigilance framework","2024","Journal of Research in Science Teaching","","","","","","","0","10.1002/tea.21983","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85204002438&doi=10.1002%2ftea.21983&partnerID=40&md5=7d84993e606337f92b7789f8baa1ec47","Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands; IPN—Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Germany","Bielik T., Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands; Krell M., IPN—Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Germany","In science education, epistemic vigilance plays a key role in the development of students' critical thinking by supporting students' abilities to evaluate the expertise level of the source and to evaluate the claim itself, using rigorous scientific standards and appropriate argumentation heuristics. Based on previous studies, which suggested two aspects of epistemic vigilance—reflecting the source of information and the claim that is made—we developed the Extended Epistemic Vigilance Framework (EEVF) that includes an additional aspect of evaluating the receiver. In an empirical exploratory pilot study, we evaluated the reliability and validity of an EEVF-based category system and investigated to what extent the EEVF can be used to characterize changes in biology graduate students' epistemic vigilance after participating in a critical thinking course. Results show that the EEVF-based category system includes reliable and valid categories for identifying students' epistemic vigilance. A statistically significant increase with a small effect size was found in students' epistemic vigilance regarding the reliability of the source and the references used to support the claim following their participation in the critical thinking course. However, a statistically significant decrease with a small effect size was found regarding the awareness of the aspects of the one-sidedness of the claim, the context of the claim, and cognitive biases and socioemotional influences on the receiver. In general, these findings indicate that the EEVF offers an improved framework to analyze students' epistemic vigilance more comprehensively. © 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Research in Science Teaching published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Association for Research in Science Teaching.","critical thinking; epistemic vigilance; evaluation","Category systems; Critical thinking; Effect size; Epistemic vigilance; Evaluation; Pilot studies; Reliability and validity; Science education; Scientific standards; Sources of informations; Systems thinking","","","","","","","Standards for educational and psychological testing, (2014); Allchin D., Error types, Perspectives on Science, 9, 1, pp. 38-58, (2001); Allchin D., Who speaks for science?, Science & Education, 31, 6, pp. 1475-1492, (2022); Allchin D., Ten competencies for the science misinformation crisis, Science Education, 107, 2, pp. 261-274, (2023); Bailin S., Critical thinking and science education, Science & Education, 11, pp. 361-375, (2002); Barzilai S., Chinn C.A., On the goals of epistemic education: Promoting apt epistemic performance, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27, 3, pp. 353-389, (2017); Barzilai S., Chinn C.A., A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition: Four lenses on “post-truth” problems, Educational Psychologist, 55, 3, pp. 107-119, (2020); Bielik T., Kruger D., Perceived relevance of critical thinking aspects for biology graduate students, Journal of Biological Education, 58, 1, pp. 166-181, (2024); Brennan R.L., Prediger D.J., Coefficient kappa: Some uses, misuses, and alternatives, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 3, pp. 687-699, (1981); Bromme R., Goldman S.R., The public's bounded understanding of science, Educational Psychologist, 49, 2, pp. 59-69, (2014); Cagle S.M., Anderson A.A., Kelp N.C., Stop the spread: Empowering students to address misinformation through community-engaged, interdisciplinary science communication training, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (2024); Duncan R.G., Chinn C.A., Barzilai S., Grasp of evidence: Problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards' conceptualization of evidence, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 7, pp. 907-937, (2018); Ennis R.H., Critical thinking assessment, Theory into Practice, 32, 3, pp. 179-186, (1993); Feinstein N., Salvaging science literacy, Science Education, 95, 1, pp. 168-185, (2011); Feinstein N.W., Baram-Tsabari A., Epistemic networks and the social nature of public engagement with science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (2024); Forzani E., A three-tiered framework for proactive critical evaluation during online inquiry, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63, 4, pp. 401-414, (2020); Fritz C.O., Morris P.E., Richler J.J., Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 1, pp. 2-18, (2012); Gierth L., Bromme R., Beware of vested interests: Epistemic vigilance improves reasoning about scientific evidence (for some people), PLoS One, 15, 4, (2020); Gohner M., Krell M., Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse in naturwissenschaftsdidaktischer Forschung unter Berücksichtigung von Gütekriterien: Ein review (qualitative content analysis in science education research under the consideration of quality criteria: A review), Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 26, 1, pp. 207-225, (2020); Hitchcock D., Critical thinking, The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, (2020); Johnson V., Butterfuss R., Harsch R., Kendeou P., Patterns of belief and trust in climate change information, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (2024); Kahneman D., Thinking, fast and slow, (2011); Ke L., Sadler T.D., Zangori L., Friedrichsen P.J., Students' perceptions of socio-scientific issue-based learning and their appropriation of epistemic tools for systems thinking, International Journal of Science Education, 42, 8, pp. 1339-1361, (2020); Krell M., Garrecht C., Minkley N., Preservice biology teachers' socioscientific argumentation: Analyzing structural and content complexity in the context of a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22, pp. 121-141, (2023); Ku K.Y., Ho I.T., Hau K.T., Lai E.C., Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of critical thinking: An intervention study, Instructional Science, 42, pp. 251-269, (2014); Landis J.R., Koch G.G., An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers, Biometrics, 33, pp. 363-374, (1977); Lederman N.G., Abd-El-Khalick F., Bell R.L., Schwartz R.S., Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 6, pp. 497-521, (2002); Lombardi D., Nussbaum E.M., Sinatra G.M., Plausibility judgments in conceptual change and epistemic cognition, Educational Psychologist, 51, 1, pp. 35-56, (2016); Mayring P., Qualitative inhaltsanalyse, Handbuch qualitative forschung in der psychologie, pp. 601-613, (2010); Mayring P., Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Klagenfurt, (2014); Mercier H., Sperber D., Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34, 2, pp. 57-74, (2011); Munchow H., Tiffin-Richards S.P., Fleischmann L., Pieschl S., Richter T., Promoting students' argument comprehension and evaluation skills: Implementation of two training interventions in higher education, Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 26, 3, pp. 703-725, (2023); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Nolan J.M., Schultz P.W., Cialdini R.B., Goldstein N.J., Griskevicius V., Normative social influence is underdetected, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 7, pp. 913-923, (2008); Osborne J., Allchin D., Science literacy in the twenty-first century: Informed trust and the competent outsider, International Journal of Science Education, pp. 1-22, (2024); Osborne J., Pimentel D., Science education in an age of misinformation, Science Education, 107, 3, pp. 553-571, (2023); Osborne J., Pimentel D., Alberts B., Allchin D., Barzilai S., Bergstrom C., Coffey J., Donovan B., Dorph R., Kivinen K., Kozyreva A., Perkins K., Perlmutter S., Wineburg S., Science education in an age of misinformation, (2022); Osborne J.F., Henderson J.B., MacPherson A., Szu E., Wild A., Yao S.Y., The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 6, pp. 821-846, (2016); Pithers R.T., Soden R., Critical thinking in education: A review, Educational Research, 42, 3, pp. 237-249, (2000); Rieckmann M., Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives, (2017); Rowe M.P., Gillespie B.M., Harris K.R., Koether S.D., Shannon L.J.Y., Rose L.A., Redesigning a general education science course to promote critical thinking, CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14, 3, (2015); Russell B., Sceptical essays, (2004); Scharrer L., Rupieper Y., Stadtler M., Bromme R., When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts, Public Understanding of Science, 26, 8, pp. 1003-1018, (2017); Schreier M., Qualitative content analysis in practice, pp. 1-280, (2012); Schwarz C.V., Passmore C., Reiser B.J., Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices, (2017); Sharon A.J., Baram-Tsabari A., Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life?, Science Education, 104, 5, pp. 873-894, (2020); Sperber D., Clement F., Heintz C., Mascaro O., Mercier H., Origgi G., Wilson D., Epistemic vigilance, Mind & Language, 25, 4, pp. 359-393, (2010); Terenzini P.T., Springer L., Pascarella E.T., Nora A., Influences affecting the development of students' critical thinking skills, Research in Higher Education, 36, pp. 23-39, (1995); Tokita C.K., Tarnita C.E., Social influence and interaction bias can drive emergent behavioural specialization and modular social networks across systems, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 17, 162, (2020); Tseng A.S., Bonilla S., MacPherson A., Fighting “bad science” in the information age: The effects of an intervention to stimulate evaluation and critique of false scientific claims, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 8, pp. 1152-1178, (2021); Vincent-Lancrin S., Gonzalez-Sancho C., Bouckaert M., de Luca F., Fernandez-Barrerra M., Jacotin G., Vidal Q., Fostering students' creativity and critical thinking: What it means in school. Educational research and innovation, (2019); Willingham D.T., Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach?, Arts Education Policy Review, 109, 4, pp. 21-32, (2008); Wirtz M.A., Caspar F., Beurteilerübereinstimmung und Beurteilerreliabilität: Methoden zur Bestimmung und Verbesserung der Zuverlässigkeit von Einschätzungen mittels Kategoriensystemen und Ratingskalen, (2002)","T. Bielik; Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands; email: tom.bielik@ru.nl","","John Wiley and Sons Inc","","","","","","00224308","","JRSTA","","English","J. Res. Sci. Teach.","Article","Article in press","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85204002438"
"Arnold J.; Bauer D.","Arnold, Julia (57201506957); Bauer, Deidre (57204013651)","57201506957; 57204013651","The Role of Science Education in Decision-Making Concerning Health and Environmental Issues","2021","Contributions from Science Education Research","10","","","201","224","23","2","10.1007/978-3-030-75297-2_11","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85135562686&doi=10.1007%2f978-3-030-75297-2_11&partnerID=40&md5=852aeaf46b45272a994c81f390f6b3ed","ZNTD – Centre for Science and Technology Education, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland – School of Education, Muttenz, Switzerland; Biology Education, IDN – Institute for Science Education, Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany","Arnold J., ZNTD – Centre for Science and Technology Education, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland – School of Education, Muttenz, Switzerland; Bauer D., Biology Education, IDN – Institute for Science Education, Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany","In this chapter, we argue that, in order to contribute to health and environmental education, science education in classroom teaching, in research, development, and teacher education as well as in educational policy should 1) include the complex nature of the multidisciplinary problems by fostering conceptual understanding about systems from different angles and disciplines and systems thinking skills, 2) aim to equip students with a sound understanding of the nature of science and the nature of scientific knowledge and how to deal with uncertainty, 3) take into account attitudes, values, and subjective needs in decision-making as well as focus on a reflective attitude towards them, and should 4) include critical thinking skills and the ability to evaluate information critically. Finally, we combine these aspects to a vision of science education that is fit to support students in becoming reflected decision-makers. Additionally, we give ideas about how this vision could be turned into reality by transforming science education on the levels of classroom teaching, school development, teacher education, educational research and educational policy. © 2021, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.","Critical thinking; Nature of Science (NOS); Systems thinking","","","","","","","","Abd-El-Khalick F., Lederman N. G., Bell R. L., Schwartz R. S., Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science, Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for the education of teachers in science, pp. 212-258, (2001); Abrami P. C., Bernard R. M., Borokhovski E., Waddington D. I., Wade C. A., Persson T., Strategies for teaching studentsto think critically: A meta-analysis, Review of Educational Research, 85, 2, pp. 275-314, (2015); Aboelela S. W., Larson E., Bakken S., Carrasquillo O., Formicola A., Glied S. A., Gebbie K. M., Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature, Health Services Research, 42, pp. 329-346, (2007); Ajzen I., The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, pp. 179-211, (1991); Ajzen I., Joyce N., Sheikh S., Gilbert Cote N., Knowledge and the prediction of behavior: The role of information accuracy in the theory of planned behavior, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33, pp. 101-117, (2011); Allchin D., Values in science, Science & Education, 8, pp. 1-12, (1999); Arnold J. C., An integrated model of decision-making in health contexts: The role of science education in health education, International Journal of Science Education, 40, 5, pp. 519-537, (2018); Arnold J. C., Kremer K., Mayer J., Understanding students’ experiments—What kind of support do they need in inquiry tasks?, International Journal of Science Education, 36, 16, pp. 2719-2749, (2014); Arnold J., Kremer K., Mayer J., Concept Cartoons als diskursiv-reflexive Szenarien zur Aktivierung des Methodenwissens beim Forschenden Lernen, Biologie Lehren und Lernen – Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Biologie, 20, 1, pp. 33-43, (2016); Assaraf O. B.-Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Bamberg S., Moser G., Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 1, pp. 14-25, (2007); Bandura A., Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychological Review, 84, pp. 191-215, (1977); Bauer D., Arnold J., Kremer K., Consumer intention formation in education for sustainable development: An adapted model based on the theory of planned behavior, Sustainability, 10, 10, (2018); Benninghaus J. C., Kremer K., Sprenger S., Assessing high-school students’ conceptions of global water consumption and sustainability, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 27, 3, pp. 250-266, (2018); Bogeholz S., Bewertungskompetenz für systematisches Entscheiden in komplexen Gestaltungssituationen Nachhaltiger Entwicklung, Theorien in der biologiedidaktischen Bildung: Ein Handbuch für Lehramtsstudenten und Doktoranden, pp. 209-220, (2007); Bolderdijk J. W., Gorsira M., Keizer K., Steg L., Values determine the (in)effective-ness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior, PLoS One, 8, (2013); Braund M., Reiss M., Towards a more authentic science curriculum: The contribution of out-of-school learning, International Journal of Science Education, 28, 12, pp. 1373-1388, (2006); Brautigam J.I., Systemisches Denken im Kontext einer Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung: Konstruktion und Validierung eines Messinstruments zur Evaluation einer Unterrichtseinheit, Von der Pädagogischen Hochschule Freiburg zur Erlangung des Grades eines Doktors der Philosophie, (2014); Cessna S., Neufled D. G., Horst S. J., Teaching the nature of science in a course in sustainable agriculture, Natural Sciences Education, 42, 20, pp. 36-42, (2013); Chinn C. A., Malhotra B. A., Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks, Science Education, 86, 2, pp. 175-218, (2002); Kritisches Denken als Unterrichtsziel: Von der Definition zur Förderung, (2018); de Leeuw A., Valois P., Houssemad C., Predicting the intention to buy fair-trade products: The role of attitude, social norm, perceived behavioral control, and moral norm, OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 2, 10, pp. 77-84, (2011); de Leeuw A., Valois P., Ajzen I., Schmidt P., Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, pp. 128-138, (2015); Lehrplan 21 [curricu-lum 21], (2016); Dillon J., Science, environment and health education: Towards a reconceptualisation on of their mutual interdependences, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 87-102, (2012); Durrant K. L., Hartman T. P. V., The integrative learning value of field courses, Journal of Biological Education, (2014); Erduran S., Dagher Z. R., Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education & scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories, (2014); Erduran S., Dagher Z. R., Regaining focus in Irish junior cycle science: Potential new directions for curriculum and assessment on nature of science, Irish Educational Studies, 33, 4, pp. 335-350, (2014); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Facione P. A., Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction & executive summary, Insight assessment, (1990); Fensham P. J., Preparing citizens for a complex world: The grand challenge of teaching socio-scientific issues in science education, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 7-30, (2012); Glaesser J., Gott R., Roberts R., Cooper B., The roles of substantive and procedural understanding in open-ended science investigations: Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to compare two different tasks, Research in Science Education, 39, 4, pp. 595-624, (2009); Gott R., Duggan S., Practical work: Its role in the understanding of evidence in science, International Journal of Science Education, 18, 7, pp. 791-806, (1996); Hart P., Creating spaces for rethinking school science: Perspectives from subjective and social-relational ways of knowing, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 103-126, (2012); Heeren A. J., Singh A. S., Zwickle A., Koontz T. M., Slagle K. M., McCreery A. C., Is sustainability knowledge half the battle?: An examination of sustainability knowl-edge, attitudes, norms, and efficacy to understand sustainable behaviours, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 17, 5, pp. 613-632, (2016); Held T., Wie viel Fachunterricht ist nötig und wie wird fachverbindender Unterricht möglich?-Entwicklung eines Strukturmodells für problemorientierte Bildungsgänge unter bildungstheoretischer Reflexion der Kompetenzorientierung im Spiegel des Schlüsselproblemansatzes Wolgang Klafkis, (2019); Hottecke D., Riess F., Naturwissenschaftliches Experimentieren im Lichte der jüngeren Wissenschaftsforschung – Auf der Suche nach einem authentischen Experimentbegriff der Fachdidaktik, Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 21, pp. 127-139, (2015); Report of the 2000 joint committee on health education and promotion terminology, American Journal of Health Education, 32, 2, pp. 97-104, (2001); Kaya E., Erduran S., From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science, Science & Education, 25, 9, pp. 1115-1133, (2016); Keselman A., Hundal S., Smith C. A., General and environmental health as the context for science education, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 127-146, (2012); Khishfe R., Abd-El-Khalick F., Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 7, pp. 551-578, (2002); Klafki W., Zur Unterrichtsplanung im Sinne kritisch-konstruktiver Didaktik, Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik, 4, pp. 251-284, (1994); Klafki W., Zum Problem der Inhalte des Lehrens und Lernens in der Schule aus der Sicht der kritisch-konstruktiven Didaktik, Didaktik und/ oder Curriculum. Grundprobleme einer international vergleichenden Didaktik (Beiheft der Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 33, pp. 91-102, (1995); Kremer K., Stuben W., Cholera in Hamburg – Wissenschaft historisch verstehen [Cholera in Hamburg & Understanding science historically], Unterricht Biologie Kompakt, 336, pp. 7-12, (2008); Kyburz-Graber R., Socio-scientific views on environment and health as challenges to science education, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 31-49, (2012); Lee T. D., Jones M. A., Chesnutt K., Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle, Research in Science Education, 49, pp. 137-172, (2019); Manderson A. K., A system based framework to examine the multi-contextual application of the sustainability concept, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8, pp. 85-97, (2006); Milfont T. L., Gouveia V. V., Time perspective and values: An exploratory study of their relations to environmental attitudes, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, pp. 72-82, (2006); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Paul R. W., Elder L., Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life, (2014); Penner D. E., Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students’ understanding of emergent phenomena, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 8, pp. 784-806, (2000); Rafolt S., Kapelari S., Kremer K., Kritisches Denken im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht – Synergiemodell, Problemlage und Desiderata, Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 25, pp. 63-75, (2019); Rieckmann M., Future-oriented higher education: Which key competencies should be fostered through university teaching and learning?, Futures, 4, pp. 127-135, (2012); Riess W., Mischo C., Entwicklung und erste Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung des systemishcen Denkens in nachhaltigkeitsrelevanten Kontexten, Kompetenzen der Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung: Operationalisierung, Messung, Rahmenbedingungen, Befunde, pp. 215-232, (2008); Schaal S., Dannemann S., Arnold J., Kahl L., Sporhase U., Simon U., Schaal S., Aufgaben schulischer Gesundheitsförderung & die Bedeutung des Faches Biologie [Tasks of school health promotion & the importance of biology], Unterricht Biologie & SCHÜLER Gesundheit, 20, pp. 48-50, (2020); Schwartz S. H., Value orientations: measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations, Measuring attitudes cross-nationally. Lessons from the European social survey, pp. 169-203, (2007); Shiva V., Staying alive. Women, ecology, and development, (2016); The impact of cotton on fresh water resources and ecosystems, (1999); Steg L., Vlek C., Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, pp. 309-317, (2009); Sterling S., Dawson J., Warwick P., Transforming sustainability education at the creative edge of the mainstream: Acase study of schumacher college, Journal of Transformative Education, 16, 4, pp. 323-343, (2018); UNESCO roadmap for implementing the global action programme on education for sustainable development, (2014); Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives, (2017); Vermeir I., Verbeke W., Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behavior and the role of confidence and values, Ecological Economics, (2007); Werner M., Kremer K., Ein Experiment ist das, was der Lehrer macht.” & Schülervorstellungen über die Natur der Naturwissenschaften [“An experiment is what the teacher does.” & Students’ ideas about the nature of science], Erkenntnisweg Biologiedidaktik, 9, pp. 135-150, (2010); Wilholt T., Bias and values in scientific research, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 40, 1, pp. 92-101, (2009); Woodcock B., The scientific method” on trial, (2013); Worsley A., Nutrition knowledge and food consumption: Can nutrition knowledge change food behaviour?, Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 11, pp. 579-585, (2002); Yeh Y.-F., Erduran S., Hsu Y.-S., Investigating coherence about nature of science in science curriculum documents, Science & Education, 28, 3, pp. 291-310, (2019); Zeidler D. L., Sadler T. D., Applebaum S., Callahan B. E., Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 1, pp. 74-101, (2009); Zeyer A., A win-win situation for health and science education: Seeing through the lens of a new framework model of health literacy, Science|Environment|Health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 147-173, (2012); Zeyer A., Getting involved with vaccination. Swiss student teachers’ reactions to a public vaccination debate, Sustainability, 11, 23, (2019); Zeyer A., Dillon J., Science|Environment|Health—Towards a reconceptualization of three critical and inter-linked areas of education, International Journal of Science Education, 36, 9, pp. 1409-1411, (2014); Zeyer A., Kyburz-Graber R., Revising science teaching: Responding to challenges of health and environmental education, Science|environment|health. Towards a renewed pedagogy for science education, pp. 175-189, (2012); Zeyer A., Alvaro N., Arnold J., Benninghaus J. C., Hasslof H., Kremer K., Et al., Addressing complexity in Science | Environment | Health pedagogy, Contributions from science education research, selected papers from the ESERA 2017 conference, (2019)","J. Arnold; ZNTD – Centre for Science and Technology Education, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland – School of Education, Muttenz, Switzerland; email: Julia.arnold@fhnw.ch","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","22133623","","","","English","Contrib. Sci. Educ. Res.","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85135562686"
"York S.; Orgill M.","York, Sarah (57211609177); Orgill, MaryKay (15623569000)","57211609177; 15623569000","ChEMIST Table: A Tool for Designing or Modifying Instruction for a Systems Thinking Approach in Chemistry Education","2020","Journal of Chemical Education","97","8","","2114","2129","15","46","10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00382","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85088097293&doi=10.1021%2facs.jchemed.0c00382&partnerID=40&md5=3462d21e24ef72954e7afed01dbfd1c0","Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States","York S., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States; Orgill M., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States","Recently, there have been calls to integrate systems thinking approaches into chemistry education in order to strengthen students' conceptual understanding, build their problem-solving capabilities, and prepare them to make informed, ethical decisions about globally relevant issues, such as sustainability. Unfortunately, implementation of systems thinking approaches in chemistry classrooms currently poses challenges. Exemplar systems thinking materials with a STEM focus are limited, particularly at the tertiary level. Moreover, the science education community has yet to agree upon a systems thinking definition or develop a comprehensive list of systems thinking skills that students should develop. Thus, a current priority for the advancement of systems thinking in chemistry education is the development of resources for instructors and students alike. In the current project, we constructed a tool that provides an operational definition for systems thinking in chemistry education and serves as guide for the design, analysis, and optimization of systems thinking activities. The Characteristics Essential for designing or Modifying Instruction for a Systems Thinking approach (ChEMIST) table identifies five essential characteristics of a systems thinking approach, along with corresponding systems thinking skills through which students can demonstrate their engagement in each essential characteristic. Here, we describe the inspiration and development of the tool. We also provide examples of how the tool might be used to support chemistry teaching and learning from a systems thinking approach. Finally, we present some initial ideas about the relationship between systems thinking and other approaches to chemistry education reform.  Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.","First-Year Undergraduate/General; History/Philosophy; Learning Theories; Problem-Solving/Decision Making; Second-Year Undergraduate; Student-Centered Learning; Upper-Division Undergraduate","","","","","","","","Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J., Introduction to systems thinking for the chemistry education community, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2720-2729, (2019); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of systems thinking in STEM education, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019); Sabelli N.H., Complexity, Technology, Science, and Education, J. Learn. Sci., 15, pp. 5-9, (2006); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B.Z., Amit M., Mapping What They Know: Concept Maps as an Effective Tool for Assessing Students' Systems Thinking, Am. J. Oper. Res., 3, pp. 245-258, (2013); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A Definition of Systems Thinking: A Systems Approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Sweeney L.B., Learning to Connect the Dots: Developing Children's Systems Literacy, Solutions Journal, 3, 5, pp. 55-62, (2012); Booth Sweeney L., Sterman J.D., Bathtub Dynamics: Initial Results of a Systems Thinking Inventory, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about Systems: Student and Teacher Conceptions of Natural and Social Systems, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 23, pp. 285-311, (2007); Caulfield C.W., Maj S.P., A Case for Systems Thinking and System Dynamics, Proceedings of the Ieee International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, (2001); Cloud J.P., Some Systems Thinking Concepts for Environmental Educators during the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, Appl. Environ. Educ. Comm. Int. J., 4, pp. 225-228, (2005); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., An Investigation of the Potential of Interactive Simulations for Developing System Thinking Skills in Elementary School: A Case Study with Fifth-Graders, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 31, pp. 655-674, (2009); Fisher D.M., Everybody Thinking Differently"": K-12 Is a Leverage Point, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 27, pp. 394-411, (2011); Forrester J.W., Learning through System Dynamics as Preparation for the 21st Century, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 32, pp. 187-203, (2016); Jacobson M.J., Problem Solving, Cognition, and Complex Systems: Differences between Experts and Novices, Complexity, 6, pp. 41-49, (2001); Jacobson M.J., So H.-J., Lee J., Wilensky U., Blikstein P., Sengupta P., Levy S.T., Noss R., Complex systems and learning: Empirical research, issues, and ""seeing"" scientific knowledge with new eyes, Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, 3, pp. 266-273, (2008); Lyneis D.A., Bringing System Dynamics to a School near You: Suggestions for Introducing and Sustaining System Dynamics in K-12 Education, The Creative Learning Exchange, (2013); Maani K.E., Maharaj V., Links between Systems Thinking and Complex Decision Making, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 20, pp. 21-48, (2004); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Holme T.A., MacKellar J., Systems thinking for education about the molecular basis of sustainability, Nat. Sustain., 2, pp. 362-370, (2019); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Whalen J.M., Holme T.A., Integrating the Molecular Basis of Sustainability into General Chemistry through Systems Thinking, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2730-2741, (2019); Mandinach E.B., Cline H.F., Systems, science, and schools, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 195-206, (1993); Mathews L.G., Jones A., Using Systems Thinking to Improve Interdisciplinary Learning Outcomes: Reflections on a Pilot Study in Land Economics, Issues in Integrative Studies, 26, pp. 73-104, (2008); Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Hopf H., Krief A., One-world chemistry and systems thinking, Nat. Chem., 8, pp. 393-398, (2016); Richmond B., Systems Thinking: Critical Thinking Skills for the 1990s and beyond, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 113-133, (1993); Sheehy N.P., Wylie J.W., McGuinness C., Orchard G., How Children Solve Environmental Problems: Using Computer Simulations to Investigate Systems Thinking, Environ. Educ. Res., 6, pp. 109-126, (2000); Mahaffy P.G., Brush E.J., Haack J.A., Ho F.M., Journal of Chemical Education call for papers-Special issue on reimagining chemistry education: Systems thinking, and green and sustainable chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 95, pp. 1689-1691, (2018); Holme T., Using the chemistry of pharmaceuticals to introduce sustainable chemistry and systems thinking in general chemistry, Sust. Chem. Pharm., 16, (2020); Hurst G.A., Systems thinking approaches for international green chemistry education, Curr. Opin. Green Sust. Chem., 21, pp. 93-97, (2020); Barak M., Williams P., Learning elemental structures and dynamic processes in technological systems: A cognitive framework, Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., 17, pp. 323-340, (2007); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex Systems in Education: Scientific and Educational Importance and Implications for the Learning Sciences, J. Learn. Sci., 15, pp. 11-34, (2006); Yoon S.A., Goh S.-E., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K-12 science education: A review of empirical studies 1995-2015, Rev. Educ. Res., 88, pp. 285-325, (2018); Flynn A., Orgill M.K., York S., Ho S., Matlin S.A., Constable D.J.C., Mahaffy P.G., Future Directions for Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education: Putting the Pieces Together, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 3000-3005, (2019); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., Development of System Thinking Skills in the Context of Earth System Education, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., Four Case Studies, Six Years Later: Developing System Thinking Skills in Junior High School and Sustaining Them over Time, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Cooper M.M., The Crosscutting concepts: Critical component or ""third wheel"" of three-dimensional learning?, J. Chem. Educ., 97, 4, pp. 903-909, (2020); Hopper M., Stave K., Assessing the effectiveness of systems thinking interventions in the classroom, Proceedings of the 26th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2008); Richmond B., The ""thinking"" in Systems Thinking: How Can We Make It Easier to Master?, Systems Thinker, 8, 2, pp. 1-5, (1997); Stave K., Hopper M., What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2007); Verhoeff R.P., Knippels M.-C.P.J., Gilissen M.G.R., Boersma K.T., The Theoretical Nature of Systems Thinking. Perspectives on Systems Thinking in Biology Education, Frontiers in Education, 3, pp. 1-11, (2018); Buck L.B., Bretz S.L., Towns M.H., Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory, J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 37, 7, pp. 52-58, (2008); Fay M.E., Grove N.P., Towns M.H., Bretz S.L., A rubric to characterize inquiry in the undergraduate chemistry laboratory, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 8, 2, pp. 212-219, (2007); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, J. Learn. Sci., 9, pp. 247-298, (2000); Jordan R.C., Hmelo-Silver C., Liu L., Gray S.A., Fostering Reasoning about Complex Systems: Using the Aquarium to Teach Systems Thinking, Appl. Environ. Educ. Comm. Int. J., 12, pp. 55-64, (2013); Raia F., Students' Understanding of Complex Dynamic Systems, J. Geosci. Educ., 53, pp. 297-308, (2005); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., System Thinking Skills at the Elementary School Level, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47, pp. 540-563, (2009); Goldstone R.L., Wilensky U., Promoting Transfer by Grounding Complex Systems Principles, J. Learn. Sci., 17, pp. 465-516, (2008); Hogan K., Assessing Students' Systems Reasoning in Ecology, J. Biol. Educ., 35, pp. 22-28, (2000); Hokayem H., Ma J., Jin H., A Learning Progression for Feedback Loop Reasoning at Lower Elementary Level, J. Biol. Educ., 49, pp. 246-260, (2015); Kali Y., Orion N., Eylon B.-S., Effect of knowledge integration activities on students' perception of the earth's crust as a cyclic system, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 40, pp. 545-565, (2003); Plate R.R., Assessing the Effectiveness of Systems-Oriented Instruction for Preparing Students to Understand Complexity, (2006); Resnick M., Wilensky U., Diving into Complexity: Developing Probabilistic Decentralized Thinking through Role-Playing Activities, J. Learn. Sci., 7, pp. 153-172, (1998); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 30, pp. 543-568, (2008); Westra R., Boersma K., Waarlo A.J., Savelsbergh E., Pinto R., Couso D., Learning and Teaching about Ecosystems Based on Systems Thinking and Modelling in an Authentic Practice, Contributions from Science Education Research, pp. 361-374, (2007); Talanquer V., Some insights into assessing chemical systems thinking, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2918-2925, (2019); Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning, (2000); Auchincloss L.C., Laursen S.L., Branchaw J.L., Eagan K., Graham M., Hanauer D.I., Lawrie G., McLinn C.M., Pelaez N., Rowland S., Towns M., Trautmann N.M., Varma-Nelson P., Weston T.J., Dolan E.L., Assessment of Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences: A meeting report, Lse, 13, pp. 29-40, (2014); Hitchins D.K., Advanced Systems Thinking, Engineering, and Management, (2003); Cheng H.-Y., Zhang S.-Q., Examining the relationship between holistic analytic style and classroom learning behaviors of high school students, Eur. J. Psychol. Educ., 32, pp. 271-288, (2017); Schmeck R.R., Schmeck R.R., An introduction to strategies and styles of learning, Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, pp. 3-19, (1988); Nisbett R.E., Peng K., Choi I., Norenzayan A., Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition, Psychol. Rev., 108, pp. 291-310, (2001); Schmeck R.R., Schmeck R.R., Strategies and styles of learning: An integration of varied perspectives, Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, pp. 317-347, (1988); Kirby J.R., Schmeck R.R., Style, strategy, and skill in reading, Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, pp. 229-274, (1988); Nisbett R.E., Norenzayan A., Pashler H., Medin D., Culture and cognition, Stevens' Handbook of Experimental Psychology, pp. 561-597, (2002); Zhang L.-F., Thinking styles: Their relationships with modes of thinking and academic performance, J. Educ. Psych., 22, pp. 331-348, (2002); Hammouri H.A.M., An investigation of undergraduates' transformational problem solving strategies: Cognitive/metacognitive processes as predictors of holistic/analytic strategies, Assess. Eval. High. Educ., 28, pp. 571-586, (2003); Marton F., Schmeck R.R., Describing and improving learning, Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, pp. 53-82, (1988); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, (1990); Kim D.H., Introduction to Systems Thinking, (1999); Castelle K., Jaradat R.M., Development of an instrument to assess capacity for systems thinking, Procedia Computer Science, 95, pp. 80-86, (2016); Anderson L.W., Krathwohl D.R., A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, (2000); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges, J. Learn. Sci., 15, pp. 53-61, (2006); Penner D.E., Explaining Systems: Investigating Middle School Students' Understanding of Emergent Phenomena, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 37, pp. 784-806, (2000); Pazicni S., Flynn A., Systems thinking in chemistry education: Theoretical challenges and opportunities, J. Chem. Educ., 96, pp. 2752-2763, (2019); Adams K., Keating C., Overview of the systems of systems engineering methodology, Int. J. Syst. Syst. Eng., 2, 2, pp. 112-119, (2011); Adams K.M., Hester P.T., Bradley J.M., Meyers T.J., Keating C.B., Systems theory: The foundation for understanding systems, Syst. Eng., 17, 1, pp. 112-123, (2014); Booth Sweeney L., Assadourian E., All Systems Go! Developing a Generation of ""systems-Smart"" Kids, EarthEd: Rethinking Education on a Changing Planet, pp. 141-153, (2017); Hammond D., Toward a Science of Synthesis: The Heritage of General Systems Theory, (1997); Hammond D., Philosophical and Ethical Foundations of Systems Thinking, Triplec, 3, 2, pp. 20-27, (2008); Ho F.M., Turning Challenges into Opportunities for Promoting Systems Thinking through Chemistry Education, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2764-2776, (2019); Jaradat R., Complex system governance requires systems thinking-how to find systems thinkers, Int. J. Sys. Sys. Eng., 6, pp. 53-70, (2015); Miljanic O., Small-molecule systems chemistry, Cell Press, 2, 4, pp. 502-524, (2017); Ossimitz G., Davidson P., Ford D., Mashayekhi A., Teaching System Dynamics and Systems Thinking in Austria and Germany, Sustainability in the Third Millennium, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2000); Richmond B., Systems Thinking/System Dynamics: Let's Just Get on with It, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 10, pp. 135-157, (1994); Samon S., Levy S.T., Interactions between reasoning about complex systems and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 57, pp. 58-86, (2020); Villani G., Structured system in chemistry: Comparison with mechanics and biology, Found. Chem., 16, 2, pp. 107-123, (2014); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in Levels: A Dynamic Systems Approach to Making Sense of the World, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 8, pp. 3-19, (1999); Calhoun J.G., Ramiah K., Weist E.M., Shortell S.M., Development of a Core Competency Model for the Master of Public Health Degree, Am. J. Public Health, 98, pp. 1598-1607, (2008); Chiu M., Mamlok-Naman R., Apotheker J., Identifying Systems Thinking Components in the School Science Curricular Standards of Four Countries, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2814-2824, (2019); Meadows D.H., Thinking in Systems: A Primer, (2008); Bausch K.C., Roots and Branches: A Brief, Picaresque, Personal History of Systems Theory, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 19, pp. 417-428, (2002); Goldstone R.L., Sakamoto Y., The transfer of abstract principles governing complex adaptive systems, Cognit. Psych., 46, 4, pp. 414-466, (2003); Hammond D., Edson M.C., Buckle Henning P., Sankaran S., Philosophical Foundations of Systems Research, A Guide to Systems Research: Philosophy, Processes and Practice, pp. 1-19, (2017); Liu L., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Promoting complex systems learning through the use of conceptual representations in hypermedia, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46, pp. 1023-1040, (2009); Perkins D.N., Grotzer T.A., Dimensions of causal understanding: The role of complex causal models in students' understanding of science, Stud. Sci. Educ., 41, pp. 117-165, (2005); Bar-Yam Y., Dynamics of Complex Systems, (1997); Tumay H., Reconsidering learning difficulties and misconceptions in chemistry: Emergence in chemistry and its implications for chemical education, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17, pp. 229-245, (2016); Boersma K., Waarlo A.J., Klaassen K., The Feasibility of Systems Thinking in Biology Education, J. Biol. Educ., 45, pp. 190-197, (2011); Draper F., A proposed sequence for developing systems thinking in a grades 4-12 curriculum, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 207-214, (1993); Frank M., Engineering Systems Thinking and Systems Thinking, Syst. Eng., 3, 3, pp. 163-168, (2000); Holland J.H., Hidden Order: How Adaption Builds Complexity, (1995); Kauffman S., The Search for Laws of Self-organization and Complexity, (1996); Plate R., Monroe M., A structure for assessing systems thinking, Creative Learning Exchange, (2014); Raia F., Causality in complex dynamic systems: A challenge in earth systems science education, J. Geosci. Educ., 56, pp. 81-94, (2008); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A., Niyogi D., Mehta J., Top S., The need to introduce systems thinking in teaching climate change, Science Educator, 25, pp. 73-81, (2017); Wylie J., Sheehy N., McGuinness C., Orchard G., Children's thinking about air pollution: A systems theory analysis, Environ. Educ. Res., 4, pp. 117-137, (1998); Aubrecht K.B., Dori Y.J., Holme T.A., Lavi R., Matlin S.A., Orgill M., Skaza-Acosta H., Graphical tools for conceptualizing systems thinking in chemistry education, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2888-2900, (2019); Richmond B., An Introduction to Systems Thinking, (2001); Chi M.T., Roscoe R.D., Slotta J.D., Roy M., Chase C.C., Misconceived causal explanations for emergent processes, Cognit. Sci., 36, 1, pp. 1-61, (2012); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Inventing a ""mid level"" to make ends meet: Reasoning between the levels of complexity, Cogn. Instr., 26, pp. 1-47, (2008); Meadows D.H., Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System, (1999); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Groschedl J., Assessing System Thinking through Different Concept-Mapping Practices, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 34, pp. 2147-2170, (2012); Coll R.K., Treagust D.F., Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners' mental models of ionic bonding, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 40, 5, pp. 464-486, (2003); Laszlo P., Towards teaching chemistry as a language, Sci. Educ., 22, 7, pp. 1669-1706, (2013); Samon S., Levy S.T., Micro-macro compatibility: When does a complex systems approach strongly benefit science learning?, Sci. Educ., 101, 6, pp. 985-1014, (2017); Sterman J.D., Risk communication on climate: Mental models and mass balance, Science, 322, pp. 532-533, (2008); Chi M.T.H., Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust, J. Learn. Sci., 14, 2, pp. 161-199, (2005); Talanquer V., On cognitive constraints and learning progressions: The case of ""structure of Matter, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 31, 15, pp. 2123-2136, (2009); Knippels M., Coping with the Abstract and Complex Nature of Genetics in Biology Education: The Yo-yo Teaching and Learning Strategy, (2002); Luisi P.L., Emergence in chemistry: Chemistry as the embodiment of emergence, Found. Chem., 4, pp. 183-200, (2002); Sjostrom J., Talanquer V., Eco-reflexive chemical thinking and action, Green Sustain. Chem., 13, pp. 16-20, (2018); Goodman M., Systems thinking: What, why, when, where, and how?, Systems Thinker, 8, pp. 6-7, (1997); Hayden N.J., Rizzo D.M., Dewoolkar M.M., Neumann M.D., Lathem S., Sadek A., Incorporating a systems approach into civil and environmental engineering curricula: Effect on course redesign, and student and faculty attitudes, Advances in Engineering Education, 2, pp. 1-27, (2011); Constable D.J.C., Jimenez-Gonzalez C., Matlin S.A., Navigating complexity with systems thinking in chemistry, with implications for chemistry education, J. Chem. Educ., 96, pp. 2689-2699, (2019); Cooper M., Klymkowsky M., Chemistry, Life, the Universe, and Everything: A new approach to general chemistry, and a model for curriculum reform, J. Chem. Educ., 90, pp. 1116-1122, (2013); Mahaffy P.G., Brush E.J., Haack J.A., Ho F.M., Can chemistry be a central science without systems thinking?, J. Chem. Educ., 96, pp. 2679-2681, (2019); Sevian H., Talanquer V., Rethinking chemistry: A learning progression on chemical thinking, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 15, pp. 10-23, (2014); Talanquer V., Pollard J., Let's teach how we think instead of what we know, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 11, pp. 74-83, (2010); McGill T.L., Williams L.C., Mulford D.R., Blakey S.B., Harris R.J., Kindt J.T., Lynn D.G., Marsteller P.A., McDonald F.E., Powell N.L., Chemistry Unbound: Designing a new four-year undergraduate curriculum, J. Chem. Educ., 96, pp. 35-46, (2019); Walker L., Warfa A.M., Process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) marginally effects achievement measures but substantially increases the odds of passing a course, PLoS One, 12, 10, (2017); Gosser D.K., Cracolice M., Kampmeier J.A., Roth V., Strozak V.S., Varma-Nelson P., Peer-led Team Learning: A Guidebook, (2001); Broman K., Parchmann I., Students' application of chemical concepts when solving chemistry problems in different contexts, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 15, pp. 516-529, (2014); Parchmann I., Grasel C., Baer A., Nentwig P., Demuth R., Ralle B., Chemie im Kontext"": A symbiotic implementation of a context-based teaching and learning approach, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28, pp. 1041-1062, (2006); Overton T., Context and problem-based learning, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, 3, pp. 7-12, (2007); Overton T.L., Byers B., Seery M.K., Eilks I., Byers B., Context- A nd problem-based learning in higher level chemistry education, Innovative Methods in Teaching and Learning Chemistry in Higher Education, pp. 43-60, (2009); Kulak V., Newton G., A guide to using case-based learning in biochemistry education, Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ., 42, pp. 457-473, (2014); Walker J.P., Sampson V., Learning to argue and arguing to learn: Argument-Driven Inquiry as a way to help undergraduate chemistry students learn how to construct arguments and engage in argumentation during a laboratory course, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 50, pp. 561-596, (2013); Cooper M., Klymkowsky M., CLUE: Chemistry, Life, the Universe, & Everything Website, (2020); Chemical Thinking, (2020); Reaching Students: What Research Says about Effective Instruction in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, (2015); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?, Educ. Psychol. Rev., 16, pp. 235-266, (2004); De Jong O., Context-based chemical education: How to improve it?, Chemical Education International, 8, pp. 1-7, (2008); Gilbert J.K., On the nature of ""context"" in chemical education, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28, pp. 957-976, (2006); Gilbert J.K., Watts M., Science Education through Contexts: Is It Worth the Effort?, pp. 145-157; Pilot A., Bulte A.M.W., The use of ""contexts"" as a challenge for the chemistry curriculum: Its successes and the need for further development and understanding, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28, pp. 1087-1112, (2006); A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, (2012); Mahaffy P.G., Krief A., Hopf H., Mehta G., Matlin S., Reorienting chemistry education through systems thinking, Nat. Rev. Chem., 2, 126, pp. 1-3, (2018); Cornish S., Yeung A., Kable S.H., Orgill M., Sharma M.D., Using teacher voices to develop the ASELL Schools professional development workshops, Teach. Sci. J. Aust. Sci. Teachers Assoc., 65, 1, pp. 4-12, (2019)","M. Orgill; Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 89154, United States; email: marykay.orgill@unlv.edu","","American Chemical Society","","","","","","00219584","","JCEDA","","English","J Chem Educ","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85088097293"
"Hayes C.; Stott K.; Lamb K.J.; Hurst G.A.","Hayes, Clare (57218541481); Stott, Katherine (57218558831); Lamb, Katie J. (56992590800); Hurst, Glenn A. (54992606200)","57218541481; 57218558831; 56992590800; 54992606200","""Making Every Second Count"": Utilizing TikTok and Systems Thinking to Facilitate Scientific Public Engagement and Contextualization of Chemistry at Home","2020","Journal of Chemical Education","97","10","","3858","3866","8","58","10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00511","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85089477885&doi=10.1021%2facs.jchemed.0c00511&partnerID=40&md5=1630a12f1e49ecc2d094f0bd18885c36","Green Chemistry Centre of Excellence, Department of Chemistry, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom","Hayes C., Green Chemistry Centre of Excellence, Department of Chemistry, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; Stott K., Green Chemistry Centre of Excellence, Department of Chemistry, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; Lamb K.J., Green Chemistry Centre of Excellence, Department of Chemistry, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; Hurst G.A., Green Chemistry Centre of Excellence, Department of Chemistry, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom","TikTok is a social media video-based phone application which enables creative and engaging videos to be shared on social media platforms worldwide. TikTok has been applied to create fun, exciting, and engaging 15-60 s long chemistry outreach educational videos, to encourage public dissemination of science with a systems thinking approach. With the creation of an online TikTok account called ""The Chemistry Collective""by undergraduate students, 16 educational videos were created, with approximately 8,500 views. Upon surveying participants, viewers of these TikTok videos strongly agreed that they had learned something new about chemistry since watching these videos (4.66/5.00) and had an increased interest in chemistry (82.7% agreed). As such, TikTok can be used to enhance public and undergraduate student engagement with chemistry and science education, together with facilitating the ability of the public to understand how chemistry can be fun, can be performed at home, and is part of our daily lives.  Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.","Elementary/Middle School Science; General Public; High School/Introductory Chemistry; Internet/Web-Based Learning; Public Understanding/Outreach","","","","","","","","Fang F.C., Casadevall A., Reductionistic and Holistic Science, Infect. Immun., 79, 4, pp. 1401-1404, (2011); Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J., Introduction to Systems Thinking for the Chemistry Education Community, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2720-2729, (2019); Wheatly M., Leadership and the New Science: Learning about Organization from an Orderly Universe, (1994); Adams D., The Salmon of Doubt: Hitchhiking the Galaxy One Last Time, pp. 135-136, (2002); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of Systems Thinking in STEM Education, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019); Mahaffy P.G., Brush E.J., Haack J.A., Ho F.M., Journal of Chemical Education Call for Papers-Special Issue on Reimagining Chemistry Education: Systems Thinking, and Green and Sustainable Chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 10, pp. 1689-1691, (2018); Holme T.A., Hutchison J.E., A Central Learning Outcome for the Central Science, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 4, pp. 499-501, (2018); Hurst G.A., Systems Thinking Approaches for International Green Chemistry Education, Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem., 21, pp. 93-97, (2020); Hurst G.A., Slootweg J.C., Balu A.M., Climent-Bellido M.S., Gomera A., Gomez P., Luque R., Mammino L., Spanevello R.A., Saito K., Ibanez J.G., International Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Chemistry Education via Systems Thinking, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 2794-2804, (2019); (2020); Anastas P.T., Warner J.C., Green Chemistry Theory and Practice, pp. 11-16, (2000); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Holme T.A., MacKellar J., Systems Thinking for Education about the Molecular Basis of Sustainability, Nat. Sustain., 2, pp. 362-370, (2019); Al-Emran M., Elsherif H.M., Shaalan K., Investigating Attitudes towards the Use of Mobile Learning in Higher Education, Comput. Human. Behav., 56, 2, pp. 93-102, (2016); Chen B., deNoyelles A., (2013); Rodriguez J.E., Social Media Use in Higher Education: Key Areas to Consider for Educators, JOLT, 7, 4, pp. 539-550, (2011); Greenhow C., Youth, Learning and Social Media, J. Educ. Comput. Res., 45, 2, pp. 139-146, (2011); (2020); Hurst G.A., Utilizing Snapchat to Facilitate Engagement with and Contextualization of Undergraduate Chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 10, pp. 1875-1880, (2018); (2020); Healey M., Flint A., Harrington K., 4, 2, pp. 1-13, (2016); (2020); (2020); (2020); (2020); (2020); (2020); Mathers R.T., McMahon K.C., Damodaran K., Retarides C.J., Kelley D.J., Ring-Opening Metathesis Polymerizations in D-Limonene: A Renewable Polymerization Solvent and Chain Transfer Agent for the Synthesis of Alkene Macromonomers, Macromolecules, 39, 26, pp. 8982-8986, (2006); Mackenzie L.S., Tyrrell H., Thomas R., Matharu A.S., Clark J.H., Hurst G.A., Valorization of Waste Orange Peel to Produce Shear-Thinning Gels, J. Chem. Educ., 96, 12, pp. 3025-3029, (2019); Jefferson M.T., Rutter C., Fraine K., Borges G.V.B., de Souza Santos G.M., Schoene F.A.P., Hurst G.A., Valorization of Sour Milk to Form Bioplastics: Friend or Foe?, J. Chem. Educ., 97, 4, pp. 1073-1076, (2020); Chawinga D., Taking social media to a university classroom: teaching and learning using Twitter and blogs, Int. J. Educ. Technol. High Educ., 14, 3, (2017); Joshi A.C., Kale S., Chandel S., Pal D.K., Likert Scale: Explored and Explained, Br. J. Appl. Sci. Technol., 7, 4, pp. 396-403, (2015); Korich A., Harnessing a Mobile Social Media App to Reinforce Course Content, J. Chem. Educ., 93, 6, pp. 1134-1136, (2016)","","","American Chemical Society","","","","","","00219584","","JCEDA","","English","J Chem Educ","Article","Final","All Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85089477885"
"Elster D.; Müller N.; Drachenberg S.","Elster, Doris (26655446400); Müller, Nicklas (57202575648); Drachenberg, Sebastian (57202585579)","26655446400; 57202575648; 57202585579","Promotion of system competence based on the syndrome approach in pre-service biology teacher education","2017","Contextualizing Teaching to Improve Learning: The Case of Science and Geography","","","","123","142","19","2","","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85048743792&partnerID=40&md5=0219a7db3e7b6af69c6c8a682d7d5135","University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany","Elster D., University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany; Müller N., University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany; Drachenberg S., University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany","""Inquire for Teacher Students"" is an innovative pre-service training course for teacher students (that is pre-service teachers) of the Master of Education study program biology at the University of Bremen. The goal of the course is to promote inquiry-based science education (IBSE) in the field of two major challenges of the 21st century: biodiversity loss and climate change. We consider environmental problems as disease patterns in earth systems that can be investigated using the syndrome approach. This allows the reduction of complex global problems in distinct relations between earth elements in cause-and-effect interactions. As a problem-based environmental context we choose the dramatically loss of the lobster population around the North Atlantic Island Helgoland. The teacher students of the University of Bremen (N = 16) conduct an excursion to Helgoland. There they investigate the environmental syndrome supported by science educators, geography educators and the researchers of the Alfred Wegener Institute at Helgoland. Based on their investigations they develop complex teaching activities, conduct these activities with school classes of the secondary level and evaluate pupils' system thinking and decision making regarding the environmental problem. For the mixed-methods evaluation of the course we use various data sources: teacher students' group interviews, portfolios, (teaching units, didactic analysis and reflections, syndrome nets), and pupils' questionnaires. In this chapter we report findings of the ""INQUIRE for Teacher Students"" course according to: (1) context-specific subject knowledge to analyze the complex Helgoland lobster syndrome; (2) the system thinking based on the syndrome approach; and (3) the teacher candidates' self-estimation in respect to their system thinking abilities. The findings demonstrate the high potential of the syndrome approach for the promotion of an education for sustainable development and to persuade teacher students in a formation of an ecologically compatible, economically efficient and socially suitable society. © 2017 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.","Pedagogical content knowledge; Pre-service teacher education; Problem-based learning; Sustainable development; Syndrome approach","","","","","","","","Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Bahr M., Bildung für nachhaltige entwicklung (BNE) [Education for sustainable development], Metzler handbuch 2.0. geographieunterricht: ein leitfaden für praxis und ausbildung [Metzler manual 2.0. Geography lessons: a guide for practice and education], pp. 17-23, (2013); Bollmann-Zuberbuhler B., Lernwirksamkeitsstudie zum systemischen denken an der sekundarstufe I [Study about learning efficacy of systemic thinking at the lower secondary school], Systemdenken: wie kinder und jugendliche komplexe systeme verstehen, pp. 99-118, (2008); Brand K.-W., Reusswig F., Umwelt [Environment], Lehrbuch der soziologie, pp. 653-672, (2007); Brown J., Collins A., Deguid P., Situated cognition and the culture of learning, Educational Researcher, 18, pp. 32-42, (1989); Campbell N., Reece J., Biology, (2011); Cassel-Gintz M., Bahr M., Syndrome globalen wandels: ein integriertes analyseinstrument des globalen wandels und seine einsatzmöglichkeiten im geographieunterricht [Syndromes of global change: an integrated analysis tool of global change and its teaching abilities in geography lessons], Praxis Geographie, 38, 6, pp. 4-10, (2008); Chi M., Glaser R., Problem solving ability, Human abilities: An information processing approach, pp. 227-250, (1985); Chin C., Chia L., Problem-based learning: using students' questions to drive knowledge construction, Science Education, 88, 5, pp. 707-727, (2004); Clausen S., Christian A., Concept mapping for measurement in a non-scholar context, Journal für Didaktik der Biowissenschaften, 3, F, pp. 18-31, (2012); Bildungsstandards im fach geographie für den mittleren schulabschluss (8. auflage) [National educational standards geography for the lower secondary level], (2014); Elster D., In welchen kontexten sind naturwissenschaftliche inhalte für jugendliche interessant? Ergebnisse der ROSE-Erhebung in österreich und Deutschland [In which context is science content of interest for young people?], Plus Lucis, 14, 3, pp. 3-8, (2007); Elster D., Inquire for students: how to promote inquiry based learning? International Conference New Perspectives in Science Education, (2013); Engelhard K., Monter L.-O., Otto K.-H., Die Welt im Wandel [Earth in change], Praxis Geographie, 39, 9, pp. 4-8, (2009); Frank M., Engineering systems thinking and systems thinking, Systems Engineering, 3, pp. 63-168, (2000); Frischknecht-Tobler U., Kunz P., Nagel U., Systemdenken. Begriffe, konzepte und definitionen [System thinking. terms, concepts and definitions], Systemdenken: wie kinder und jugendliche komplexe systeme verstehen, pp. 11-32, (2008); Gallagher S., Stepien W., Sher B., Workman D., Implementing problem based learning in science classrooms, Schools, Science and Mathematics, 95, pp. 136-146, (1995); Germer S., Keim K., Naumann M., Bens O., Emmermann R., Huttl R., Handeln unter bedingungen des globalen wandels [Acting under conditions of global change], Globaler wandel und regionale entwicklung, pp. 175-180, (2011); Hauff M., Kleine A., Nachhaltige entwicklung: grundlagen und umsetzung [Sustainable development: basics and transformations], (2009); Hmelo-Silver C., Pfeffer M., Comparing expert and novice understanding of complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, pp. 127-138, (2004); Inquiry-based teacher education for sustainable future Manual of the University Bremen, (2011); Jonassen D., Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes, Educational Technology Research and Development, 45, 1, pp. 65-94, (1997); Kinchin I., Hay D., Adama A., How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to add learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development, Educational Research, 42, 1, pp. 43-57, (2000); Klieme E., Maichle U., Modellbildung und simulation im unterricht der sekundarstufe I [Modeling and simulation in lessons of the lower secondary level], (1994); Krings T., Syndromansatz, Metzler handbuch 2.0. geographieunterricht: ein leitfaden für praxis und ausbildung [Metzler manual 2.0. Geography lessons: a guide for practice and education], pp. 514-521, (2013); Bildungsstandards im fach biologie für den mittleren schulabschluss [National educational standards biology for the lower secondary level], (2004); Kross E., Globales lernen: aufgabe des geographieunterrichts [Tasks in geography education], Globales lernen im geographieunterricht: erziehung zu einer nachhaltigen entwicklung, pp. 5-24, (2004); Laustroer A., Rost J., Operationalisierung und messung von bewertungskompetenz, Kompetenzen der bildung für nachhaltige entwicklung, pp. 89-102, (2008); Lave J., Cognition in practice: mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life, (1988); Lipowsky F., Rzejak D., Lehrerinnen und lehrer als lerner: Wann gelingt der Rollentausch? Merkmale und wirkungen effektiver lehrerfortbildungen [Teachers as learners: When is the role change successful? Issues and effects of successful in-service teacher education], Reform der lehrerbildung in Deutschland, österreich und der Schweiz. Teil 1: Analysen, Perspektiven und Forschung, pp. 235-253, (2012); Mayring P., Qualitative inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und techniken [Qualitative content analysis. Basics and techniques], (2010); Ossimitz G., Entwicklung systemischen denkens. Theoretische konzepte und empirische untersuchungen [Development of system thinking. Theoretical concepts and empirical research], (2000); Park S., Oliver J., Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals, Research in Science Education, 38, 3, pp. 261-284, (2008); Pilardeaux B., Syndrome des globalen wandels: ein neuer ansatz zur erdsystemanalyse [Syndromes of global change: a new approach for earth system analysis], Geographische Rundschau, 49, 5, pp. 314-316, (1997); Rempfler A., Kunzle R., Der komplexität von lawinen auf der spur, Konzeption und umsetzung einer unterrichtseinheit [The complexity of snowslides. Concepts and transformations of an educational activity]. Geographie und Schule, 35, 4, pp. 29-38, (2013); Rempfler A., Uphues R., System competence in geography education, Development of competence models, diagnosing pupils' achievement. European Journal of Geography, 3, 1, pp. 6-22, (2012); Rempfler A., Systemkompetenz: forschungsstand und forschungsfragen [System competence: current state of research and research questions], Geographie und ihre Didaktik, 37, 2, pp. 58-79, (2009); Rempfler A., Schlüsselkompetenzen für zukunftsorientiertes raumverhalten [Key competences for future-oriented action in spaces], Geographie aktuell und Schule, 184, pp. 11-17, (2010); Rempfler A., Mehren R., Ulrich-Riedhammer E., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Wie lässt sich Systemdenken messen? Darstellung eines validierten kompetenzmodells zur erfassung geographischer systemkompetenz [How measuring system thinking? Description of a validated competence model for geographical system competence], Geographie aktuell und Schule, 215, pp. 4-14, (2015); Riess W., Mischo C., Entwicklung und erste validierung eines fragebogens zur erfassung des systemischen denkens in nachhaltigkeitsrelevanten kontexten [Development and first validation of a questionaire for determination of system thinking in contexts of sustainable relevance], Kompetenzen der bildung für nachhaltige entwicklung, pp. 215-232, (2008); Riess W., Bildung für nachhaltige entwicklung (BNE) und förderung des systemischen denkens [Education for sustainable development and promotion of system thinking], Anliegen Natur, 35, 1, pp. 55-64, (2013); Riess W., Schuler S., Horsch C., Wie lässt sich systemisches denken vermitteln und fördern? Theoretische grundlagen und praktische umsetzungen am beispiel eines seminars für lehramtsstudierende [How to train and promote system thinking? Theoretical basics and practical implementations within a seminar for teacher candidates], Geographie aktuell und Schule, 215, 37, pp. 16-29, (2015); Roth W., McGinn M., Towards a new perspective on problem solving, Canadian Journal of Education, 22, 1, pp. 18-32, (1997); Schreier M., Odag O., Mixed methods, Handbuch qualitativer forschung in der psychologie [Handbook for qualitative research in psychology], pp. 63-277, (2010); Schrufer G., Schockemohle J., Bildung für nachhaltige entwicklung [Education for sustainable development], Wörterbuch der geographiedidaktik, pp. 32-33, (2013); Sommer C., Untersuchung der systemkompetenz von grundschülern im bereich biologie [Investigation of the system competence of primary students in biology], (2005); Spiro R., Coulson R., Feltovich P., Anderson, Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Technical Report No. 441, (1988); Stoltenberg U., Kultur als dimension eines bildungskonzepts für eine nachhaltige entwicklung [Culture as a dimension of an education concept for sustainable development], Wechselspiele kultur und nachhaltigkeit, pp. 293-312, (2010); Sweeney L., Stermann J., Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural social systems, System Dynamics Review, 23, 2-3, pp. 285-312, (2007); Welt im wandel: herausforderung für die deutsche wissenschaft (Hauptgutachten 1996), (1996); Wenger E., McDermott R., Snyder W., Cultivating communities of practice, (2002)","D. Elster; University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany; email: doris.elster@uni-bremen.de","","Nova Science Publishers, Inc.","","","","","","","978-153611869-8; 978-153611845-2","","","English","Contextualizing Teach. to Improv. Learn.: The Case of Sci. and Geogr.","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85048743792"
"Peretz R.; Tal M.; Akiri E.; Dori D.; Dori Y.J.","Peretz, Roee (57219655914); Tal, Marina (57219651467); Akiri, Effrat (57219656496); Dori, Dov (7006011859); Dori, Yehudit Judy (7004099746)","57219655914; 57219651467; 57219656496; 7006011859; 7004099746","Fostering engineering and science students’ and teachers’ systems thinking and conceptual modeling skills","2023","Instructional Science","51","3","","509","543","34","8","10.1007/s11251-023-09625-9","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85149826579&doi=10.1007%2fs11251-023-09625-9&partnerID=40&md5=49d8714d926133820a957e7b21e47a27","Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel; The Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Faculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion, Haifa, Israel; The Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy, Technion, Haifa, Israel","Peretz R., Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Tal M., Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Akiri E., The Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Dori D., Faculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion, Haifa, Israel; Dori Y.J., Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel, The Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy, Technion, Haifa, Israel","As science and technology create an ecosystem that is becoming increasingly more knowledge-intensive, complex, and interconnected, the next generation science standards include systems thinking and systems modeling among 21st skills that should be fostered. We examined the effect of an online cross-disciplinary learning process on the development of systems thinking and modeling skills among engineering students and engineering and science teachers. The study, which used quantitative and qualitative tools, included 55 participants who performed four food-related learning assignments and created conceptual models in Object-Process Methodology. Their responses to online assignments were analyzed along with their perceptions, captured via a reflection questionnaire. The online learning process in this study effectively enhanced systems thinking and modeling skills of all learners, including those with no relevant background. One main conclusion that extends beyond the online learning was that imparting the basics of systems thinking and conceptual modeling skills can be achieved even within a short period of time—less than one semester. The contribution of the study is the formation of theoretical and practical frameworks for the integration of an cross-disciplinary model-based systems engineering online assignments into engineering and science curricula. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.","Conceptual modeling; Engineering education; Object-Process Methodology—OPM; Science education; Systems thinking","","","","","","Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, (2029857); European Institute of Innovation and Technology, EIT, (2030366)","This work was supported by the Gordon Center for Systems Engineering at the Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, under Grant 2029857; and EIT Food’s project TRACOD under Grant 2030366. ","Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, pp. 2020-2021, (2020); Akiri E., Tal M., Peretz R., Dori D., Dori Y.J., STEM graduate students’ systems thinking, modeling and scientific understanding-the case of food production, Applied Sciences (switzerland), 10, 21, pp. 1-23, (2020); Allen T., Prosperi P., Modeling sustainable food systems, Environmental Management, 57, 5, pp. 956-975, (2016); Aristovnik A., Kerzic D., Ravselj D., Tomazevic N., Umek L., Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective, Sustainability, 12, 20, pp. 1-34, (2020); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A complete set of systems thinking skills, INCOSE International Symposium, 27, 1, pp. 1355-1370, (2017); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Barak M., Fostering systems thinking in the context of electronics studies, Teaching and learning about technological systems: Philosophical, pp. 73-107, (2022); Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Orion N., Four case studies, six years later: Developing system thinking skills in junior high school and sustaining them over time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 10, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Booth-Sweeney L., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, 4, pp. 249-286, (2000); Bracher M., Foundations of a wisdom-cultivating pedagogy: Developing systems thinking across the university disciplines, Philosophies, (2021); Brophy S., Klein S., Portsmore M., Rogers C., Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms, Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 3, pp. 369-387, (2008); Buchmann R.A., Ghiran A.-M., Doller V., Karagiannis D., Conceptual modeling education as a “design problem, Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly, 21, pp. 21-33, (2019); Cabrera L., Sokolow J., Cabrera D., Developing and validating a measurement of systems thinking: The Systems Thinking and Metacognitive Inventory (STMI), Routledge Handbook of Systems Thinking, pp. 1-42, (2021); Cabrera D., Colosi L., Lobdell C., Systems thinking, Evaluation and Program Planning, 31, 3, pp. 299-310, (2008); Care E., Twenty-first century skills: From theory to action, Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research and applications, pp. 3-17, (2018); Chen P.P.S., The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 1, 1, pp. 9-36, (1976); Comfort K.B., Timms M., A twenty-first century skills lens on the common core state standards and the next generation science standards, Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research and applications, pp. 131-144, (2018); Cottrell S., Critical thinking skills: Effective analysis, argument and reflection, (2017); Crawley E., Foreword, Object-process methodology: a holistic systems paradigm, (2001); Creswell J.W., Clark V.L.P., Designing and conducting mixed methods research, (2018); Daniel S.J., Education and the COVID-19 pandemic, Prospects, 49, 1-2, pp. 91-96, (2020); Davies I., Green P., Rosemann M., Indulska M., Gallo S., How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice?, Data and Knowledge Engineering, 58, 3, pp. 358-380, (2006); de Back T.T., Tinga A.M., Louwerse M.M., CAVE-based immersive learning in undergraduate courses: examining the effect of group size and time of application, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, (2021); Dhukaram A.V., Sgouropoulou C., Feldman G., Amini A., Higher education provision using systems thinking approach—case studies, European Journal of Engineering Education, 43, 1, pp. 3-25, (2018); Dong M., Lu J., Wang G., Zheng X., Kiritsis D., Model-based systems engineering papers analysis based on word cloud visualization, International Systems Conference, (2022); Dori D., Object-process analysis: Maintaining the balance between system structure and behaviour, Journal of Logic and Computation, 5, 2, pp. 227-249, (1995); Dori D., Object-process methodology a holistic systems paradigm, Journal of chemical information and modeling, (2002); Dori D., Modeling knowledge with object-process methodology, Encyclopedia of knowledge management, (2005); Dori D., Words from pictures for dual-channel processing, Communications of the ACM, 51, 5, pp. 47-52, (2008); Dori D., Model-based systems engineering with OPM and SysML, (2016); Dori D., Jbara A., Levi N., Wengrowicz N., Object-process methodology, OPM ISO 19450—OPCloud and the evolution of OPM modeling tools, Systems Engineering Newsletter (PPI SyEN), 61, pp. 6-17, (2018); Dori D., Sillitto H., What is a system? An Ontological Framework, Systems Engineering, 20, 3, pp. 207-219, (2017); Dori D., Sillitto H., Griego R.M., McKinney D., Arnold E.P., Godfrey P., Martin J., Jackson S., Krob D., System definition, system worldviews, and systemness characteristics, IEEE Systems Journal, 14, 2, pp. 1538-1548, (2020); Dori Y.J., Belcher J., How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts?, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 2, pp. 243-279, (2005); Dugan K.E., Mosyjowski E.A., Daly S.R., Lattuca L.R., Systems thinking assessments in engineering: A systematic literature review, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 39, 4, pp. 840-866, (2021); Eilam B., Reisfeld D., A curriculum unit for promoting complex system thinking: The case of combined system dynamics and agent based models for population growth, Journal of Advances in Education Research, 2, 2, pp. 39-60, (2017); Fanta D., Braeutigam J., Riess W., Fostering systems thinking in student teachers of biology and geography-an intervention study, Journal of Biological Education, 54, 3, pp. 226-244, (2019); Fillieule R., The general system theory, International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, pp. 15418-15423, (2001); Frank M., Knowledge, abilities, cognitive characteristics and behavioral competences of engineers with high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST), Systems Engineering, 9, 2, pp. 91-103, (2006); Frank M., Assessing the interest for systems engineering positions and other engineering positions' required capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST), Systems Engineering, 13, 2, pp. 161-174, (2010); Freeman L.A., Urbaczewski A., Using concept maps to assess students’ understanding of information systems, Journal of Information Systems Education, 12, 1, (2020); Gero A., Shekh-Abed A., Hazzan O., Interrelations between systems thinking and abstract thinking: The case of high-school electronics students, European Journal of Engineering Education, 46, 5, pp. 735-749, (2021); Gero A., Shlomo I., Promoting systems thinking in two-year technology students: An interdisciplinary course on medical ultrasound systems, International Journal of Engineering Education, 37, 2, pp. 564-572, (2021); Gero A., Zach E., High school programme in electro-optics: A case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking, International Journal of Engineering Education, 30, 5, pp. 1190-1199, (2014); Gharajedaghi J., Systems thinking: Managing chaos and complexity: A platform for designing business architecture, (2011); Gibson A., Kitto K., Bruza P., Towards the discovery of learner metacognition from reflective writing, Journal of Learning Analytics, 3, 2, pp. 22-36, (2016); Gilissen M.G.R., Knippels M.C.P.J., Verhoeff R.P., van Joolingen W.R., Teachers’ and educators’ perspectives on systems thinking and its implementation in Dutch biology education, Journal of Biological Education, 54, 5, pp. 485-496, (2020); Gillett-Swan J., The challenges of online learning: Supporting and engaging the isolated learner, Journal of Learning Design, 10, 1, (2017); Golick D., Dauer J., Lynch L., Ingram E., A framework for pollination systems thinking and conservation, Environmental Education Research, 24, 8, pp. 1143-1158, (2018); Grohs J.R., Kirk G.R., Soledad M.M., Knight D.B., Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, pp. 110-130, (2018); Guo S., Synchronous versus asynchronous online teaching of physics during the COVID-19 pandemic, Physics Education, (2020); Hake R.R., Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, American journal of Physics, 66, 1, pp. 64-74, (1998); Hallgren K.A., Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial, Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 8, 1, (2012); Henrie C.R., Halverson L.R., Graham C.R., Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review, Computers & Education, 90, pp. 36-53, (2015); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hofkirchner W., Schafranek M., General system theory, Philosophy of complex systems, pp. 177-194, (2011); Hrastinski S., Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning, Educause quarterly, 31, 4, pp. 51-55, (2008); Hung W., Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 6, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); Iivari N., Sharma S., Venta-Olkkonen L., Digital transformation of everyday life—How COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care?, International Journal of Information Management, 55, (2020); Jacobson M.J., Kapur M., So H.J., Lee J., The ontologies of complexity and learning about complex systems, Instructional Science, 39, 5, pp. 763-783, (2011); Jagustovic R., Zougmore R.B., Kessler A., Ritsema C.J., Keesstra S., Reynolds M., Contribution of systems thinking and complex adaptive system attributes to sustainable food production: Example from a climate-smart village, Agricultural Systems, 171, pp. 65-75, (2019); Kayama M., Ogata S., Asano D.K., Hashimoto M., Educational criteria for evaluating simple class diagrams made by novices for conceptual modeling, Proceedings of the 13Th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age, CELDA 2016, Celda, pp. 319-323, (2016); Klaassen R.G., Interdisciplinary education: A case study, European Journal of Engineering Education, 43, 6, pp. 842-859, (2018); Koral-Kordova S., Frank M., Nissel Miller A., Systems thinking education—Seeing the forest through the trees, Systems, 6, 3, (2018); Kramer J., Is abstraction the key to computing?, Communications of the ACM, 50, 4, pp. 37-42, (2007); Lattuca L.R., Voight L.J., Fath K.Q., Does interdisciplinarity promote learning ? Theoretical support and researchable questions, Review of Higher Education, 28, 1, pp. 23-48, (2004); Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Systems thinking of pre- and in-service science and engineering teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 2, pp. 248-279, (2019); Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Wengrowicz N., Dori D., Model-based systems thinking: Assessing engineering student teams, IEEE Transactions on Education, 63, 1, pp. 39-47, (2019); Lee J., Hong N.L., Ling N.L., An analysis of students’ preparation for the virtual learning environment, Internet and Higher Education, 4, 3-4, pp. 231-242, (2001); Lee T.D., Gail Jones M., Chesnutt K., Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle, Research in Science Education, 49, 1, pp. 137-172, (2019); Lin X., Gao L., Students’ sense of community and perspectives of taking synchronous and asynchronous online courses, Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15, 1, (2020); Loewenberg Ball D., Thames M.H., Phelps G., Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?, Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 5, pp. 389-407, (2008); Mahaffy P.G., Brush E.J., Haack J.A., Ho F.M., Journal of chemical education call for papers—Special issue on reimagining chemistry education: Systems thinking, and green and sustainable chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education, 95, 10, pp. 1689-1691, (2018); Max-Neef M.A., Foundations of transdisciplinarity, Ecological Economics, 53, 1, pp. 5-16, (2005); Mayr H.C., Thalheim B., The triptych of conceptual modeling: A framework for a better understanding of conceptual modeling, Software and Systems Modeling, 20, 1, pp. 7-24, (2021); Molin F., Haelermans C., Cabus S., Groot W., Do feedback strategies improve students’ learning gain?-Results of a randomized experiment using polling technology in physics classrooms, Computers and Education, 175, (2021); Monat J.P., Gannon T.F., What is systems thinking? A review of selected literature plus recommendations, American Journal of Systems Science, 4, 1, pp. 11-26, (2015); Mylopoulos J., Conceptual modeling and telos, Conceptual modeling, databases, and case: An integrated view of information systems development, chap 2, pp. 49-68, (1992); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century, (2012); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, National Research Council, (2013); Novak J.D., Gowin D.B., Learning how to learn, (1984); Connected minds technology and today’s learners, Educational research and innovation, (2012); Parrish C.W., Williams D.S., Estis J.M., Leveraging synchronous engagement and asynchronous flexibility within an integrated online model for team-based learning, Journal of Educators Online, 18, 2, (2021); Pleasants J., Olson J.K., What is engineering? Elaborating the nature of engineering for K-12 education, Science Education, 103, 1, pp. 145-166, (2019); Rates C.A., Mulvey B.K., Chiu J.L., Stenger K., Examining ontological and self-monitoring scaffolding to improve complex systems thinking with a participatory simulation, Instructional Science, 50, 2, pp. 199-221, (2022); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 6, pp. 705-725, (2010); Robinson C.C., Hullinger H., New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning, Journal of Education for Business, 84, 2, pp. 101-109, (2008); Rosenkranzer F., Horsch C., Schuler S., Riess W., Student teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching systems thinking: Effects of different interventions, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 14, pp. 1932-1951, (2017); Rosenkranzer F., Kramer T., Horsch C., Schuler S., Riess W., Promoting student teachers’ content related knowledge in teaching systems thinking: Measuring effects of an intervention through evaluating a videotaped lesson, Higher Education Studies, 6, 4, pp. 156-169, (2016); Rosenthal K., Ternes B., Strecker S., Learning conceptual modeling: Structuring overview, research themes and paths for future research, (2019); Schleicher A., PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations, (2019); Schraw G., The use of computer-based environments for understanding and improving self-regulation, Metacognition and Learning, 2, 2-3, pp. 169-176, (2007); Schuler S., Fanta D., Rosenkraenzer F., Riess W., Systems thinking within the scope of education for sustainable development (ESD)–a heuristic competence model as a basis for (science) teacher education, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42, 2, pp. 192-204, (2018); Shulman L., Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform, Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1, pp. 1-23, (1987); Spiertz H., Avenues to meet food security. The role of agronomy on solving complexity in food production and resource use, European Journal of Agronomy, 43, 1, pp. 1-8, (2012); Stave K., Hopper M., What Constitutes Systems Thinking? A Proposed Taxonomy, 25Th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2007); Stenger K., Chiu J., Fick S., “Adding Stuff From Other People”: How Peer Comparison Influences Conceptual Modeling in Precollege Engineering Contexts, In 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings., (2021); Streiling S., Horsch C., Riess W., Effects of teacher training in systems thinking on biology students—An intervention study, Sustainability, 13, 14, (2021); Summerton L., Clark J.H., Hurst G.A., Ball P.D., Rylott E.L., Carslaw N., Creasey J., Murray J., Whitford J., Dobson B., Sneddon H.F., Ross J., Metcalf P., McElroy C.R., Industry-informed workshops to develop graduate skill sets in the circular economy using systems thinking, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, (2019); Szozda A.R., Bruyere K., Lee H., Mahaffy P.G., Flynn A.B., Investigating educators’ perspectives toward systems thinking in chemistry education from international contexts, Journal of Chemical Education, (2022); Talanquer V., Some insights into assessing chemical systems thinking, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2918-2925, (2019); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B.Z., Amit M., Mapping what they know: Concept maps as an effective tool for assessing students’ systems thinking, American Journal of Operations Research, 3, 1, pp. 245-258, (2013); Turnham E.J.A., Braun D.A., Wolpert D.M., Facilitation of learning induced by both random and gradual visuomotor task variation, Journal of Neurophysiology, 107, 4, pp. 1111-1122, (2012); Verhoeff R.P., Knippels M.C.P., Gilissen M.G., Boersma K.T., The theoretical nature of systems thinking. Perspectives on systems thinking in biology education, Frontiers in Education, (2018); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 4, pp. 543-568, (2008); von Bertalanffy L., General system theory: Foundations, development, (1968); Wade J., Heydari B., Complexity: Definition and reduction techniques some simple thoughts on complex systems, In Proceedings of the Poster Workshop at the 2014 Complex Systems Design & Management International Conference, pp. 213-226, (2014); Wand Y., Weber R., Research commentary: Information systems and conceptual modeling—a research agenda, Information Systems Research, 13, 4, pp. 363-376, (2002); Whitehead N.P., Scherer W.T., Smith M.C., Systems thinking about systems thinking: A proposal for a common language, IEEE Systems Journal, 9, 4, pp. 1117-1128, (2015); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 1, pp. 3-19, (1999); Winberg C., Teaching engineering/engineering teaching: Interdisciplinary collaboration and the construction of academic identities, Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 3, pp. 353-367, (2008); Wright D.B., Comparing groups in a before-after design: When t-test and ANCOVA produce different results, The British Psychological Society, 76, pp. 663-675, (2006); Yoon S.A., Anderson E., Koehler-Yom J., Evans C., Park M., Sheldon J., Schoenfeld I., Wendel D., Scheintaub H., Klopfer E., Teaching about complex systems is no simple matter: Building effective professional development for computer-supported complex systems instruction, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 99-121, (2017); York S., Orgill M., ChEMIST table: A tool for designing or modifying instruction for a systems thinking approach in chemistry education, Journal of Chemical Education, 97, 8, pp. 2114-2129, (2020)","R. Peretz; Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel; email: roee.peretz@campus.technion.ac.il","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","00204277","","","","English","Instr. Sci.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Bronze Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85149826579"
"Ward A.R.","Ward, Annmarie R. (57220944618)","57220944618","Modeling authentic STEM research: A systems thinking perspective","2016","Reconceptualizing STEM Education: The Central Role of Practices","","","","101","114","13","6","10.4324/9781315700328-13","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85041329634&doi=10.4324%2f9781315700328-13&partnerID=40&md5=c2ee54992dcc2602591f40bce61344ec","Department of Curriculum and Instruction, United States; Center for Science and the Schools (CSATS), College of Education, The Pennsylvania State University, United States","Ward A.R., Department of Curriculum and Instruction, United States, Center for Science and the Schools (CSATS), College of Education, The Pennsylvania State University, United States","The Next Generation Science Standards [NGSS] (NGSS Lead States, 2013) advocate for a learning progression orientation for developing student understanding of crosscutting concepts and the discourse and practices that embody the research process. Students are expected to acquire understanding of elements of the nature of science through engagement in classroom activities that incorporate these concepts and research practices. Duschl, Bismack, Greeno, and Gitomer (this volume) present strong arguments for the potential of the NGSS approach for enhancing K-12 science learning, and the ability of K-12 students to successfully engage in this type of learning. However, for this to happen, teachers must incorporate the discourse and practices of science and engineering into their science teaching (NGSS Lead States, 2013; NRC, 2007, 2012a). This expectation poses a major challenge for many K-12 inservice teachers. If teachers who have only minimal experience doing research are expected to incorporate the discourse and practices of science and engineering into their teaching, then professional development programs are needed to provide depth of understanding of the research enterprise and how to translate that understanding into classroom teaching, either by implementing existing curriculum or by designing original lessons. © 2016 Taylor & Francis.","","","","","","","","","","","","Taylor and Francis","","","","","","","978-131745851-7; 978-113890103-2","","","English","Reconceptualizing STEM Education: The Central Role of Practices","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85041329634"
"Price N.A.","Price, Nancy A. (57863631700)","57863631700","Practice-Crosscutting Concept pairs of the NGSS and ways of knowing in the Earth & Space Sciences","2023","Journal of Geoscience Education","71","2","","253","265","12","1","10.1080/10899995.2022.2126652","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85139942209&doi=10.1080%2f10899995.2022.2126652&partnerID=40&md5=3e8e9357df2f0cb8e25d41fd34c70bdc","Center for Earth & Environmental Science, State University of New York at Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, NY, United States","Price N.A., Center for Earth & Environmental Science, State University of New York at Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, NY, United States","The epistemic components of science are included in instruction through the three-dimensional learning of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Students use the Science & Engineering Practices to engage the Disciplinary Core Ideas through the perspective of the Crosscutting Concepts. The NGSS focus on the epistemic aspects that all sciences share, but the domain-specific epistemic aspects, referred to here as ways of knowing, are still important to include in science education because they require different pedagogical methods. In this paper, I show how curriculum developers can incorporate the ways of knowing of the Earth & Space Sciences into their units through the choice of Practices and Crosscutting Concepts in the lesson-specific learning performance statements. I start by identifying the most common Practice-Crosscutting Concept pairs of the Earth & Space Sciences performance expectations and comparing them to the literature on the ways of knowing in the geosciences. The performance expectations represent the multiple modes of inquiry and systems thinking characteristic of the Earth & Space Sciences. Yet, they don’t effectively represent other aspects of the Earth & Space Sciences, like visualization, spatial reasoning, deep time, and large size and spatial scales. I then encourage curriculum developers to move beyond the example of the performance expectations by providing suggested Practice and Crosscutting Concept pairs and groupings that can be used by curriculum developers to communicate these other aspects. I also include example unit outlines to show what the suggestions might look like in application. © 2022 National Association of Geoscience Teachers.","curriculum development; Earth & Space Sciences; learning performance statement; NGSS; science education","conceptual framework; curriculum; educational attainment; learning; standardization; visualization","","","","","","","Abd-El-Khalick F., Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 3, pp. 353-374, (2012); (2014); (2016); (2017); Baker V.R., Uniformitarianism, earth system science, and geology, Anthropocene, 5, pp. 76-79, (2014); Black A.A., Spatial ability and earth science conceptual understanding, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 4, pp. 402-414, (2005); Berland L.K., Schwarz C.V., Krist C., Kenyon L., Lo A.S., Reiser B.J., Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 7, pp. 1082-1112, (2016); (2021); Buhr Sullivan S.M., Ledley T.S., Lynds S.E., Gold A.U., Navigating climate science in the classroom: Teacher preparation, perceptions and practices, Journal of Geoscience Education, 62, 4, pp. 550-559, (2014); Bybee R.W., Translating the NGSS for classroom instruction, (2013); Carr J.R., Data visualization in the geosciences, (2002); Cervato C., Frodeman R., The significance of geologic time: Cultural, educational, and economic frameworks, Earth and mind II: A synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences, pp. 19-27, (2012); Cian H., Marshall J., Cook M., Formatively assessing NGSS, The Science Teacher, 86, 6, pp. 44-49, (2019); Clark H.F., Sandoval W.A., Kawasaki J.N., Teachers’ uptake of problematic assumptions of climate change in the NGSS, Environmental Education Research, 26, 8, pp. 1177-1192, (2020); Dodick J., Orion N., Cognitive factors affecting student understanding of geologic time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 4, pp. 415-442, (2003); Duschl R., Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals, Review of Research in Education, 32, 1, pp. 268-291, (2008); Egger A.E., Kastens K.A., Turrin M.K., Sustainability, the next generation science standards, and the education of future teachers, Journal of Geoscience Education, 65, 2, pp. 168-184, (2017); Erduran S., Breaking the law: Promoting domain-specificity in chemical education in the context of arguing about the periodic law, Foundations of Chemistry, 9, 3, pp. 247-263, (2007); Erduran S., Dagher Z., Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education, (2014); Ford M.J., Educational implications of choosing “practice” to describe science in the Next Generation Science Standards, Science Education, 99, 6, pp. 1041-1048, (2015); Frodeman R., Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 107, 8, pp. 960-0968, (1995); Goldman S.R., Ko M.L.M., Greenleaf C., Brown W., Domain-specificity in the practices of explanation, modeling, and argument in the sciences, Scientific reasoning and argumentation: The roles of domain-specific and domain-general knowledge, pp. 121-141, (2018); Gramelsberger G., Lenhard J., Parker W.S., Philosophical perspectives on Earth system modeling: Truth, adequacy, and understanding, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, 1, (2020); Hanuscin D., Lipsitz K., Cisterna-Alburquerque D., Arnone K.A., van Garderen D., de Araujo Z., Lee E.J., Developing coherent conceptual storylines: Two elementary challenges, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27, 4, pp. 393-414, (2016); Harris C.J., Krajcik J.S., Pellegrino J.W., DeBarger A.H., Designing knowledge‐in‐use assessments to promote deeper learning, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38, 2, pp. 53-67, (2019); Hunt M.E., Cervenec J., (2021); Jimenez-Aleixandre M.P., Crujeiras B., Epistemic practices and scientific practices in science education, Science education: An international course companion, pp. 69-80, (2016); Judson E., Ernzen J., Krause S., Middleton J.A., Culbertson R.J., How engineering standards are interpreted and translated for middle school, Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6, 1, (2016); Kastens K., Commentary: Object and spatial visualization in geosciences, Journal of Geoscience Education, 58, 2, pp. 52-57, (2010); Kastens K.A., Data use in the next generation science standards (revised edition) [White paper, (2015); Kastens K.A., Manduca C.A., Fostering knowledge integration in geoscience education, Earth and mind II: A synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences, pp. 183-206, (2012); Kastens K.A., Manduca C.A., Using systems thinking in the design, implementation, and evaluation of complex educational innovations, with examples from the InTeGrate project, Journal of Geoscience Education, 65, 3, pp. 219-230, (2017); Kastens K.A., Rivet A., Multiple modes of inquiry in earth science, Science Teacher, 75, 1, pp. 26-31, (2008); Kelly G.J., Licona P., Epistemic practices and science education, History, philosophy and science teaching, pp. 139-165, (2018); King C., Geoscience education: An overview, Studies in Science Education, 44, 2, pp. 187-222, (2008); Krajcik J., Three-dimensional instruction, The Science Teacher, 82, 8, pp. 50-52, (2015); Krajcik J., Codere S., Dahsah C., Bayer R., Mun K., Planning instruction to meet the intent of the next generation science standards, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 157-175, (2014); LaDue N.D., Manning C.B., Next generation science standards: A call to action for the geoscience community, GSA Today, 25, 2, pp. 28-29, (2015); Lewis E., High school earth and space science should be taught by geoscientists, Earth, 62, 2, pp. 8-9, (2017); Libarkin J.C., Brick C., Research methodologies in science education: Visualization and the geosciences, Journal of Geoscience Education, 50, 4, pp. 449-455, (2002); Libarkin J.C., Kurdziel J.P., Anderson S.W., College student conceptions of geological time and the disconnect between ordering and scale, Journal of Geoscience Education, 55, 5, pp. 413-422, (2007); Liben L.S., Titus S.J., The importance of spatial thinking for geoscience education: Insights from the crossroads of geoscience and cognitive science, Earth and mind II: A synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences, pp. 51-70, (2012); Lohner S.; MacLeod M., What makes interdisciplinarity difficult? Some consequences of domain specificity in interdisciplinary practice, Synthese, 195, 2, pp. 697-720, (2018); Miller E., Manz E., Russ R., Stroupe D., Berland L., Addressing the epistemic elephant in the room: Epistemic agency and the next generation science standards, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 7, pp. 1053-1075, (2018); Minner D.D., Levy A.J., Century J., Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 4, pp. 474-496, (2010); Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning, (2002); A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting themes, and core ideas, (2012); (2014); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Nyman M., Clair T.S., A geometric model to teach nature of science, science practices, and metacognition, Journal of College Science Teaching, 45, 5, (2016); Orion N., Ben-Chaim D., Kali Y., Relationship between Earth science education and spatial visualization, Journal of Geoscience Education, 45, 2, pp. 129-132, (1997); Osborne J., Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 177-196, (2014); Osborne J., Rafanelli S., Kind P., Toward a more coherent model for science education than the crosscutting concepts of the next generation science standards: The affordances of styles of reasoning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 7, pp. 962-981, (2018); Penuel W.R., Reiser B.J., Designing NGSS-aligned curriculum materials. Committee to revise America’s lab report, (2018); Petcovic H.L., Cervenec J., Cheek K., Dahl R., Price N., Research on elementary, middle, and secondary Earth and Space Sciences teacher education, Community framework for geoscience education research, (2018); Pruitt S.L., The next generation science standards: The features and challenges, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 145-156, (2014); Puttick G., Drayton B., Biocomplexity: Aligning an “NGSS-ready” curriculum with NGSS performance expectations, The American Biology Teacher, 79, 5, pp. 344-349, (2017); Pyle E.J., A model of inquiry for teaching earth science, Electronic Journal for Research in Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 2, pp. 3-21, (2008); Raia F., Students’ understanding of complex dynamic systems, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 3, pp. 297-308, (2005); Raia F., Students’ understanding of complex dynamic systems, Journal of Geoscience Education, 56, 1, pp. 81-94, (2008); Reiser B.J., Novak M., McGill T.A., Penuel W.R., Storyline units: An instructional model to support coherence from the students’ perspective, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32, 7, pp. 805-829, (2021); Sandoval W.A., Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry, Science Education, 89, 4, pp. 634-656, (2005); Stillings N., Complex systems in the geosciences and in geoscience learning, Earth and mind II: A synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences, pp. 97-111, (2012); Stroupe D., Describing “science practice” in learning settings, Science Education, 99, 6, pp. 1033-1040, (2015); Tretter T.R., Jones G.M., Minogue J., Accuracy of scale conceptions in science: Mental maneuverings across many orders of spatial magnitude, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 10, pp. 1061-1085, (2006); van Bemmelen R.W., The scientific character of geology, The Journal of Geology, 69, 4, pp. 453-463, (1961); Zen E., What is deep time and why should anyone care?, Journal of Geoscience Education, 49, 1, pp. 5-9, (2001); Zimmerman C., The development of scientific reasoning skills, Developmental Review, 20, 1, pp. 99-149, (2000)","N.A. Price; Center for Earth & Environmental Science, State University of New York at Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, 101 Broad Street, 12901, United States; email: npric002@plattsburgh.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","10899995","","","","English","J. Geosci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85139942209"
"Plack M.M.; Goldman E.F.; Scott A.R.; Pintz C.; Herrmann D.; Kline K.; Thompson T.; Brundage S.B.","Plack, Margaret M. (11439035700); Goldman, Ellen F. (55319533000); Scott, Andrea R. (57194653384); Pintz, Christine (15072915600); Herrmann, Debra (24390641000); Kline, Kathleen (57200874727); Thompson, Tracey (57200100911); Brundage, Shelley B. (14035095900)","11439035700; 55319533000; 57194653384; 15072915600; 24390641000; 57200874727; 57200100911; 14035095900","Systems Thinking and Systems-Based Practice Across the Health Professions: An Inquiry Into Definitions, Teaching Practices, and Assessment","2018","Teaching and Learning in Medicine","30","3","","242","254","12","27","10.1080/10401334.2017.1398654","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85039556289&doi=10.1080%2f10401334.2017.1398654&partnerID=40&md5=537da5d28a4db53d24dcadf9e74d2d8f","Department of Physical Therapy and Health Care Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Department of Human and Organizational Learning, Graduate School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Office of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; School of Nursing, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Department of Physician Assistant Studies, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Office of Medical Education, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Department Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States","Plack M.M., Department of Physical Therapy and Health Care Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Goldman E.F., Department of Human and Organizational Learning, Graduate School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States, Office of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Scott A.R., Department of Human and Organizational Learning, Graduate School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Pintz C., School of Nursing, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Herrmann D., Department of Physician Assistant Studies, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Kline K., Office of Medical Education, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Thompson T., Office of Medical Education, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States; Brundage S.B., Department Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States","Phenomenon: Systems thinking is the cornerstone of systems-based practice (SBP) and a core competency in medicine and health sciences. Literature regarding how to teach or apply systems thinking in practice is limited. This study aimed to understand how educators in medicine, physical therapy, physician assistant, nursing, and speech-language pathology education programs teach and assess systems thinking and SBP. Approach: Twenty-six educators from seven different degree programs across the five professions were interviewed and program descriptions and relevant course syllabi were reviewed. Qualitative analysis was iterative and incorporated inductive and deductive methods as well as a constant comparison of units of data to identify patterns and themes. Findings: Six themes were identified: 1) participants described systems thinking as ranging across four major levels of healthcare (i.e., patient, care team, organization, and external environment); 2) participants associated systems thinking with a wide range of activities across the curriculum including quality improvement, Inter-professional education (IPE), error mitigation, and advocacy; 3) the need for healthcare professionals to understand systems thinking was primarily externally driven; 4) participants perceived that learning systems thinking occurred mainly informally and experientially rather than through formal didactic instruction; 5) participants characterized systems thinking content as interspersed across the curriculum and described a variety of strategies for teaching and assessing it; 6) participants indicated a structured framework and inter-professional approach may enhance teaching and assessment of systems thinking. Insights: Systems thinking means different things to different health professionals. Teaching and assessing systems thinking across the health professions will require further training and practice. Tools, techniques, taxonomies and expertise outside of healthcare may be used to enhance the teaching, assessment, and application of systems thinking and SBP to clinical practice; however, these would need to be adapted and refined for use in healthcare. © 2018, © 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.","assessment; medicine and health sciences education; systems thinking; systems-based practice; teaching","Clinical Competence; Curriculum; Female; Health Personnel; Humans; Interviews as Topic; Male; Qualitative Research; Systems Analysis; Teaching; clinical competence; curriculum; education; female; health care personnel; human; interview; male; qualitative research; system analysis; teaching","","","","","School of Medicine and Health Sciences Office of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development; George Washington University","The School of Medicine and Health Sciences Office of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development at the George Washington University partially funded this study.","Swing S., The ACGME outcome project: Retrospective and prospective, Medical Teacher, 29, pp. 648-654, (2007); The essentials of baccalaureate education for professional nursing practice, (2008); The essentials of master's education in nursing, (2011); The essentials of doctoral education for advanced nursing practice, (2006); Guidelines for the clinical doctorate in speech-language pathology, (2017); Functions and structures of a medical school: Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree; AAMC coreentrustableprofessional activities for entering residency: Curriculum developers' guide, (2017); CAPTE accreditation handbook: PT standards and required elements, (2017); Common program requirements; Competencies for the physician assistant profession, (2017); Johnson J.K., Miller S.H., Horowitz S.D., Systems-based practice: Improving safety and quality of patient care by recognizing and improving the systems in which we work, (2017); To err is human: Building a safer health system, (2000); Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century, (2001); Health professions education: A bridge to quality, (2003); Bertalanffy L.V., General systems theory: Foundations, development, applications, (1968); Ackoff R., Redesigning the future: A systems approach to societal problems, (1974); Ackoff R., The democratic corporation: A radical prescription for recreating corporate america and rediscovering success, (1994); Senge P., The fifth discipline, (2006); Batalden P., Mohr J., Building knowledge of health care as a system, Quality Management in Health Care, 5, pp. 1-12, (1997); Bowe C., Armstrong A., Assessment for systems learning: A holistic assessment framework to support decision making across the medical education continuum, Academic Medicine, 92, 5, pp. 585-592, (2017); Reid P., Compton W., Grossman J., Fanjiang G., Building a better delivery system: A new engineering/health care partnership, (2005); Ferlie E.B., Shortell S.M., Improving the quality of health care in the United Kingdom and the United States: A framework for change, The Milbank Quarterly, 79, 2, pp. 281-315, (2001); Phillips J., Stalter A., Dolansky M., Lopez G., Fostering future leadership in quality and safety in health care through systems thinking, Journal of Professional Nursing, 32, 1, pp. 15-24, (2016); Reineck C., Create a learning organization, Nursing Management, 33, 10, pp. 42-43, (2002); Colbert C., Ogden P., Ownby A., Bowe C., Systems-based practice in graduate medical education: Systems thinking as the missing foundational construct, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 23, 2, pp. 179-185, (2011); Three Sigma I., A systems thinking primer; Richmond B., Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, System Dynamics Review, 9, pp. 113-133, (1993); Sweeney L., Sterman J., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Nutley S., Davies H., Developing organizational learning in the NHS, Medical Education, 35, pp. 35-42, (2001); Bierema L., Systems thinking: A new lens for old problems, Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 23, pp. S27-S33, (2003); Trbovich P., Five ways to incorporate systems thinking into healthcare organizations, Horizons, pp. 31-36, (2014); Sandhu G., Garcha I., Sleeth J., Yeates K., Walker G., AIDER: A model for social accountability in medical education and practice, Medical Teacher, 35, pp. e1403-e1408, (2013); Pfeiffer J., Beschta J., Hohl S., Gloyd S., Hagopian A., Wasserheit J., Competency-based curricula to transform global health: Redesign with the end in mind, Academic Medicine, 88, pp. 131-136, (2013); Stalter A., Phillips J., Dolansky M., QSEN institute RN-BSN task force: White paper on recommendation for systems-based practice competency, Journal Nursing Care Quality, 32, 4, pp. 354-358, (2017); Phillips J., Stalter A., Integrating systems thinking into nursing education, The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47, 9, pp. 395-397, (2016); Norman C., Teaching systems thinking and complexity theory in health sciences, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 19, pp. 1087-1089, (2013); O'Brien B., Bachhuber M., Teherani A., Iker T., Batt J., O'Sullivan P., Systems-oriented workplace learning experiences for early learners: Three models, Academic Medicine, 92, 5, pp. 684-693, (2017); Dawidowicz P., The person on the street's understanding of systems thinking, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 29, 1, pp. 2-13, (2012); Kay J., Foster J., About teaching systems thinking, Presented at: HKK conference; june 14–15, (1999); Whitehead N., Scherer W., Moving from systematic treatment to a systemic approach: A path for sustainable U.S. healthcare,  Annual Systems Conference; April 15–18, (2013); Moore S., Dolansky M., Palmieri P., Singh M., Alemi F., Developing a measure of system thinking: A key component in the advancement of the science of QI, Presented at International Health Forum on Quality and Safety in Healthcare; April 23, 2010; Nice; Moore S., Dolansky M., Singh M., Palmieri P., Alemi F., The systems thinking scale, 2011; Hopper M., Stave K., Assessing the effectiveness of systems thinking interventions in the classroom, Presented at: 26th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society; July 20–24, (2008); Stave K., Hopper M., What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy,  International Conference of the System Dynamics Society; July 29–August 2, (2007); Creswell J., Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, (2007); Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis, (2002); Barbour R., Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog, British Medical Journal, 322, pp. 1115-1117, (2001); Kuzel A., Sampling in qualitative inquiry, Doing qualitative research, pp. 31-44, (1992); Miles M., Huberman A., Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, (1994); Denzin N., Lincoln Y., eds, Handbook of qualitative research, (1994); Guba E., Lincoln Y., Newbury Park, (1989); Atkinson H.L., Nixon-Cave K., A tool for clinical reasoning and reflection using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework and patient management model, Phys Ther, 91, 3, pp. 416-430, (2011); Puntambekar S., Hubscher R., Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed?, Educational Psychologist, 40, 1, pp. 1-12, (2005); Larkin M., Using scaffolded instruction to optimize learning, (2002); Instructional scaffolding to improve learning; International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF; Polit D., Beck C., Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47, pp. 1451-1458, (2010); O'Brien B., Harris I., Beckman T., Reed D., Cook D., Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations, Academic Medicine, 89, 9, pp. 1245-1251, (2014)","M.M. Plack; The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Physical Therapy and Health Care Sciences, Washington, 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 218, 20036, United States; email: mplack@gwu.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","10401334","","","29283669","English","Teach. Learn. Med.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85039556289"
"Zangori L.; Forbes C.T.","Zangori, Laura (55589435200); Forbes, Cory T. (24724345700)","55589435200; 24724345700","Exploring Third-Grade Student Model-Based Explanations about Plant Relationships within an Ecosystem","2015","International Journal of Science Education","37","18","","2942","2964","22","23","10.1080/09500693.2015.1118772","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84956803558&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2015.1118772&partnerID=40&md5=f9aab18a19d94cd79580a0dea7beda83","Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO, United States; Department of Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education, College of Education and Human Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, NE, United States; School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, NE, United States","Zangori L., Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO, United States; Forbes C.T., Department of Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education, College of Education and Human Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, NE, United States, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, NE, United States","Elementary students should have opportunities to develop scientific models to reason and build understanding about how and why plants depend on relationships within an ecosystem for growth and survival. However, scientific modeling practices are rarely included within elementary science learning environments and disciplinary content is often treated as discrete pieces separate from scientific practice. Elementary students have few, if any, opportunities to reason about how individual organisms, such as plants, hold critical relationships with their surrounding environment. The purpose of this design-based research study is to build a learning performance to identify and explore the third-grade students’ baseline understanding of and their reasoning about plant–ecosystem relationships when engaged in the practices of modeling. The developed learning performance integrated scientific content and core scientific activity to identify and measure how students build knowledge about the role of plants in ecosystems through the practices of modeling. Our findings indicate that the third-grade students’ ideas about plant growth include abiotic and biotic relationships. Further, they used their models to reason about how and why these relationships were necessary to maintain plant stasis. However, while the majority of the third-grade students were able to identify and reason about plant–abiotic relationships, a much smaller group reasoned about plant–abiotic–animal relationships. Implications from the study suggest that modeling serves as a tool to support elementary students in reasoning about system relationships, but they require greater curricular and instructional support in conceptualizing how and why ecosystem relationships are necessary for plant growth and development. © 2016 Taylor & Francis.","Elementary science; Explanations; Modeling; Systems thinking","","","","","","University of Nebraska-Lincoln, UNL","This research was supported in part by the Paul and Edith Babson Fellowship and the Warren and Edith Day Doctoral Dissertation Travel Award, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.","Atlas for scientific literacy, (2007); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Booth Sweeney L., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: Student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, Systems Dynamics Review, 23, 2-3, pp. 285-312, (2007); Coll R.K., Lajium D., Modeling and the future of science learning, Models and modeling cognitive tools for scientific enquiry, pp. 3-21, (2011); Eilam B., Systems thinking and feeding relations: Learning with a live ecosystem model, Instructional Science, 40, 2, pp. 213-239, (2012); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Forbes C.T., Zangori L., Schwarz C.V., Empirical validation of integrated learning performances for hydrologic phenomena: 3<sup>rd</sup>-Grade students’ model-driven explanation-construction, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 7, pp. 895-921, (2015); Teacher guide: Structures of life, (2009); Gilbert J.K., Models and modelling: Routes to more authentic science education, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 2, pp. 115-130, (2004); Grotzer T.A., Bell Basca B., How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding?, Journal of Biological Education, 38, 1, pp. 16-29, (2004); Hammer D., Russ R., Mikeska J., Scherr R., Identifying inquiry and conceptualizing students’ abilities, Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation, pp. 138-156, (2008); Hogan K., Assessing students’ systems reasoning in ecology, Journal of Biological Education, 35, 1, pp. 22-28, (2000); Inagaki K., Hatano G., Young children's naïve thinking about the biological world, (2013); Jonsson A., Svingby G., The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences, Educational Research Review, 2, 2, pp. 130-144, (2007); Krajcik J., McNeill K.L., Reiser B.J., Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy, Science Education, 92, 1, pp. 1-32, (2007); Leach J., Driver R., Scott P., Wood-Robinson C., Children's ideas about ecology 3: Ideas found in children aged 5–16 about the interdependency of organisms, International Journal of Science Education, 18, 2, pp. 129-141, (1996); Manz E., Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge, Science Education, 96, 6, pp. 1071-1105, (2012); Metz K., Narrowing the gulf between the practices of science and the elementary school science classroom, Elementary School Journal, 109, 2, pp. 138-161, (2008); Miles M.B., Huberman A.M., Qualitative data analysis, (1994);  century, (2011); The next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learner, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Shin N., Stevens S.Y., Krajcik J., Tracking student learning over time using construct-centered design, Using analytical frameworks for classroom research. Collecting data analysing narrative, pp. 38-58, (2010); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 4, pp. 543-568, (2008); Westcott H.L., Littleton K.S., Exploring meaning in interviews, Researching children's experience: Methods and approaches, pp. 141-179, (2005); Zangori L., Forbes C.T., Scientific practices in elementary classrooms: 3<sup>rd</sup> grade students’ scientific explanations for seed structure and function, Science Education, 98, 4, pp. 614-639, (2014)","L. Zangori; Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, United States; email: zangoril@missouri.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-84956803558"
"Zoller U.","Zoller, Uri (57203612329)","57203612329","Research-based transformative science/STEM/STES/STESEP education for ""Sustainability Thinking"": From teaching to ""Know"" to learning to ""Think""","2015","Sustainability (Switzerland)","7","4","","4474","4491","17","30","10.3390/su7044474","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84929008802&doi=10.3390%2fsu7044474&partnerID=40&md5=091955f2c76a5f5bf94dea8e75706539","Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Haifa-Oranim, Kiryat Tivon, 36006, Israel","Zoller U., Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Haifa-Oranim, Kiryat Tivon, 36006, Israel","Sustainability is conceptualized, approached and acted upon differently by people, sectors, societies, nations and educational systems. Consequently, the ""sustainability thinking""-related scientific, technological, environmental, societal, economic and policy/political components are expected to transform differently. The related necessary transformative paradigm shifts in science, technology, environment, society, economy and policy (STESEP)-education from the contemporary disciplinary science, technology and environmental teaching to ""know""-to transdisciplinary learning to ""think"" are to be expected. The overriding purpose: ensuring ""sustainability thinking"" by responsible, capable ""STESEP literate"" citizens. Consequently, ""sustainability thinking"" in the STESEP interfaces contexts, requires (1) the development of students' higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS) via a transformative/transdisciplinary ""STESEP Education"" (2) a research-based shift from the conventional algorithmic lower-order cognitive skills (LOCS)-based teaching to ""know"", to ""HOCS learning"" to ""think"" and (3) a special focus on HOCS-promoting teaching, assessment and learning strategies in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, environment, society and education. A pre-post research design of system thinking, evaluative thinking, and decision making capabilities of 10 grade high school, undergraduate and graduate students, in Israel, are presented and discussed in the learning for ""sustainability thinking"" context. In conclusion: contemporary science education in secondary and tertiary levels is mainly, disciplinary (biology, chemistry, mathematics, physics) in science, technology and engineering courses. The LOCS-to-HOCS paradigm shift still constitutes a major issue of concern, with respect to ensuring a transformative science/STESEP education, targeting ""sustainability thinking"" in secondary and tertiary education. © 2015 by the authors.","Higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS); Science/STEM/STES/STESEP environmental education (SSSEE); STESEP education; Sustainability thinking","Israel; educational development; engineering; learning; paradigm shift; policy making; sustainability; teaching; technological change","","","","","","","Fischler F., Sustainability: The concept for modern society, CSR Sustain. Ethics Gov, (2014); Seghezzo L., The five dimensions of sustainability, Environ. Polit., 18, pp. 539-556, (2009); Keinan E., Gloomy forecast for the prophets of apocalypse and bright forecast for chemists, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 52, pp. 2667-2672, (2013); Turcu C., Re-thinking sustainability indicators: Local perspectives of urban sustainability, J. Environ. Plan. Manag., 56, pp. 695-719, (2012); Zoller U., Science education for global sustainability: What is necessary for teaching, learning, and assessment strategies? J, Chem. Educ., 89, pp. 297-300, (2012); Wals A.E., A mid decade review of the decade of education for sustainable development, J. Educ. Sustain. Dev., 3, pp. 195-204, (2009); Huckle J., Education for sustainability: Assessing pathways to the future, Aust. J. Environ. Educ., 1, pp. 31-50, (2014); Zoller U., Scholz R.W., The HOCS paradigm shift from disciplinary knowledge (LOCS)-To interdisciplinary evaluative, system thinking (HOCS): What should it take in science-technologyenvironment- society oriented courses, curricula and assessment?, Water Sci. Technol., 49, pp. 27-36, (2004); Zoller U., Science, technology, environment, society (STES) literacy for sustainability: What should it take in chem/science education?, Educ. Quim., 24, pp. 207-214, (2013); Bengtsson S.L., Ostman L.O., Globalisation and education for sustainable development: Emancipation from context and meaning, Environ. Educ. Res., 19, pp. 477-498, (2012); Ardoin N.M., Clark C., Kelsey E., An exploration of future trends in environmental education research, Environ. Educ. Res., 19, pp. 499-520, (2012); Zoller U., Chemistry and environmental education, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 5, pp. 95-97, (2004); Johnston P., Everard M., Santillo D., Robert K.H., Reclaiming the definition of sustainability, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int., 14, pp. 60-66, (2007); Sterling S., Sustainable education-Towards a deep learning response to unsustainability, Policy Pract.: A Dev. Educ. Rev., 6, pp. 63-68, (2008); Zoller U., Are lecture and learning compatible? Maybe for LOCS: Unlikely for HOCS, J. Chem. Educ., 70, pp. 195-197, (1993); Zoller U., Blonder R., Finlayson O.E., Bogner F., Lieflaender A.K., Kaiser F.G., Research-based coherent science teaching-assessment-learning to think for global sustainability, Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference e-Proceedings, (2013); Zoller U., Levy Nahum T., From teaching to know to learning to think in science education, Second International Handbook of Science Education, 24, pp. 209-229, (2012); Lynch S., Brian L., Supporting the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through research: Introduction to NARST position pape; Zoller U., Enhancing deep learning via Higher-Order Cognitive Skills (HOCS): Promoting teaching strategies and assessment, Trends Sci. Math. Educ, 1, pp. 21-29, (2009); Tsaparlis G., Zoller U., Evaluation of higher vs. lower-order cognitive skills-type examinations in chemistry: Implications for university in-class assessment and examinations, Univ. Chem. Educ., 7, pp. 50-57, (2003); Zoller U., The examination where the student asks the question, Sch. Sci. Math., 94, pp. 347-349, (1994); Bogner F., Wiseman M., Adolescents' attitudes towards nature and environment: Quantifying the 2-MEV model, Environmentalist, 26, pp. 247-254, (2006); Powell N., Larsen R.K., Integrated water resource management: A platform for higher education institutions to meet complex sustainability challenges, Environ. Educ. Res., 19, pp. 458-476, (2012); Hansmann R., Mieg H.A., Frischknecht P., Principal sustainability components: Empirical analysis of synergies between the three pillars of sustainability, Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol., 19, pp. 451-459, (2012); Roczen N., Kaiser F.G., Bogner F.X., Wilson M., A Competence Model for Environmental Education, Environ. Behav., 46, pp. 972-992, (2014); Levy Nahum T., Ben-Chaim D., Azaiza I., Herskovitz O., Zoller U., Does STES-oriented science education promote 10th-grade students' decision-making capability?, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 32, pp. 1315-1336, (2009); Ennis R.H., Goals for a critical thinking curriculum and its assessment, Developing Minds, pp. 44-46, (2002); Zoller U., The fostering of question-asking capability: A meaningful aspect of problem-solving in chemistry, J. Chem. Educ, (1987); Bybee R.W., Fuchs B., Preparing the 21st century workforce: A new reform in science and technology education, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 43, pp. 349-352, (2006); Ratcliffe M., Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues within the science curriculum, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 19, pp. 167-182, (1997); Wu Y.T., Tsai C.C., High school students' informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 29, pp. 1163-1187, (2007); Zeidler D.L., Sadler T.D., Simmons M.L., Howes E.V., Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education, Sci. Educ., 89, pp. 357-377, (2005); Eggert S., Bogeholz S., Students' use of decision-making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the Rasch partial credit model, Sci. Educ., 94, pp. 230-258, (2010); Stevenson R.B., Schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and practice, Environ. Educ. Res., 13, pp. 139-153, (2007); Zoller U., Science and technology education in the STES context in primary schools: What should it take?, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 20, pp. 444-453, (2011)","U. Zoller; Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Haifa-Oranim, Kiryat Tivon, 36006, Israel; email: uriz@research.haifa.ac.il","","MDPI","","","","","","20711050","","","","English","Sustainability","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-84929008802"
"Laherto A.; Rasa T.","Laherto, Antti (56153713100); Rasa, Tapio (57440841400)","56153713100; 57440841400","Facilitating transformative science education through futures thinking","2022","On the Horizon","30","2","","96","103","7","11","10.1108/OTH-09-2021-0114","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85126651565&doi=10.1108%2fOTH-09-2021-0114&partnerID=40&md5=7616bb8bf4774fbb23077ce2a6de586f","Antti Laherto and Tapio Rasa are both based at the Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland","Laherto A., Antti Laherto and Tapio Rasa are both based at the Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Rasa T., Antti Laherto and Tapio Rasa are both based at the Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland","Purpose: The aims and pedagogies in the field of science education are evolving because of global sustainability crises. School science is increasingly concerned with responsible agency and value-based transformation. The purpose of this conceptual paper is to argue that perspectives and methods from the field of futures studies are needed to meet the new transformative aims of science education for sustainable development. Design/methodology/approach: This paper analyses some contemporary challenges in science education and gives reasons for introducing a futures perspective into science classrooms. The suggestion is illustrated by reviewing some results, published elsewhere, on future-oriented activities trialled within the European Union project “I SEE” and students’ experiences on them. Findings: Recent research has shown that future-oriented science learning activities, involving systems thinking, scenario development and backcasting, can let students broaden their futures perceptions, imagine alternatives and navigate uncertainty. Practising futures thinking in the context of contemporary science offers synergies through shared perspectives on uncertainty, probabilities and creative thinking. Originality/value: This paper highlights the relevance of the futures field for science education. Future-oriented activities appear as promising tools in science education for fostering sustainability, agency and change. Yet, further work is needed to integrate futures aspects into science curricula. To that end, the paper calls for collaboration between the fields of futures studies and science education. © 2022, Antti Laherto and Tapio Rasa.","Agency; Education for sustainable development; Futures thinking; Science education; Transformative learning","","","","","","European Commission Erasmus+, (2016–1-IT02-KA201-024373); Università di Bologna, UNIBO","The authors thank the colleagues of the projects” I SEE” and” FEDORA”, both coordinated by Olivia Levrini, University of Bologna, for their support in the development the approaches discussed here. The module that was discussed as an example was developed by Arto Hellas, Johanna Jauhiainen, Timo Kärkkäinen, Elina Palmgren, Tuomas Puranen, Tiina Ranta-aho, Kimmo Tuominen and the authors of this article with the support by the European Commission Erasmus+ programme under Grant Agreement No. 2016–1-IT02-KA201-024373.","Bencze L., Sperling E., Carter L., Students’ research-informed socio-scientific activism: re/visions for a sustainable future, Research in Science Education, 42, 1, pp. 129-148, (2012); Bishop P., Hines A., Collins T., The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques, Foresight, 9, 1, pp. 5-25, (2007); Borjeson L., Hojer M., Dreborg K., Ekvall T., Finnveden G., Scenario types and techniques: towards a user's guide, Futures, 38, 7, pp. 723-739, (2006); Branchetti L., Cutler M., Laherto A., Levrini O., Palmgren E., Tasquier G., Wilson C., The I SEE project: an approach to futurize STEM education, Visions for Sustainability, 9, pp. 10-26, (2018); Buntting C., Jones A., Futures thinking in the future of science education, The Future in Learning Science: What’s in It for the Learner?\?}, pp. 229-244, (2015); Carabelli G., Lyon D., Young people’s orientations to the future: navigating the present and imagining the future, Journal of Youth Studies, 19, 8, pp. 1110-1127, (2016); Carter L., Smith C., Re-visioning science education from a science studies and futures perspective, Journal of Future Studies, 7, 4, pp. 45-54, (2003); Cook J., Young adults’ hopes for the long-term future: from re-enchantment with technology to faith in humanity, Journal of Youth Studies, 19, 4, pp. 517-532, (2016); Cuzzocrea V., Mandich G., Students’ narratives of the future: imagined mobilities as forms of youth agency?, Journal of Youth Studies, 19, 4, pp. 552-567, (2016); Emirbayer M., Mische A., What is agency?, American Journal of Sociology, 103, 4, pp. 962-1023, (1998); Science education for responsible citizenship: report to the European Commission of the expert group on science education, (2015); Haggstrom M., Schmidt C., Futures literacy–to belong, participate and act! An educational perspective, Futures, 132, (2021); Hilppo J.A., Rajala A., Zittoun T., Kumpulainen K., Lipponen L., Interactive dynamics of imagination in a science classroom, Front Learning Research, 4, 4, pp. 20-29, (2017); Hodson D., Time for action: science education for an alternative future, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 6, pp. 645-670, (2003); Hodson D., Looking to the Future: Building a Curriculum for Social Activism, (2011); Jones A., Buntting C., Hipkins R., McKim A., Conner L., Saunders K., Developing students’ futures thinking in science education, Research in Science Education, 42, 4, pp. 687-708, (2012); Kapon S., Laherto A., Levrini O., Disciplinary authenticity and personal relevance in school science, Science Education, 102, 5, pp. 1077-1106, (2018); Laherto A., Kampschulte L., de Vocht M., Blonder R., Akaygun S., Apotheker J., Contextualizing the EU’s ‘responsible research and innovation’ policy in science education: a conceptual comparison with the nature of science concept and practical examples”, EURASIA journal of mathematics, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14, 6, pp. 2287-2300, (2018); Levrini O., Tasquier G., Barelli E., Laherto A., Palmgren E., Branchetti L., Wilson C., Recognition and operationalization of future-scaffolding skills: results from an empirical study of a teaching-learning module on climate change and futures thinking, Science Education, 105, 2, pp. 281-308, (2021); Levrini O., Tasquier G., Branchetti L., Barelli E., Developing future-scaffolding skills through science education, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 18, pp. 2647-2674, (2019); Lloyd D., Wallace J., Imaging the future of science education: the case for making futures studies explicit in student learning, Studies in Science Education, 40, 1, pp. 139-177, (2004); Lotz-Sisitka H., Wals A.E., Kronlid D., McGarry D., Transformative, transgressive social learning: rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dysfunction, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 16, pp. 73-80, (2015); The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030, (2018); PISA 2018 science framework, PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework, (2019); Osborne J., Collins S., Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum, The School Science Review, 82, 298, pp. 23-31, (2000); Paige K., Lloyd D., Use of future scenarios as a pedagogical approach for science teacher education, Research in Science Education, 46, 2, pp. 263-285, (2016); Rasa T., Laherto A., Young people’s technological images of the future: implications for science and technology education, European Journal of Futures Research, (2022); Rasa T., Palmgren E., Laherto, Futurising science education: students’ experiences from a course on futures thinking and quantum computing, Instructional Science, (2022); Roberts D.A., Bybee R.W., Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education, Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, pp. 545-558, (2014); Robinson J.B., Futures under glass: a recipe for people who hate to predict, Futures, 22, 8, pp. 820-842, (1990); Rocard M., Csermely P., Jorde D., Lenzen D., Walwerg-Heriksson H., Hemmo V., Science education now: a renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe, (2007); Roth W., Lee S., Science education as/for participation in the community, Science Education, 88, 2, pp. 263-291, (2004); Sjostrom J., Frerichs N., Zuin V., Eilks I., Use of the concept of Bildung in the international science education literature, its potential, and implications for teaching and learning, Studies in Science Education, 53, 2, pp. 165-192, (2017); Stuckey M., Hofstein A., Mamlok-Naaman R., Eilks I., The meaning of ‘relevance’ in science education and its implications for the science curriculum, Studies in Science Education, 49, 1, pp. 1-34, (2013); Threadgold S., I reckon my life will be easy, but my kids will be buggered’: ambivalence in young people's positive perceptions of individual futures and their visions of environmental collapse, Journal of Youth Studies, 15, 1, pp. 17-32, (2012); Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives, (2017); Zeidler D.L., Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: theory, research and practice, Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, pp. 697-726, (2014)","A. Laherto; Antti Laherto and Tapio Rasa are both based at the Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; email: antti.laherto@helsinki.fi","","Emerald Group Holdings Ltd.","","","","","","10748121","","","","English","Horizon","Article","Final","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85126651565"
"Stewart A.L.; Ahmed S.; Warne T.; Byker Shanks C.; Arnold S.","Stewart, Alyssa L. (57219366502); Ahmed, Selena (55456818200); Warne, Teresa (57213153023); Byker Shanks, Carmen (56814574100); Arnold, Shannon (57617741700)","57219366502; 55456818200; 57213153023; 56814574100; 57617741700","Educator Practices and Perceptions of Integrating Sustainability and Food Systems Concepts Into Elementary Education: Comparative Case Study in Two Northwestern States in the United States","2021","Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","5","","714226","","","","5","10.3389/fsufs.2021.714226","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85118667371&doi=10.3389%2ffsufs.2021.714226&partnerID=40&md5=8f763e918a80835167572f3cacb71eea","Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States; Department of Agricultural and Technology Education, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States","Stewart A.L., Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States; Ahmed S., Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States; Warne T., Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States; Byker Shanks C., Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States; Arnold S., Department of Agricultural and Technology Education, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States","Elementary education can equip future consumers and leaders with the systems thinking skills, real-world experiences, and knowledge to make decisions and lead progress toward sustainability transitions. The implementation of learning standards that focus on sustainability is one approach for integrating sustainability and food systems content into elementary education. The purpose of this study was to administer a survey with elementary-level educators to: (1) identify practices and perceptions of integrating sustainability and food systems concepts into the classroom; and (2) determine if practices and perceptions vary based on the presence of state learning standards focused on sustainability. A total of 171 educators completed the majority of the survey from two northwestern states in the United States: Washington (which has state learning standards focused on sustainability) and Montana (which does not have sustainability learning standards). Findings that 30% or less of the surveyed educators integrate sustainability and food systems content in their classroom highlights the urgent need for reforming elementary school curriculum to integrate sustainability as a central unifying framework to support societal and planetary health. Given the similarities in survey responses between educators in Washington and Montana, findings emphasize that state learning standards focused on sustainability are not adequate on their own to foster teacher adoption of sustainability content. There is thus a need for larger curriculum reformation to integrate sustainability as a framework, development of place-based teacher resources, and open access professional development to ensure that elementary-school students cultivate the systems thinking skills, real world experience, and knowledge that will allow them to develop the competencies to ultimately guide society toward meeting the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. Copyright © 2021 Stewart, Ahmed, Warne, Byker Shanks and Arnold.","education for sustainable development (ESD); elementary education; learning standards; sustainability education; sustainable food systems education","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (FEC OIA 1632810)","Funding for this publication was provided by NSF RII Track-2 FEC OIA 1632810.","Berkes F., Folke C., Linking social and ecological systems for resilience and sustainability, Link. Soc. Ecol. Syst, 1, (1998); Bowen G.A., Document analysis as a qualitative research method, Qual. Res. J, 9, (2009); Brandt J.-O., Burgener L., Barth M., Redman A., Becoming a competent teacher in education for sustainable development, Int. J. Sustainab. Higher Educ, 20, pp. 630-653, (2019); Bronfenbrenner U., Toward an experimental ecology of human development, Am. Psychol, 32, (1977); Bronfenbrenner U., Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives, Dev. Psychol, 22, (1986); Casper J.M., McCullough B.P., Smith D.M.K., Pro-environmental sustainability and political affiliation: an examination of USA college sport sustainability efforts, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18, (2021); Church W., Skelton L., Sustainability education in K-12 classrooms, J. Sustainabil. Educ, 1, pp. 1-13, (2010); Cotton D., Winter J., It's not just bits of paper and light bulbs': a review of sustainability pedagogies and their potential for use in higher education, Sustainability Education, (2010); The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2019. Safeguarding Against Economic Slowdowns and Downturns. Rome: FAO, (2019); Gakidou E., Afshin A., Abajobir A.A., Abate K.H., Abbafati C., Abbas K.M., Et al., Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016, Lancet, 390, pp. 1345-1422, (2017); Hess D.J., Mai Q.D., Brown K.P., Red states, green laws: Ideology and renewable energy legislation in the United States, Energy Res. Soc. Sci, 11, pp. 19-28, (2016); Laurie R., Nonoyama-Tarumi Y., McKeown R., Hopkins C., Contributions of education for sustainable development (ESD) to quality education: a synthesis of research, J. Educ. Sustain. Dev, 10, pp. 226-242, (2016); Leicht A., Heiss J., Byun W.J., Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO, (2018); Mason P., Lang T., Sustainable Diets: How Ecological Nutrition Can Transform Consumption and the Food System, (2017); McKeough A.M., Bird S., Tourigny E., Romaine A., Graham S., Ottmann J., Et al., Storytelling as a Foundation to Literacy Development for Aboriginal Children: Culturally and Developmentally Appropriate Practices, (2008); Mckeown R., Teacher education 1992 and 2012: Reflecting on 20 years, J. Educ. Sustain. Dev, 6, pp. 37-41, (2012); Advanced Directory of Montana Schools, (2020); Content Standards and Model Curriculum Guides, (2020); Ag Facts, (2019); Nolet V., Teacher education and ESD in the United States: The vision, challenges, and implementation, Schooling for Sustainable Development in Canada and the United States, pp. 53-67, (2013); Redman E., Wiek A., Redman A., Continuing professional development in sustainability education for K-12 teachers: principles, programme, applications, outlook, J. Educ. Sustain. Dev, 12, pp. 59-80, (2018); Saldana J., The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, (2015); Sarabhai K.V., ESD for sustainable development goals (SDGs), J. Educ. Sustain. Dev, 9, pp. 121-123, (2015); Steffen W., Richardson K., Rockstrom J., Cornell S.E., Fetzer I., Bennett E.M., Et al., Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet, Science, 347, (2015); Stoy P.C., Ahmed S., Jarchow M., Rashford B., Swanson D., Albeke S., Et al., Opportunities and trade-offs among BECCS and the food, water, energy, biodiversity, and social systems nexus at regional scales, BioScience, 68, pp. 100-111, (2018); The Bamber P., Bullivant A., Glover A., King B., McCann G., A comparative review of policy and practice for education for sustainable development/education for global citizenship (ESD/GC) in teacher education across the four nations of the UK, Manag. Educ, 30, pp. 112-120, (2016); Tilbury D., Education for Sustainable Development: An Expert Review of Processes and Learning. Paris: UNESCO, (2011); Education for Sustainable Development Sourcebook, (2012); Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO, (2014); Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives, (2017); UNESCO 40th General Conference Adopts a New Global Framework for Education for Sustainable Development for 2020-2030, (2019); Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, (2015); 2010 Census of Population and Housing. Population and Housing Unit Counts, (2012); Title I, Part A Program, (2018); Valley W., Wittman H., Jordan N., Ahmed S., Galt R., An emerging signature pedagogy for sustainable food systems education, Renew. Agric. Food Syst, 33, pp. 467-480, (2018); Walker B., Salt D., Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a changing world, (2012); Agriculture: A Cornerstone of Washington's Economy, (2019); Education Directory, (2020); Learning Standards and Instructional Materials, (2020); Wheeler G., Vavrus J., Dorn R.I., Kanikeberg K., Burke A., Washington State K-12 Integrated Environmental and Sustainability Education Learning Standards, (2014); Willett W., Rockstrom J., Loken B., Springmann M., Lang T., Vermeulen S., Et al., Food in the anthropocene: the EAT-lancet commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems, Lancet, 393, pp. 447-492, (2019); Wisconsin Standards for Environmental Literacy and Sustainability, (2018); Witoszek N., Teaching sustainability in Norway, China and Ghana: challenges to the UN programme, Environ. Educ. Res, 24, pp. 831-844, (2018); Our Common Future, (1987); Global Health Observatory (GHO) Data: Overweight and Obesity, (2020)","S. Ahmed; Montana State University Food and Health Lab, Department of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, United States; email: selena.ahmed@montana.edu","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","2571581X","","","","English","Front. Sustain. food Syst.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85118667371"
"Kelly O.; White P.; Butera F.; Illingworth S.; Martens P.; Huynen M.; Bailey S.; Schuitema G.; Cowman S.","Kelly, Orla (57758564000); White, Peta (57219846831); Butera, Fabrizio (7003722857); Illingworth, Sam (35336887800); Martens, Pim (7102660346); Huynen, Maud (7005639384); Bailey, Susan (57198539797); Schuitema, Geertje (16246031600); Cowman, Sian (58243795000)","57758564000; 57219846831; 7003722857; 35336887800; 7102660346; 7005639384; 57198539797; 16246031600; 58243795000","A transdisciplinary model for teaching and learning for sustainability science in a rapidly warming world","2023","Sustainability Science","18","6","","2707","2722","15","1","10.1007/s11625-023-01407-z","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85174227823&doi=10.1007%2fs11625-023-01407-z&partnerID=40&md5=d3ef71d202a5e74b558faeb7da8b29d3","School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington Building, Dublin, Ireland; School of Education, Deakin University, Burwood, Melbourne, Australia; Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Department of Learning and Teaching Enhancement, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; University College Venlo, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands; Maastricht Sustainability Institute, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands; School of Arts and Humanities, Edith Cowan University, South West Campus, Bunbury, WA, Australia; School of Business, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland","Kelly O., School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington Building, Dublin, Ireland; White P., School of Education, Deakin University, Burwood, Melbourne, Australia; Butera F., Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Illingworth S., Department of Learning and Teaching Enhancement, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Martens P., University College Venlo, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands; Huynen M., Maastricht Sustainability Institute, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands; Bailey S., School of Arts and Humanities, Edith Cowan University, South West Campus, Bunbury, WA, Australia; Schuitema G., School of Business, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Cowman S., School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland","Transdisciplinary sustainability science integrates multiple perspectives, promotes internal reflexivity and situated learning, and engages with multiple stakeholders to solve real-world sustainability challenges. Therefore, transdisciplinary approaches to teaching and learning for sustainability science have traditionally focused on promoting core skills such as systems thinking and science communication. However, as the socio-ecological crises grow in intensity and complexity, so too must our conceptualisation of the core tenants of transdisciplinary sustainability science. To this end, we propose a model for teaching and learning that considers the contemporary pressures of sustainability science praxis. We highlight how social science perspectives can be used to situate considerations of power, justice, and historical responsibility at the centre of sustainability discussions while helping students understand the drivers of transformative change at the individual and societal levels. We outline the benefits of using arts-based approaches in the classroom to facilitate participation and opportunities for creative expression and peer and co-learning. We also discuss the importance of and provide strategies for supporting students in dealing with anxiety and ecological grief. We provide suggestions for assessment strategies that can be used to develop a range of competencies in students, including systems thinking, empowerment and collaboration. In a novel way, we model transdisciplinarity by drawing on insights from the disciplines in which we have expertise, including education, psychology, health, sociology, communications, social work, and science. We also provide an actionable, adaptable model for teaching and learning sustainability science in a rapidly warming world. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Japan KK, part of Springer Nature.","Higher education; Science education; Sustainability science; Teaching and learning; Transdisciplinarity","","","","","","Worldwide Universities Network, WUN","","Abrahamse W., Steg L., Vleg C., Rothengatter T., A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation, J Environ Psychol, 25, pp. 273-291, (2005); Adler C., Hirsch Hadorn G., Breu T., Wiesmann U., Pohl C., Conceptualizing the transfer of knowledge across cases in transdisciplinary research, Sustain Sci, 13, pp. 179-190, (2018); Aeberhard A., Rist S., Transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge in the development of organic agriculture in Switzerland, Ecol Econ, 68, pp. 1171-1181, (2009); Aguirre A.A., Changing patterns of emerging zoonotic diseases in wildlife, domestic animals, and humans linked to biodiversity loss and globalization, ILAR J, 58, pp. 315-318, (2017); Agusdinata D.B., The role of universities in SDGs solution co-creation and implementation: a human-centered design and shared-action learning process, Sustain Sci, 17, pp. 1589-1604, (2022); Agyeman J., Schlosberg D., Craven L., Matthews C., Trends and directions in environmental justice: from inequity to everyday life, community, and just sustainabilities, Annu Rev Environ Resour, 41, pp. 321-340, (2016); Ajzen I., Joyce N., Sheikh S., Cote N.G., Knowledge and the prediction of behavior: the role of information accuracy in the theory of planned behavior, Basic Appl Soc Psychol, 33, pp. 101-117, (2011); Amel E., Manning C., Scott B., Koger S., Beyond the roots of human inaction: fostering collective effort toward ecosystem conservation, Science, 356, pp. 275-279, (2017); Amsler S., Facer K., Contesting anticipatory regimes in education: exploring alternative educational orientations to the future, Futures, 94, pp. 6-14, (2017); Atkinson Q.D., Jacquet J., Challenging the idea that humans are not designed to solve climate change, Perspect Psychol Sci, 17, pp. 619-630, (2022); Auyero J., Swistun D., The social production of toxic uncertainty, Am Sociol Rev, 73, pp. 357-379, (2008); Bailey S., Hendrick A., Palmer M., Eco-social work in action: a place for community gardens, Aust Soc Work, 71, pp. 98-110, (2018); Baker C., Clayton S., Bragg E., Educating for resilience: parent and teacher perceptions of children’s emotional needs in response to climate change, Environ Educ Res, 27, pp. 687-705, (2021); Barth M., Michelsen G., Learning for change: an educational contribution to sustainability science, Sustain Sci, 8, pp. 103-119, (2013); Baumgardner J., Richards A., A manifest: young women, feminism, and the future, (2000); Baumgartner S., Becker C.U., Frank K., Muller B., Quaas M.F., Relating the philosophy and practice of ecological economics: the role of concepts, models, and case studies in inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability research, Ecol Econ, 67, pp. 384-393, (2008); Bendell J., Deep adaptation: A map for navigating climate tragedy, Occasional Paper., (2018); Bosch G., Train PhD students to be thinkers not just specialists, Nature, 554, (2018); Bostrom M., Andersson E., Berg M., Gustafsson K., Gustavsson E., Hysing E., Lidskog R., Lofmarck E., Ojala M., Olsson J., Singleton B.E., Svenberg S., Uggla Y., Ohman J., Conditions for transformative learning for sustainable development: a theoretical review and approach, Sustainability, 10, (2018); Brulle R.J., The climate lobby: a sectoral analysis of lobbying spending on climate change in the USA, 2000 to 2016, Clim Change, 149, pp. 289-303, (2018); Brulle R.J., Aronczyk M., Carmichael J., Corporate promotion and climate change: an analysis of key variables affecting advertising spending by major oil corporations, 1986–2015, Clim Change, 159, pp. 87-101, (2020); Brundiers K., Wiek A., Beyond interpersonal competence: teaching and learning professional skills in sustainability, Educ Sci, 7, 1, (2017); Brundiers K., Barth M., Cebrian G., Cohen M., Diaz L., Doucette S., Dripps W., Habron G., Harre N., Jarchow M., Losch K., Michel J., Mochizuki Y., Rieckmann M., Parnell R., Walker P., Zint M., Key competencies in sustainability in higher education—toward an agreed-upon reference framework, Sustain Sci, 4, (2021); Bryson L., McPhillips K., Robinson K., Turning public issues into private troubles: lead contamination, domestic labor, and the exploitation of women’s unpaid labor in Australia, Gend Soc, 15, pp. 754-772, (2001); Buchs C., Gilles I., Antonietti J.P., Butera F., Why students need to be prepared to cooperate: a cooperative nudge in statistics learning at university, Educ Psychol, 36, pp. 956-974, (2016); Butera F., Sommet N., Darnon C., Sociocognitive conflict regulation: how to make sense of diverging ideas, Curr Dir Psychol Sci, 28, pp. 145-151, (2019); Butera F., Swiatkowski W., Dompnier B., Competition in education, The Oxford handbook on the psychology of competition, (2021); Butera F., Batruch A., Autin F., Mugny G., Quiamzade A., Pulfrey C., Teaching as social influence: empowering teachers to become agents of social change, Soc Issues Policy Rev, 15, pp. 323-355, (2021); Capstick S., Whitmarsh L., Poortinga W., Pidgeon N., Upham P., International trends in public perceptions of climate change over the past quarter century, Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change, 6, pp. 35-61, (2015); Cisse G., McLeman R., Adams H., Aldunce P., Bowen K., Campbell-Lendrum D., Clayton S., Ebi K.L., Hess J., Huang C., Liu Q., McGregor G., Semenza J., Tirado M.C., Health, wellbeing, and the changing structure of communities, To the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2, pp. 1041-1170, (2022); Clayton S., Climate anxiety. Psychological responses to climate change, J Anxiety Disord, 74, (2020); Clayton S., Devine-Wright P., Stern P., Whitmarsch L., Carrico A., Steg L., Swim J., Bonnes M., Psychological research and global climate change, Nat Clim Change, 5, pp. 640-646, (2015); Cunsolo A., Ellis N.R., Ecological grief as a mental health response to climate change-related loss, Nat Clim Change, 8, pp. 275-281, (2018); da Rocha P.L.B., Pardini R., Viana B.F., El-Hani C.N., Fostering inter- and transdisciplinarity in discipline-oriented universities to improve sustainability science and practice, Sustain Sci, 15, pp. 717-728, (2020); Daly H.E., Farley J., Ecological economics: principles and applications, (2011); Dewey J., Experience & education, (1938); Dietz T., Shwom R.L., Whitley C.T., Climate change and society, Annu Rev Sociol, 46, pp. 135-158, (2020); Dunlap R.E., Brulle R.J., Climate change and society: sociological perspectives, (2015); Dunlap R.E., McCright A.M., Challenging climate change: the denial countermovement, Climate change and society: sociological perspectives, pp. 300-332, (2015); Dzialo L., The feminization of environmental responsibility: a quantitative, cross-national analysis, Environ Sociol, 3, pp. 427-437, (2017); Eigenbrode S.D., O'Rourke M., Wulfhorst J.D., Althoff D.M., Goldberg C.S., Merrill K., Morse W., Nielsen-Pincus M., Stephens J., Winowiecki L., Bosque-Perez N.A., Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science, Bioscience, 57, pp. 55-64, (2007); Farrell J., The growth of climate change misinformation in US philanthropy: evidence from natural language processing, Environ Res Lett, 14, (2018); Foster A., Cole J., Farlow A., Petrikova I., Planetary health ethics: beyond first principles, Challenges, 10, (2019); Fritsche I., Barth M., Jugert P., Masson T., Reese G., A social identity model of pro-environmental action (SIMPEA), Psychol Rev, 125, pp. 245-269, (2018); Frumkin H., Sustaining life: human health–planetary health linkages, Health of people, health of planet and our responsibility, (2020); Funtowicz S., Ravetz J., O'Connor M., Challenges in the use of science for sustainable development, Int J Sustain Dev, 1, pp. 99-107, (1998); Gaard G., Critical ecofeminism: interrogating ‘meat’, ‘species’, and ‘plant’, Meat culture, pp. 264-287, (2016); Gifford R., The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation, Am Psychol, 66, pp. 290-302, (2011); Glazebrook T., Opoku E., Defending the defenders: environmental protectors, climate change and human rights, Ethics Environ, 23, pp. 83-109, (2018); Graham P., Kuyvenhoven C., Upitis R., Arshad-Ayaz A., Scheinman E., Khan C., Goebel A., Brown R.S., Hovorka A., The emotional experience of sustainability courses: learned eco-anxiety, potential ontological adjustment, J Educ Sustain Develop, 14, pp. 190-204, (2020); Grasso M., Oily politics: a critical assessment of the oil and gas industry’s contribution to climate change, Energy Res Soc Sci, 50, pp. 106-115, (2019); Guzman C.A.F., Aguirre A.A., Astle B., Barros E., Bayles B., Chimbari M., El-Abbadi N., Evert J., Hackett F., Howard C., Jennings J., Krzyzek A., LeClair J., Maric F., Martin O., Osano O., Patz J., Potter T., Redvers N., Trienekens N., Walpole S., Wilson L., Xu C., Zylstra M., A framework to guide planetary health education, Lancet Planet Health, 5, pp. e253-e255, (2021); Hamilton I., Kennard H., McGushin A., Hoglund-Isaksson L., Kiesewetter G., Lott M., Milner J., Purohit P., Rafaj P., Sharma R., Springmann M., Woodcock J., Watts N., The public health implications of the Paris Agreement: a modelling study, Lancet Planet Health, 5, pp. e74-e83, (2021); Hardin G., The tragedy of the commons, Science, 162, pp. 1243-1248, (1968); Hassan R., When innovation becomes conformist, Universities in the flux of time: an exploration of time and temporality in university life, pp. 79-93, (2015); Heras M., Galafassi D., Oteros-Rozas E., Ravera F., Berraquero-Diaz L., Ruiz-Mallen I., Realising potentials for arts-based sustainability science, Sustain Sci, 16, pp. 1875-1889, (2021); Hilger A., Keil A., Education for sustainable development with transdisciplinary-oriented courses—experiences and recommendations for future collaborations in higher education teaching, J Geogr High Educ, (2021); Hirsch Hadorn G., Bradley D., Pohl C., Rist S., Wiesmann U., Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research, Ecol Econ, 60, pp. 119-128, (2006); Holden C., Hicks D., Making global connections: the knowledge, understanding and motivation of trainee teachers, Teach Teach Ed, 23, pp. 13-23, (2007); Hsu Y.S., Tytler R., White P.J., Innovative approaches to socioscientific issues and sustainability education: linking research to practice, learning sciences for higher education, (2022); Huckle J., Wals A.E.J., The UN decade of education for sustainable development: business as usual in the end, Environ Educ Res, 21, pp. 491-505, (2015); Huddart Kennedy E., Krahn H., Krogman N.T., Are we counting what counts? A closer look at environmental concern, pro-environmental behaviour, and carbon footprint, Local Environ, 20, pp. 220-236, (2015); Hunt S.A., Benford R.D., Collective identity, solidarity, and commitment, The Blackwell companion to social movements, pp. 433-457, (2004); Huynen M., Martens P., Akin S.-M., Climate change: an amplifier of existing health risks in developing countries, Environ Dev Sustain, (2013); Global Report on Internal Displacement 2021, (2021); World Disasters Report, (2020); Displacement in a Changing Climate, (2021); Illingworth S., Jack K., Rhyme and reason-using poetry to talk to underserved audiences about environmental change, Clim Risk Manag, 19, pp. 120-129, (2018); Illingworth S., Wake P., Developing science tabletop games: ‘Catan’® and global warming, J Sci Commun, 18, (2019); Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, (2019); Climate Change 2022a: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change., (2022); Summary for policymakers, Climate Change 2022B: Mitigation of Climate Change, (2022); Jahn T., Bergmann M., Keil F., Transdisciplinarity: between mainstreaming and marginalization, Ecol Econ, 79, pp. 1-10, (2012); Johnson A.E., Wilkinson K.K., All we can save: truth, courage, and solutions for the climate crisis, (2021); Jones C.A., Davison A., Disempowering emotions: the role of educational experiences in social responses to climate change, Geoforum, 118, pp. 190-200, (2021); Jordan J.C., Theatre making and storytelling on the margins: the lived experience of climate change in Dhaka, Res Drama Educ, 25, pp. 569-575, (2020); Jorgenson A.K., Fiske S., Hubacek K., Li J., McGovern T., Rick T., Schor J.B., Solecki W., York R., Zycherman A., Social science perspectives on drivers of and responses to global climate change, Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change, 10, (2019); Kates R.W., What kind of a science is sustainability science?, Proc Natl Acad Sci, 108, pp. 9449-19450, (2011); Kelly O., The empowerment paradox: exploring the implications of neoliberalized feminism for sustainable development, Sociol Dev, 6, pp. 296-317, (2020); Kelly O., Illingworth S., Butera F., Dawson V., White P., Blaise M., Martens P., Schuitema G., Huynen M., Bailey S., Cowman S., Education in a warming world: trends, opportunities and pitfalls for institutes of higher education, Front Sustain, (2022); Kelly O., Illingworth S., Butera F., Steinberger J., Blaise M., Dawson V., Huynen M., Martens P., Bailey S., Savage G., White P., Schuitema G., Cowman S., Tertiary education in a warming world, reflections from the field, (2022); Kim S., Shin W., Understanding American and Korean students’ support for pro-environmental tax policy: the application of the value–belief–norm theory of environmentalism, Environ Commun, 11, pp. 311-331, (2017); Klein J.T., Prospects for transdisciplinarity, Futures, 36, pp. 515-526, (2004); Knaggard A., Ness B., Harnesk D., Finding an academic space: reflexivity among sustainability researchers, Ecol Soc, 23, (2018); Knight P., Yorke M., Assessment, learning and employability, (2003); Kollmuss A., Agyeman J., Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?, Environ Educ Res, 8, pp. 239-260, (2002); Lang D.J., Wiek A., Bergmann M., Stauffacher M., Martens P., Moll P., Swilling M., Thomas C.J., Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges, Sustain Sci, 7, pp. 25-43, (2012); Lavery J.V., Building an evidence base for stakeholder engagement, Science, 361, pp. 554-556, (2018); Nat Rev Earth Environ, 1, (2020); Lockie S., Sustainability and the future of environmental sociology, Environ Sociol, 2, pp. 1-4, (2016); Longo S.B., Clark B., Shriver T.E., Clausen R., Sustainability and environmental sociology: putting the economy in its place and moving toward an integrative socio-ecology, Sustainability, 8, (2016); Longo S.B., Isgren E., Clark B., Jorgenson A.K., Jerneck A., Olsson L., Kelly O.M., Harnesk D., York R., Sociology for sustainability science, Discov Sustain, 2, (2021); Lorenzoni I., Nicholson-Cole S., Whitmarsh L., Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications, Glob Environ Change, 17, pp. 445-459, (2007); Loy L.S., Spence A., Reducing, and bridging, the psychological distance of climate change, J Environ Psychol, 67, (2020); Maibach E.W., Nisbet M., Baldwin P., Akerlof K., Diao G., Reframing climate change as a public health issue: an exploratory study of public reactions, BMC Public Health, 10, pp. 1-11, (2010); Massenberg J.R., Social values and sustainability: a retrospective view on the contribution of economics, Sustain Sci, 14, pp. 1233-1246, (2019); McClam S., Flores-Scott E.M., Transdisciplinary teaching and research: what is possible in higher education?, Teach High Educ, 17, pp. 231-243, (2012); McCowan T., The impact of universities on climate change: A theoretical framework, Transforming Universities for a Changing Climate, Working Paper Series No. 1, (2020); McDonald R.I., Chai H.Y., Newell B.R., Personal experience and the ‘psychological distance’ of climate change: an integrative review, J Environ Psychol, 44, pp. 109-118, (2015); McKie R.E., Climate change counter movement neutralization techniques: a typology to examine the climate change counter movement, Sociol Inq, 89, pp. 288-316, (2019); Miller T., Baird T.D., Littlefield C.M., Kofinas G., Chapin F.S., Redman C., Epistemological pluralism: reorganizing interdisciplinary research, Conserv Ecol, (2008); Mills C.W., The sociological imagination, (1959); Mobjork M., Consulting versus participatory transdisciplinarity: a refined classification of transdisciplinary research, Futures, 42, pp. 866-873, (2010); Myers S., Frumkin H., An introduction to planetary health, Planetary health: protecting nature to protect ourselves, (2020); Nagatsu M., Davis T., DesRoches C.T., Et al., Philosophy of science for sustainability science, Sustain Sci, 15, pp. 1807-1817, (2020); Newman T.P., Nisbet E.C., Nisbet M.C., Climate change, cultural cognition, and media effects: worldviews drive news selectivity, biased processing, and polarized attitudes, Public Underst Sci, 27, pp. 985-1002, (2018); Norgaard K.M., Cognitive and Behavioral Challenges in Responding to Climate Change, (2009); Norgaard K.M., The sociological imagination in a time of climate change, Glob Planet Change, 163, pp. 171-176, (2018); O'Brien K., Selboe E., Hayward B.M., Exploring youth activism on climate change: dutiful, disruptive, and dangerous dissent, Ecol Soc, 23, 3, (2018); O'Neill S., Nicholson-Cole S., Fear won’t do it”: promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations, Sci Commun, 30, pp. 355-379, (2009); Ojala M., How do children cope with global climate change? Coping strategies, engagement, and well-being, J Environ Psychol, 32, pp. 225-233, (2012); Ojala M., Hope in the face of climate change: associations with environmental engagement and student perceptions of teachers’ emotion communication style and future orientation, J Environ Educ, 46, pp. 133-148, (2015); Overland I., Sovacool B.K., The misallocation of climate research funding, Energy Res Soc Sci, 62, (2020); Pellow D.N., Toward a critical environmental justice studies: black lives matter as an environmental justice challenge—corrigendum, Du Bois Rev, 13, (2016); Pellow D.N., Brehm H.N., An environmental sociology for the twenty-first century, Annu Rev Sociol, 39, pp. 229-250, (2013); Perry J., Twenty leaded rules to make sure your project sinks! Green teacher: the middle years, (2004); Persson L., Carney Almroth B.M., Collins C.D., Cornell S., de Wit C.A., Diamond M.L., Fantke P., Hassellov M., MacLeod M., Ryberg M.W., Sogaard Jorgensen P., Villarrubia-Gomez P., Wang Z., Hauschild M.Z., Outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary for novel entities, Environ Sci Technol, 56, pp. 1510-1521, (2022); Pharo E., Davison A., McGregor H., Warr K., Brown P., Using communities of practice to enhance interdisciplinary teaching: lessons from four Australian institutions, High Educ Res Dev, 33, pp. 341-354, (2014); Preston K.M., Mourning for the Earth, Sojourners, (2013); Pulfrey C., Buchs C., Butera F., Why grades engender performance avoidance goals: the mediating role of autonomous motivation, J Educ Psychol, 103, pp. 683-700, (2011); Raphael J., White P.J., van Cuylenburg K., Sparking learning in science and drama: setting the scene, Science and drama: contemporary and creative approaches to teaching and learning, (2021); Romanello M., McGushin A., Di Napoli C., Drummond P., Hughes N., Jamart L., Kennard H., Lampard P., Solano Rodriguez B., Arnell N., Ayeb-Karlsson S., Belesova K., Cai W., Campbell-Lendrum D., Capstick S., Chambers J., Chu L., Ciampi L., Dalin C., Dasandi N., Dasgupta S., Davies M., Dominguez-Salas P., Dubrow R., Ebi K.L., Eckelman M., Ekins P., Escobar L.E., Georgeson L., Grace D., Graham H., Gunther S.H., Hartinger S., He K., Heaviside C., Hess J., Hsu S.-C., Jankin S., Jimenez M.P., Kelman I., Kiesewetter G., Kinney P.L., Kjellstrom T., Kniveton D., Lee J.K.W., Lemke B., Liu Y., Liu Z., Lott M., Lowe R., Martinez-Urtaza J., Maslin M., McAllister L., McMichael C., Mi Z., Milner J., Minor K., Mohajeri N., Moradi-Lakeh M., Morrissey K., Munzert S., Murray K.A., Neville T., Nilsson M., Obradovich N., Sewe M.O., Oreszczyn T., Otto M., Owfi F., Pearman O., Pencheon D., Rabbaniha M., Robinson E., Rocklov J., Salas R.N., Semenza J.C., Sherman J., Shi L., Springmann M., Tabatabaei M., Taylor J., Trinanes J., Shumake-Guillemot J., Vu B., Wagner F., Wilkinson P., Winning M., Yglesias M., Zhang S., Gong P., Montgomery H., Costello A., Hamilton I., The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: code red for a healthy future, Lancet, 398, pp. 1619-1662, (2021); Rosa E.A., Rudel T.K., York R., Jorgenson A.K., Dietz T., The human (anthropogenic) driving forces of global climate change, Climate change and society: sociological perspectives, pp. 32-60, (2015); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A., Niyogi D., Mehta J., Top S., The need to introduce system thinking in teaching climate change, Sci Educ, 25, pp. 73-81, (2017); Ruch G., Turney D., Ward A., Relationship-based social work: getting to the heart of practice, (2018); Rudel T.K., Roberts J.T., Carmin J., Political economy of the environment, Annu Rev Sociol, 37, pp. 221-238, (2011); Rudman L.A., McLean M.C., Bunzl M., When truth is personally inconvenient, attitudes change: the impact of extreme weather on implicit support for green politicians and explicit climate-change beliefs, Psychol Sci, 24, pp. 2290-2296, (2013); Salovaara J.J., Soini K., Pietikainen J., Sustainability science in education: analysis of master’s programmes’ curricula, Sustain Sci, 15, pp. 901-915, (2020); Sampedro J., Smith S.J., Arto I., Gonzalez-Eguino M., Markandya A., Mulvaney K.M., Pizarro-Irizar C., Van Dingenen R., Health co-benefits and mitigation costs as per the Paris Agreement under different technological pathways for energy supply, Environ Int, 136, (2020); Sarrasin O., Crettaz von Roten F., Butera F., Who’s to act? Perceptions of intergenerational obligation and pro-environmental behaviours among youth, Sustainability, 14, (2022); Scholz R.W., Transdisciplinarity: science for and with society in light of the university’s roles and functions, Sustain Sci, 15, pp. 1033-1049, (2020); Schuitema G., Sintov N.D., Should we quit our jobs? Challenges, barriers and recommendations for interdisciplinary energy research, Energy Policy, 101, pp. 246-250, (2017); Sellberg M.M., Cockburn J., Holden P.B., Lam D.P.M., Towards a caring transdisciplinary research practice: navigating science, society and self, Ecosyst People, 17, pp. 292-305, (2021); Shah H., Global problems need social science, Nature, 577, (2020); Sherif M., Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict, Am J Sociol, 63, pp. 349-356, (1958); Shove E., Social theory and climate change, Theory Cult Soc, 27, pp. 277-288, (2010); Spence A., Poortinga W., Pidgeon N., The psychological distance of climate change, Risk Anal, 32, pp. 957-972, (2012); Steelman T.A., Andrews E., Baines S., Bharadwaj L., Bjornson E.R., Bradford L., Cardinal K., Carriere G., Fresque-Baxter J., Jardine T.D., MacColl I., Macmillan S., Marten J., Orosz C., Reed M.G., Rose I., Shmon K., Shantz S., Staples K., Strickert G., Voyageur M., Identifying transformational space for transdisciplinarity: using art to access the hidden third, Sustain Sci, 14, pp. 771-790, (2019); Stone S.B., Myers S.S., Golden C.D., Cross-cutting principles for planetary health education, Lancet Planet Health, 2, pp. e192-e193, (2018); Tejedor G., Segalas J., Action research workshop for transdisciplinary sustainability science, Sustain Sci, 13, pp. 493-502, (2018); Thurston G.D., Bell M.L., The human health co-benefits of air quality improvements associated with climate change mitigation, Climate change and global public health. Respiratory medicine, 7, (2021); Trott C.D., Even T.L., Frame S.M., Merging the arts and sciences for collaborative sustainability action: a methodological framework, Sustain Sci, 15, pp. 1067-1085, (2020); Tytler R., Prain V., There is a strong case for inquiry learning in maths and science, Educationhq, (2021); Tytler R., Ferguson J., White P., Constructivist and sociocultural theories of learning, The art of teaching science, pp. 34-46, (2019); Rio declaration on environment and development, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UN Doc. A/CONF.151/26, Vol I, 31, (1992); Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing window—climate Crisis Calls for Rapid Transformation of Societies., (2022); Knowledge-driven actions: Transforming higher education for global sustainabilityIndependent Expert Group on the Universities and the 2030 Agenda, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris, (2022); van der Linden S., Maibach E., Leiserowitz A., Improving public engagement with climate change: five “best practice” insights from psychological science, Perspect Psychol Sci, 10, pp. 758-763, (2015); Vasbinder J.W., Andersson B., Arthur W.B., Boasson M., de Boer R., Changeux J.P., Domingo E., Eigen M., Fersht A., Frenkel D., Rees M., Groen T., Huber R., Hunt T., Holland J., May R., Norrby E., Nijkamp P., Lehn J.M., Rabbinge R., Scheffer M., Schuster P., Serageldin I., Stuip J., de Vries J., van Vierssen W., Willems R., Transdisciplinary EU science institute needs funds urgently, Nature, 463, (2010); Verlie B., Learning to live with climate change: from anxiety to transformation, (2021); Wang-Erlandsson L., Tobian A., van der Ent R.J., Fetzer I., te Wierik S., Porkka M., Staal A., Jaramillo F., Dahlmann H., Singh C., Greve P., Gerten D., Keys P.W., Gleeson T., Cornell S.E., Steffen W., Bai X., Rockstrom J., A planetary boundary for green water, Nat Rev Earth Environ, (2022); Watts N., Adger W.N., Agnolucci P., Blackstock J., Byass P., Cai W., Chaytor S., Colbourn T., Collins M., Cooper A., Cox P.M., Depledge J., Drummond P., Ekins P., Galaz V., Grace D., Graham H., Grubb M., Haines A., Hamilton I., Hunter A., Jiang X., Li M., Kelman I., Liang L., Lott M., Lowe R., Luo Y., Mace G., Maslin M., Nilsson M., Oreszczyn T., Pye S., Quinn T., Svensdotter M., Venevsky S., Warner K., Xu B., Yang J., Yin Y., Yu C., Zhang Q., Gong P., Montgomery H., Costello A., Health and climate change: policy responses to protect public health, Lancet, 386, pp. 1861-1914, (2015); Webb J., Climate change and society: the chimera of behaviour change technologies, Sociology, 46, pp. 109-125, (2012); Westoby R., McNamara K.E., Fear, grief, hope and action, Nat Clim Change, 9, pp. 500-501, (2019); White P.J., Action Learning Group Project., (2012); White P.J., Activist, The Handbook of the Anthropocene, (2023); White P.J., Ferguson J.P., Smith N.O., Carre H.O., School strikers enacting politics for climate justice: daring to think differently about education, Aus J Environ Educ, 38, pp. 26-39, (2021); White P.J., Raphael J., van Cuylenburg K., Science and drama: contemporary and creative approaches to teaching and learning, (2021); Whitmee S., Haines A., Beyrer C., Boltz F., Capon A.G., de Souza Dias B.F., Ezeh A., Frumkin H., Gong P., Head P., Horton R., Mace G.M., Marten R., Myers S.S., Nishtar S., Osofsky S.A., Pattanayak S.K., Pongsiri M.J., Romanelli C., Soucat A., Vega J., Yac D., Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of The Rockefeller Foundation-Lancet Commission on planetary health, Lancet, 386, pp. 1973-2028, (2015); COP26 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: The Health Argument for Climate Action., (2021); (2022); Wmo-World Meteorological Organization, (2023); Workman A., Blashki G., Bowen K.J., Karol D.J., Wiseman J., The political economy of health co-benefits: embedding health in the climate change agenda, Int J Environ Res Public Health, 15, (2018); Yeh E.T., How can experience of local residents be “knowledge”? Challenges in interdisciplinary climate change research, Area, 48, pp. 34-40, (2016)","O. Kelly; School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Dublin, Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington Building, Ireland; email: o.kelly1@ucd.ie","","Springer","","","","","","18624065","","","","English","Sustainability Sci.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85174227823"
"Nadav N.; Benoliel P.; Schechter C.","Nadav, Nechama (57207931843); Benoliel, Pascale (36018136800); Schechter, Chen (14219658000)","57207931843; 36018136800; 14219658000","Principal systems thinking and senior management team effectiveness: the mediating role of senior management team learning","2023","Journal of Educational Administration","61","6","","662","681","19","1","10.1108/JEA-06-2023-0136","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85173519079&doi=10.1108%2fJEA-06-2023-0136&partnerID=40&md5=feaa8671718ddabf834c2c882a488e33","Leadership, Organizational Development and Policy, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel","Nadav N., Leadership, Organizational Development and Policy, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Benoliel P., Leadership, Organizational Development and Policy, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Schechter C., Leadership, Organizational Development and Policy, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel","Purpose: The role of leadership through senior management teams (SMT) has received increasing attention over the past several decades. Such leadership requires principals to play a key role in promoting SMT effectiveness. Therefore, according to the input–mediator–outcome model (Ilgen et al., 2005), this study's purpose is to investigate the mediating role of school SMT learning in the relationship between principal systems thinking (PST) and SMT effectiveness after accounting for students' socioeconomic backgrounds and SMT members' tenure. Design/methodology/approach: A three-source survey design with self-reported and non-self-reported data was used, from a sample of 282 participants from 71 elementary schools in Israel. The sample included principals and SMTs. Data were aggregated at the school level of analysis. Findings: The results from structural equation modeling and bootstrapping analysis indicated that SMT learning fully mediates the relationship between PST and SMT effectiveness, irrespective of the students' socioeconomic backgrounds. Originality/value: This study provides important insights into the role of SMT learning as a mediator in the relationship between PST and SMT effectiveness. In addition, the study responds to the call of previous studies to examine the effects of PST on characteristics and outcomes at the group level. Moreover, the proposed integrative model highlights the importance of SMT learning and suggests new ways to encourage it. © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.","Senior management teams; Systems thinking; Team in-role performance; Team innovation; Team learning","","","","","","","","Baron R.M., Kenny D.A., The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological-research - conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 6, pp. 1173-1182, (1986); Benoliel P., Principals’ boundary activities and school violence: the mediating role of school management teams, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 48, 2, pp. 286-304, (2020); Benoliel P., A team-based perspective for school improvement: the mediating role of school management teams, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 14, 2, pp. 442-470, (2021); Benoliel P., Shaked H., Nadav N., Schechter C., Principals' systems thinking attribute: exploring a principal–middle leader relational demography perspective, Journal of Educational Administration, 59, 1, pp. 22-42, (2021); Benoliel P., Somech A., Functional heterogeneity and senior management team effectiveness: the mediating role of school leadership, Journal of Educational Administration, 54, 4, pp. 492-512, (2016); Bhengu T.T., Mchunu B.S., Bayeni S.D., Growing our own timber! Lived experiences of five school principals in using a Systems Thinking Approach for school development, SAGE Open, 10, 1, pp. 1-12, (2020); Bickmore D.L., Roberts M.M., Gonzales M.M., How aspiring principals applied course-based learning to develop school improvement plans, Journal of Educational Administration, 59, 2, pp. 199-214, (2021); Bliese P.D., Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: implications for data aggregation and analysis, Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations, pp. 349-381, (2000); Bogler R., Berkovich I., A systematic review of empirical evidence on teachers' organizational commitment 1994-2018, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21, 3, pp. 440-457, (2020); Chamtitigul N., Li W., The influence of ethical leadership and team learning on team performance in software development projects, Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 27, 3-4, pp. 240-259, (2021); Chen-Levi T., Schechter C., Buskila Y., Exploring systems thinking in schools: mental models of school management teams, International Journal of Educational Reform, 30, 2, pp. 116-137, (2021); Dimas I.D., Assuncao M., Rebelo T., Lourenco P.R., Alves M., Innovation in teams: the role of psychological capital and team learning, The Journal of Psychology, 156, 2, pp. 133-146, (2022); Dunlap W.P., Burke M.J., Smith-Crowe K., Accurate tests of statistical significance for rWG and average deviation interrater agreement indexes, Journal of Applied Psychology, 888, 2, pp. 356-362, (2003); Edmondson A.C., The Fearless Organization. Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth, (2018); Flatten T., Adams D., Brettel M., Fostering absorptive capacity through leadership: a cross-cultural analysis, Journal of World Business, 50, 3, pp. 519-534, (2015); Harvey J.F., Johnson K.J., Roloff K.S., Edmondson A.C., From orientation to behavior: the interplay between learning orientation, open-mindedness, and psychological safety in team learning, Human Relations, 72, 11, pp. 1726-1751, (2019); Harvey J.F., Cromwell J.R., Johnson K.J., Edmondson A.C., The dynamics of team learning: harmony and rhythm in teamwork arrangements for innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 68, 3, pp. 601-647, (2023); Hayes A.F., An index and test of linear moderated mediation, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 1, pp. 1-22, (2015); Hvidston D.J., Range B.G., McKim C.A., Mette I.M., The views of novice and late career principals concerning instructional and organizational leadership within their evaluation, Planning and Changing, 46, 1-2, (2015); Ilgen D.R., Hollenbeck J.R., Johnson M., Jundt D., Teams in organization, Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 1, pp. 517-543, (2005); Education – statistical abstract of Israel 2020 – No.71, (2020); James L.R., Brett J.M., Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 2, (1984); James L.R., Demaree R.G., Wolf G., An assessment of within-group interrater agreement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 2, (1993); James L.R., Mulaik S.A., Brett J.M., A tale of two methods, Organizational Research Methods, 9, 2, pp. 233-244, (2006); Joreskog K.G., Sorbom D., LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide, (1996); Kenny D.A., Kashy D.A., Bolger N., Data analysis in social psychology, The Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 233-265, (1998); Khan S.H., Saeed M., Fatima K., Assessing the performance of secondary school headteachers: a survey study based on teachers' views in Punjab, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 37, 6, pp. 766-783, (2009); Knapp M.S., Copland M.A., Honig M.I., Plecki M.L., Portin B.S., Practicing and supporting learning-focused leadership in schools and districts, Learning-focused Leadership in Action: Improving Instruction in Schools and Districts, pp. 181-210, (2014); Koeslag-Kreunen M., Van den Bossche P., Hoven M., Van der Klink M., Gijselaers W., When leadership powers team learning: a meta-analysis, Small Group Research, 49, 4, pp. 475-513, (2018); Kostopoulos K.C., Spanos Y.E., Prastacos G.P., Structure and function of team learning emergence: a multilevel empirical validation, Journal of Management, 39, 6, pp. 1430-1461, (2013); Kurland H., Hasson-Gilad D.R., Organizational learning and extra effort: the mediating effect of job satisfaction, Teaching and Teacher Education, 49, pp. 56-67, (2015); Lavy S., Ayuob W., Teachers' sense of meaning associations with teacher performance and graduates' resilience: a study of schools serving students of low socio-economic status, Frontiers in Psychology, 10, (2019); LeBreton J.M., Senter J.L., Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement, Organizational Research Methods, 11, 4, pp. 815-852, (2008); Leithwood K., Team learning processes, Organizational Learning in Schools, pp. 203-217, (2021); Lipscombe K., Tindall-Ford S., Grootenboer P., Middle leading and influence in two Australian schools, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 48, 6, pp. 1063-1079, (2020); Louis K.S., Robinson V.M., External mandates and instructional leadership: school leaders as mediating agents, Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 5, pp. 629-665, (2012); Lovelace K., Shapiro D.L., Weingart L.R., Maximizing cross-functional new product teams' innovativeness and constraint adherence: a conflict communications perspective, Academy of Management Journal, 44, 4, pp. 779-793, (2001); Lu J., Hallinger P., A mirroring process: from school management team cooperation to teacher collaboration, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17, 2, pp. 238-263, (2018); MacKinnon D.P., Lockwood C.M., Hoffman J.M., West S.G., Sheets V., A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects, Psychological Methods, 7, 1, (2002); Mathieu J.E., Gallagher P.T., Domingo M.A., Klock E.A., Embracing complexity: reviewing the past decade of team effectiveness research, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, pp. 17-46, (2019); McCaughan N., Palmer B., Systems Thinking for Harassed Managers, (2018); McGurk E., Pearson D., Practitioner response: systems thinking among enrollees in a principal preparation program, Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13, 3, pp. 283-285, (2018); Muijs D., Harris A., Teacher leadership in (in) action: three case studies of contrasting schools, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 35, 1, pp. 111-134, (2007); Murphy J., Neumerski C.M., Goldring E., Grissom J., Porter A., Bottling fog? The quest for instructional management, Cambridge Journal of Education, 46, 4, pp. 455-471, (2016); Nadav N., Benoliel P., Shaked H., Schechter C., Exploring school principals' systems thinking activities, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20, 4, pp. 579-598, (2021); Nadav N., Benoliel P., Schechter C., Principals' systems thinking and teachers' withdrawal behaviours: the intervening role of school structure and principal–teacher gender (dis) similarity, British Educational Research Journal, 49, 2, pp. 405-426, (2023); Nadav N., Benoliel P., Schechter C., Principals' systems thinking and school effectiveness: the mediating role of collective teacher efficacy, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, pp. 1-19, (2023); Portin B.S., Learning Focused Leadership, (2022); Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F., Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models, Behavior Research Methods, 40, 3, pp. 879-891, (2008); Qadach M., Schechter C., Da'as R.A., From principals to teachers to students: exploring an integrative model for predicting students' achievements, Educational Administration Quarterly, 56, 5, pp. 736-778, (2020); Rebelo T., Lourenco P.R., Dimas I.D., The journey of team learning since “The Fifth Discipline, The Learning Organization, 27, 1, pp. 42-53, (2019); Rousseau D.M., Issues of level in organizational research: multi-level and cross-level perspectives, Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, pp. 1-37, (1985); Sebastian J., Huang H., Allensworth E., Examining integrated leadership systems in high schools: connecting principal and teacher leadership to organizational processes and student outcomes, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 28, 3, pp. 463-488, (2017); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning, (2006); Settoon R.P., Bennett N., Liden R.C., Social exchange in organizations: perceived organizational support, leader–member exchange, and employee reciprocity, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 3, pp. 219-227, (1996); Shaked H., Schechter C., Systems thinking leadership: new explorations for school improvement, Management in Education, 34, 3, pp. 107-114, (2020); Shaked H., Benoliel P., Nadav N., Schechter C., Principals' systems thinking: the meaning and measure of a leadership construct, Leading Holistically: How Schools, Districts, and States Improve Systemically, pp. 54-73, (2018); Shrout P.E., Bolger N., Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations, Psychological Methods, 7, 4, (2002); Sleegers P., Moolenaar N., Daly A., The interactional nature of schools as social organizations: three theoretical perspectives, The SAGE Handbook of School Organization, pp. 267-284, (2018); Somech A., Naamneh M., Subject coordinators as boundary managers: the impact on team learning and organizational outcomes, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 47, 1, pp. 56-73, (2019); Tang J., Bryant D.A., Walker A.D., School middle leaders as instructional leaders: building the knowledge base of instruction-oriented middle leadership, Journal of Educational Administration, 60, 5, pp. 511-526, (2022); Tuytens M., Moolenaar N., Daly A., Devos G., Teachers' informal feedback seeking towards the school leadership team. A social network analysis in secondary schools, Research Papers in Education, 34, 4, pp. 405-424, (2019); Urick A., Bowers A.J., The impact of principal perception on student academic climate and achievement in high school: how does it measure up?, Journal of School Leadership, 24, 2, pp. 386-414, (2014); Van den Bossche P., Gabelica C., Koeslag-Kreunen M., Team learning, Research Approaches on Workplace Learning: Insights from a Growing Field, pp. 201-218, (2022); Van der Haar S., Koeslag-Kreunen M., Euwe E., Segers M., Team leader structuring for team effectiveness and team learning in command-and-control teams, Small Group Research, 48, 2, pp. 215-248, (2017); Vidal J., Systems thinking in education: its application in a D-VUCA world, (2023); Wang G., Maher L.P., Mead B., O'Boyle E., Oh I.S., Unit agreement and reliability generalization in management and organizational research, Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018, 1, (2018); Weist M.D., Mellin E.A., Chambers K.L., Lever N.A., Haber D., Blaber C., Challenges to collaboration in school mental health and strategies for overcoming them, Journal of School Health, 82, 2, pp. 97-105, (2012); West M.A., Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups, Applied Psychology, 51, 3, pp. 355-387, (2002); West M.A., Wallace M., Innovation in healthcare teams, British Journal of Social Psychology, 21, pp. 303-315, (1991); Widmann A., Mulder R.H., The effect of team learning behaviours and team mental models on teacher team performance, Instructional Science, 48, 1, pp. 1-21, (2020); Zhang W., Chinese school principals explore the fifth discipline fostering a learning community in a high school in Beijing, International Journal of Educational Reform, 32, 1, pp. 102-124, (2023); Marshall J., Fisher D., Making preparation practical: reducing aspiring administrator time to competence through five types of leaderly thinking, Journal of School Administration Research and Development, 3, 1, pp. 74-80, (2018)","P. Benoliel; Leadership, Organizational Development and Policy, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; email: pascale.benoliel@biu.ac.il","","Emerald Publishing","","","","","","09578234","","","","English","J. Educ. Adm.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85173519079"
"Johnson C.; Boon H.; Dinan Thompson M.","Johnson, Claudia (57222480375); Boon, Helen (18433692400); Dinan Thompson, Maree (36782133100)","57222480375; 18433692400; 36782133100","Cognitive Demands of the Reformed Queensland Physics, Chemistry and Biology Syllabus: An Analysis Framed by the New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives","2022","Research in Science Education","52","5","","1603","1622","19","2","10.1007/s11165-021-09988-4","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85106247370&doi=10.1007%2fs11165-021-09988-4&partnerID=40&md5=5e1f3a6f4c8fbd64d7cdd82b260e91c9","College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia; College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia; Learning, Teaching and Student Engagement, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia","Johnson C., College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia; Boon H., College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia; Dinan Thompson M., Learning, Teaching and Student Engagement, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia","Learning objectives outline the knowledge and skills to be taught in a subject, thus signaling what is worth learning and what type of thinking is valued. The aim of this syllabus analysis is to determine the cognitive demand of learning objectives in the recently reformed Queensland physics, chemistry and biology syllabus and to analyse whether the development of students’ metacognitive and self-system thinking is embedded in the curriculum. Marzano and Kendall’s (2007) New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives was used as a theoretical framework for the analysis. Results show that cognitive levels of learning objectives are skewed towards the lower order thinking skills retrieval and comprehension in all three sciences, with less than 50% of learning objectives at analysis or knowledge utilisation level. Teaching metacognitive and self-system thinking were found to be implicit rather than explicit objectives of the new syllabi. There may be a mismatch between the policy goals of science education in Australia and the cognitive demands emphasised in the new syllabi, fuelling the debate about the right balance of lower order and higher order cognitive skills in secondary science. Implications for pedagogy and stakeholders in science education are discussed. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature.","Cognition; Curriculum; Secondary/high school; Syllabus analysis","","","","","","","","Anderson L.W., Krathwohl D.R., A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, (2001); Bayat S., Tarmizi R.A., Assessing meta-cognitive strategies during algebra problem solving performance among university students, Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 8, pp. 403-410, (2010); Beyer B.K., What research tells us about teaching thinking skills, The Social Studies, 99, 5, pp. 223-232, (2008); Biggs J., Collis K., Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy, (1982); Bloom B.S., Engelhart M.D., Furst E.J., Hill W.H., Krathwohl D.R., Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: cognitive domain, (1956); Booker M.J., A roof without walls: Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy and the misdirection of American education, Academic Questions, 20, 4, pp. 347-355, (2007); Christensen C., Instruction, practice, and children’s use of thinking strategies to solve basic addition facts, Learning and Teaching Cognitive Skills, pp. 51-69, (1991); de Acedo S., Lizarraga M.L., de Acedo S., Baquedano M.T.S., Rufo M.P., Effects of an instruction method in thinking skills with students from compulsory secondary education, The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13, 1, pp. 127-137, (2010); DeCorte E., Towards powerful learning environments for the acquisition of problem-solving skills, European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1, pp. 5-19, (1990); Dunlosky J., Rawson K.A., Marsh E.J., Nathan M.J., Willingham D.T., Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 1, pp. 4-58, (2013); Fensham P.J., Bellocchi A., Higher order thinking in chemistry curriculum and its assessment, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, pp. 250-264, (2013); Fenwick L., Standards-based reform to senior-secondary curriculum and metacognition in the literacy domain, The Curriculum Journal, 29, 3, pp. 338-353, (2018); Firn J., Science literature review., (2016); Fitzgerald M., Danaia L., McKinnon D.H., Barriers inhibiting inquiry-based science teaching and potential solutions: Perceptions of positively inclined early adopters, Research in Science Education, pp. 1-24, (2017); Gonski D., Arcus T., Boston K., Gould V., Johnson W., O'Brian L., Roberts M., Through growth to achievement: Report of the review to achieve educational excellence in Australian schools, (2018); Goodrum D., Rennie L.J., Australian school science education national action plan 2008 – 2012. Department of Education, Science and Training., (2007); Hattie J., Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement, (2008); Hollins M., Reiss M.J., A review of the school science curricula in eleven high achieving jurisdictions, Curriculum Journal, 27, 1, pp. 80-94, (2016); Irvine J., A comparison of revised Bloom and Marzano’s new taxonomy of learning, Research in Higher Education Journal, 33, pp. 1-16, (2017); Curriculum mapping project phase 4a: Comparing international curricula against the Australian Curriculum final report, Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, (2011); Kereluik K., Mishra P., Fahnoe C., Terry L., What knowledge is of most worth: teacher knowledge for 21st century learning, Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29, 4, pp. 127-140, (2013); Kruger M., Won M., Treagust D.F., Teachers’ perceptions on the changes in the curriculum and exit examinations for biology and human biology, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38, 3, pp. 41-58, (2013); Lee Y.J., Kim M., Yoon H.G., The intellectual demands of the intended primary science curriculum in Korea and Singapore: an analysis based on revised Bloom’s taxonomy, International Journal of Science Education, 37, 13, pp. 2193-2213, (2015); Lemons P.P., Lemons J.D., Questions for assessing higher-order cognitive skills: it’s not just Bloom’s, CBE Life Sciences Education, 12, 1, pp. 47-58, (2013); Liang L.L., Yuan H., Examining the alignment of Chinese national physics curriculum guidelines and 12th-grade exit examinations: a case study, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 13, pp. 1823-1835, (2008); Liu X., Fulmer G., Alignment between the science curriculum and assessment in selected NY state regents exams, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 4, pp. 373-383, (2008); Marzano R.J., Kendall J.S., The new taxonomy of educational objectives, (2007); Marzano R.J., Kendall J.S., Designing and assessing educational objectives: applying the new taxonomy, (2008); Year 12 Curriculum Content and Achievement Standards, (2007); Matters G., Masters G., Redesigning the secondary – tertiary interface. Queensland review of senior assessment and tertiary entrance. Australian Council for Educational Research., (2014); Mishra P., Mehta R., What we educators get wrong about 21st-century learning: results of a survey, Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33, 1, pp. 6-19, (2017); Morris A., Burgess C., The intellectual quality and inclusivity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content in the NSW Stage 5 History syllabus, Curriculum Perspectives, 38, 2, pp. 107-116, (2018); Moseley D., Baumfield V., Higgins S., Lin M., Newton D., Robson S., Gregson M., Thinking skill frameworks for post-16 learners: An evaluation A research report for the learning and skills research centre, (2004); Pekdag B., Erol H., The examination of secondary education chemistry curricula published between 1957–2007 in terms of the dimensions of rationale, goals, and subject-matter, Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13, 1, pp. 653-659, (2013); Senior Syllabus Physics 2007. Physics Senior Syllabus., (2007); Porter A., McMaken J., Hwang J., Yang R., Common core standards: the new U.S. intended curriculum, Educational Researcher Sciences, 40, 3, pp. 103-116, (2011); Science literature review — addendum., (2016); Biology 2019 V1.2 General Senior Syllabus, (2018); Cognitive Verb Toolkit Release, (2018); About us, (2019); Rohrer D., Pashler H., Recent research on human learning challenges conventional instructional strategies, Educational Researcher, 39, 5, pp. 406-412, (2010); Scogin S.C., Cavlazoglu B., LeBlanc J., Stuessy C.L., Inspiring science achievement: a mixed methods examination of the practices and characteristics of successful science programs in diverse high schools, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13, 3, pp. 649-670, (2018); Shalem Y., Sapire I., Huntley B., Mapping onto the mathematics curriculum - an opportunity for teachers to learn, Pythagoras, 34, 1, pp. 1-11, (2013); Toledo S., Dubas J.M., Encouraging higher-order thinking in general chemistry by scaffolding student learning using Marzano’s taxonomy, Journal of Chemical Education, 93, 1, pp. 64-69, (2015); Tytler R., School innovation in science: Improving science teaching and learning in Australian schools, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 13, pp. 1777-1809, (2009); Venville G., Oliver M., The impact of a cognitive acceleration programme in science on students in an academically selective high school, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 15, pp. 48-60, (2015); Wei B., The change in the intended senior high school chemistry curriculum in China: focus on intellectual demands, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2017, pp. 14-23, (2020)","C. Johnson; College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia; email: claudia.pudelko@my.jcu.edu.au","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","0157244X","","","","English","Res. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85106247370"
"Yun M.; Crippen K.J.","Yun, Minji (58740911000); Crippen, Kent J. (8590314400)","58740911000; 8590314400","Computational Thinking Integration into Pre-Service Science Teacher Education: A Systematic Review","2024","Journal of Science Teacher Education","","","","","","","0","10.1080/1046560X.2024.2390758","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85202764680&doi=10.1080%2f1046560X.2024.2390758&partnerID=40&md5=5dbcb752cf035203bb331c876e216e96","School of Teaching and Learning, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States","Yun M., School of Teaching and Learning, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States; Crippen K.J., School of Teaching and Learning, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States","Computational Thinking (CT) has emerged as a fundamental aspect of modern science education, especially within pre-service teacher education. This study examines the current landscape of CT integration in pre-service science teacher education, drawing insights from an analysis of 18 empirical studies conducted since the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards in 2013. The findings reveal the predominantly exploratory nature of research in this area and underscore the prevalence of positive outcomes associated with CT integration. Moreover, the study identifies prominent pedagogical strategies such as problem-based learning and the engineering design process, highlighting their integral roles in CT integration. Additionally, the findings uncover the interconnectedness of modeling and simulation, computational problem-solving, and systems thinking practices within CT-integrated science interventions. This suggests the necessity for a more holistic approach, including the integration of unplugged activities, the generalization component of CT, and diverse science disciplines, encompassing life science and Earth/space science. Ultimately, these findings emphasize the imperative for further investigation to comprehensively explore CT integration within pre-service science teacher education, aligning closely with contemporary educational standards and practices. © 2024 Association for Science Teacher Education.","Computational thinking; integration; pre-service science teacher education; science education; systematic review","","","","","","","","Adair J.G., The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 2, pp. 334-345, (1984); Adler R.F., Hibdon J., Kim H., Mayle S., Pines B., Srinivas S., Assessing computational thinking across a STEM curriculum for pre-service teachers, Education and Information Technologies, 28, 7, pp. 8051-8073, (2023); Adler R.F., Kim H., Enhancing future K-8 teachers’ computational thinking skills through modeling and simulations, Education and Information Technologies, 23, 4, pp. 1501-1514, (2018); Araujo R.C., Floyd L., Gadanidis G., Teacher candidates’ key understandings about computational thinking in mathematics and science education, Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 38, 3, pp. 205-229, (2019); Arik M., Topcu M.S., Computational thinking integration into science classrooms: Example of digestive system, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31, 1, pp. 99-115, (2022); Aytekin A., Topcu M.S., The effect of integrating computational thinking (CT) components into science teaching on 6th grade students’ learning of the circulatory system concepts and CT skills, Education and Information Technologies, 29, 7, pp. 8079-8110, (2023); Bati K., Integration of python into science teacher education, developing computational problem solving and using information and communication technologies competencies of pre-service science teachers, Informatics in Education, 21, 2, pp. 235-251, (2022); Bell T.C., Witten I.H., Fellows M., Computer science unplugged: Off-line activities and games for all ages, (1998); Berland M., Wilensky U., Comparing virtual and physical robotics environments for supporting complex systems and computational thinking, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 5, pp. 628-647, (2015); Bort H., Brylow D., CS4Impact: Measuring computational thinking concepts present in CS4HS participant lesson plans, Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - SIGCSE, (2013); Bower M., Wood L., Lai J., Howe C., Lister R., Mason R., Highfield K., Veal J., Improving the computational thinking pedagogical capabilities of school teachers, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42, 3, pp. 53-72, (2017); Breslyn W., McGinnis J.R., Investigating preservice elementary science teachers’ understanding of climate change from a computational thinking systems perspective, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15, 6, (2019); Ciftci A., Topcu M.S., Improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ computational thinking teaching self-efficacy beliefs in a STEM course, Research in Science & Technological Education, 41, 4, pp. 1215-1241, (2022); Ciftci A., Topcu M.S., Improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ computational thinking skills through the unplugged computational thinking integrated STEM approach, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, (2023); de Jong I., Jeuring J., Computational thinking interventions in higher education: A scoping literature review of interventions used to teach computational thinking, Koli Calling ’20: Proceedings of the 20th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, pp. 1-10, (2020); Denning P.J., The profession of it beyond computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 52, 6, pp. 28-30, (2009); Denning P.J., Remaining trouble spots with computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 60, 6, pp. 33-39, (2017); Grover S., Pea R., Computational thinking: A competency whose time has come, Computer Science Education: Perspectives on Teaching and Learning in School, 19, 1, pp. 19-38, (2018); Integrating STEM and Computing in PK-12: Operationalizing computational thinking for STEM learning and assessment, The Interdisciplinarity of the Learning Sciences, 14th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2020, 3, pp. 1479-1486, (2020); Hamerski P.C., McPadden D., Caballero M.D., Irving P.W., Students’ perspectives on computational challenges in physics class, Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18, 2, (2022); Harrison R., Jones B., Gardner P., Lawton R., Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): An appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies, BMC Health Services Research, 21, 1, (2021); Hickmott D., Prieto-Rodriguez E., Holmes K., A scoping review of studies on computational thinking in K–12 mathematics classrooms, Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4, 1, pp. 1-22, (2017); Huang W., Looi C.-K., A critical review of literature on “unplugged” pedagogies in K-12 computer science and computational thinking education, Computer Science Education, 31, 1, pp. 83-111, (2020); Jaipal-Jamani K., Angeli C., Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26, 2, pp. 175-192, (2017); Kakavas P., Ugolini F.C., Computational thinking in primary education: A systematic literature review, Research on Education and Media, 11, 2, pp. 64-94, (2019); Kampylis P., Dagiene V., Bocconi S., Chioccariello A., Engelhardt K., Stupuriene G., Masiulionyte-Dagiene V., Jasute E., Malagoli C., Horvath M., Earp J., Integrating computational thinking into primary and lower secondary education, Educational Technology & Society, 26, 2, pp. 99-117, (2023); Kaya E., Newley A., Yesilyurt E., Deniz H., Measuring computational thinking teaching efficacy beliefs of preservice elementary teachers, Journal of College Science Teaching, 49, 6, pp. 55-64, (2020); Kite V., Park S., Context matters: Secondary science teachers’ integration of process‐based, unplugged computational thinking into science curriculum, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61, 1, pp. 203-227, (2023); Koch M., von Luck K., Schwarzer J., Draheim S., The novelty effect in large display deployments–experiences and lessons-learned for evaluating prototypes, (2018); Lee I., Grover S., Martin F., Pillai S., Malyn-Smith J., Computational thinking from a disciplinary perspective: Integrating computational thinking in K-12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 1, pp. 1-8, (2020); Lee S.J., Francom G.M., Nuatomue J., Computer science education and K-12 students’ computational thinking: A systematic review, International Journal of Educational Research, 114, (2022); Liberati A., Altman D.G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gotzsche P.C., Ioannidis J.P.A., Clarke M., Devereaux P.J., Kleijnen J., Moher D., The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62, 10, pp. 1-34, (2009); Lu Y., Deng G., Shuai Z., Future directions of chemical theory and computation, Pure and Applied Chemistry, 93, 12, pp. 1423-1433, (2021); Lyon J.A., Magana A.J., Computational thinking in higher education: A review of the literature, Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 28, 5, pp. 1174-1189, (2020); Mason S.L., Rich P.J., Preparing elementary school teachers to teach computing, coding, and computational thinking, Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19, 4, pp. 790-824, (2019); McGinnis J.R., Hestness E., Mills K., Ketelhut D., Cabrera L., Jeong H., Preservice science teachers’ beliefs about computational thinking following a curricular module within an elementary science methods course, Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20, 1, pp. 85-107, (2020); McHugh M.L., Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic, Biochemia Medica, 22, 3, pp. 276-282, (2012); Moon P.F., Himmelsbach J., Weintrop D., Walkoe J., Developing preservice teachers intuitions about computational thinking in a mathematics and science methods course, Journal of Psychology Research, 7, 2, pp. 5-20, (2023); Mouza C., Yang H., Pan Y.-C., Yilmaz Ozden S., Pollock L., Resetting educational technology coursework for pre-service teachers: A computational thinking approach to the development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33, 3, (2017); Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking (National Research Council, Ed.), (2010); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Charting a course for success: America’s strategy for STEM education, (2018); O'Connor C., Joffe H., Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, (2020); Ogegbo A.A., Ramnarain U., A systematic review of computational thinking in science classrooms, Studies in Science Education, 58, 2, pp. 203-230, (2022); The future of education and skills: Education 2030, (2018); Peel A., Sadler T.D., Friedrichsen P., Learning natural selection through computational thinking: Unplugged design of algorithmic explanations, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56, 7, pp. 983-1007, (2019); Peel A., Sadler T.D., Friedrichsen P., Algorithmic explanations: An unplugged instructional approach to integrate science and computational thinking, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31, 4, pp. 428-441, (2022); Peters-Burton E., Rich P.J., Kitsantas A., Stehle S.M., Laclede L., High school biology teachers’ integration of computational thinking into data practices to support student investigations, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60, 6, pp. 1353-1384, (2022); Pewkam W., Chamrat S., Pre-service teacher training program of stem-based activities in computing science to develop computational thinking, Informatics in Education, 21, 2, pp. 311-329, (2022); Pontual Falcao T., de Franca R.S., Computational thinking goes to school: Implications for teacher education in brazil, Revista Brasileira de Informática Na Educação, 29, pp. 1158-1177, (2021); Rich K.M., Yadav A., Schwarz C.V., Computational thinking, mathematics, and science: Elementary teachers’ perspectives on integration, Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 27, 2, pp. 165-205, (2019); Rodriguez-Becerra J., Caceres-Jensen L., Diaz T., Druker S., Bahamonde Padilla V., Pernaa J., Aksela M., Developing technological pedagogical science knowledge through educational computational chemistry: A case study of pre-service chemistry teachers’ perceptions, Chemical Education Research and Practice, 21, 2, pp. 638-654, (2020); Rose S., Habgood M.P.J., Jay T., An exploration of the role of visual programming tools in the development of young children’s computational thinking, Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 15, 4, pp. 297-309, (2017); Sands P., Yadav A., Good J., Computational thinking in K-12: In-service teacher perceptions of computational thinking, Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines: Foundations and research highlights, pp. 151-164, (2018); Sari U., Pektas H.M., Sen O.F., Celik H., Algorithmic thinking development through physical computing activities with Arduino in STEM education, Education and Information Technologies, 27, 5, pp. 6669-6689, (2022); Shute V.J., Sun C., Asbell-Clarke J., Demystifying computational thinking, Educational Research Review, 22, pp. 142-158, (2017); Sneider C., Stephenson C., Schafer B., Flick L., Teacher’s toolkit: Exploring the science framework and NGSS: Computational thinking in the science classroom, Science Scope, 38, 3, (2014); Sultani G., Heinsch M., Wilson J., Pallas P., Tickner C., Kay-Lambkin F., “Now I have dreams in place of the nightmares”: An updated systematic review of post-traumatic growth among refugee populations. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 25, 1, pp. 795-812, (2024); Suters L., Elementary preservice teacher coursework design for developing science and mathematics computational thinking practices, Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 21, 2, pp. 360-440, (2021); Tsai F.-H., Hsiao H.-S., Yu K.-C., Lin K.-Y., Development and effectiveness evaluation of a stem-based game-design project for preservice primary teacher education, International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 32, 5, pp. 2403-2424, (2022); Tsay C.H., Kofinas A.K., Trivedi S.K., Yang Y., Overcoming the novelty effect in online gamified learning systems: An empirical evaluation of student engagement and performance, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36, 2, pp. 128-146, (2020); Ufer S., Neumann K., Measuring competencies, International handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 433-443, (2018); Vasconcelos L., Kim C., Preparing preservice teachers to use block-based coding in scientific modeling lessons, Instructional Science, 48, 6, pp. 765-797, (2020); Vasconcelos L., Kim C., Preservice science teachers coding science simulations: Epistemological understanding, coding skills, and lesson design, Educational Technology Research & Development, 70, 4, pp. 1517-1549, (2022); Voogt J., Fisser P., Good J., Mishra P., Yadav A., Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice, Education and Information Technologies, 20, 4, pp. 715-728, (2015); Waterman K.P., Goldsmith L., Pasquale M., Integrating computational thinking into elementary science curriculum: An examination of activities that support students’ computational thinking in the service of disciplinary learning, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 1, pp. 53-64, (2019); Weintrop D., Beheshti E., Horn M., Orton K., Jona K., Trouille L., Wilensky U., Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 1, pp. 127-147, (2016); Weinzierl T., The pillars of science, Principles of parallel scientific computing: A first guide to numerical concepts and programming methods, pp. 3-9, (2021); Wing J., Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 49, 3, (2006); Yadav A., Berges M., Computer science pedagogical content knowledge, ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19, 3, pp. 1-24, (2019); Yadav A., Mayfield C., Zhou N., Hambrusch S., Korb J.T., Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education, ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14, 1, pp. 1-16, (2014); Yadav A., Stephenson C., Hong H., Computational thinking for teacher education, Communications of the ACM, 60, 4, pp. 55-62, (2017)","K.J. Crippen; School of Teaching and Learning, University of Florida, Gainesville, PO Box 117048, 32611, United States; email: kcrippen@coe.ufl.edu","","Taylor and Francis Ltd.","","","","","","1046560X","","","","English","J. Sci. Teach. Educ.","Article","Article in press","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85202764680"
"Lebo N.; Eames C.; Coll R.; Otrel-Cass K.","Lebo, Nelson (56625981100); Eames, Chris (6506714806); Coll, Richard (7004312779); Otrel-Cass, Katherine (6504326106)","56625981100; 6506714806; 7004312779; 6504326106","Toward Ecological Literacy: A Permaculture Approach to Junior Secondary Science","2014","Australian Journal of Environmental Education","29","2","","241","242","1","4","10.1017/aee.2014.9","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85007978636&doi=10.1017%2faee.2014.9&partnerID=40&md5=21be5e6ce0b5157488a93dcca0587e0c","","","Environmental, economic, and social trends suggest the need for more sustainable ways of thinking and patterns of behaviour. Such a shift would require humanity to function at high levels of ecological literacy, which relies on a certain amount of scientific literacy. However, troubling evidence indicates an international pattern of student disengagement with science at the secondary level. Evidence also suggests that it is difficult to integrate environmental or sustainability education at this level, both within New Zealand and elsewhere. This research was aimed at examining the use of a novel approach, using permaculture, in junior secondary science (Years 9 and 10) to enhance students’ ecological and scientific literacy, as well as their attitudes toward studying science in school. Permaculture is an ecological design system based on science and ethics. A permaculture approach to science education involves eco-design thinking, as well as the use of local permaculture properties and practitioners, and the science behind common permaculture practices. The approach is also meant to be relevant and engaging, and to promote systems thinking. This study involved the design and delivery of an intervention based on permaculture principles to one Year 10 science class in New Zealand. Research took the form of a naturalistic, interpretive, mixed methods case study, which included the use of questionnaires, interviews, and observations. Data collection focused on the impacts of a permaculture approach on the teaching and learning of science, on students’ ecological literacy, and on students’ attitudes toward learning science in school. Pre- and post-intervention questionnaires probed students’ opinions on the environment, science, and learning science in school, and tested their sustainable thinking and systems thinking with concept mapping and SOLO Taxonomy exercises. Classroom observations took place over the course of 12 weeks, on average 3 days per week, totalling 31 days. Before and after some classroom visits, I had informal conversations with the teacher, along with three formal interviews before, during and after the intervention. Three focus groups of students were interviewed immediately following the intervention. Findings show that a permaculture approach to junior secondary science can impact positively on students’ understanding of science and sustainability, and may impact on their attitudes toward studying science in school. It also appeared to impact positively on the science teacher's attitude toward including sustainability in his teaching practice, and on his own sustainability learning. Regarding both students and teachers, a permaculture approach appears to have been effective to cultivate attitudes and trellis learning. The teacher and the students responded favourably to many aspects of the intervention, including the overall focus on the environment, the field trips, and some classroom learning activities. The teacher reported appreciating the way the intervention contextualised science with real world examples. Most students reported appreciating the experiential aspects of the intervention, as well as the relevance that a permaculture approach to science education provided. Findings indicate that advances in ecological and scientific literacy varied among students. Some students appeared to: improve their use of science and sustainability vocabulary; become more aware of select socio-scientific issues; better recognise scientific and ecological limits and possibilities. Some students also showed advances in sustainable thinking and systems thinking. Although many students expressed concern about issues such as pollution, wildlife, and genetic engineering’” and prioritised protecting the environment over making money’” there appeared to be a disconnect between these feelings and a sense of personal responsibility to act. Most students reported enjoying learning science with a focus on the environment, with one cohort indicating much greater enjoyment of the permaculture approach than their usual level of enjoyment of learning science in school. Trends in environmental degradation, population growth, energy inflation, and economic stagnation’” especially pronounced since the beginning of this inquiry in 2008’” indicate that the world of the future will require ecologically literate citizens who can design and create truly sustainable systems for all human endeavors. Cultivating such citizens, and trellising their science and sustainability learning has implications for science education. This thesis identifies an innovative approach for junior secondary science in New Zealand that provides a way towards a more sustainable future. © 2014, The Authors. All rights reserved.","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","08140626","","","","English","Aust. J. Environ. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85007978636"
"Li R.; Li G.","Li, Ruying (58667701200); Li, Gaofeng (57896936000)","58667701200; 57896936000","EXPLORING LOWER-SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ SYSTEMS THINKING PERFORMANCE IN ECOLOGICAL ISSUES","2023","Journal of Baltic Science Education","22","5","","865","880","15","1","10.33225/jbse/23.22.865","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85175071707&doi=10.33225%2fjbse%2f23.22.865&partnerID=40&md5=58f16fa0889673adb1b0d3c91fd95a87","College of Life Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, No.620, West Chang’an Avenue, Chang’an District, Xi’an, 710119, China; Shaanxi Normal University Branch, Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality, Xi’an, China","Li R., College of Life Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, No.620, West Chang’an Avenue, Chang’an District, Xi’an, 710119, China; Li G., College of Life Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, No.620, West Chang’an Avenue, Chang’an District, Xi’an, 710119, China, Shaanxi Normal University Branch, Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality, Xi’an, China","Exploring students’ systems thinking (ST) is essential in enhancing science learning, but existing studies have failed to understand students’ ST fully as it relates to ecological issues. This study aimed to fill the aforementioned literature gap by exploring lower-secondary school students’ ST regarding ecological issues. The Systems Thinking Test regarding Ecological Issues, which measures four ST skills (system organisation, behaviour, application, and evaluation), was administered to 1,092 lower-secondary school students. The results reveal low ST performance in ecological issues, with students finding it particularly difficult to identify interactions among components and understand system characteristics. Furthermore, most lacked reflective consciousness and consideration of the diverse dimensions of ecological issues, resulting in monocausal reasoning in system decision-making and evaluation. Comparatively, urban school students performed better than their rural counterparts; additionally, an item-level analysis revealed that climate warming was challenging for the students to understand. This study suggests that greater efforts should be made to address students’ drawbacks and that multi-perspectival teaching is necessary in the context of ecological issues. The addition of system decision-making and evaluation in assessments can enable a broader understanding of ST. © 2023, Scientia Socialis Ltd. All rights reserved.","environment education; lower-secondary school; partial credit model; sustainable development; systems thinking","","","","","","Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment; Beijing Normal University, BNU, (2022–05-012-BZPK01); Beijing Normal University, BNU; Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, (2021TS062); Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities","This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Grant number 2021TS062 and the Research Program Funds of the Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality at Beijing Normal University under Grant number 2022–05-012-BZPK01.","Australian curriculum: F-10 curriculum: Science; Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Four case studies, six years later: Developing system thinking skills in junior high school and sustaining them over time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 10, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Bond T. G., Fox C. M., Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences, (2007); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Grossschedl J., Assessing system thinking through different concept-mapping practices, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 14, pp. 2147-2170, (2012); Brotman J. S., Moore F. M., Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 9, pp. 971-1002, (2008); Cohen J., Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit, Psychological Bulletin, 70, 4, pp. 213-220, (1968); Cox M., Elen J., Steegen A., Systems thinking in geography: Can high school students do it?, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28, 1, pp. 37-52, (2019); What are ecological problems, (2023); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Fanta D., Braeutigam J., Riess W., Fostering systems thinking in student teachers of biology and geography – An intervention study, Journal of Biological Education, 54, 3, pp. 226-244, (2020); Gilissen M. G. R., Knippels M. P. J., van Joolingen W. R., Bringing systems thinking into the classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 42, 8, pp. 1253-1280, (2020); Gilissen M. G. R., Knippels M. P. J, van Joolingen W. R., Fostering students’ understanding of complex biological systems, CBE Life Sciences Education, 20, 3, (2021); Hmelo-Silver C. E., Pfeffer M. G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, 1, pp. 127-138, (2004); Hmelo-Silver C. E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C. E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hogan K., Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 4, pp. 341-368, (2002); Hokayem H., Gotwals A. W., Early elementary students’ understanding of complex ecosystems: A learning progression approach: A learning progression approach, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 10, pp. 1524-1545, (2016); Jin H., Shin H. J., Hokayem H., Qureshi F., Jenkins T., Secondary students’ understanding of ecosystems: A learning progression approach, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 2, pp. 217-235, (2019); Ke L., Sadler T. D., Zangori L., Friedrichsen P. J., Students’ perceptions of socio-scientific issue-based learning and their appropriation of epistemic tools for systems thinking, International Journal of Science Education, 42, pp. 1339-1361, (2020); Landis J. R., Koch G. G., The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data, Biometrics, 33, 1, pp. 159-174, (1977); Lee H., Yoo J., Choi K., Kim S.-W., Krajcik J., Herman B. C., Zeidler D. L., Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens, International Journal of Science Education, 35, 2, pp. 2079-2113, (2013); Liu S.-Y., Lin C.-S., Tsai C.-C., College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making, Science Education, 95, 3, pp. 497-517, (2011); Liu X. F., Using and developing measurement instruments in science education: A Rasch modeling approach, (2020); Mambrey S., Timm J., Landskron J. J., Schmiemann P., The impact of system specifics on systems thinking, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 10, pp. 1632-1651, (2020); Mambrey S., Schrei ber N., Schmi emann P., Young students’ reasoni ng about ecosystems: The role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research in Science Education, 52, 1, pp. 79-98, (2022); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Ulrich-Riedhammer E. M., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Wie lässt sich Systemdenken messen? Darstellung eines empirisch validierten Kompetenzmodells zur Erfassung geographischer Systemkompetenz [How can systems thinking be measured? Representation of an empirically validated competence model for the assessment of geographic system competence, Geographie, Aktuell & Schule, 37, pp. 4-16, (2015); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Ulrich-Riedhammer E. M., System competence modelling: Theoretical foundation and empirical validation of a model involving natural, social and human-environment systems, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 5, pp. 685-711, (2018); China P. R., 义务教育生物学课程标准 [Biology curriculum standards for compulsory education], (2022); Standards for K-12 engineering education?, (2010); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 6, pp. 705-725, (2010); Robitzsch A., Kiefer T., Wu M., TAM: Test Analysis Modules, (2021); Rosenkranzer F., Horsch C., Schuler S., Riess W., Student teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching systems thinking: Effects of different interventions, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 14, pp. 1932-1951, (2017); Sadler T. D., Barab S. A., Scott B., What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?, Research in Science Education, 37, 4, pp. 371-391, (2007); Schuler S., Fanta D., Rosenkraenzer F., Riess W., Systems thinking within the scope of education for sustainable development (ESD) – A heuristic competence model as a basis for (science) teacher education, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42, 2, pp. 192-204, (2018); Sommer C., Lucken M., System competence–Are elementary students able to deal with a biological system?, Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, 2, pp. 125-143, (2010); Sweeney L. B., Sterman J. D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, 4, pp. 249-286, (2000); Verhoeff R. P., Knippels M. P. J., Gilissen M. G. R., Boersma K. T., The theoretical nature of systems thinking. Perspectives on systems thinking in biology education, Frontiers in Education, 3, (2018); Wang Z., Song G., Towards an assessment of students’ interdisciplinary competence in middle school science, International Journal of Science Education, 43, 5, pp. 1-24, (2021); Wen J., Gu C., The rural-urban differences in resources allocation of basic education and its social consequence: Base on the analysis of China’s education statistics, Journal of East China Normal University: Educational Science, 35, 2, (2017); Wu M., Tam H. P., Jen T.-H., Educational measurement for applied researchers, Theory into practice, (2016); Yang F.-Y., Student views concerning evidence and the expert in reasoning a socio-scientific issue and personal epistemology, Educational Studies, 31, 1, pp. 65-84, (2005); You H. S., Marshall J. A., Delgado C., Assessing students’ disciplinary and interdisciplinary understanding of global carbon cycling, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 3, pp. 377-398, (2018)","G. Li; College of Life Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an, No.620, West Chang’an Avenue, Chang’an District, 710119, China; email: ligaofeng@snnu.edu.cn","","Scientia Socialis Ltd","","","","","","16483898","","","","English","J. Baltic Sci. Edu.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85175071707"
"Benoliel P.; Shaked H.; Nadav N.; Schechter C.","Benoliel, Pascale (36018136800); Shaked, Haim (57217604062); Nadav, Nechama (57207931843); Schechter, Chen (14219658000)","36018136800; 57217604062; 57207931843; 14219658000","School principals’ systems thinking: antecedents and consequences","2019","Journal of Educational Administration","57","2","","167","184","17","16","10.1108/JEA-08-2018-0144","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85063262573&doi=10.1108%2fJEA-08-2018-0144&partnerID=40&md5=3f18f8a1fe243d3df2c4ba6bc3d2feb4","School of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Hemdat Hadarom College of Education, Netivot, Israel","Benoliel P., School of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Shaked H., Hemdat Hadarom College of Education, Netivot, Israel; Nadav N., School of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Schechter C., School of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel","Purpose: Today’s educational complexities require principals to adopt a more systemic perspective toward school management. Although research has emphasized the benefits associated with the holistic perspective of systems thinking, research in the educational field has been limited. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the mediating role of principals’ systems thinking (PST) in the relationships between instructional leadership (IL) and subject coordinators’ organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected by surveying a sample of 226 subject coordinators from different elementary schools randomly chosen in Israel. Subject coordinators completed questionnaires on their PST competencies, their principals’ IL, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Structural equation modeling was used to test the research hypotheses. Findings: The results confirmed the main hypotheses: PST did facilitate subject coordinators’ organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Findings also showed that PST mediated the relationship between IL and subject coordinators’ organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Originality/value: By integrating research from both educational and non-educational literature, this study contributes to deepen our understanding regarding the antecedents and consequences of the PST as perceived by their subject coordinators, providing a broader leadership framework on their functions in today’s complex school systems. © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited.","Job satisfaction; Organizational commitment; Principals; Subject coordinators; System thinking","","","","","","","","Abbott I., Bush T., Establishing and maintaining high-performing leadership teams: a primary perspective, International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 41, 6, pp. 586-602, (2013); Alavi S.B., McCormick J., Theoretical and measurement issues for studies of collective orientation in team contexts, Small Group Research, 35, 2, pp. 111-127, (2004); Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W., Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin, 103, 3, pp. 411-423, (1988); Anderson S., Leithwood K., Louis K.S., Data use: an exploration from the district to the school, Linking Leadership to Student Learning, pp. 158-180, (2012); Barnett R.R., Glass J.C., Snowdon R.I., Stringer K.S., Size, performance and effectiveness: cost-constrained measures of best-practice performance and secondary-school size, Education Economics, 10, 3, pp. 291-311, (2002); Bennett N., Woods P., Wise C., Newton W., Understandings of middle-leadership in secondary schools: a review of empirical research, School Leadership and Management, 27, 5, pp. 453-470, (2007); Benoliel P., Managing school management team boundaries and school improvement: an investigation of the school leader role, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20, 1, pp. 57-86, (2017); Berson Y., Da'as R., Waldman D.A., How do leaders and their teams bring about organizational learning and outcomes?, Personnel Psychology, 68, 1, pp. 79-108, (2015); Bertalanffy L., General System Theory, (1968); Bogler R., Nir A.E., The contribution of perceived fit between job demands and abilities to teachers’ commitment and job satisfaction, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 43, 4, pp. 541-560, (2015); Bogler R., Somech A., Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers’ organizational commitment, professional commitment and organizational citizenship behavior in schools, Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 3, pp. 277-289, (2004); Bollen K.A., Structural Equations with Latent Variables, (1989); Bousquet A., Curtis S., Complexity theory, systems thinking and international relations, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24, 1, pp. 43-62, (2011); Brazer S.D., Bauer S.C., Preparing instructional leaders: a model, Educational Administration Quarterly, 49, 4, pp. 645-684, (2013); Brezicha K., Bergmark U., Mitra D.L., One size does not fit all: differentiating leadership to support teachers in school reform, Educational Administration Quarterly, 51, 1, pp. 96-132, (2015); Browne M.W., Cudek R., Alternative ways of assessing model fit, Testing Structural Equation Models, pp. 136-162, (1993); Bui H.T.M., Baruch Y., Creating learning organizations: a systems perspective, Learning Organization, 17, 3, pp. 208-227, (2010); Bui H.T.M., Baruch Y., Learning organizations in higher education: an empirical evaluation within an international context, Management Learning, 43, 5, pp. 515-544, (2012); Bush T., Glover D., School leadership models: what do we know?, School Leadership and Management, 34, 5, pp. 553-571, (2014); Carter A., Empowering middle leaders’ trends in school leadership research on the principal’s impact on school effectiveness, Australian Educational Leader, 38, 1, pp. 37-41, (2016); Chance P.L., Engaging communities through vision development: A systems approach to public relations, Journal of School Public Relations, 26, 2, pp. 139-155, (2005); Cheng E.C.K., Management strategies for promoting teacher collective learning, US-China Education Review, 8, 1, pp. 33-45, (2011); Collie R.J., Shapka J.D., Perry N.E., Predicting teacher commitment: the impact of qschool climate and social–emotional learning, Psychology in the Schools, 48, 10, pp. 1034-1048, (2011); Crick R.D., Barr S., Green H., Pedder D., Evaluating the wider outcomes of schools: complex systems modelling for leadership decisioning, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45, 4, pp. 719-743, (2017); Curran P.J., West S.G., Finch J.F., The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis, Psychological Methods, 1, pp. 16-29, (1996); Dale A., Newman L., Sustainable development, education and literacy, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6, 4, pp. 351-362, (2005); Day C., Gu Q., Sammons P., The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference, Educational Administration Quarterly, 52, 2, pp. 221-258, (2016); Dou D., Devos G., Valcke M., The relationships between school autonomy gap, principal leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 45, 6, pp. 959-977, (2017); Dyehouse M., Bennett D., Harbor J., Childress A., Dark M., A comparison of linear and systems thinking approaches for program evaluation, illustrated using the Indiana interdisciplinary GK-12, Evaluation and Program Planning, 32, 3, pp. 187-196, (2009); Fornell C., Larcker D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 2, pp. 39-50, (1981); Fox S., Spector P.E., A model of work frustration-aggression, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 6, pp. 915-931, (1999); Fullan M., The Principal: Three Keys to Maximizing Impact, (2014); Gharajedaghi J., Systems Thinking, Managing Chaos and Complexity: A Platform for Designing Business Architecture, (2011); Gurr D., Drysdale L., Middle-level secondary school leaders: potential, constraints and implications for leadership preparation and development, Journal of Educational Administration, 51, 1, pp. 55-71, (2013); Hair J.F., Anderson P.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C., Multivariate Data Analysis, (1998); Hallinger P., A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal instructional management rating scale: a lens on methodological progress in educational leadership, Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 2, pp. 271-306, (2011); Hallinger P., Murphy J., Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals, Elementary School Journal, 86, 2, pp. 217-247, (1985); Hallinger P., Wang W.C., Assessing Instructional Leadership with the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale, (2015); Hallinger P., Wang W.C., Chen C.W., Assessing the measurement properties of the principal instructional management rating scale: a meta-analysis of reliability studies, Educational Administration Quarterly, 49, 2, pp. 272-303, (2013); Hammond D., Philosophical and ethical foundations of systems thinking, Triple C, 3, 2, pp. 20-27, (2005); Hayes A.F., An Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, (2013); Hoy W.K., Miskel C.G., Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice, (2013); Hsieh J.Y., Spurious or true? An exploration of antecedents and simultaneity of job performance and job satisfaction across the sectors, Public Personnel Management, 45, 1, pp. 90-118, (2016); Hunt J., Accountability is the Key: Unlocking School Potential through Enhanced Educational Leadership, (2013); James L.R., Mulaik S.A., Brett J.M., A tale of two methods, Organizational Research Methods, 9, 2, pp. 233-244, (2006); Joo B., Park S., Career satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention: the effects of goal orientation, organizational learning culture and developmental feedback, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31, 6, pp. 482-500, (2010); Joo B., Yoon H.J., Jeung C., The effects of core self-evaluations and transformational leadership on organizational commitment, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 33, 6, pp. 564-582, (2012); Joreskog K., Sorbom D., LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood and Least Square Methods, (1996); Judge T.A., Kammeyer-Mueller J.D., Job attitudes, Annual Review of Psychology, 63, pp. 341-367, (2012); Kreis K., Brockopp D.Y., Autonomy: a component of teacher job satisfaction, Education, 107, 1, pp. 110-115, (1986); Kruse S., Schools as soft systems: addressing the complexity of ill-defined problems, Leading Holistically: How Schools, Districts, and States Improve Systemically, (2018); Leithwood K., Department-head leadership for school improvement, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15, 2, pp. 117-140, (2016); Leithwood K., Sun J., Pollock K., How School Leaders Contribute to Student Success: The Four Paths Framework, 23, (2017); Louis K.S., Robinson V.M., External mandates and instructional leadership: School leaders as mediating agents, Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 5, pp. 629-665, (2012); McCall G.J., Interactionist perspectives in social psychology, Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 3-29, (2013); MacKinnon D.P., Lockwood C.M., Hoffman J.M., West S.G., Sheets V., A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects, Psychological Methods, 7, pp. 83-104, (2002); Marshall J., Fisher D., Making preparation practical: reducing aspiring administrator time to competence through five types of leaderly thinking, Journal of School Administration Research and Development, 3, 1, pp. 74-80, (2018); Meyer J.P., Employee commitment: looking back and moving forward, Handbook of Employee Commitment, pp. 511-527, (2016); Minarik M.M., Thornton B., Perreault G., Systems thinking can improve teacher retention, Clearing House, 76, 5, pp. 230-234, (2003); Mowday R.R., Steers R.M., Porter L.W., The measurement of organizational commitment, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 2, pp. 224-247, (1979); Nadav, Systems thinking in educational leadership: structure validation, (2018); Neumerski C.M., Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: what do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?, Educational Administration Quarterly, 49, 2, pp. 310-347, (2012); Ng S., Chan T.K., Continuing professional development for middle leaders in primary schools in Hong Kong, Journal of Educational Administration, 52, 6, pp. 869-886, (2014); Northouse P.G., Leadership: Theory and Practice, (2016); Osborne-Lampkin L., Cohen-Vogel L., ‘Spreading the wealth’: how principals use performance data to populate classrooms, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13, 2, pp. 188-208, (2014); Pang N.S.K., Pisapia J., The strategic thinking skills of Hong Kong school leaders: usage and effectiveness, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40, 3, pp. 343-361, (2012); Park I., Teacher commitment and its effects on student achievement in American high schools, Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 5, pp. 461-485, (2005); Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.Y., Podsakoff N.P., Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 5, pp. 879-903, (2003); Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F., Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models, Behavior Research Methods, 40, 3, pp. 879-891, (2008); Price-Mitchell M., Boundary dynamics: Implications for building parent-school partnerships, School Community Journal, 19, 2, pp. 9-26, (2009); Rigby J.G., Three logics of instructional leadership, Educational Administration Quarterly, 50, 4, pp. 610-644, (2014); Robbins S.P., Judge T.A., Essential of Organizational Behavior, (2016); Robinson V.M., Hohepa M., Lloyd C., School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why – Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, (2009); Saiti A., Conflicts in schools, conflict management styles and the role of the school leader: a study of Greek primary school educators, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43, 4, pp. 582-609, (2015); Schechter C., Qadach M., Toward an organizational model of change in elementary schools, Educational Administration Quarterly, 48, 1, pp. 116-153, (2012); Schechter C., Qadach M., Promoting learning in schools: principals’ learning mechanisms, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15, 2, pp. 141-167, (2016); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, (2006); Senge P.M., Creating schools for the future not the past for all students, Leader to Leader, 65, pp. 44-49, (2012); Shaked H., Schechter C., System thinking among school middle leaders, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 45, 4, pp. 699-718, (2017); Shaked H., Benoliel P., Nadav N., Schechter C., Principals’ systems thinking: the meaning and measure of a leadership construct, Leading Holistically: How Schools, Districts, and States Improve Systemically, (2018); Shrout P.E., Bolger N., Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations, Psychological Methods, 7, 4, pp. 422-445, (2002); Skaalvik E.M., Skaalvik S., Motivated for teaching? Associations with school goal structure, teacher self-efficacy, job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion, Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, pp. 152-160, (2017); Somech A., Bogler R., Antecedents and consequences of teacher organizational and professional commitment, Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 4, pp. 555-577, (2002); Somech A., Naamneh M., Subject coordinators as boundary managers: the impact on team learning and organizational outcomes, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 47, 1, pp. 56-73, (2019); Stacey R.D., Griffin D., Shaw P., Complexity and Management Fad or Radical Challenge to Systems Thinking?, (2000); Stronge J.H., Richard H.B., Catano N., Qualities of Effective Principals, (2008); Supovitz J., Sirinides P., May H., How principals and peers influence teaching and learning, Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 1, pp. 31-56, (2010); Tejeda J., Ferreira S., Applying systems thinking to analyze wind energy sustainability, Procedia Computer Science, 28, pp. 213-220, (2014); Thornton B., Peltier G., Perreault G., Systems thinking: a skill to improve student achievement, Clearing House, 77, 5, pp. 222-227, (2004); Thorpe A., Bennett-Powell G., The perceptions of secondary school middle-leaders regarding their needs following a middle-leadership development programme, Management in Education, 28, 2, pp. 52-57, (2014); Walker J., Slear S., The impact of principal leadership behaviors on the efficacy of new and experienced middle school teachers, National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 95, 1, pp. 46-64, (2011); Weick K.E., Making Sense of Organization: Vol. 2 – The Impermanent Organization, (2009); Wells C., Keane W.G., Building capacity for professional learning communities through a systems approach: A toolbox for superintendents, AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 4, 4, pp. 24-32, (2008); Zak I., Job satisfaction: a causal model, (1975); Benoliel P., Managers as boundary spanners and school violence: the mediating role of school management teams, Educational Management and Administration Leadership; Lingard B., Rawolle S., New scalar politics: implications for education policy, Comparative Education, 47, 4, pp. 489-502, (2011); Louis K., Leithwood K., Wahlstrom K.L., Anderson S.E., Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning, (2010)","P. Benoliel; School of Education, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; email: pascale.benoliel@biu.ac.il","","Emerald Group Holdings Ltd.","","","","","","09578234","","","","English","J. Educ. Adm.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85063262573"
"Nadav N.; Benoliel P.; Schechter C.","Nadav, Nechama (57207931843); Benoliel, Pascale (36018136800); Schechter, Chen (14219658000)","57207931843; 36018136800; 14219658000","Principals' systems thinking and teachers' withdrawal behaviours: The intervening role of school structure and principal–teacher gender (dis)similarity","2023","British Educational Research Journal","49","2","","405","426","21","2","10.1002/berj.3848","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85144217775&doi=10.1002%2fberj.3848&partnerID=40&md5=54af53e25d9dc909cbc007f2517038ed","Oganisational Development and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel","Nadav N., Oganisational Development and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Benoliel P., Oganisational Development and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; Schechter C., Oganisational Development and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel","Relying on the contingency theory, the present study examines the influence of school characteristics and principal–teacher gender (dis)similarity on the relationship between principals’ systems thinking (PST) and teacher withdrawal behaviours of absenteeism and intent to leave. Data were collected from two sources: 111 school management team members and 109 teachers (220 participants in total) randomly chosen from elementary schools in Israel. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that principal–teacher dissimilarity and a bureaucratic school structure moderate the relationship between PST and teachers’ withdrawal behaviours. These findings indicate that the organisational conditions under which principals practise systems thinking can affect teachers’ withdrawal behaviours. Therefore, this study may advance theory and practise regarding the implications of PST on withdrawal behaviours, which are an important determinant of teachers’ performance and a school's success. © 2022 British Educational Research Association.","gender similarity; school structure; systems thinking; teachers’ withdrawal behaviours","","","","","","","","Aiken L.S., West S.G., Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions, (1991); Avery D.R., McKay P.F., Tonidandel S., Volpone S.D., Morris M.A., Is there method to the madness? Examining how racioethnic matching influences retail store productivity, Personnel Psychology, 65, 1, pp. 167-199, (2012); Bacharach S.B., Bamberger P., Conley S.C., Work processes, role conflict, and role overload: The case of nurses and engineers in the public sector, Work and Occupations, 17, 2, pp. 199-228, (1990); Bakar H.A., McCann R.M., Matters of demographic similarity and dissimilarity in supervisor–subordinate relationships and workplace attitudes, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 41, pp. 1-16, (2014); Barth A., Benoliel P., School religious-cultural attributes and school principals' leadership styles in Israel, Religious Education, 114, 4, pp. 470-485, (2019); Benoliel P., A team-based perspective for school improvement: The mediatingrole of school management teams, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 14, 2, pp. 442-470, (2021); Benoliel P., Barth A., The implications of the school's cultural attributes in the relationships between participative leadership and teacher job satisfaction and burnout, Journal of Educational Administration, 55, 6, pp. 640-656, (2017); Benoliel P., Shaked H., Nadav N., Schechter C., School principals' systems thinking: Antecedentsand consequences, Journal of Educational Administration, 57, 2, pp. 167-184, (2019); Berkovich I., Effects of principal–teacher gender similarity on teacher's trust and organizational commitment, Sex Roles, 78, 7, pp. 561-572, (2018); Bhengu T.T., Mchunu B.S., Bayeni S.D., Growing our own timber! Lived experiences of five school principals in using a systems thinking approach for school development, SAGE Open, 10, 1, pp. 1-12, (2020); Blau G., Tatum D.S., Ward-Cook K., Dobria L., McCoy K., Testing for time-based correlates of perceived gender discrimination, Journal of Allied Health, 34, 3, pp. 130-137, (2005); Bliese P.D., Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis, Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations, pp. 349-381, (2000); Bliese P., Multilevel: Multilevel functions, (2016); Bogler R., Berkovich I., A systematic review of empirical evidence on teachers' organizational commitment 1994–2018, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21, 3, pp. 440-457, (2022); Bruno P., Rabovsky S.J., Strunk K.O., Taking their first steps: The distribution of new teachers in school and classroom contexts and implications for teacher effectiveness, American Educational Research Journal, 57, 4, pp. 1688-1729, (2020); Bush T., Leadership and context: Why one-size does not fit all, Educational Management Administrational and Leadership, 47, 1, pp. 3-4, (2018); Candela L., Gutierrez A.P., Keating S., What predicts nurse faculty members' intent to stay in the academic organization? A structural equation model of a national survey of nursing faculty, Nurse Education Today, 35, 4, pp. 580-589, (2015); Perception of the Principal's role in the State of Israel: Report by the Professional Committee to Formulate Policy Recommendations for the Ministry of Education, (2008); Cerit Y., The mediating effect of LMX in the relationship between school bureaucratic structure and teachers' proactive behavior, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38, 6, pp. 780-793, (2017); Chingara R., Heystek J., Leadership as agency in the context of structure, International Journal of Educational Management, 33, 7, pp. 1596-1609, (2019); Cohen A., Veled-Hecht A., The relationship between organizational socialization and commitment in the workplace among employees in long-term nursing care facilities, Personnel Review, 39, 5, pp. 537-556, (2010); Dahlstrom C., Lapuente V., Organizing the leviathan: How the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats shapes good government, (2017); Drach-Zahavy A., Freund A., Team effectiveness under stress: A structural contingency approach, Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 28, 4, pp. 423-450, (2007); Dunlap W.P., Burke M.J., Smith-Crowe K., Accurate tests of statistical significance for rwg and interrater agreement indexes, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 2, pp. 356-362, (2003); Ford T.G., Olsen J., Khojasteh J., Ware J., Urick A., The effects of leader support for teacher psychological needs on teacher burnout, commitment, and intent to leave, Journal of Educational Administration, 57, 6, pp. 615-634, (2019); Gray J., Kruse S., Tarter C.J., Enabling school structures, collegial trust and academic emphasis: Antecedents of professional learning communities, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44, 6, pp. 875-891, (2016); Gregory A., Cornell D., Fan X., Teacher safety and authoritative school climate in high schools, American Journal of Education, 118, 4, pp. 401-425, (2012); Hall R.J., Lord R.G., Multi-level information-processing explanations of followers' leadership perceptions, The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 3, pp. 265-287, (1995); Hallinger P., Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership, Educational management administration & leadership, 46, 1, pp. 5-24, (2018); Harrison D.A., Price K.H., Context and consistency in absenteeism: Studying social and dispositional influences across multiple settings, Human Resource Management Review, 13, 2, pp. 203-225, (2003); Hayes A.F., Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, (2013); Henry G.T., Redding C., The consequences of leaving school early: The effects of within-year and end-of-year teacher turnover, Education Finance and Policy, 15, 2, pp. 332-356, (2020); Hindenburg K., Examining the effects of support for teachers' basic psychological needs on teachers' intent to leave, (2019); Howard J.T., Howard K.J., The effect of perceived stress on absenteeism and presenteeism in public school teachers, Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 35, 2, pp. 100-116, (2020); Hoy W.K., Sweetland S.R., Designing better schools: The meaning and measure of enabling school structures, Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 3, pp. 296-321, (2001); Imran R., Allil K., Mahmoud A.B., Teacher's turnover intentions: Examining the impact of motivation and organizational commitment, International Journal of Educational Management, 31, 6, pp. 828-842, (2017); Imron A., Satria R., Puspitaningtyas I., Implementation of situational leadership in educational organizations, The 4th International Conference on Education and Management (COEMA), pp. 73-77, (2019); Inbar D.E., Developing autonomy: The case of the Israeli school system, Centralization and school empowerment: From rhetoric to practice, pp. 59-78, (2009); Trends and Indicators among School Principals, 1991–2016, (2017); James L.R., Demaree R.G., Wolf G., An assessment of within-group interrater agreement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 2, pp. 306-309, (1993); Johnson D.D., Predictors of teachers' turnover and transfer intentions: A multiple mediation model of teacher engagement, Journal of Education Human Resources, 39, 3, pp. 322-349, (2021); King E., Dawson J., Jensen J., Jones K., A socioecological approach to relational demography: How relative representation and respectful coworkers affect job attitudes, Journal of Business and Psychology, 32, 1, pp. 1-19, (2017); Lazcano C., Guerrero P., Volante P., Influence of instructional leadership on teacher retention, International Journal of Leadership in Education, pp. 1-19, (2022); LeBreton J.M., Senter J.L., Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement, Organizational Research Methods, 11, 4, pp. 815-852, (2008); Lee V.E., Loeb S., School size in Chicago elementary schools: Effects on teachers' attitudes and students' achievement, American Educational Research Journal, 37, 1, pp. 3-31, (2000); Lenzi M., Vieno A., Perkins D.D., Santinello M., Elgar F.J., Morgan A., Mazzardis S., Family affluence, school and neighborhood contexts and adolescents’ civic engagement: A cross-national study, American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 1-2, pp. 197-210, (2012); Liu S., Hallinger P., Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model, Educational Administration Quarterly, 54, 4, pp. 501-528, (2018); Lumby J., Distributed leadership and bureaucracy, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47, 1, pp. 5-19, (2019); McCray J., Palmer A., Chmiel N., Building resilience in health and social care teams, Personnel Review, 45, 6, pp. 1132-1155, (2016); McGurk E., Pearson D., Practitioner response: Systems thinking among enrollees in a principal preparation program, Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13, 3, pp. 283-285, (2018); Mero-Jaffe I., Altarac H., A professional development model for school leadership, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21, 3, pp. 483-500, (2022); Meyer J.P., Allen N.J., A longitudinal analysis of the early development and consequences of organizational commitment, Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 19, 2, pp. 199-215, (1987); Miller J.M., Youngs P., Person-organization fit and first-year teacher retention in the United States, Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, (2021); Neumann J.E., Why people don't participate in organizational change, Research in Organizational Change and Development, 3, 1, pp. 181-212, (1989); Nadav N., Benoliel P., Shaked H., Schechter C., Exploring school principals' systems thinking competencies, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20, 4, pp. 579-598, (2021); Nguyen T.D., Pham L.D., Crouch M., Springer M.G., The correlates of teacher turnover: An updated and expanded meta-analysis of the literature, Educational Research Review, 31, (2020); Paletta A., Alivernini F., Manganelli S., Leadership for learning, The International Journal of Educational Management, 31, 2, pp. 98-117, (2017); Qadach M., Schechter C., Da'as R., Instructional leadership and teachers’ intent to leave: The mediating role of collective teacher efficacy and shared vision, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48, 4, pp. 617-634, (2020); Rivera-McCutchen R.L., “We don't got time for grumbling”: Toward an ethic of radical care in urban school leadership, Educational Administration Quarterly, 57, 2, pp. 257-289, (2021); Rosenblatt Z., Shapira-Lishchinsky O., Temporal withdrawal behaviors in an educational policy context, The International Journal of Educational Management, 31, 7, pp. 895-907, (2017); Rosenblatt Z., Shapira-Lishchinsky O., Shirom A., Absenteeism in Israeli schoolteachers: An organizational ethics perspective, Human Resource Management Review, 20, 3, pp. 247-259, (2010); Rupcic N., Complexities of learning organizations–addressing key methodological and content issues, The Learning Organization, 25, 6, pp. 443-454, (2018); Ryan J.F., Healy R., Sullivan J., Oh, won't you stay? Predictors of faculty intent to leave a public research university, Higher Education, 63, 4, pp. 421-437, (2012); Shaked H., Benoliel P., *Nadav N., Schechter C., Principals' systems thinking: The meaning and measure of a leadership construct, Leading holistically: How schools, districts, and states improve systemically, pp. 54-73, (2018); Shapira-Lishchinsky O., International aspects of organizational ethics in educational system, (2018); Shapira-Lishchinsky O., Raftar-Ozery T., Leadership, absenteeism acceptance, and ethical climate as predictors of teachers' absence and citizenship behaviors, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46, 3, pp. 491-510, (2018); Simon N., Moore Johnson S., Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do, Teachers College Record, 117, 3, pp. 1-36, (2015); Somech A., Naamneh M., Subject coordinators as boundary managers: The impact on team learning and organizational outcomes, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47, 1, pp. 56-73, (2019); Sun J., Li W.D., Li Y., Liden R.C., Li S., Zhang X., Unintended consequences of being proactive? Linking proactive personality to coworker envy, helping, and undermining, and the moderating role of prosocial motivation, Journal of Applied Psychology, 106, 2, pp. 250-267, (2021); Suzuki K., Hur H., Bureaucratic structures and organizational commitment: Findings from a comparative study of 20 European countries, Public Management Review, 22, 6, pp. 877-907, (2020); Tahir L., Thakib M.T.M., Hamzah M.H., Said M.N.H.M., Musah M.B., Novice head teachers' isolation and loneliness experiences: A mixed-methods study, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45, 1, pp. 164-189, (2017); Tajfel H., Turner J.C., An integrative theory of intergroup relation, Psychology of intergroup relations, pp. 7-24, (1986); Urick A., What type of school leadership makes teachers want to stay?, NASSP Bulletin, 104, 3, pp. 145-176, (2020); Urick A., Bowers A.J., The impact of principal perception on student academic climate and achievement in high school: How does it measure up?, Journal of School Leadership, 24, 2, pp. 386-414, (2014); Utami P.P., Harini H., The effect of job satisfaction and absenteeism on teacher work productivity, Multicultural Education, 5, 1, pp. 99-108, (2019); Vroom V.H., Jago A.G., Situation effects and levels of analysis in the study of leader participation, Leadership: The multiplelevel approaches, pp. 145-159, (1998); Walsh J.P., Ashford S.J., Hill T.E., Feedback obstruction: The influence of the information environment to employee turnover intentions, Human Relations, 38, 1, pp. 23-46, (1985); Wijaya N.H.S., Proactive personality, LMX, and voice behavior: Employee–supervisor sex (dis)similarity as a moderator, Management Communication Quarterly, 33, 1, pp. 86-100, (2019); Zancajo A., Schools in the marketplace: Analysis of school supply responses in the Chilean education market, Educational Policy, 34, 1, pp. 43-64, (2020); Zavelevsky E., Benoliel P., Shapira-Lishchinsky O., Retaining novice teachers: The meaning and measure of ecological school culture construct, Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, (2022)","P. Benoliel; Oganisational Development and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel; email: pascale.benoliel@biu.ac.il","","John Wiley and Sons Inc","","","","","","01411926","","","","English","Br. Educ. Res. J.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85144217775"
"Ignacio J.T.S.; Gotangco Gonzales C.K.; Lee-Chua Q.N.","Ignacio, John Trixstan S. (58184377200); Gotangco Gonzales, Charlotte Kendra (57738344200); Lee-Chua, Queena N. (6504300634)","58184377200; 57738344200; 6504300634","Development of an e-Learning Module Integrating Systems Thinking for Climate Change","2023","Ubiquitous Learning","16","2","","","","","3","10.18848/1835-9795/CGP/V16I02/1-16","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85152541668&doi=10.18848%2f1835-9795%2fCGP%2fV16I02%2f1-16&partnerID=40&md5=92c71f2184b53e2a5c4f1af980e474e3","Chiang Kai Shek College, Philippines; Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines","Ignacio J.T.S., Chiang Kai Shek College, Philippines; Gotangco Gonzales C.K., Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines; Lee-Chua Q.N., Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines","Climate change is an issue that concerns all countries, but surveys report that only a fraction of Filipinos are well-informed about it. Building climate science literacy is vital for citizens to understand the impacts of climate change and develop solutions to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects. Making connections between human actions and their effects on climate change is included in the learning competencies of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Systems thinking is an approach that emphasizes understanding the relationships and feedback among variables in a system. Given the inherent interconnections of the Earth system, it becomes critical to integrate systems thinking into comprehending climate science and managing climate change. This research study utilized a descriptive research design, with the objective of developing an e-learning module for climate change with the integration of systems thinking. Five experts validated the e-learning module: one each in the field of Earth and environmental science; science education; systems thinking; language, grammar, and style; and information technology. Descriptive statistics were used to identify the level of acceptability of the e-learning module. The results showed that the module can be used teach climate change topics to junior high school students in the Philippines. © 2023 Common Ground Research Networks. All rights reserved.","Climate Change; e-Learning Module; Integration; PISA; Systems Thinking","","","","","","Capacity Building Program in Science and Mathematics Education; Institute of Education Sciences, IES; Department of Science and Technology, Republic of the Philippines, DOST; Science Education Institute, Department of Science and Technology, Republic of the Philippines, DOST-SEI","The authors would like to acknowledge the Department of Science & Technology–Science Education Institute (DOST-SEI), for their support through the Capacity Building Program in Science and Mathematics Education (CBPSME) scholarship grants. The corresponding author wants to acknowledge his partner, Wendy S. Villamin, for her support during the study.","Abdyrov Aitzan, Galiyev Temir, Yessekeshova Maral, Aldabergenova Saule, Alshynbayeva Zhuldyz, On Systems Thinking and Ways of Building It in Learning, International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11, 18, pp. 11149-11161, (2016); Al-Shagran Aula, Sahraoui Abd-El-Kader, Assessment of e-Learning Systems: A Systems Engineering Approach System, International Journal of Computer Science and Software Engineering, 6, 8, pp. 173-179, (2017); Ballew Matthew T., Goldberg Matthew H., Rosenthal Seth A., Gustafson Abel, Leiserowitz Anthony, Systems Thinking as a Pathway to Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes through an Ecological Worldview, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 17, pp. 8214-8219, (2019); Bollettino Vincenzo, Alcayna-Stevens Tilly, Sharma Manasi, Dy Philip, Pham Phuong, Vinck Patrick, Public Perception of Climate Change and Disaster Preparedness: Evidence from the Philippines, Climate Risk Management, 30, pp. 1-14, (2020); Bonks Curtis Jay, Reynolds Thomas H., Learner-Centred Web Instruction for Higher-Order Thinking, Teamwork, and Apprenticeship, Web-Based Instruction, pp. 167-178, (1997); Brimble Mandy, Jones Aled, Using Systems Thinking in Patient Safety: A Case Study on Medicines Management, Nursing Management, 24, 4, pp. 28-33, (2017); Carliner Saul, An Overview of Online Learning, (2004); Cole Robert A., Issues in Web-Based Pedagogy: A Critical Primer, (2001); Dal Burckin, Ozturk Nilay, Alper Umut, Sonmez Duygu, Cokelez Aytekin, An Analysis of the Teachers' Climate Change Awareness, Athens Journal of Education, 2, 2, pp. 111-122, (2015); Eckstein David, Kunzel Vera, Schafer Laura, Global Climate Risk Index 2021, (2021); (1996); Hopfenbeck Therese N., Lenkeit Jenny, Masri Yasmine El, Cantrell Kate, Ryan Jeanne, Baird Jo-Anne, Lessons Learned from Pisa: A Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Articles on the Programme for International Student Assessment, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62, 3, pp. 333-353, (2017); Hossain Niamat Ullah Ibne, Dayarathna Vidanelage L., Nagahi Morteza, Jaradat Raed, Systems Thinking: A Review and Bibliometric Analysis, Systems, 8, 3, (2020); Ignacio John Trixstan S., The Effects of Integrating Systems Thinking in an e-Learning Module for Climate Change, (2022); Jacobson Michael J., Problem Solving about Complex Systems: Differences between Experts and Novices, Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences, pp. 26-33, (2000); Kordova Sigal Koral, Frank Moti, Miller Anat Nissel, Systems Thinking Education-Seeing the Forest through the Trees, Systems, 6, 3, (2018); Kuthe Alina, Korfgen Annemarie, Stotter Johann, Keller Lars, Strengthening Their Climate Change Literacy: A Case Study Addressing the Weaknesses in Young People's Climate Change Awareness, Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 19, 4, pp. 375-388, (2020); Lecon Carsten, Corona e-Learning Cocktail: Sustainability of University Education in Times of Pandemics, 15th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE), pp. 57-65, (2020); Liu Shiyu, Roehrig Gillian, Bhattacharya Devarati, Varma Keisha, In-Service Teachers' Attitudes, Knowledge and Classroom Teaching of Global Climate Change, Science Educator, 24, 1, pp. 12-22, (2015); Lopez Joshua Jener D., Malay Christopher A., Awareness and Attitude towards Climate Change of Selected Senior High Students in Cavite, Philippines, Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 7, 2, pp. 56-62, (2019); Mahyoob Mohammad, Challenges of e-Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic Experienced by EFL Learners, Arab World English Journal, 11, 4, pp. 351-362, (2020); Maqsood Aneela, Abbas Jaffar, Rehman Ghazala, Mubeen Riaqa, The Paradigm Shift for Educational System Continuance in the Advent of COVID-19 Pandemic: Mental Health Challenges and Reflections, Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 2, pp. 1-5, (2021); Miller Jonathan L., Wentzel Michael T., Clark James H., Hurst Glenn A., Green Machine: A Card Game Introducing Students to Systems Thinking in Green Chemistry by Strategizing the Creation of a Recycling Plant, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 3006-3013, (2019); Miller Kelsey, The Benefits of Online Learning: 7 Advantages of Online Degrees, (2019); Naguimbing-Manlulu Marjorie F., Climate Change Narratives in Philippine Print News Media, Media Asia, 48, 3, pp. 190-206, (2021); Oliver Mary C., Adkins Michael J., Hot-Headed' Students? Scientific Literacy, Perceptions and Awareness of Climate Change in 15-Year Olds across 54 Countries, Energy Research & Social Science, 70, pp. 1-9, (2020); Richmond Barry, Systems Thinking/System Dynamics: Let's Just Get on with It, System Dynamics Review, 10, 2-3, pp. 135-157, (2006); Schlange Lutz E., Linking Futures Research Methodologies: An Application of Systems Thinking and Metagame Analysis to Nuclear Energy Policy Issues, Futures, 27, 8, pp. 823-838, (2000); Shroff Anshu, A Systems Thinking Approach to Risk Reduction and Mitigation for Improving Disaster Management, (2021); Simmons D. E., Forum Report: e-Learning Adoption Rates and Barriers, The ASTD e-Learning Handbook, pp. 19-23, (2002); Tripto Jaklin, Ben Zvi Assaraf Orit, Snapir Zohar, Amit Miriam, How Is the Body's Systemic Nature Manifested amongst High School Biology Students?, Instructional Science, 45, pp. 73-98, (2017); Climate Change; Villanueva Joselito Christian Paulus M., Melendres Mark Anthony V., Lagunzad Catherine Genevieve B., Libatique Nathaniel Joseph C., Design and Deployment of a Mobile Learning Cloud Network to Facilitate Open Educational Resources for Asynchronous Learning, 29th International Conference on Computers in Education Proceedings, pp. 398-403, (2021); York Sarah, Lavi Rea, Dori Yehudit Judy, Orgill MaryKay, Applications of Systems Thinking in STEM Education, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019)","J.T.S. Ignacio; Chiang Kai Shek College, Philippines; email: trixstan.ignacio@obf.ateneo.edu.ph","","Common Ground Research Networks","","","","","","18359795","","","","English","Ubiquitous Learn.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85152541668"
"Jordan R.C.; Gray S.; Sorensen A.E.; Pasewark S.; Sinha S.; Hmelo-Silver C.E.","Jordan, Rebecca C. (56233963100); Gray, Steven (35310150500); Sorensen, Amanda E. (56556014800); Pasewark, Samantha (57207458604); Sinha, Suparna (37041421900); Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E. (6507383226)","56233963100; 35310150500; 56556014800; 57207458604; 37041421900; 6507383226","Modeling with a conceptual representation: Is it necessary? Does it work?","2017","Frontiers in ICT","4","APR","7","","","","7","10.3389/fict.2017.00007","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85048117857&doi=10.3389%2ffict.2017.00007&partnerID=40&md5=cc2624c325b75ca8cb24bd4855061de3","Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States; Department of Educational Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Center for Mathematics, Science and Computer Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States","Jordan R.C., Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Gray S., Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States; Sorensen A.E., Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Pasewark S., Department of Educational Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Sinha S., Center for Mathematics, Science and Computer Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Hmelo-Silver C.E., Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States","In response to recent educational imperatives in the United States, modeling and systems thinking have been identified as being critical for science learning. In this paper, we investigate models in the classroom from two important perspectives: (1) from the teacher perspective to understand how teachers perceive models and use models in the classroom and (2) from the students perspective to understand how student use model-based reasoning to represent their understanding in a classroom setting. Qualitative data collected from 19 teachers who attended a professional development workshop in the northeastern United States indicate that while teachers see the value in teaching to think with models (i.e., during inquiry practices), they tend to use models mostly as communication tools in the classroom. Quantitative data collected about the modeling practices of 42 middle school students who worked collaboratively in small groups (4-5 students) using a computer modeling program indicated that students tended to engage in more mechanistic and function-related thinking with time as they reasoned about a complex system. Furthermore, students had a typified trajectory of first adding and then next paring down ideas in their models. Implications for science education are discussed. © 2017 Jordan, Gray, Sorensen, Pasewark, Sinha and Hmelo-Silver.","Complex systems; Conceptual representation; Education; Modeling; Technology","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF; Directorate for Education and Human Resources, EHR, (0632546); National Science Foundation, NSF, (0959756)","The authors thank the numerous students and teachers involved with this project. In addition, they acknowledge their funding sources: Woodrow Wilson Foundation and the National Science Foundation (DRL: 0959756). All research was conducted with Rutgers University Institutional Review Board approval. The authors would also like to thank the reviewers of this manuscript for their thoughtful comments. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation Grant # DRL 0632546.","Carey S., Smith C., On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge, Educ. Psychol, 28, pp. 235-251, (1993); Chan C.K.K., Burtis J., Bereiter C., Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change, Cognition Instruct, 15, pp. 1-40, (1997); Chinn C.A., Malhotra B.A., Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: a theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks, Sci. Educ, 86, pp. 175-218, (2002); Clement J., Model based learning as a key research area for science education, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 9, pp. 1041-1053, (2000); Crawford B., Jordan R., Inquiry, models, and complex reasoning to transform learning in environmental education,, Trading Zones in Environmental Education, pp. 105-127, (2013); Crawford B.A., Cullin M.J., Supporting prospective teachers' conceptions of modeling in science, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 26, pp. 1140-1379, (2004); Dauer J.T., Momsen J.L., Bray-Speth E., Makohon-Moore S., Long T.M., Analysis of student-constructed models of complex biological systems, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 50, pp. 639-659, (2013); Gilbert J.K., Models and Modeling in Science Education, (1993); Goel A.K., Gomez A., Grue N., Murdock W., Recker M., Govindaraj T., Towards design learning environments: explaining how devices work,, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 493-501, (1996); Hmelo C.E., Ramakrishnan S., Day R.S., Shirey W., Brufsky A., Johnson C., Et al., The oncology thinking cap: scaffolded use of a simulation to learn about designing clinical trials, Teach. Learn. Med, 13, pp. 183-191, (2001); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Jordan R.C., Hmelo-Silver C., Lei L., Gray S.A., Fostering reasoning about complex systems: using the aquarium to teach systems thinking, Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun, 12, pp. 55-64, (2013); Jordan R.C., Gray S.A., Brooks W.R., Honwad S., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Process-based thinking in ecosystem education, Nat. Sci. Educ, 42, pp. 68-74, (2013); Kuhn D., Weinstock M., What is epistemological thinking and why does it matter?, Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing, pp. 121-144, (1997); Linn M.C., Hsi S., Computers, Teachers, Peers, (2000); Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States, (2013); Rosenblueth A., Wiener N., The role of models in science, Philos. Sci, 12, pp. 316-321, (1945); Schommer M., Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension, J. Educ. Psychol, 82, pp. 498-504, (1990); Shernoff D., Optimal Learning Environments to Promote Student Engagement, (2013); Treagust D.F., Chittleborough G., Mamiala T.L., Students' understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 24, pp. 357-368, (2002); Van Driel J.H., Verloop N., Teachers knowledge of models and modeling in science, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 21, pp. 1141-1153, (1999)","R.C. Jordan; Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, United States; email: rebecca.jordan@rutgers.edu","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","2297198X","","","","English","Front. ICT","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85048117857"
"Saba J.; Hel-Or H.; Levy S.T.","Saba, Janan (57217585894); Hel-Or, Hagit (6603607140); Levy, Sharona T. (7402774725)","57217585894; 6603607140; 7402774725","Much.Matter.in.Motion: learning by modeling systems in chemistry and physics with a universal programing platform","2023","Interactive Learning Environments","31","5","","3128","3147","19","4","10.1080/10494820.2021.1919905","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85105190350&doi=10.1080%2f10494820.2021.1919905&partnerID=40&md5=f1274ad360e9db36058e75d6a802d88a","Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel; Department of Computer Science, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel","Saba J., Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel; Hel-Or H., Department of Computer Science, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel; Levy S.T., Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel","This paper presents the design and initial learning research with the MMM modeling platform, seeking to advance middle school students’ learning through constructing computational models of complex physical and chemical systems. A complexity-based structure of an MMM interface is introduced. It suggests that a complex system can be described and modeled by defining entities, their actions, interactions with each other, and interactions with their environment. MMM applies to a wide range of phenomena, targeting learning transfer and generalization. Design principles of MMM are presented and discussed based on a study with seventh-grade students. The study is a quasi-experimental, pretest-intervention-posttest control-comparison-group design. Findings from a quantitative analysis of the questionnaires show that engaging students with the construction of models using MMM significantly promoted students’ conceptual learning and enhanced their systems’ thinking compared with a comparison group who followed a normative curriculum. Students’ responses to the worksheets showed mutual effects between improving the practice of modeling and promoting conceptual understanding and systems thinking. A qualitative analysis of screen-capture movies of one pair of students and their log files revealed that, in a later construction activity, their constructed models grew in sophistication and they articulated their thinking and learning in depth, using more sophisticated relationships between concepts. © 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","Complex Systems; computational models; construction of models; modeling tools; science education","","","","","","Ministry of Science, Technology and Space, MOST, (87166); Israel Science Foundation, ISF, (1205\18)","This work was supported by the Israeli Science Foundation [grant number 1205\18]; and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Space, Israel [grant number 87166].","Ainsworth S., Prain V., Tytler R., Drawing to learn in science, Science, 333, 6046, pp. 1096-1097, (2011); Akpan J.P., Issues associated with inserting computer simulations into biology instruction: A review of the literature, The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 53, (2001); Assaraf O.B.Z., Dodick J., Tripto J., High school students’ understanding of the human body system, Research in Science Education, 43, 1, pp. 33-56, (2013); Bar-Yam Y., Dynamics of complex systems, (2003); Barab S., Design-based research: A methodological toolkit for engineering change, The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 151-170, (2014); Barzilai S., Zohar A., Epistemic thinking in action: Evaluating and integrating online sources, Cognition and Instruction, 30, 1, pp. 39-85, (2012); Basu S., Kinnebrew J.S., Biswas G., Assessing student performance in a computational-thinking based science learning environment, In international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 476–481), Springer, Cham, (2014); Ben Horin H., Orad Y., Welger B., (2013); Blikstein P., Wilensky U., An atom is known by the company it keeps: A constructionist learning environment for materials science using agent-based modeling, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14, 1, pp. 81-119, (2009); Buckley B.C., Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 9, pp. 895-935, (2000); Bybee R.W., NGSS and the next generation of science teachers, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 211-221, (2014); Chen D., Stroup W., General system theory: Towards a conceptual framework for science and technology education for all, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, 3, pp. 447-459, (1993); Creswell J.W., Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, (2012); Damelin D., Krajcik J., Mcintyre C., Bielik T., Students making system models: An accessible approach, Science Scope, 40, 5, pp. 78-82, (2017); Dickes A.C., Sengupta P., Farris A.V., Basu S., Development of mechanistic reasoning and multilevel explanations of ecology in third grade using agent-based models, Science Education, 100, 4, pp. 734-776, (2016); Eshach H., The use of intuitive rules in interpreting students’ difficulties in reading and creating kinematic graphs, Canadian Journal of Physics, 92, 1, pp. 1-8, (2014); Forrester J.W., Principles of systems, (1968); Gilbert J.K., Boulter C.J., Elmer R., Positioning models in Science Education and in design and Technology Education, Developing models in Science Education, pp. 3-17, (2000); Goh S.E., Yoon S., Wang J., Yang Z., Klopfer E., Investigating the relative difficulty of various complex systems ideas in biology, 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences: The Future of learning, (2012); Gravemeijer K., Cobb P., Whitenack B.J., Symbolizing, modeling and instructional design, Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms. Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design, pp. 225-273, (2000); Holland J.H., Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity, (1995); Jacobson M.J., Archodidou A., The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 2, pp. 145-199, (2000); Jacobson M., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 1, pp. 11-34, (2006); Kauffman S., At home in the universe: The search for the laws of self-organization and complexity, (1995); King G.P., Bergan-Roller H., Galt N., Helikar T., Dauer J.T., Modelling activities integrating construction and simulation supported explanatory and evaluative reasoning, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 13, pp. 1764-1786, (2019); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education, (2006); Levy S.T., Saba J., Hel-Or H., Much.Matter.in.Motion (MMM) platform: Widget-based platform for constructing computational models in science, (2018); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Crossing levels and representations: The connected chemistry (CC1) curriculum, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 3, pp. 224-242, (2009); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Students’ learning with the Connected Chemistry (CC1) curriculum: Navigating the complexities of the particulate world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 3, pp. 243-254, (2009); Lobato J., Alternative Perspectives on the Transfer of Learning: History, Issues, and Challenges for Future Research, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 4, pp. 431-449, (2006); Luckin R., Boulay D., The role of communication in learning to model (pp. 99–126), (2002); Mahaffy P.G., Krief A., Hopf H., Mehta G., Matlin S.A., Reorienting chemistry education through systems thinking, Nature Reviews Chemistry, 2, 4, pp. 1-3, (2018); Mandinach E.B., Cline H.F., Project components: Systems thinking, graphical user interface, and modeling, Classroom dynamics: Implementing a technology-based learning environment, pp. 45-72, (1994); Metcalf S.H.J., Krajcik J., Soloway E., MODEL-IT: A design retrospective, Innovations in science and mathematics education, pp. 77-116, (2000); Mitchell M., Complexity: A guided tour, (2009); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Ramadas J., Visual and spatial modes in science learning, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 3, pp. 301-318, (2009); Rates C.A., Mulvey B.K., Feldon D.F., Promoting conceptual change for complex systems understanding: Outcomes of an agent-based participatory simulation, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 4, pp. 610-627, (2016); Repenning A., Webb D., Ioannidou A., Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools, Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 265-269), (2010); Resnick L.B., Education and learning to think, (1987); Resnick M., Turtles, termites and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds, (1994); Resnick M., Maloney J., Monroy-Hernandez A., Rusk N., Eastmond E., Brennan K., Millner A., Rosenbaum E., Silver J., Silverman B., Kafai Y., Scratch: Programming for all, Communications of the ACM, 52, 11, pp. 60-67, (2009); Roschelle J., Kaput J.J., Stroup W., Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 47–76), (2000); Russ R.S., Scherr R.E., Hammer D., Mikeska J., Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science, Science Education, 92, 3, pp. 499-525, (2008); Samon S., Levy S.T., (2010); Samon S., Levy S.T., Micro–macro compatibility: When does a complex systems approach strongly benefit science learning?, Science Education, 101, 6, pp. 985-1014, (2017); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Shwartz Y., Hug B., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Sengupta P., Farris A.V., Learning kinematics in elementary grades using agent-based computational modeling: A visual programming-based approach, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on interaction design and children, pp. 78-87, (2012); Sengupta P., Kinnebrew J.S., Basu S., Biswas G., Clark D., Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework, Education and Information Technologies, 18, 2, pp. 351-380, (2013); Settlage J., Conceptions of natural selection: A snapshot of the sense-making process, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 5, pp. 449-457, (1994); Smetana L.K., Bell R.L., Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 9, pp. 1337-1370, (2012); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: Student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, System Dynamics Review, 23, 2-3, pp. 285-311, (2007); VanLehn K., Wetzel J., Grover S., Van De Sande B., Learning how to construct models of dynamic systems: An initial evaluation of the dragoon intelligent tutoring system, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10, 2, pp. 154-167, (2016); Wagh A., Wilensky U., Evobuild: A quickstart toolkit for programming agent-based models of evolutionary processes, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 2, pp. 131-146, (2018); White B.Y., Frederiksen J.R., Technological tools and instructional approaches for making science inquiry accessible to all, Innovations in science and Mathematics education, pp. 321-359, (2000); Wilensky U., NetLogo models library [Computer software], Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling, (1999); Wilensky U., Statistical mechanics for secondary school: The GasLab modeling toolkit, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8, 1, pp. 1-41, (2003); Wilensky U., Papert S., Restructurations: Reformulations of knowledge disciplines through new representational forms, Proceedings of the Constructionism 2010 conference, (2010); Wilensky U., Rand W., An introduction to agent-based modeling: Modeling natural, social and engineered complex systems with NetLogo, (2015); Wilensky U., Reisman K., 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, pp. 171-209, (2006); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems perspective to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 1, pp. 3-19, (1999); Wilkerson-Jerde M., Wagh A., Wilensky U., Balancing curricular and pedagogical needs in computational construction kits: Lessons from the DeltaTick project, Science Education, 99, 3, pp. 465-499, (2015); Yoon S.A., An evolutionary approach to harnessing complex systems thinking in the science and technology classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1, pp. 1-32, (2008); Zhang Z.H., Linn M.C., Can generating representations enhance learning with dynamic visualizations?, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 10, pp. 1177-1198, (2011)","J. Saba; Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel; email: janansaba3@gmail.com","","Routledge","","","","","","10494820","","","","English","Interact. Learn. Environ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85105190350"
"McGowan V.C.; Bell P.","McGowan, Veronica Cassone (57174038400); Bell, Philip (35386108700)","57174038400; 35386108700","“I now deeply care about the effects humans are having on the world”: cultivating ecological care and responsibility through complex systems modelling and investigations","2022","Educational and Developmental Psychologist","39","1","","116","131","15","10","10.1080/20590776.2022.2027212","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85124317838&doi=10.1080%2f20590776.2022.2027212&partnerID=40&md5=568a52354c3380873070c7cb28547701","Educational Studies, University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, WA, United States; Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of Washington, College of Education, Seattle, WA, United States","McGowan V.C., Educational Studies, University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, WA, United States; Bell P., Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of Washington, College of Education, Seattle, WA, United States","Objective: Systems thinking can be counterintuitive to everyday ways of knowing. This can surface doubt around predicted patterns of emergence in complex systems data, especially as it relates to the current climate crisis and related justice-oriented solutions. Method: Our study describes a four-year design-based research project in which we engaged high school biology students in complex systems modelling to understand linkages between increasing ocean temperatures and the rate and severity of disease outbreaks in sea stars. Results: Our findings showed that students approached climate data with uncertainty and viewed their lives as separate from the impacts of climate change. Through iterative design work, youth used authentic data and computational tools to construct geospatial and causal-loop models of climate-related disease outbreaks that situated case studies within broader socioecological and sociotechnical contexts of historic and powered human actions. Through a speculative design lens, models were transformed from data visualization tools to mediums for storying and re-storying present and future worlds for multispecies survival in the face of the climate crisis. Conclusion: Students shifted their understandings of disease outbreaks from a technical perspective to a more social and situated lens of care and responsibility for mitigating the impacts of the climate crisis on human and more-than-human communities. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: (1) Teachers that cover climate change often focus solely on technical and data-based aspects during instruction, such as the carbon cycle and increasing atmospheric CO2 levels, without including the social and political contexts through which the climate emergency emerged. (2) Engaging students in meaningful action and problem-solving creates positive affective outcomes and retains hope in students in the face of future climate impacts. (3) There is still more that we need to learn about how to design learning environments that cultivate hope, agency, and multispecies caring in K-12 contexts. What this topic adds: (1) We show how complex systems modelling and data visualization can cultivate multispecies caring and climate action by situating climate-related phenomena in larger socioecological and sociotechnical systems. (2) Through a speculative design lens, we show how modelling can be transformed from data visualization to storytelling and re-storying present and future worlds that centre on ecological and multispecies flourishing. Here we show a new ontological dimension of modelling practices as future and world making. (3) Our research shows how multispecies caring emerged as an action in this world, and for creating the future worlds students wanted to see; it became an affective dimension for making meaning amid the complexity and uncertainty of the climate crisis. © 2022 Australian Psychological Society.","Climate change; complex systems thinking; identity; modelling; science education; speculative design","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (1543255)","for this STEM+C project was provided by The National Science Foundation’s STEM + Computing (STEM+C) Partnerships programme under award number [1543255], which seeks to enhance K-12 student learning in both STEM and computing topics. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors would like to thank Elaine Klein, Kristen Clapper Bergsman, Deb Morrison, Thuy Dang, and Angelica Sauceda-Clark who were instrumental in co-creating this instructional unit, as well as the students who participated in this research project. We would also like to thank Doug Lombardi for his editorial feedback and guidance, and the anonymous reviewers whose thoughtful feedback improved an earlier version of the manuscript.","Abram D., The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world, (1997); Allen K., Climate change, a critical new role for educational and developmental psychologists, The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 37, 1, pp. 1-3, (2020); Bang M., Marin A., Nature–culture constructs in science learning: Human/non‐human agency and intentionality, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 4, pp. 530-544, (2015); Bell P., The educational opportunities of contemporary controversies in science, Internet environments for science education, pp. 233-260, (2004); Burke S., Sanson A., Van Hoorn J., The psychological effects of climate change on children, Current Psychiatry Reports, 20, 5, pp. 1-8, (2018); Cajete G., Native science: Natural laws of interdependence, (2000); Cianchi J., Radical environmentalism: Nature, identity and more-than-human agency, (2015); Cobb P., Confrey J., diSessa A.A., Lehrer R., Schauble L., Design experiments in educational research, Educational Researcher, 32, 1, pp. 9-13, (2003); Corbin J., Strauss A., Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria, Qualitative Sociology, 13, 1, pp. 3-21, (1990); Di Lorenzo E., Mantua N., Multi-year persistence of the 2014/15 North Pacific marine heatwave, Nature Climate Change, 6, 11, pp. 1042-1047, (2016); Dunne A., Raby F., Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming, (2013); Eisenlord M., Groner M., Yoshioka R., Elliott J., Maynard J., Fradkin S., Turner M., Pyne K., Rivlin N., van Hooidonk R., Harvell C., Ochre star mortality during the 2014 wasting disease epizootic: Role of population size structure and temperature, Philosophical Transactions. Biological Sciences, 371, 1689, (2016); Emerson R., Fretz R.I., Shaw L.L., Writing ethnographic fieldnotes, (2011); Fincke K., Morrison D., Bergsman K., Bell P., Formative assessment for equitable learning: Leveraging student voice through practical measures, The Science Teacher (National Science Teachers Association), 89, 2, (2021); Frydenberg E., My journey in coping research and practice: The impetus and the relevance, The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 37, 1, pp. 83-90, (2020); Haraway D., Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene (Experimental futures), (2016); Harvell C., Mitchell C., Ward J., Altizer S., Dobson A., Ostfeld R., Samuel M., Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota, Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science), 296, 5576, pp. 2158-2162, (2002); Henderson J., Drewes A., Teaching climate change in the United States (Routledge advances in climate change research), (2020); Hewson I., Button J., Gudenkauf B., Miner B., Newton A., Gaydos J., Wynne J., Groves C.L., Hendler G., Murray M., Fradkin S., Densovirus associated with sea-star wasting disease and mass mortality, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 111, 48, pp. 17278-17283, (2014); Ingold T., Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture, (2013); Framework: Ethical deliberation and decision-making in socio-ecological systems, (2020); Lombardi D., Bickel E., Bailey J., Burrell S., High school students’ evaluations, plausibility (re) appraisals, and knowledge about topics in Earth science, Science Education, 102, 1, pp. 153-177, (2018); Lombardi D., Sinatra G., Nussbaum E., Plausibility reappraisals and shifts in middle school students’ climate change conceptions, Learning and Instruction, 27, pp. 50-62, (2013); McGowan V.C., Bell P., Engineering education as the development of critical sociotechnical literacy, Science & Education, 29, 4, pp. 981-1005, (2020); Medin D., Bang M., Who’s asking?: Native science, Western science, and science education, (2014); Merriam S.B., Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis, (2002); Miles M., Huberman A., Saldana J., Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, (2020); Monroe M., Plate R., Oxarart A., Bowers A., Chaves W., Identifying effective climate change education strategies: A systematic review of the research, Environmental Education Research, 25, 6, pp. 791-812, (2019); Montecino-Latorre D., Eisenlord M., Turner M., Yoshioka R., Harvell C., Pattengill-Semmens C., Nichols J.D., Gaydos J., Devastating transboundary impacts of sea star wasting disease on subtidal asteroids, PloS One, 11, 10, (2016); Muis K.R., Pekrun R., Sinatra G.M., Azevedo R., Trevors G., Meier E., Heddy B.C., The curious case of climate change: Testing a theoretical model of epistemic beliefs, epistemic emotions, and complex learning, Learning and Instruction, 39, pp. 168-183, (2015); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, National Academies Press, (2013); Nxumalo F., Geotheorizing mountain–child relations within anthropogenic inheritances, Children’s Geographies, 15, 5, pp. 558-569, (2017); Ojala M., How do children cope with global climate change? Coping strategies, engagement, and well-being, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 3, pp. 225-233, (2012); Plutzer E., Lee A., Rosenau J., McCaffrey M., Berbeco M., Reid A., Mixed messages: How climate is taught in America’s schools, (2016); Pugh P., McGinty M., Bang M., Relational epistemologies in land-based learning environments: Reasoning about ecological systems and spatial indexing in motion, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14, 2, pp. 425-448, (2019); Puig de la Bellacasa M., Matters of care: Speculative ethics in more than human worlds, (2017); Salmon E., Teaching kincentric ecology in an urban environment, Journal of Sustainability Education, (2015); Sezen-Barrie A., Stapleton M.K., Marbach-Ad G., Science teachers’ sensemaking of the use of epistemic tools to scaffold students’ knowledge (re) construction in classrooms, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 7, pp. 1058-1092, (2020); Sinatra G., Lombardi D., Evaluating sources of scientific evidence and claims in the post-truth era may require reappraising plausibility judgments, Educational Psychologist, 55, 3, pp. 120-131, (2020); Stapleton S., Lynch K., Fostering relationships between elementary students and the more-than-human world using movement and stillness, The Journal of Environmental Education, 52, 4, pp. 272-289, (2021); Tronto J.C., Fisher B., Toward a feminist theory of caring, Circles of care, pp. 36-54, (1990); Walsh E.M., Cordero E., Youth science expertise, environmental identity, and agency in climate action filmmaking, Environmental Education Research, 25, 5, pp. 656-677, (2019); Walsh E.M., McGowan V.C., ‘Let your data tell a story:’ Climate change experts and students navigating disciplinary argumentation in the classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 1, pp. 20-43, (2017); Walsh E.M., Tsurusaki B.K., Social controversy belongs in the climate science classroom, Nature Climate Change, 4, 4, pp. 259-263, (2014); Weintrop B., Horn E., Orton M., Jona K., Wilensky U., Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 1, pp. 127-147, (2016)","V.C. McGowan; Educational Studies, University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, United States; email: vmcgowan@uw.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","20590776","","","","English","Educa. Dev. Psychol.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85124317838"
"Widjaja S.P.; Baek J.S.","Widjaja, Shannen Patricia (58499443800); Baek, Joon Sang (56878250900)","58499443800; 56878250900","VISUALIZING THE COMPLEX PROBLEM OF CHILDREN'S DIGITAL WELLBEING IN SOUTH KOREA: A SYSTEMS THINKING APPROACH","2023","Proceedings of the Design Society","3","","","3841","3850","9","1","10.1017/pds.2023.385","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85165462861&doi=10.1017%2fpds.2023.385&partnerID=40&md5=427d1b9c16c556fcd48bb369a3c0c49d","Yonsei University, South Korea","Widjaja S.P., Yonsei University, South Korea; Baek J.S., Yonsei University, South Korea","Considering the prevalence of digital interaction within the Generation Alpha, this study focuses on the digital wellbeing of elementary school-aged children in South Korea. By taking into account the multi-faceted nature, this study frames the issue that exists within children's digital wellbeing as a complex problem and aims to have a better comprehensive understanding of the system using a designerly and systems thinking approach. Thus, this study conducts a Systematic literature review and thematic analysis to get grasp of the current situation which then is translated using a systems thinking-based visualization tool to convey the causal relationships that exist within the system. Therefore, the outcome of this study presents a concept map that consolidates the findings to communicate a holistic perspective of children's digital wellbeing which can be used in design activities and decision-making processes which contribute to future design solutions and conversations. © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press.","Complexity; Digital Wellbeing; Social responsibility; Societal consequences; Visualisation","Decision making; Systems thinking; Complex problems; Complexity; Digital interactions; Digital wellbeing; Elementary schools; Social responsibilities; Societal consequence; South Korea; System thinkings; Wellbeing; Visualization","","","","","","","Ahn S., Kang B., Lee K., Structural relationships among children's duration of media use, behavior problems, and school adjustment, Korean Journal of Child Studies, 38, 2, pp. 191-204, (2017); Alafaireet P., Bouras A., Houghton H.L., Lavoie B.J., Lavoie J.P., Cressman B., Modi S., Applying concept mapping to solving in-patient mental health recidivism, Missouri medicine, 112, 1, pp. 63-66, (2015); An S., Kang H., Korean children's understanding of social media advergames: An exploratory study of ad recognition and skeptical attitudes toward advertising, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 18, 5, pp. 387-398, (2019); Blizzard J.L., Klotz L.E., A framework for sustainable whole systems design, Design Studies, 33, 5, pp. 456-479, (2012); Buchi M., Digital well-being theory and research, New Media and Society, (2021); Buchi M., Festic N., Latzer M., Digital overuse and subjective well-being in a digitized society, Social Media + Society, 5, 4, (2019); Burke J.G., O'Campo P., Peak G.L., Gielen A.C., McDonnell K.A., Trochim W.M.K., An introduction to concept mapping as a participatory public health research method, Qualitative Health Research, 15, 10, pp. 1392-1410, (2005); Burmeister K., Komplexes Problemlosen im Kontext angewandter Eignungsdiagnostik, (2009); Cardenas C., Sosa R., Moysen R., Martinez V.G., Sustaining sustainable design through systemic thinking, International Journal of Engineering Education, 26, 2, pp. 287-292, (2010); Cecchinato M.E., Rooksby J., Hiniker A., Munson S., Lukoff K., Ciolfi L., Thieme A., Harrison D., Designing for digital wellbeing: A research & practice agenda, Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems [Preprint], (2019); Cho Y., Mediating effects of online-based leisure between parenting attitudes and children's smartphone dependency, Korean Journal of Child Studies, 42, 6, pp. 695-706, (2021); Choi Y., Lee D.Y., Lee S., Park E.J., Yoo H.J., Shin Y., Association between screen overuse and behavioral and emotional problems in elementary school children"", 32, 4, pp. 154-160, (2021); Clegg C.W., Sociotechnical principles for system design, Applied Ergonomics, 31, 5, pp. 463-477, (2000); Da Costa J., Diehl J.C., Snelders D., A framework for a systems design approach to complex societal problems, Design Science, 5, (2019); Daellenbach H., Hard OR, soft OR, problem structuring methods, critical systems thinking: A primer, Proceedings of the ORSNZ Conference., (2001); Dorner D., Kreuzig H.W., Reither F., Staudel T., (1983); Duke E., Montag C., Smartphone addiction and beyond: Initial insights on an emerging research topic and its relationship to internet addiction, Internet Addiction, pp. 359-372, (2017); Eoh Y., Lee E., Park S.H., The relationship between children's school adaptation, academic achievement, happiness, and problematic smartphone usage: A multiple informant moderated mediating model, Applied Research in Quality of Life [Preprint], (2022); Fischer A., Greiff S., Funke J., The process of solving complex problems, Journal of Problem Solving, 4, 1, pp. 19-42, (2012); Forlizzi J., The product service ecology: Using a systems approach in design, Proceedings of the 2nd conference on Relating Systems Thinking and Design (RSD2), pp. 1-27, (2012); Funke J., Dynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement, Thinking and Reasoning, 7, 1, pp. 69-89, (2001); Funke J., Problemlosendes denken, Kohlhammer., (2003); Funke J., Complex problem solving, Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning, pp. 682-685, (2012); Han H., Chang Y., The effect of family leisure and family rituals on the mobile internet use and smartphone overdependence of children, Korean Journal of Family Welfare, 25, 2, pp. 141-161, (2020); Henderson L.W., Knight T., Integrating the hedonic and eudemonic perspectives to more comprehensively understand wellbeing and pathways to wellbeing, International Journal of Wellbeing, 2, pp. 196-221, (2012); Hong N.H., Media literacy and childhood from the vulnerable in media use to prosumers of deviance, Korean Journal of Communication & Information, 107, pp. 149-180, (2021); Hong Y., Effects of the purpose of smart device usage and executive function difficulties on the types of changes in elementary school children's smart device dependency, Korean Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 16, 1, pp. 1-25, (2022); Jackson M.C., Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers., (2003); Jackson M.C., Keys P., Towards a system of systems methodologies, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 35, 6, pp. 473-486, (1984); Jeong H., Yim H.W., Lee S., Lee H.K., Potenza M.N., Jo S., Son H.J., Reciprocal relationship between depression and Internet gaming disorder in children: A 12-month follow-up of the iCURE study using cross-lagged path analysis, Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 8, 4, pp. 725-732, (2019); Jo J., Bang K.S., The effect of peer relationship enhancement programs on the prevention of smartphone addiction among late school-age children in south korea, Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 63, (2022); Jones P.H., Systemic design principles for complex social systems, Social Systems and Design. Translational Systems Sciences, 1, (2014); Ju S., The effects of personal factors, parent factors, and peer factors on smart-phone excessive use by children in local child center, The Journal of Humanities and Social science, 10, 4, pp. 1651-1662, (2019); Kan H.W., Nearly 1 in 4 Koreans diagnosed with smartphone overdependence, [Online] The Korea Herald, (2022); Kim D., Jahng K.E., The effect of children's negative automatic thoughts on their problematic smartphone use: The moderating effect of weekend family rituals, Korean Journal of Child Studies, 42, 5, pp. 601-614, (2021); Kim H., Jung H., Development and application of youtube literacy education program, Global Creative Leader: Education & Learning, 11, 2, pp. 31-55, (2021); Kim H.S., Choi J.Y., Effects of internet-use controlling parenting behaviors and warm/rational parenting style on children's and adolescents' internet addiction: Moderation of child gender, Korean Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 15, 1, pp. 23-36, (2020); Kim S.E., Kang H.K., Influences of playfulness on smartphone dependency among upper grades of Korean elementary schoolers, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 12, (2022); Kim S., Kim T.H., The effect of group art therapy on the delay of gratification of children with smartphone addiction, Forum For Youth Culture, 58, pp. 31-60, (2019); Kim S.Y., Han S., Park E.J., Yoo H.J., Park D., Suh S., Shin Y.M., The relationship between smartphone overuse and sleep in younger children: A prospective cohort study, Journal of clinical sleep medicine, 16, 7, pp. 1133-1139, (2020); Kim Y.M., Park Y.J., The influence of happiness self-esteem on media addiction in elementary school children: The mediation effect of school adjustment, Journal of Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 22, 7, pp. 480-487, (2021); Kim Y.H., Temperament types at age 3 and smartphone overdependence at age 10, Frontiers in Psychology, 13, (2022); King D.L., Delfabbro P.H., Doh Y.Y., Wu A.M.S., Kuss D.J., Pallesen S., Mentzoni R., Carragher N., Sakuma H., Policy and prevention approaches for disordered and hazardous gaming and internet use: An international perspective, Prevention science : The official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 19, 2, pp. 233-249, (2018); Kirsh D., Thinking with external representations, AI & society, 25, pp. 441-454, (2010); Lanaj K., Johnson R.E., Barnes C.M., Beginning the workday yet already depleted? Consequences of late-night smartphone use and sleep, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124, 1, pp. 11-23, (2014); Lee J.P., Lee Y.S., Structural equation model of elementary school students' quality of life related to smart devices usage based on precede model, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 8, (2021); Lee K., Causal longitudinal analysis between media usage time trajectories and school adaptation trajectories for low grade elementary school children, Journal of Parent Education, 12, 1, pp. 105-124, (2020); Lee K., Park H.-Y., Analysis of the difference on elementary students' school adaptation and academic performance by dependence on smart devices, Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information, 27, 4, pp. 213-221, (2022); Lee S., Kim M., The effects of changes in media usage time on media device addiction and school adaptation of children, Education Review, 47, pp. 212-235, (2021); Lee E.J., Kim H.S., Effect of maternal factors on problematic smartphone use among elementary school children, International journal of environmental research and public health, 18, 17, (2021); Lee S., Kim S., Suh S., Han H., Jung J., Yang S., Shin Y., Relationship between screen time among children and lower economic status during elementary school closures due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, BMC Public Health, 22, 160, (2022); Lee S., Mun I.B., How does perceived parental rejection influence cyberbullying by children? A serial mediation model of children's depression and smartphone addiction, The Social Science Journal., (2022); Leischow S.J., Best A., Trochim W.M., Clark P.I., Gallagher R.S., Marcus S.E., Matthews E., Systems thinking to improve the public's health, American journal of preventive medicine, 35, (2008); Lim S.I., Jeong S., The relationship between Korean parents' smartphone addiction and that of their children: The mediating effects of children's depression and social withdrawal, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 9, (2022); McDaniel B.T., Drouin M., Daily technology interruptions and emotional and relational well-being, Computers in Human Behavior, 99, pp. 1-8, (2019); Mischel W., Processes in delay of gratification, Advances in experimental social psychology, 7, pp. 249-292, (1974); Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G., Group P., Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement, International journal of surgery, 8, 5, pp. 336-341, (2010); Monge R.A., De Russis L., Coping with digital wellbeing in a multi-device world, Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 1-14, (2021); Moon J.H., Kim K.W., Moon N.J., Smartphone use is a risk factor for pediatric dry eye disease according to region and age: A case control study, BMC Ophthalmol, 16, 188, (2016); Nam C., guknae•oe yu•adong dijiteol gyoyuk donghyanggwa dijiteol gyoyuk baljeon bangan tamsaek, 69, pp. 23-29, (2021); Nam S.J., Hwang H., Consumers' needs for public education and corporate participation regarding child internet addiction: Based on the risk perception attitude framework, Journal of Consumer Affairs, 53, 3, pp. 1220-1233, (2019); Oh S.C., Kim Y.K., Park J.H., Latent profile analysis of smart device usage pattern in children: Smart device addiction according to its usage pattern, Korean Journal of Child Studies, 41, 1, pp. 47-60, (2020); Oh Y., Kim H., Joung Y.S., Problematic internet use in children according to maternal depression trajectories: A population-based cohort study with 9-year follow-up, Journal of Psychiatric Research, 141, pp. 364-369, (2021); Ollinger M., Hammon S., Von Grundherr M., Funke J., Does visualization enhance complex problem solving? The effect of causal mapping on performance in the computer-based microworld Tailorshop, Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 4, pp. 621-637, (2015); Park B., Noh J., Effects of parenting behaviors and children's happiness on media device addiction, Korean Journal of Child Studies, 40, 3, pp. 87-103, (2019); Park M., Jeong S.H., Huh K., Park Y.S., Park E., Jang S., Association between smartphone addiction risk, sleep quality, and sleep duration among Korean school-age children: A population-based panel study, Sleep Biol Rhythms, 20, pp. 371-380, (2022); Rittel H.W., Webber M.M., Dilemmas in a general theory of planning, Policy sciences, 4, 2, pp. 155-169, (1973); Schnauber-Stockmann A., Meier A., Reinecke L., Procrastination out of habit? The role of impulsive versus reflective media selection in procrastinatory media use, Media Psychology, 21, 4, pp. 640-668, (2018); Song H., Longitudinal investigations of autoregressive cross-lagged path models among internet use, executive function problems, and maternal control in young korean children, Frontiers in psychiatry, 13, (2022); Son H.G., Cho H.J., Jeong K.H., The effects of Korean parents' smartphone addiction on Korean children's smartphone addiction: Moderating effects of children's gender and age, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 13, (2021); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B., Amit M., Mapping what they know: Concept maps as an effective tool for assessing students' systems thinking, American Journal of Operations Research., (2013); Trochim W.M.K., Cabrera D., The complexity of concept mapping for policy analysis, Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 7, 1, pp. 11-22, (2005); Trochim W.M., Cabrera D.A., Milstein B., Gallagher R.S., Leischow S.J., Practical challenges of systems thinking and modeling in public health, American journal of public health, 96, 3, pp. 538-546, (2006); Valasek C.J., Disciplining the akratic user: Constructing digital (un)wellness, Mobile Media and Communication, 10, 2, pp. 235-250, (2022); Vanden A.M.M.P., Digital wellbeing as a dynamic construct, Communication Theory, 31, 4, pp. 932-955, (2021); Vanden A.M.M.P., Nguyen M.H., Digital well-being in an age of mobile connectivity: An introduction to the special issue, Mobile Media and Communication, 10, 2, pp. 174-189, (2022); Verbeek P.P., What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, (2005); Williams M., Moser T., The art of coding and thematic exploration in qualitative research, International Management Review, 15, 1, pp. 45-55, (2019); Yang K., Seo S.H., Ok H.J., Parents' perceptions and guidance behavior on media use of children aged 3-9 years old : Focusing on differences in parents' media education experience, Journal of Reading Research, 59, pp. 107-136, (2021); Yoo K.-H., Choi H.-J., Effects of parental pressure and autonomy support on academic enthusiasm, in the fourth grade of elementary school: The mediating effect of smartphone dependence, The Korean Journal of Child Education, 30, 3, pp. 109-129, (2021); Yoon J.-Y., Jeong K.-H., Cho H.J., The effects of children's smartphone addiction on sleep duration: The moderating effects of gender and age, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 11, (2021); Yue A., Pang N., Torres F., Mambra S., Developing an indicator framework for digital wellbeing: Perspectives from digital citizenship, NUSCTIC Working Paper Series, 1, (2021); Zhang J., The nature of external representations in problem solving, Cognitive Science, 21, 2, pp. 179-217, (1997)","S.P. Widjaja; Yonsei University Korea, South Korea; email: shannenpwj@gmail.com","Otto K.","Cambridge University Press","","24th International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 2023","24 July 2023 through 28 July 2023","Bordeaux","190097","2732527X","","","","English","Proc. Des. Soc.","Conference paper","Final","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85165462861"
"Ke L.; Sadler T.D.; Zangori L.; Friedrichsen P.J.","Ke, Li (56735640300); Sadler, Troy D. (7006721381); Zangori, Laura (55589435200); Friedrichsen, Patricia J. (59014296100)","56735640300; 7006721381; 55589435200; 59014296100","Students’ perceptions of socio-scientific issue-based learning and their appropriation of epistemic tools for systems thinking","2020","International Journal of Science Education","42","8","","1339","1361","22","51","10.1080/09500693.2020.1759843","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85084369344&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2020.1759843&partnerID=40&md5=c8e6a008ce9f0b401101fa6c1c52f581","School of Education, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri, Columbia, United States","Ke L., School of Education, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; Sadler T.D., School of Education, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; Zangori L., Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri, Columbia, United States; Friedrichsen P.J., Department of Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum, College of Education, University of Missouri, Columbia, United States","Learning science in the context of socio-scientific issues (SSI) is widely advocated for achieving the goal of scientific literacy that values using science in daily lives. While prior research suggests that SSI-based learning can promote students’ disciplinary knowledge and practices, less is known about students’ perceptions of SSI-based learning and how to support students in considering the epistemic aspects of SSI learning. In this study, we seek to address the research gap by examining students’ perceptions of their learning and how they appropriate the epistemic tools for systems thinking in an issue-based unit on the regulation of e-cigarettes. We used semi-structured interviews from 33 students in a midwestern U.S. high school as our primary data. The results suggest that students in general held positive attitudes towards SSI-based learning experiences and found SSI work to be 1) relevant, 2) interesting, 3) promoting agency, and 4) beneficial for their science learning. Also, we found that students differed in how they appropriated the epistemic tools for systems thinking ranging from lack of appropriation, to appropriating surface features, and to appropriating epistemic purposes. We conclude the paper by discussing how engaging students in meaningful learning activities may support students’ productive engagement in SSI learning. © 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","Epistemic practices; learning environment; socio-scientific issues","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (IIA-1355406); National Science Foundation, NSF; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, UNC-CH","This research was supported by the National Science Foundation Office of Integrative Activities under collaborative agreement IIA-1355406. The ideas expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. We appreciate the interest and participation of the teachers and students who made this work possible. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Li Ke, School of Education, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC Email: lke@unc.edu","Aikenhead G., Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice, (2006); Albe V., When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue, Research in Science Education, 38, 1, pp. 67-90, (2008); Berland L.K., Hammer D., Framing for scientific argumentation, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 1, pp. 68-94, (2012); Bingle W.H., Gaskell P.J., Scientific literacy for decisionmaking and the social construction of scientific knowledge, Science Education, 78, 2, pp. 185-201, (1994); Chinn C.A., Buckland L.A., Samarapungavan A., Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology, Educational Psychologist, 46, 3, pp. 141-167, (2011); Creswell J., Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, (1998); Ekborg M., Ottander C., Silfver E., Simon S., Teachers’ experience of working with socio-scientific: A large scale and in depth study, Research in Science Education, 43, 2, pp. 599-617, (2013); Friedrichsen P., Li K., Sadler T.D., Zangori L., Enacting co-designed socio-scientific issues-based curriculum units: A case of secondary science teacher learning, Journal of Science Teacher Education; Furberg A., Ludvigsen S., Students’ meaning-making of socio-scientific issues in computer mediated settings: Exploring learning through interaction trajectories, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 13, pp. 1775-1799, (2008); Glaser B.G., Strauss A.L., The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, (1967); Gouvea J., Passmore C., Models of” versus “models for, Science & Education, 26, 1, pp. 49-63, (2017); Grossman P.L., Smagorinsky P., Valencia S., Appropriating tools for teaching English: A theoretical framework for research on learning to teach, American Journal of Education, 108, 1, pp. 1-29, (1999); Hancock T.S., Friedrichsen P.J., Kinslow A.T., Sadler T.D., Selecting socio-scientific issues for teaching, Science & Education, 28, 6, pp. 639-667, (2019); Hidi S., Renninger K.A., The four-phase model of interest development, Educational Psychologist, 41, 2, pp. 111-127, (2006); Hogan K., Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 4, pp. 341-368, (2002); Jimenez-Aleixandre M.P., Rodriguez A.B., Duschl R.A., “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: argument in high school genetics, Science Education, 84, 6, pp. 757-792, (2000); Kelly G.J., Cunningham C.M., Epistemic tools in engineering design for K-12 education, Science Education, 103, 4, pp. 1080-1111, (2019); Ko M.L.M., Krist C., Opening up curricula to redistribute epistemic agency: A framework for supporting science teaching, Science Education, 103, 4, pp. 979-1010, (2019); Krist C., Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Identifying essential epistemic heuristics for guiding mechanistic reasoning in science learning, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28, 2, pp. 160-205, (2019); Lave J., Wenger E., Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, (1991); Lazarowitz R., Bloch I., Awareness of societal issues among high school biology teachers teachingg, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14, 5, pp. 437-457, (2005); Lee H., Abd-El-Khalick F., Choi K., Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6, 2, pp. 97-117, (2006); Lee H., Yang J., Science teachers taking their first steps toward teaching Socioscientific issues through collaborative action research, Research in Science Education, 49, 1, pp. 51-71, (2019); Leont'ev A.N., Problems of the development of mind, (1981); Liu S.-Y., Lin C.-S., Tsai C.-C., College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making, Science Education, 95, 3, pp. 497-517, (2011); Markauskaite L., Goodyear P., Epistemic fluency and professional education, (2014); McNeill K.L., Krajcik J., Synergy between teacher practices and curricular scaffolds to support students in using domain-specific and domain-general knowledge in writing arguments to explain phenomena, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 3, pp. 416-460, (2009); Mehan H., The schools’ work of sorting students, Talk and social structure, pp. 71-90, (1991); Newman E.P., Griffin P., Cole M., The construction zone: Working for Cognitive change in school, (1989); Nicolaou C.T., Evagorou M., Lymbouridou C., Elementary school students’ emotions when exploring an authentic socio-scientific issue through the use of models, Science Education International, 26, 2, pp. 240-259, (2015); Oscarsson M., Jidesjo A., Stromdahl H., Karlsson K.-G., Science in society or science in school: Swedish secondary school science teachers’ beliefs about science and science lessons in comparison with what their students want to learn, Nordic Studies in Science Education, 5, 1, pp. 18-34, (2009); Ottander C., Ekborg M., Students’ experience of working with socioscientific issues—A quantitative study in secondary school, Research in Science Education, 42, 6, pp. 1147-1163, (2012); Patton M.Q., Qualitative research and evaluation methods, (2001); Ratcliffe M., Grace M., Science education for citizenship, (2003); Russ R.S., Luna M.J., Inferring teacher epistemological framing from local patterns in teacher noticing, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 3, pp. 284-314, (2013); Sadler T.D., Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice, Studies in Science Education, 45, 1, pp. 1-42, (2009); Sadler T.D., Barab S.A., Scott B., What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?, Research in Science Education, 37, 4, pp. 371-391, (2007); Sadler T.D., Friedrichsen P., Zangori L., A framework for teaching for socio-scientific issue and model based learning (SIMBL), Educação e Fronteiras/Education and Borders, 9, 25, pp. 8-26, (2019); Sandoval W.A., Reiser B.J., Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry, Science Education, 88, 3, pp. 345-372, (2004); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Shwartz Y., Hug B., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Stenseth T., Braten I., Stromso H.I., Investigating interest and knowledge as predictors of students’ attitudes towards socio-scientific issues, Learning and Individual Differences, 47, pp. 274-280, (2016); Stroupe D., Examining classroom science practice communities: How teachers and students negotiate epistemic agency and learn science-as-practice, Science Education, 98, 3, pp. 487-516, (2014); Tal T., Kedmi Y., Teaching socioscientific issues: Classroom culture and students’ performances, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 4, pp. 615-644, (2006); Tan E., Barton A.C., Benavides A., Engineering for sustainable communities: Epistemic tools in support of equitable and consequential middle school engineering, Science Education, 103, 4, pp. 1011-1046, (2019); Tidemand S., Nielsen J.A., The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: From the perspective of teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 1, pp. 44-61, (2017); Tomas L., Rigano D., Ritchie S.M., Students’ regulation of their emotions in a science classroom, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 2, pp. 234-260, (2016); Vygotsky L.S., Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, (1978); Wendell K.B., Andrews C.J., Paugh P., Supporting knowledge construction in elementary engineering design, Science Education, 103, 4, pp. 952-978, (2019); Wertsch J.V., Vygotsky and the social formation of mind, (1985); Wertsch J.V., Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action, (1991); Yang F.-Y., Student views concerning evidence and the expert in reasoning a socio-scientific issue and personal epistemology, Educational Studies, 31, 1, pp. 65-84, (2005); Zangori L., Peel A., Kinslow A., Friedrichsen P., Sadler T.D., Student development of model-based reasoning about carbon cycling and climate change in a socio-scientific issues unit, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54, 10, pp. 1249-1273, (2017); Zeidler D.L., Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis: Theory, Research, and Practice, (2014); Zeidler D.L., Sadler T.D., Simmons M.L., Howes E.V., Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education, Science Education, 89, 3, pp. 357-377, (2005)","L. Ke; School of Education, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; email: lke@unc.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85084369344"
"Karga B.; Ceyhan G.D.","Karga, Busra (59342169400); Ceyhan, Gaye Defne (57203463892)","59342169400; 57203463892","Investigating middle school science teachers’ stock-flow, causal-loop, and dynamic thinking skills with scenario-based questions","2024","International Journal of Science Education","","","","","","","0","10.1080/09500693.2024.2404546","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85204892037&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2024.2404546&partnerID=40&md5=19e222ef0299b7ccedaa0d9ceb519355","Eindhoven School of Education, Department of Applied Physics and Science Education, Eindhoven, Netherlands; Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, İstanbul, Turkey","Karga B., Eindhoven School of Education, Department of Applied Physics and Science Education, Eindhoven, Netherlands; Ceyhan G.D., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, İstanbul, Turkey","In recent years, the world has been facing many serious and complex problems, such as climate change, clean energy, and health problems. More comprehensive, holistic, and interdisciplinary approaches are needed to address such complex and global problems. The systems thinking approach in education provides a holistic approach that focuses on the interactions and relationships among components within complex systems at different levels. This study aims to investigate the systems thinking skills of science teachers using three scenario-based questions related to stock-flow thinking, causal-loop thinking, and dynamic thinking skills. The eight middle school science teachers were the participants of the study. Data were collected through online interviews, the qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data. The results showed that teachers had varying levels of ability to think in terms of stock flows, to think dynamically, and to think in terms of causal loops in the context of domain-general scenario-based questions. The results of the study suggest that the systems thinking and system dynamics approach inherent in science education can be incorporated into teacher training curricula and workshops to improve teachers’ systems thinking skills. © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","system dynamics; Systems thinking; systems thinking skills","","","","","","","","Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A complete set of systems thinking skills, Insight, 20, 3, pp. 9-17, (2017); Asiotak G., Doganca Kucuk Z., Metacognition in action as a possible explanation for stock-flow failure, System Dynamics Review, 37, 4, pp. 253-282, (2021); Ateskan A., Lane J.F., Assessing teachers’ systems thinking skills during a professional development program in Turkey, Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, pp. 4348-4356, (2018); Bartus G.A., Fisher F.T., Barriers and opportunities to the acquisition of systems thinking skills for K-12 teachers, Proceedings of ASME International mechanical engineering congress and exposition, (2016); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Dodick J., Tripto J., High school students’ understanding of the human body system, Research in Science Education, 43, 1, pp. 33-56, (2013); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Bianchi G., Pisiotis U., Cabrera M., Greencomp, the European sustainability competence framework, (2022); Bielik T., Delen I., Krell M., Assaraf O.B.Z., Characterising the literature on the teaching and learning of system thinking and complexity in stem education: A bibliometric analysis and research synthesis, Journal for STEM Education Research, 6, 2, pp. 199-231, (2023); Budak U.S., Ceyhan G.D., Research trends on systems thinking approach in science education, International Journal of Science Education, 46, 5, pp. 485-502, (2024); Ceyhan G.D., Budak U.S., Karga B., Assessing pre-service teachers’ systems thinking skills through case scenarios; Cheng L.T., Hung J.F., Liu S.Y., Using systems thinking strategy in an environment course, US-China Education Review, 5, 1, pp. 46-51, (2015); Davis K., Ghaffarzadegan N., Grohs J., Grote D., Hosseinichimeh N., Knight D., Mahmoudi H., Triantis K., The Lake Urmia vignette: A tool to assess understanding of complexity in socio-environmental systems, System Dynamics Review, 36, 2, pp. 191-222, (2020); Doganca Kucuk Z., Saysel A.K., Developing seventh grade students’ understanding of complex environmental problems with systems tools and representations: A quasi-experimental study, Research in Science Education, 48, 2, pp. 491-514, (2018); Dorani K., Mortazavi A., Dehdarian A., Mahmoudi H., Khandan M., Mashayekhi A.N., Developing question sets to assess systems thinking skills, pp. 19-23, (2015); Eidin E., Bielik T., Touitou I., Bowers J., McIntyre C., Damelin D., Krajcik J., Thinking in terms of change over time: Opportunities and challenges of using system dynamics models, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33, 1, pp. 1-28, (2024); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Fisher D.M., Systems thinking activities used in K-12 for up to two decades, Frontiers in Education, 8, (2023); Forrester J.W., System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR, System Dynamics Review, 10, 2-3, pp. 245-256, (1994); Gilissen M.G., Knippels M.C.P., Verhoeff R.P., van Joolingen W.R., Teachers’ and educators’ perspectives on systems thinking and its implementation in Dutch biology education, Journal of Biological Education, 54, 5, pp. 485-496, (2019); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, 1, pp. 127-138, (2004); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 3, pp. 247-298, (2000); Hopper M.A., Proposing measures for assessing systems thinking interventions, M.S thesis, (2007); Karaarslan G., Science teachers as ESD educators: An outdoor ESD model for developing systems thinking skills, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, (2016); Karaarslan Semiz G., Teksoz G., Developing the systems thinking skills of pre-service science teachers through an outdoor ESD course, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 20, 4, pp. 337-356, (2020); Karaman A.C., Community service learning and the emergence of systems thinking: A teacher education project in an urban setting in Turkey, Systemic Practice and Action Research, 27, 5, pp. 485-497, (2014); Lee T.D., Science teachers’ representational competence and systems thinking, Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, (2015); Lee T.D., Jones M.G., Chesnutt K., Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle, Research in Science Education, 49, 1, pp. 137-172, (2019); Maani K.E., Maharaj V., Links between systems thinking and complex decision making, System Dynamics Review, 20, 1, pp. 21-48, (2004); Mambrey S., Timm J., Landskron J.J., Schmiemann P., The impact of system specifics on systems thinking, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 10, pp. 1632-1651, (2020); Meadows D.H., Thinking in systems: A primer, (2008); Turkiye Yuzyılı Maarif Modeli Ortak Metin, (2024); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Ormanci U., Cepni S., Balim A.G., Ortaokul 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin sistem düşünme becerilerine ilişkin durumlarının belirlenmesi [, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 44, 44, pp. 15-27, (2018); Ossimitz G., Teaching system dynamics and systems thinking in Austria and Germany, The 18th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2000); Peretz R., Tal M., Akiri E., Dori D., Dori Y.J., Fostering engineering and science students’ and teachers’ systems thinking and conceptual modeling skills, Instructional Science, 51, 3, pp. 509-543, (2023); Randle J.M., Stroink M.L., The development and initial validation of the paradigm of systems thinking, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35, 6, pp. 645-657, (2018); Raved L., Yarden A., Developing seventh grade students’ systems thinking skills in the context of the human circulatory system, Frontiers in Public Health, 2, 260, pp. 1-11, (2014); Repko A.F., Szostak R., Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory, (2020); Richmond B., Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, System Dynamics Review, 9, 2, pp. 113-133, (1993); Richmond B., Systems thinking/system dynamics: Let's just get on with it, System Dynamics Review, 10, 2-3, pp. 135-157, (1994); Richmond B., The ‘thinking’ in systems thinking: How can we make it easier to master, The Systems Thinker, 8, 2, pp. 1-5, (1997); Richmond B., The ‘thinking’ in systems thinking: Seven essential skills, (2000); Samon S., Levy S.T., Micro–macro compatibility: When does a complex systems approach strongly benefit science learning?, Science Education, 101, 6, pp. 985-1014, (2017); Schuler S., Fanta D., Rosenkraenzer F., Riess W., Systems thinking within the scope of education for sustainable development (ESD)–a heuristic competence model as a basis for (science) teacher education, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42, 2, pp. 192-204, (2018); Senge P.M., The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, (1990); Shaked H., Schechter C., Systems thinking among school middle leaders, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45, 4, pp. 699-718, (2017); Stave K., Hopper M., What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy, 25th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, (2007); Sterman J.D., System dynamics modeling: Tools for learning in a complex world, California Management Review, 43, 4, pp. 8-25, (2001); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review: The Journal of the System Dynamics Society, 16, 4, pp. 249-286, (2000); Taylor S., Calvo-Amodio J., Well J., A method for measuring systems thinking learning, Systems, 8, 2, (2020); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B.Z., Snapir Z., Amit M., How is the body’s systemic nature manifested amongst high school biology students?, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 73-98, (2017); Van de Vijver F., Tanzer N.K., Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview, European Review of Applied Psychology, 54, 2, pp. 119-135, (2004); Vare P., Lausselet N., Rieckmann M., Competences in education for sustainable development, (2022); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of systems thinking in STEM education, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019)","B. Karga; Eindhoven School of Education, Department of Applied Physics and Science Education, Eindhoven, Netherlands; email: b.karga@tue.nl","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Article in press","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85204892037"
"Zainuddin M.Z.; Mohamad N.S.; Assilam M.F.; Mastor M.Z.S.; Hashim M.H.; Radzi Z.","Zainuddin, M.Z. (16242968200); Mohamad, N.S. (56263015000); Assilam, M.F. (57210990667); Mastor, M.Z.S. (57211000418); Hashim, M.H. (36924011200); Radzi, Z. (55949158300)","16242968200; 56263015000; 57210990667; 57211000418; 36924011200; 55949158300","Space Science Education in Malaysia: A review based on performance improvement framework in complex systems","2019","ASM Science Journal","12","Special Issue  2","","172","182","10","1","","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85072157915&partnerID=40&md5=dd235e79ca36ba29451a97ac71078fe2","Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, Malaysia; Pusat PERMATApintar' Negara, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia; Perdana School of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, UTM, Malaysia; Planetarium Negara, Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC), Malaysia; National Space Agency of Malaysia (ANGKASA), Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC), Malaysia","Zainuddin M.Z., Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, Malaysia; Mohamad N.S., Pusat PERMATApintar' Negara, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia; Assilam M.F., Perdana School of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, UTM, Malaysia; Mastor M.Z.S., Planetarium Negara, Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC), Malaysia; Hashim M.H., National Space Agency of Malaysia (ANGKASA), Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC), Malaysia; Radzi Z., National Space Agency of Malaysia (ANGKASA), Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC), Malaysia","This paper focused on reviewing space science education in Malaysia based on the performance improvement framework in complex systems. Therefore, not all articles were reviewed but only randomly selected ones to find the pattern by analyzing activities commenced and compared to the performance improvement framework in complex systems. The data were then analyzed by using the continuous comparison method. The findings from this study implied that to improve space science education for the younger generation, it was important to view the direction of education and to understand in depth the complex systems of education as a whole. The direction of the younger generation's education system should enable them to solve complex problems efficiently. Space science education could be set as an example of how to move forward in this direction. This is due to the nature of space science education itself which is multidisciplinary. Transdisciplinary methods could be used in space science education and might act as a case of an integrated STEM model for the Malaysian Education System. Other implications of the transdisciplinary method implementation are exposure to systems thinking among scientists, teachers, educators, administrators, authorities, students and the public. The changes will take effect only if more people are aware of the importance of systems thinking as the basis in life so as to be able to understand that all the elements are interconnected in the complex systems as a whole. © Academy of Sciences Malaysia 2019.","Complex systems; Performance improvement; Space science education; Systems thinking; Transdisciplinary","","","","","","","","Angkasa, Sedekad angkasa 1994-2004, (2004); Avsar C., Frese W., Meschede T., Briess K., Developing a Planetary Rover with Students: Space Education at TU Berlin, Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 8, 1, pp. 20-29, (2014); Blackmore J., Leading as Emotional Management Work in High Risk Time: The Counterintuitive Impulses of Perfomativity and Passion, School Leadership & Management, 24, 4, pp. 439-459, (2004); Brethower D.M., Systemic Issues, in Handbook of Human Performance Technology: Principles, Practices & Potential, pp. 111-137, (2006); Ertas A., Integrating Transdisciplinary in Undergraduate Education, in Transdisciplinary Theory & Practice, 4, pp. 17-19, (2013); Evans T.L., Transdisciplinary Collaborations for Sustainability Education: Institutional and Intragroup Challenges and Opportunities, Policy Futures in Education, 13, 1, pp. 70-96, (2015); Fraknoi A., Space Science Education in the United States: The Good, Bad, and the Ugly, in Societal Impact of Spaceflight, eds Washington DC: NASA Office of External Relations History Division, pp. 407-419, (2007); Guvenen O., Transdisciplinary Science Methodology as a Necessary Condition in Research and Education, Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 7, pp. 69-78, (2016); Declaration Future Earth and Space Science Education, The IUGG Electric Journal, 15, 12, pp. 3-5, (2015); Ibrahim I.A., Safiai M.H., Jamsari E.A.Ahmad M.Y., Mohd Nor A.H., Mohd Nasir B., Observatories in Malaysia: Descendants of Islamic Civilization superiority, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8, 12, pp. 782-795, (2017); Kikuchi K., Yamanaka R., Yamaguchi K., JAXA's Educational Activities through JEM Utilization, Int. J. Microgravity Sci. Appl, 33, 2, pp. 1-3, (2016); Krippendorff K., Content anaysis: An introduction to its methodology, (2004); Mangiante E.M.S., Teachers matter: Measures of Teacher Effectiveness in Low-Income Minority Schools, Educ Asse Eval Acc, 23, 1, pp. 41-63, (2011); Mardina Abdullah B.B., Alina Marie Hasbi R.A.M., Baharudin Yatim M.A.M.A., Siti Aminah Bahari N.M.D., Mohd Hezri Mokhtar A.F.M.Z., Mhd Fairos A., Development of UKM-SID teaching module for space science education, Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 102, pp. 80-85, (2013); Mhd Fairos A., Malaysia Education Program in Commemoration of National ""Angkasawan"" Program, in United Nations/Malaysia expert meeting on Human Space Technology, (2011); Mohamad N.S., Analisis Sistem Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sekolah Menengah daripada Perspekstif Teknologi Prestasi Manusia, (2012); Mohd Hafiz Safiai E.A.J., Ibnor Azli I., Malaysian Observatories and those of the Islamic Civilization era: General similarities, Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 20, 12, pp. 2164-2171, (2014); Mohd Zambri Z., Perspective of Space Science Education and Awareness in Malaysia, in Thai National Astronomy Meeting 2007, (2007); Mohd Zambri Z., Space Science Educational Module for Primary School (Teacher Training Version), (2009); Mohd Zambri Z., Astronomy Educational Module for primary school in Malaysia, in The 11th Asian-Pacific Regional IAU Meeting 2011 NARIT Conference Series, 1, 2013, (2013); Muhammad Abd Hadi B., Finley F.N., STEM education in Malaysia: Reviewing the current Physics Curriculum, (2016); Mullis I.V.S., Martin M.O., Goh S., Cotter K., TIMSS 2015 Encyclopedia: Education Policy and Curriculum in Mathematics and Science, (2016); Norhan Mat Yusoff H.Z.M.S., Ahmad Razlan M., Remote Sensing Educational Ground Receiving System for interest creation in space science and technology in education, International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 4, 4, pp. 171-182, (2008); Resolusi Konvesyen Astronomi Nasional ASTROcon2016, (2016); Rasi P., Ruokamo H., Maasiita M., Towards a Culturally Inclusive, Integrated, and Transdisciplinary Media Education Curriculum: Case study of an International MA Program at the University of Lapland, Journal of Media Literacy Education, 9, 1, pp. 22-35, (2017); Rueda R., The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right solutions to the right problems, (2011); Annual Report Space Generation Advisory Council, (2015); Stamovlasis D., Catastrophe theory: Methodology, epistemology and applications in learning science, in Complex Dynamical Systems in Education: Concepts, Methods and Applications, pp. 141-175, (2016); Stentoft D., From Saying to Doing Interdisciplinary Learning: Is Problem-Based Learning the Answer?, Active Learning in Higher Education, 18, 1, pp. 51-61, (2017); Thornton B., Peltier G., Perreault G., Systems Thinking: A Skill to Improve Student Achievement, The Clearing House, 77, 5, pp. 222-227, (2004)","N.S. Mohamad; Perdana School of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, UTM, Malaysia; email: sakinah@ukm.edu.my","","Akademi Sains Malaysia","","","","","","18236782","","","","English","ASM Sci. J.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85072157915"
"Sajjadi P.; Bagher M.M.; Myrick J.G.; Guerriero J.G.; White T.S.; Klippel A.; Swim J.K.","Sajjadi, Pejman (56185165600); Bagher, Mahda M. (57205745034); Myrick, Jessica G. (55654015400); Guerriero, Joseph G. (57230368400); White, Timothy S. (7402587163); Klippel, Alexander (8438953000); Swim, Janet K. (6701663494)","56185165600; 57205745034; 55654015400; 57230368400; 7402587163; 8438953000; 6701663494","Promoting systems thinking and pro-environmental policy support through serious games","2022","Frontiers in Environmental Science","10","","957204","","","","15","10.3389/fenvs.2022.957204","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85140390508&doi=10.3389%2ffenvs.2022.957204&partnerID=40&md5=f716a1a2f2868ad0fdb7f0559b5486f3","The Center for Immersive Experiences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; College of Communications, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, The Pennsylvania State University (PSU), University Park, PA, United States; Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands","Sajjadi P., The Center for Immersive Experiences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; Bagher M.M., The Center for Immersive Experiences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; Myrick J.G., College of Communications, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; Guerriero J.G., Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States; White T.S., Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, The Pennsylvania State University (PSU), University Park, PA, United States; Klippel A., Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands; Swim J.K., Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States","We evaluated whether teaching the public about the “critical zone”–the Earth’s outer skin, critical to all life—via a digital serious game can affect adults’ systems thinking about the environment and support policies to protect the environment. An experiment (N = 152) compared the effects of playing “CZ Investigator” versus viewing a static website on systems thinking about the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) nexus and support for relevant public policies. The serious game had the strongest effects on our outcomes of interest for those participants with less past science education. For these individuals, the serious game, relative to the static website, increased perceptions of the strength of interconnections across food, energy, and water systems (p <.01) and support for policies that regulated human impacts on the environment (p <.01). Mediation analysis revealed that increases in systems thinking explain increases in policy support. This group of users also indicated that the game was easier, more enjoyable, and more effective for learning than the website. Mediation analyses also revealed that perceived learning effectiveness was a stronger mediator than ease and enjoyment effects of the game on systems thinking and policy support. These results are valuable for environmental education because understanding interconnections within complex systems is vital for solving environmental problems, particularly for learners with less background in science. Copyright © 2022 Sajjadi, Bagher, Myrick, Guerriero, White, Klippel and Swim.","critical zone; environmental communication; environmental policies; food-energy-water nexus; serious games; systems thinking","","","","","","Pennsylvania State University Institute for Energy; National Science Foundation, NSF, (2129402)","The study was funded by the Pennsylvania State University Institute for Energy and the Environment awarded to authors JKS , AK, JGM, and TSW and the National Science Foundation (Award number 2129402) awarded to authors TSW and JKS. ","Arnab S., Brown K., Clarke S., Dunwell I., Lim T., Suttie N., Et al., The development approach of a pedagogically-driven serious game to support Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) within a classroom setting, Comput. Educ, 69, pp. 15-30, (2013); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Comput. Sci, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Ballew M.T., Goldberg M.H., Rosenthal S.A., Gustafson A., Leiserowitz A., Systems thinking as a pathway to global warming beliefs and attitudes through an ecological worldview, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A, 116, pp. 8214-8219, (2019); Benbunan-Fich R., Hiltz S.R., Mediators of the effectiveness of online courses, IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun, 46, pp. 298-312, (2003); Bloom B.S., Taxonomy of educational objectivesCognitive domain, N. Y. McKay, 120, (1956); Borgonovi F., Video gaming and gender differences in digital and printed reading performance among 15-year-olds students in 26 countries, J. Adolesc, 48, pp. 45-61, (2016); Boyle E.A., Hainey T., Connolly T.M., Gray G., Earp J., Ott M., Et al., An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games, Comput. Educ, 94, pp. 178-192, (2016); Brantley S., White T., White A., Frontiers in exploration of the critical zone, (2005); Bullock J.B., Bowman A.O., Exploring citizens’ support for policy tools at the food, energy, water nexus, Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy, 37, pp. 148-154, (2018); Ceci S.J., Williams W.M., Why aren’t more women in science?: Top researchers debate the evidence, (2007); Charles D., Mcneill M., McAlister M., Black M., Moore A., Stringer K., Et al., Player-centred game design: Player modelling and adaptive digital games, pp. 285-298, (2005); Clayton S., Social issues and personal life: Considering the environment, J. Soc. Issues, 73, pp. 667-681, (2017); Collins R., Skills for the 21st century: Teaching higher-order thinking, Curric. Leadersh. J, 12, (2014); Cox M., Elen J., Steegen A., Systems thinking in geography: Can high school students do it?, Int. Res. Geogr. Environ. Educ, 28, pp. 37-52, (2019); Dankbaar M.E., Richters O., Kalkman C.J., Prins G., Ten Cate O.T., van Merrienboer J.J., Et al., Comparative effectiveness of a serious game and an e-module to support patient safety knowledge and awareness, BMC Med. Educ, 17, pp. 30-10, (2017); Davis A.C., Stroink M.L., The relationship between systems thinking and the new ecological paradigm, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci, 33, pp. 575-586, (2016); den Haan R.-J., van der Voort M.C., Baart F., Berends K., Van Den Berg M., Straatsma M., Et al., The Virtual River Game: Gaming using models to collaboratively explore river management complexity, Environ. Model. Softw, 134, (2020); Dickey M.D., Murder on Grimm Isle: The impact of game narrative design in an educational game-based learning environment, Br. J. Educ. Technol, 42, pp. 456-469, (2011); Fox J., McKnight J., Sun Y., Maung D., Crawfis R., Using a serious game to communicate risk and minimize psychological distance regarding environmental pollution, Telemat. Inf, 46, (2020); Harteveld C., Triadic game design: Balancing reality, meaning and play, (2011); Hayes A.F., Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, (2013); Hegarty M., Richardson A.E., Montello D.R., Lovelace K., Subbiah I., Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability, Intelligence, 30, pp. 425-447, (2002); Hendrix M., Bellamy-Wood T., McKay S., Bloom V., Dunwell I., Implementing adaptive game difficulty balancing in serious games, IEEE Trans. Games, 11, pp. 320-327, (2018); Herlin C., Thi Phan L., Jou S.-C., Social science approaches to critical zone studies: A review, T1 - ecosystem services assessment covering diverse beneficiaries to improve ES related policy. Presented at the 3rd ESP asia conference, (2021); Hocine N., Gouaich A., Cerri S.A., Dynamic difficulty adaptation in serious games for motor rehabilitation, International conference on serious games, pp. 115-128, (2014); Jouan J., De Graeuwe M., Carof M., Baccar R., Bareille N., Bastian S., Et al., Learning interdisciplinarity and systems approaches in agroecology: Experience with the serious game SEGAE, Sustainability, 12, (2020); Klippel A., Zhao J., Sajjadi P., Wallgrun J.O., Bagher M.M., Oprean D., Immersive place-based learning-an extended research framework, 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW), pp. 449-454, (2020); Kolb D.A., Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, (2014); Koroleva K., Novak J., How to engage with sustainability issues we rarely experience? A gamification model for collective awareness platforms in water-related sustainability, Sustainability, 12, (2020); Lane D.C., Till the muddle in my mind have cleared awa’: Can we help shape policy using systems modelling?, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci, 33, pp. 633-650, (2016); Lee E.A.L., Wong K.W., Fung C.C., How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modeling approach, Comput. Educ, 55, pp. 1424-1442, (2010); Lezak S.B., Thibodeau P.H., Systems thinking and environmental concern, J. Environ. Psychol, 46, pp. 143-153, (2016); Licorish S.A., George J.L., Owen H.E., Daniel B., Go Kahoot!” enriching classroom engagement, motivation and learning experience with games, 25th international conference on computers in education New.Zealand: Asia-pacific society for computers in education, (2017); Lopes R., Bidarra R., Adaptivity challenges in games and simulations: A survey, IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games, 3, pp. 85-99, (2011); Maor D., Fraser B.J., An online questionnaire for evaluating students’ and teachers’ perceptions of constructivist multimedia learning environments, Res. Sci. Educ, 35, pp. 221-244, (2005); Marks R.B., Sibley S.D., Arbaugh J.B., A structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning, J. Manag. Educ. Newbury. Park, 29, pp. 531-563, (2005); Martens R., Bastiaens T., Kirschner P.A., New learning design in distance education: The impact on student perception and motivation, Distance Educ, 28, pp. 81-93, (2007); Michael D.R., Chen S.L., Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform, (2005); Poltrock S.E., Brown P., Individual differences in visual imagery and spatial ability, Intelligence, 8, pp. 93-138, (1984); Portney K.E., Hannibal B., Goldsmith C., McGee P., Liu X., Vedlitz A., Awareness of the food–energy–water nexus and public policy support in the United States: Public attitudes among the American people, Environ. Behav, 50, pp. 375-400, (2018); Purwanto A., Susnik J., Suryadi F.X., de Fraiture C., Water-energy-food nexus: Critical review, practical applications, and prospects for future research, Sustainability, 13, (2021); Raath S., Hay A., Preservice geography students’ exposure to systems thinking and cooperative learning in environmental education, J. Geogr, 118, pp. 66-76, (2019); Sajjadi P., Zhao J., Wallgrun J.O., La Femina P., Klippel A., Influence of HMD type and spatial ability on experiences and learning in place-based education, 2021 7th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN), pp. 1-8, (2021); Sajjadi P., Bagher M.M., Cui Z., Myrick J.G., Swim J.K., White T.S., Design of a Serious Game to Inform the Public About the Critical Zone, 2020 IEEE 8th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), pp. 1-8, (2020); Sajjadi P., Hoffmann L., Cimiano P., Kopp S., A personality-based emotional model for embodied conversational agents: Effects on perceived social presence and game experience of users, Entertain. Comput, 32, (2019); Sermet Y., Demir I., Muste M., A serious gaming framework for decision support on hydrological hazards, Sci. Total Environ, 728, (2020); Susnik J., Masia S., Indriksone D., Bremere I., Vamvakeridou-Lydroudia L., System dynamics modelling to explore the impacts of policies on the water-energy-food-land-climate nexus in Latvia, Sci. Total Environ, 775, (2021); Swim J.K., Geiger N., Sweetland J., Fraser J., Social construction of scientifically grounded climate change discussions, Psychology and climate change: From denial and depression to adaptation and resilience, pp. 65-93, (2018); Thibodeau P.H., Frantz C.M., Berretta M., The earth is our home: Systemic metaphors to redefine our relationship with nature, Clim. Change, 142, pp. 287-300, (2017); Basic research opportunities in earth sciences, (2001); Vandewaetere M., Cornillie F., Clarebout G., Desmet P., Adaptivity in educational games: Including player and gameplay characteristics, Int. J. High. Educ, 2, pp. 106-114, (2013); Vasconcelos C., Orion N., Earth science education as a key component of education for sustainability, Sustainability, 13, (2021); Wolf T., Green gamification: How gamified information presentation affects pro-environmental behavior, GamiFIN, pp. 82-91, (2020); Wouters P., Van der Spek E.D., Van Oostendorp H., Current practices in serious game research: A review from a learning outcomes perspective, Games-based learning advancements for multi-sensory human computer interfaces: Techniques and effective practices, pp. 232-250, (2009); Wu J.S., Lee J.J., Climate change games as tools for education and engagement, Nat. Clim. Chang, 5, pp. 413-418, (2015); Yen T.S., Halili S.H., Effective teaching of higher order thinking (HOT) in education, Online J. Distance Educ. e-learn, 3, pp. 41-47, (2015); Zhao J., LaFemina P., Carr J., Sajjadi P., Wallgrun J.O., Klippel A., Learning in the field: Comparison of desktop, immersive virtual reality, and actual field trips for place-based STEM education, 2020 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR), pp. 893-902, (2020)","P. Sajjadi; The Center for Immersive Experiences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States; email: sfs5919@psu.edu","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","2296665X","","","","English","Front. Environ. Sci.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85140390508"
"Gupta R.; LaMarca N.; Rank S.J.; Flinner K.","Gupta, Rupanwita (55821466000); LaMarca, Nicole (57205300094); Rank, Shelley J. (55821179200); Flinner, Kate (57194113946)","55821466000; 57205300094; 55821179200; 57194113946","The Environment as a Pathway to Science Learning for K-12 Learners-A Case Study of the E-STEM Movement","2018","Ecopsychology","10","4","","228","242","14","7","10.1089/eco.2018.0047","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85059462847&doi=10.1089%2feco.2018.0047&partnerID=40&md5=eeb1f0b172c18c8cffc3fff631abbf1a","New Knowledge Organization Ltd, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, New York, 10005, NY, United States","Gupta R., New Knowledge Organization Ltd, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, New York, 10005, NY, United States; LaMarca N., New Knowledge Organization Ltd, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, New York, 10005, NY, United States; Rank S.J., New Knowledge Organization Ltd, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, New York, 10005, NY, United States; Flinner K., New Knowledge Organization Ltd, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, New York, 10005, NY, United States","Recent trends in the environmental education field have recognized the value of using the environment as a pathway for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) learning, or E→STEM. Research has highlighted that nature-focused outdoor lessons can support students' science knowledge development, yet little is known about the mechanisms through which learning occurs. Moreover, a focus on content knowledge limits understanding of students' development as science learners who can apply lessons more meaningfully in their lives. In our mixed-method study, we examined the pathways through which a nature-based curriculum teaching about the natural world, conservation science, and systems-based perspectives helped students' science learning, encompassing its socioemotional components. In 14 schools across three US cities, we conducted interviews with K-12 teachers who used the curriculum, focus groups with students, and we deployed a quantitative student impact survey. The sample of students were primarily ninth graders. Results indicated a holistic science learning experience, whereby they gained new understandings of complex natural phenomenon, developed systems thinking, and expressed excitement about science in the present and for future pursuits. The learning overlapped with interest in actions to protect and advocate for the environment. Access to nearby nature, hands-on interactions with flora and fauna, and collaborative explorations facilitated learning. The research underscores the value of studying the processes through which E→STEM efforts build knowledgeable, engaged science learners motivated to protect the environment in the present and future. © Copyright 2018, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.","E/STEM; Environmental stewardship.; Nature-based learning; Systems thinking","","","","","","","","Bell P., Lewenstein B., Shouse A.W., Feder M.A., Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits, (2009); Blake E., Howitt C., Science in early learning centres: Satisfying curiosity, guided play or lost opportunities?, Issues and Challenges in Science Education Research, pp. 281-299, (2012); Chawla L., Growing up green: Becoming an agent of care for the natural world, Journal of Developmental Processes, 4, pp. 6-23, (2009); Dieser O., Bogner F.X., Young peoples cognitive achievement as fostered by hands-on-centered environmental education, Environmental Education Research, 22, pp. 943-957, (2016); Falk J.H., Heimlich J.E., Foutz S., Free-choice Learning and the Environment, (2009); Falk J.H., Storksdieck M., Dierking L.D., Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning, Public Understanding of Science, 16, pp. 455-469, (2007); Fraser J., Gupta R., Flinner K., Rank S., Ardalan N., Engaging Young People in 21st Century Community Challenges: Linking Environmental Education with Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, (2013); Gardner H.E., Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice, (2008); Gough A., Mutualism: A different agenda for environmental and science education, International Journal of Science Education, 24, pp. 1201-1215, (2010); Gupta R., LaMarca N., Rank S.J., Flinner K., Teacher Development Survey & Interim Report: Nature Works Everywhere, (2016); Gupta R., Rank S.J., Ardalan N., Flinner K., Leaders in Environmental Action for the Future 2015 Final Report, (2016); NAAEE 2013 E-STEM: Linking Environmental Education with Science, Technology, Engineering and Math; National Science Education Standards, (1996); Sellmann D., Bogner F.X., Climate change education: Quantitatively assessing the impact of a botanical garden as an informal learning environment, Environmental Education Research, 19, pp. 415-429, (2013); Stapp W.B., The concept of environmental education, The Journal of Environmental Education, 1, pp. 30-31, (1969); Van Maanen M., Li S., The pathic principle of pedagogical language, Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, pp. 215-224, (2002); Volk T.L., Cheak M.J., The effects of an environmental education program on students, parents, and community, Journal of Environmental Education, 34, pp. 12-25, (2003); Wals A.E.J., Brody M., Dillon J., Stevenson R.B., Convergence between science and environmental education, Science, 344, pp. 583-584, (2014); Wolch J.R., Byrne J., Newell J.P., Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities just green enough, Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, pp. 234-244, (2014); Yin R., Case Study Research. Design and Methods, (1994)","R. Gupta; New Knowledge Organization Ltd, New York, 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1403, 10005, United States; email: rgupta@newknowledge.org","","Mary Ann Liebert Inc.","","","","","","19429347","","","","English","Ecopsychology","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85059462847"
"Smetana L.K.; Wenner J.; Settlage J.; Mccoach D.B.","Smetana, LARA K. (55243294900); Wenner, Julianne (56044099200); Settlage, John (6602497037); Mccoach, D. Betsy (6602778336)","55243294900; 56044099200; 6602497037; 6602778336","Clarifying and Capturing “Trust” in Relation to Science Education: Dimensions of Trustworthiness within Schools and Associations with Equitable Student Achievement","2016","Science Education","100","1","","78","95","17","13","10.1002/sce.21195","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84945151305&doi=10.1002%2fsce.21195&partnerID=40&md5=b28aca4f9013fe66a318a71337ee6370","Loyola University Chicago, School of Education, Chicago, 60611, IL, United States; Boise State University, Boise, 83725, ID, United States; University of Connecticut, Storrs, 06269, CT, United States","Smetana L.K., Loyola University Chicago, School of Education, Chicago, 60611, IL, United States; Wenner J., Boise State University, Boise, 83725, ID, United States; Settlage J., University of Connecticut, Storrs, 06269, CT, United States; Mccoach D.B., University of Connecticut, Storrs, 06269, CT, United States","Science education reform may fall short of its potential to reduce educational disparities if the challenges are interpreted using strictly reductionist approaches. Taking a cue from school effectiveness research and reframing our approach using systems thinking, this study examined school-level variables associated with equitable science achievement. In particular, this study explores the concept of trust in relation to science education. Building upon a substantial body of research literature, we offer refined conceptualizations of schoolwide trust along with the findings that trust fluctuates according to the type of interpersonal relationship, that teacher views of the school principal's trustworthiness are considerably more variable than views of fellow teachers’ trustworthiness, and that schoolwide science achievement is associated with perceptions of the school principal's trustworthiness. This study supports the view that trustworthy professional relationships are one of several complementary organizational resources that promote effective and equitable science education. Moreover, our study identified aspects of school trust corresponding to school-level student science outcomes, and these differed from results reported elsewhere for math and reading/language-arts achievement. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.","","","","","","","National Science Foundation; National Science Foundation, NSF, (1119349)","This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under NSF Grant #1119349. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. ","Abrams E., Southerland S.A., Evans C., An introduction to inquiry, Inquiry in the classroom: Realities and opportunities, pp. i-xiii, (2008); Adams C.M., Building trust in schools: A review of the empirical evidence, Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture, pp. 29-54, (2008); Bryk A.S., Organizing schools for improvement, Phi Delta Kappan, 91, 7, pp. 23-31, (2010); Bryk A.S., Schneider B., Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement, (2002); Bryk A.S., Sebring P., Allensworth E., Luppescu S., Easton J.Q., Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago, (2010); Burns D., Darling-Hammond L., Teaching around the world: What can TALIS tell us, (2014); Carlone H.B., Webb S.M., On (not) overcoming our history of hierarchy: Complexities of university/school collaboration, Science Education, 90, 3, pp. 544-568, (2006); Chen S.F., Lin C.Y., Wang J.R., Lin S.W., Kao H.L., A cross-grade comparison to examine the context effect on the relationships among family resources, school climate, learning participation, science attitude, and science achievement based on TIMSS 2003 in Taiwan, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 14, pp. 2089-2106, (2012); Chiu M.M., Family inequality, school inequalities, and mathematics achievement in 65 countries: Microeconomic mechanisms of rent seeking and diminishing marginal returns, Teachers College Record, 117, 1, pp. 1-32, (2015); Coburn C.E., Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation, American Educational Research Journal, 43, 3, pp. 343-379, (2006); Coleman J.C., Social capital in the creation of human capital, American Journal of Sociology, 94, pp. 95-120, (1988); Coleman J.S., The concept of equality of educational opportunity, Harvard Educational Review, 38, 1, pp. 7-23, (1968); Colquitt J., Scott B., LePine J., Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 4, pp. 909-927, (2007); Cosner S., Building organizational capacity through trust, Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 2, pp. 248-291, (2009); Cosner S., Drawing on a knowledge-based trust perspective to examine and conceptualize within-school trust development by principals, Journal of School Leadership, 20, 2, pp. 117-144, (2010); Cosner S., Teacher learning, instructional considerations and principal communication: Lessons from a longitudinal study of collaborative data use by teachers, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39, 5, pp. 568-589, (2011); Dering A., Cunningham S., Whitby K., Developing leadership teams within an EAZ network: What makes for success?, School Leadership & Management, 26, 2, pp. 107-123, (2006); Diaconu D.V., Radigan J., Suskavcevic M., Nichol C., A multi-year study of the impact of the Rice Model Teacher Professional Development on elementary science teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 6, pp. 855-877, (2012); Dirks K.T., Ferrin D.L., Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 4, (2002); Dorner L.M., Spillane J.P., Pustejovsky J., Organizing for instruction: A comparative study of public, charter, and Catholic schools, Journal of Educational Change, 12, 1, pp. 71-98, (2011); Duschl R., Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals, Review of Research in Education, 32, 1, pp. 268-291, (2008); Duschl R.A., Schweingruber H.A., Shouse A.W., Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8, (2007); Eick C.J., Job sharing their first year: A narrative of two partnered teachers’ induction into middle school science teaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, pp. 887-904, (2002); Ferrin D., Bligh C., Kohles J., It takes two to tango: An interdependence analysis of the Spiraling of perceived trustworthiness and cooperation in interpersonal and intergroup relationships, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 107, 2, pp. 161-178, (2008); Forsyth P.B., The empirical consequences of school trust, Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture, pp. 1-27, (2008); Forsyth P., Adams C., Hoy W., Collective trust: Why schools can't improve without it, (2011); Goddard R.D., Salloum S.J., Berebitsky D., Trust as a mediator of the relationships between poverty, racial composition, and academic achievement: Evidence from Michigan's public elementary schools, Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 2, pp. 292-311, (2009); Goddard R.D., Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy W.K., Teacher trust in students and parents: A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in urban elementary schools, Elementary School Journal, 102, 1, pp. 3-17, (2001); Goodman L.A., Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models, Biometrika, 61, pp. 215-231, (1974); Grossman P., Wineburg S., Woolworth S., Toward a theory of teacher community, The Teachers College Record, 103, 6, pp. 942-1012, (2001); Hallinger P., Bickman L., Davis K., School context, principal leadership, and student reading achievement, The Elementary School Journal, 96, 5, pp. 527-549, (1996); Hallinger P., Heck R.H., Exploring the journey of school improvement, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22, 1, pp. 1-27, (2011); Halverson R., Feinstein N., Meshoulam D., School leadership for science education, The role of public policy in K-12 science education, pp. 397-430, (2011); Hiebert J., Morris A.K., Teaching, rather than teachers, as a path toward improving classroom instruction, Journal of Teacher Education, 63, 2, pp. 92-102, (2012); Hosmer L.T., Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics, Academy of Management Review, 20, pp. 379-403, (1995); Hoy W.K., Tschannen-Moran M., The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools: The omnibus T-Scale, Studies in Leading and Organizing Schools, pp. 181-208, (2003); Hoy W.K., Tschannen-Moran M., The five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools, Journal of School Leadership, 9, pp. 184-208, (1999); Ishimaru A.M., Galloway M.K., Beyond individual effectiveness: Conceptualizing organizational leadership for equity, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13, 1, pp. 93-146, (2014); Jencks C., Phillips M., The Black-White test score gap, (1998); Keeves J.P., Learning science in a changing world: Cross-national studies of science achievement, 1970 to 1984, (1992); Khourey-Bowers C., Dinko R.L., Hart R.G., Influence of a shared leadership model in creating a school culture of inquiry, collaboration and collegiality, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 1, pp. 3-24, (2005); Kisiel J.F., Clarifying the complexities of school-museum interactions: Perspectives from two communities, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 3, pp. 342-367, (2014); Konstantopoulos S., Borman G.D., Family background and school effects on student achievement: A multilevel analysis of the Coleman data, Teachers College Record, 113, 1, pp. 97-132, (2011); Leblanc P.R., Shelton M.M., Teacher leadership: The needs of teachers, Action in Teacher Education, 19, 3, pp. 32-48, (1997); Lewis J.D., Weigert A.J., The social dynamics of trust: Theoretical and empirical research, 1985–2012, Social Forces, 91, 1, pp. 25-31, (2012); Lewis J.D., Weigert A.J., Trust as a social reality, Social Forces, 63, 4, pp. 967-985, (1985); Louis K.S., Dretzke B., Wahlstrom K., How does leadership affect student achievement? Results from a national US survey, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21, 3, pp. 315-336, (2010); Louis K.S., Marks H., Kruse S., Teachers' professional community in restructuring schools, American Educational Research Journal, 33, 4, pp. 757-798, (1996); Luhmann N., Trust and power, (1979); Martin M.O., Mullis I.V.S., Gonzalez E.J., Gregory K.D., Smith T.A., Chrostowski S.J., Garden R.A., O'Connor K.M., TIMSS 1999 international science report: Findings from IEA's repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the eighth grade, (2000); Mayer R.C., Davis J.H., Schoorman F.D., An integrative model of organizational trust, Academy of Management Review, 20, pp. 709-734, (1995); McCutcheon A.L., A latent class analysis of tolerance for nonconformity in the American public, The Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 4, pp. 474-488, (1985); Melville W., Wallace J., Metaphorical duality: High school subject departments as both communities and organizations, Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 7, pp. 1193-1205, (2007); Milner H.R., Analyzing poverty, learning, and teaching through a critical race theory lens, Review of Research in Education, 37, 1, pp. 1-53, (2013); Mishra A.K., Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust, Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, pp. 261-287, (1996); Muijs D., Harris A., Teacher leadership in (In) action three case studies of contrasting schools, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 35, 1, pp. 111-134, (2007); Murphy J., The architecture of school improvement, Journal of Educational Administration, 51, 3, pp. 252-263, (2012); Muthen L.K., Muthen B.O., Mplus user's guide, (2013); Nadelson L., Jorcyk C., Yang D., Jarratt Smith M., Matson S., Cornell K., Husting V., I just don't trust them: The development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists, School Science and Mathematics, 114, 2, pp. 76-86, (2014); The Nation's Report Card: Science 2011, (2012); Nelson T., Teachers' collaborative inquiry and professional growth: Should we be optimistic?, Science Education, 93, 3, pp. 548-580, (2009); Nooteboom B., Social capital, institutions and trust, Review of Social Economy, 65, 1, pp. 29-53, (2007); New Insights from TALIS 2013: Teaching and learning in primary and upper secondary education, (2014); Pirson M., Malhotra D., Foundations of organizational trust: What matters to different stakeholders?, Organization Science, 22, 4, pp. 1087-1104, (2011); Powell W.W., Colyvas J.A., Microfoundations of institutional theory, SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, 276, (2008); Ramnarain U.D., Modiba M., Critical friendship, collaboration and trust as a basis for self-determined professional development: A case of science teaching, International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1, pp. 65-85, (2013); Reezigt G.J., Creemers B.P., A comprehensive framework for effective school improvement, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 4, pp. 407-424, (2005); Richmond G., Manokore V., Identifying elements critical for functional and sustainable professional learning communities, Science Education, 95, 3, pp. 543-570, (2011); Ritchie S., School environments, Encyclopedia of Science Education, pp. 848-851, (2015); Robinson V.M., From instructional leadership to leadership capabilities: Empirical findings and methodological challenges, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9, 1, pp. 1-26, (2010); Robinson V.M.J., Lloyd C., Rowe K.J., The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership type, Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 5, pp. 635-674, (2008); Rousseau D.M., Sitkin S.B., Burt R.S., Camerer C., Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust, Academy of Management Review, 23, 3, pp. 393-404, (1998); Rousseau D.M., Looking back on ‘Organizations in action’ from the new organizational era, Personnel Psychology, 49, 3, pp. 776-778, (1996); Ruby A., Improving science achievement at high-poverty urban middle schools, Science Education, 90, 6, pp. 1005-1027, (2006); Rudolph J.L., Scientists in the classroom: The cold war reconstruction of American science education, (2002); Schaverien L., Cosgrove M., Learning to teach generatively: Mentor-supported professional development and research in technology-and-science, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 3, pp. 317-346, (1997); Schoorman F.D., Mayer R.C., Davis J.H., An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present and future, Academy of Management Review, 32, 2, pp. 344-354, (2007); Settlage J., Butler M.B., Wenner J., Smetana L.K., McCoach D.B., Examining elementary school science achievement gaps using an organizational and leadership perspective, School Science & Mathematics, 115, 8, pp. 381-391, (2015); Shapiro S.P., The social control of impersonal trust, American Journal of Sociology, 93, 3, pp. 623-658, (1987); Sitkin S., Roth N., Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust, Organization Science, 4, 3, pp. 367-392, (1993); Smylie M.A., Evans A.E., Social capital and the problem of implementation, New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting policy, pp. 187-208, (2006); Spillane J.P., Hopkins M., Organizing for instruction in education systems and school organizations: How the subject matters, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45, 6, pp. 721-747, (2013); Spillane J.P., Thompson C.L., Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency's capacity for ambitious instructional reform, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 2, pp. 185-203, (1997); Tobin K.G., Elmesky R., Seiler G., Improving urban science education: New roles for teachers, students, and researchers, (2005); Tschannen-Moran M., Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools, (2004); Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy W.K., A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and measurement of trust, Review of Educational Research, 71, pp. 547-593, (2000); Tytler R., Symington D., Darby L., Malcolm C., Kirkwood V., Discourse communities: A framework from which to consider professional development for rural teachers of science and mathematics, Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, pp. 871-879, (2011); UChicagoImpactTools for Reliably Excellent Schooling, (2014); Wahlstrom K.L., Louis K.S., How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility, Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 4, pp. 458-495, (2008); West M., Ainscow M., Stanford J., Sustaining improvements in schools in challenging circumstances: A study of successful practice, School Leadership & Management, 25, 1, pp. 77-93, (2005); Wood N.B., Lawrenz F., Huffman D., Schultz M., Viewing the school environment through multiple lenses: In search of school-level variables tied to student achievement, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 3, pp. 237-254, (2006)","L.K. Smetana; Loyola University Chicago, School of Education, Chicago, 60611, United States; email: LSmetana@luc.edu","","Wiley-Liss Inc.","","","","","","00368326","","","","English","Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-84945151305"
"Veal W.R.; Morrell P.D.; Rogers M.A.P.; Roehrig G.; Pyle E.J.","Veal, William R. (6602236145); Morrell, Patricia D. (56000399600); Rogers, Meredith A. Park (16069353400); Roehrig, Gillian (6603557737); Pyle, Eric J. (35932974700)","6602236145; 56000399600; 16069353400; 6603557737; 35932974700","A perspective on drivers impacting science teacher preparation in developing countries","2023","Challenges in Science Education: Global Perspectives for the Future","","","","83","108","25","0","10.1007/978-3-031-18092-7_5","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85160368184&doi=10.1007%2f978-3-031-18092-7_5&partnerID=40&md5=df2f69c51f3c19bd47587b540a76f05a","The College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, United States; The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia; Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States; University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, United States; James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, United States","Veal W.R., The College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, United States; Morrell P.D., The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia; Rogers M.A.P., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States; Roehrig G., University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, United States; Pyle E.J., James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, United States","This study examines the driving factors influencing science teacher preparation (STP) in 11 developing countries. The countries represented in this study were purposefully selected to show a range of developing countries based on income levels, as well as countries from which the authors were able to speak directly with an informant working as a science teacher educator in the country. Employing neoliberalism as a framework for understanding potential driving factors on systems preparing science teachers, four themes were identified: (a) the degree to which a country is still working towards building independence, (b) the influence of developed countries, (c) the role of accreditation on determining teacher qualifications, and (d) competition. Each of these factors is situated within a neoliberal perspective but, as the results of this study show, the complexity of these factors interacting with each other, and ultimately the influence governments are having on teacher preparation due to their control over K-12 education, suggests a systems thinking approach would be better suited for considering drivers impacting science teacher preparation in developing countries. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023. All rights reserved.","Science education; Science teacher preparation; Teacher preparation","","","","","","","","Anil K., Teacher education in Pakistan, International handbook of teacher education worldwide, 2, pp. 675-692, (2019); Aucoin P., Administrative reform in public management: Paradigms, principles, paradoxes and pendulums, Governance, 3, 2, pp. 115-137, (1990); Ball S.J., Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach, (1994); Ball S.J., Big policies/small world: An introduction to international perspectives in education policy, Comparative Education, 34, 2, pp. 119-130, (1998); Bates A., Choi T., Kim Y., Outsourcing education services in South Korea, England and Hong Kong: A discursive institutionalist analysis, Compare, 57, 2, pp. 259-277, (2021); Blackmore J., Editorial: Teacher professionalism - Collaborative and/or collegial work?, Australian Educational Researcher, 26, 2, pp. i-vi, (1999); Campbell D.T., Assessing the impact of planned social change, Education and Program Planning, 2, pp. 67-90, (1979); Carney S., Negotiating policy in an age of globalization: Exploring educational ""Policyscapes"" in Denmark, Nepal, and China, Comparative Education Review, 53, 1, pp. 63-88, (2009); Carter L., Neoliberalism and STEM Education, Journal of Activist Science & Technology Education, 7, 1, pp. 31-41, (2016); Carter D.S.G., O'Neill M.H., International perspectives on educational reform and policy implementation, (1995); Chubb J., Moe T., Politics, markets and America's schools, (1990); Darling-Hammond L., Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes, Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 2, pp. 120-138, (2006); Darling-Hammond L., Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice?, European Journal of Teacher Education, 40, 3, pp. 291-309, (2017); Darling-Hammond L., Defining teaching quality around the world, European Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 3, pp. 295-308, (2021); Darling-Hammond L., Wei R.C., Andree A., How high-achieving countries develop great teachers, (2010); Devine N., Is analytic Marxism possible? A 'socialist' interpretation of Public Choice Theory, Philosophy of Management, 5, 2, pp. 89-95, (2005); Fernandez M.B., Framing teacher education: Conceptions of teaching, teacher education, and justice in Chilean national politics, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26, 34, pp. 1-33, (2018); Goldspink G., Transforming education: Evidential support for a complex systems approach, Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 9, 1-2, pp. 1-18, (2007); Greenblatt D., Neoliberalism and teacher certification, Policy Futures in Education, 16, 6, pp. 804-827, (2018); Guerrero M.D., Farruggio P., Neoliberal teacher preparation: Conceptualising a response in the US borderlands, Education Inquiry, 3, 4, pp. 553-568, (2012); Gupta A., How neoliberal globalization is shaping early childhood education policies in India, China, Singapore, Sri Lanka and the Maldives, Policy Futures in Education, 16, 1, pp. 11-28, (2018); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 1, pp. 53-61, (2006); Holland J.H., Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity, (1995); Hursh D., Neo-liberalism, markets, and accountability: Transforming education and undermining democracy in the United States and England, Policy Futures in Education, 3, 1, pp. 3-15, (2005); Jacobson M.J., Levin J.A., Kapur M., Education as a complex system: Conceptual and methodological implications, Educational Researcher, 48, 2, pp. 112-119, (2019); Jones P.W., Globalisation and internationalism: Democratic prospects for world education, Comparative Education, 34, pp. 143-155, (1998); Lee K., Kaluarachchi J., Western education in developing countries: Why it isn't as beneficial as we might think, Melbourne Microfinance Initiative, (2020); Lemke J.L., Sabelli N.H., Complex systems and educational change: Towards a new research agenda, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40, 1, pp. 118-129, (2008); Loomis S., Rodriguez J., Tillman R., Developing into similarity: Global teacher education in the twenty-first century, European Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 3, pp. 233-245, (2008); Loomis S., Rodriguez J., Tillman R., Gunderson J., The logic of convergence and uniformity in teacher production, Teaching Education, 79, 1, pp. 1-10, (2008); Maroulis S., Guimera R., Petry H., Stringer M.J., Gomez L.M., Amaral L.A.N., Wilensky U., Complex systems view of educational policy research, Science, 330, pp. 38-39, (2010); Mhishi M., Bkukuvhani C.E., Sana A.F., Science teacher training programme in rural schools: An ODL lesson from Zimbabwe, The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 72, 1, pp. 72-86, (2012); Muborakshoeva M., Islam and higher education: Concepts, challenges, and opportunities, (2012); Mullis I.V.S., Martin M.O., Using TIMSS and PIRLS to improve teaching and learning, Recherches en education, (2012); Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers, (2005); Equity and quality in education: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools, (2012); Country note: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results from PISA 2018, (2018); Oz E., Comparability of teachers' educational background items in TIMSS: A case from Turkey, Large-scale Assessment in Education, 9, (2021); Education failure in developing countries -Report, (2012); 20 reasons why, in 2020, there are still 260m children out of school, (2020); Rizvi N.F., Khamis A., Review of DFID and USAID initiatives for the development of teacher education in Pakistan, Compare, 50, 8, pp. 1210-1221, (2020); Scheerens J., Conceptual models and theory-embedded principles on effective schooling, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 3, pp. 269-310, (1997); Schleicher A., PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations, (2019); Senin M.S., bin Nordin M.N., Abidin N.Z., Fauzi A., Roni M., Teacher education: Issues and considerations between Malaysia and Australia, Turkish Journal of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, 32, 3, pp. 4797-4803, (2021); Stretton H., Orchard L., Public goods, public enterprise, public choice: Theoretical foundations of the contemporary attack on government, (1994); The education crisis: Being in school is not the same as learning, (2019); Teachers; Thomson S., Lokan J., Stephen L., Ainley J., Lessons from the third international mathematics and science study, (2003); Udehn L., The limits of public choice: A sociological critique of the economic theory of politics, (1996); Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4, (2015); 2017/8 Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments, (2018); World economic situation and prospects 2020, pp. 165-169, (2020); Veal W.R., Morrell P.D., Park Rogers M., Roehrig G.H., Pyle E.J., Preparing science teachers across the world, Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 11, 1, pp. 137-157, (2022); White D.G., Levin J.A., Navigating the turbulent waters of school reform guided by complexity theory, Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 13, 1, pp. 43-80, (2016); Wright A., Fantasies of empowerment: Mapping neoliberal discourse in the coalition government's school policy, Journal of Education Policy, 27, 3, pp. 279-294, (2012)","W.R. Veal; The College of Charleston, Charleston, United States; email: vealw@cofc.edu","","Springer International Publishing","","","","","","","978-303118092-7; 978-303118091-0","","","English","Chall. in Sci. Educ.: Glob. Perspect. for the Future","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85160368184"
"Cole L.B.; Priscilla L.; Zangori L.; Kania-Gosche B.; Burken J.","Cole, Laura B. (55856124900); Priscilla, Lilian (59147736200); Zangori, Laura (55589435200); Kania-Gosche, Beth (56111022000); Burken, Joel (7004572174)","55856124900; 59147736200; 55589435200; 56111022000; 7004572174","Raising the Green Roof: Enhancing Youth Water Literacy through Built Environment Education","2024","Sustainability (Switzerland) ","16","10","4262","","","","0","10.3390/su16104262","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85194415075&doi=10.3390%2fsu16104262&partnerID=40&md5=bea5b2f2b544d628aca2d3d89c491a5f","Department of Design & Merchandising, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 80523, CO, United States; Department of Architectural Studies, University of Missouri, Columbia, 65211, MO, United States; Department of Learning, Teaching, & Curriculum, University of Missouri, Columbia, 65211, MO, United States; Department of Education, Missouri University of Science & Technology, Rolla, 65409, MO, United States; Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Missouri University of Science & Technology, Rolla, 65409, MO, United States","Cole L.B., Department of Design & Merchandising, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 80523, CO, United States; Priscilla L., Department of Architectural Studies, University of Missouri, Columbia, 65211, MO, United States; Zangori L., Department of Learning, Teaching, & Curriculum, University of Missouri, Columbia, 65211, MO, United States; Kania-Gosche B., Department of Education, Missouri University of Science & Technology, Rolla, 65409, MO, United States; Burken J., Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Missouri University of Science & Technology, Rolla, 65409, MO, United States","Green roofs cool cities, clean the air, provide habitat, and manage stormwater. They are compelling tools to teach interconnected human-ecological systems. This study included the design, pilot, and evaluation of a fourth-grade science unit entitled “Raising the Green Roof”, exploring these connections. Five classrooms in two Midwestern U.S. public elementary schools participated, and 4th-grade students (n = 73) drew systems models at three time points (212 models) and wrote their ideas. Qualitative content analyses of the models showed that learners were increasingly combining social systems (green roof infrastructure) with ecological systems (water cycle) across the unit. Students also increasingly evidenced specific knowledge as they progressed through the unit. The analysis of student models revealed that most student confusion is related to built environment aspects (e.g., how water moves from building roofs to municipal waterways). Results of the study suggest the potential for teaching socio-hydrologic systems thinking at the fourth-grade level. The findings emphasize the need to enhance built environment education for youth in science units that aspire to connect features of the built environment, such as green roofs, with ecology. The study additionally reinforced the effectiveness of place-based units in elementary education that emphasize science practices. © 2024 by the authors.","elementary education; green roof technologies; scientific models; socio-hydrologic systems thinking; water literacy","education; environmental education; literacy; numerical model; roof; student; teaching","","","","","University of Missouri, MU","This research was generously funded by the University of Missouri System Strategic Investment Program Tier 3.","Cheng C.-L., Evaluating water conservation measures for Green Building in Taiwan, Build. Environ, 38, pp. 369-379, (2003); Beck D.A., Johnson G.R., Spolek G.A., Amending green roof soil with biochar to affect runoff water quantity and quality, Environ. Pollut, 159, pp. 2111-2118, (2011); Stovin V., Poe S., Berretta C., A modelling study of long term green roof retention performance, J. Environ. Manag, 131, pp. 206-215, (2013); Cristiano E., Deidda R., Viola F., The role of green roofs in urban Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystem nexus: A review, Sci. Total Environ, 756, (2021); Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States, (2013); Wals A.E.J., Brody M., Dillon J., Stevenson R.B., Convergence Between Science and Environmental Education, Science, 344, pp. 583-584, (2014); Cole L.B., Green building literacy: A framework for advancing green building education, Int. J. STEM Educ, 6, (2019); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); McCarroll M., Hamann H., What We Know about Water: A Water Literacy Review, Water, 12, (2020); Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, (2015); Mostacedo-Marasovic S.-J., Mott B.C., White H., Forbes C.T., Towards water literacy: Analysis of standards for teaching and learning about water on Earth, J. Geosci. Educ, 71, pp. 192-207, (2023); McBride B.B., Brewer C.A., Berkowitz A.R., Borrie W.T., Environmental literacy, ecological literacy, ecoliteracy: What do we mean and how did we get here?, Ecosphere, 4, pp. 1-20, (2013); Owens D.C., Petitt D.N., Lally D., Forbes C.T., Cultivating Water Literacy in STEM Education: Undergraduates’ Socio-Scientific Reasoning about Socio-Hydrologic Issues, Water, 12, (2020); Abbott B.W., Bishop K., Zarnetske J.P., Minaudo C., Chapin F.S., Krause S., Hannah D.M., Conner L., Ellison D., Godsey S.E., Et al., Human domination of the global water cycle absent from depictions and perceptions, Nat. Geosci, 12, pp. 533-540, (2019); Farnum R.L., Macdougall R., Thompson C., Re-envisioning the hydro cycle: The hydrosocial spiral as a participatory toolbox for water education and management, Water, Creativity and Meaning: Multidisciplinary Understandings of Human-Water Relationships, pp. 138-156, (2019); Dove J.E., Everett L.A., Preece P.F.W., Exploring a hydrological concept through children’s drawings, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 21, pp. 485-497, (1999); Driver R., Squires A., Rushworth P., Wood-Robinson V., Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into Children’s Ideas, (1994); Shepardson D.P., Wee B., Priddy M., Schellenberger L., Harbor J., What is a watershed? Implications of student conceptions for environmental science education and the National Science Education Standards, Sci. Educ, 91, pp. 554-578, (2007); Henriques L., Children’s Ideas About Weather: A Review of the Literature, Sch. Sci. Math, 102, pp. 202-215, (2002); Forbes C.T., Vo T., Zangori L., Schwarz C., Scientific models help students understand the water cycle, Sci. Child, 53, pp. 42-49, (2015); Fick S.J., McAlister A.A., Chiu J.L., McElhaney K.W., Using Students’ Conceptual Models to Represent Understanding of Crosscutting Concepts in an NGSS-Aligned Curriculum Unit About Urban Water Runoff, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 30, pp. 678-691, (2021); Levy A.R., Moore Mensah F., Learning through the Experience of Water in Elementary School Science, Water, 13, (2020); Gunckel K.L., Covitt B.A., Salinas I., Anderson C.W., A learning progression for water in socio-ecological systems, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 49, pp. 843-868, (2012); Louca L.T., Zacharia Z.C., Modeling-based learning in science education: Cognitive, metacognitive, social, material and epistemological contributions, Educ. Rev, 64, pp. 471-492, (2012); Tytler R., Prain V., Aranda G., Ferguson J., Gorur R., Drawing to reason and learn in science, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 57, pp. 209-231, (2020); Gilbert J.K., Boulter C.J., Rutherford M., Explanations with Models in Science Education, Developing Models in Science Education, pp. 193-208, (2000); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Shwartz Y., Hug B., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 632-654, (2009); Linn M.C., Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The scaffolded knowledge integration framework, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 4, pp. 103-126, (1995); Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8, (2007); Zangori L., Peel A., Kinslow A., Friedrichsen P., Sadler T., Student development of model-based reasoning about carbon cycling and climate change in a socio-scientific issues unit, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 54, pp. 1249-1273, (2017); Braaten M., Windschitl M., Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education, Sci. Educ, 95, pp. 639-669, (2011); Russ R.S., Coffey J.E., Hammer D., Hutchison P., Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking, Sci. Educ, 93, pp. 875-891, (2009); Metz K.E., Reassessment of Developmental Constraints on Children’s Science Instruction, Rev. Educ. Res, 65, pp. 93-127, (1995); Weisberg D.S., Sobel D.M., Constructing Science: Connecting Causal Reasoning to Scientific Thinking in Young Children, (2022); Davis E.A., Knowledge Integration in Science Teaching: Analysing Teachers’ Knowledge Development, Res. Sci. Educ, 34, pp. 21-53, (2004); Yin R.K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5, (2009); Samarapungavan A., Bryan L., Wills J., Second graders’ emerging particle models of matter in the context of learning through model-based inquiry, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 54, pp. 988-1023, (2017); Zangori L., Cole L., Assessing the contributions of green building practices to ecological literacy in the elementary classroom: An exploratory study, Environ. Educ. Res, 25, pp. 1674-1696, (2019); Saldana J., The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, (2021); Landis J.R., Koch G.G., An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers, Biometrics, 33, pp. 363-374, (1977); Charmaz K., Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis, (2006); Harry B., Sturges K.M., Klingner J.K., Mapping the Process: An Exemplar of Process and Challenge in Grounded Theory Analysis, Educ. Res, 34, pp. 3-13, (2005); Smaling A., Varieties of methodological intersubjectivity—The relations with qualitative and quantitative research, and with objectivity, Qual. Quant, 26, pp. 169-180, (1992); Creswell J.W., Creswell J.D., Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, (2017); Guest G., MacQueen K.M., Handbook for Team-Based Qualitative Research, (2008); Creswell J.W., Poth C.N., Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, (2016); Gilissen M.G.R., Knippels M.-C.P.J., van Joolingen W.R., Bringing systems thinking into the classroom, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 42, pp. 1253-1280, (2020); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 53-72, (2017); Tripto J., Assaraf O.B.Z., Amit M., Recurring patterns in the development of high school biology students’ system thinking over time, Instr. Sci, 46, pp. 639-680, (2018); Lally D., Forbes C.T., Sociohydrologic Systems Thinking: An Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Operationalization and Modeling of Coupled Human-Water Systems, Water, 12, (2020); Zangori L., Ke L., Sadler T.D., Peel A., Exploring primary students causal reasoning about ecosystems, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 42, pp. 1799-1817, (2020); Grotzer T.A., Solis S.L., Action at an attentional distance: A study of children’s reasoning about causes and effects involving spatial and attentional discontinuity, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 52, pp. 1003-1030, (2015); Perkins D.N., Grotzer T.A., Dimensions of Causal Understanding: The Role of Complex Causal Models in Students’ Understanding of Science, Stud. Sci. Educ, 41, pp. 117-165, (2005); Zangori L.O., Otto S., Cole L.B., Snyder R., Oertli R.T., Fallahhosseini S., Energy and your environment (EYE): Place-based curriculum unit to empower students’ energy literacy and conservation, Science Curricula for the Anthropocene: Curriculum Models for our Collective Future, pp. 59-82, (2023); Portillo M., Rey-Barreau J.A., The Place of Interior Design in K-12 Education and the Built Environment Education Movement, J. Inter. Des, 21, pp. 39-43, (1995); Design, Selection, and Implementation of Instructional Materials for the Next Generation Science Standards: Proceedings of a Workshop, (2018); Cole L.B., McPhearson T., Herzog C., Kudryavtsev A., Green Infrastructure, Urban Environmental Education Review, pp. 261-270, (2017)","L.B. Cole; Department of Design & Merchandising, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 80523, United States; email: laura.cole@colostate.edu","","Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)","","","","","","20711050","","","","English","Sustainability","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85194415075"
"Malandrakis G.; Papadopoulou P.; Gavrilakis C.; Mogias A.","Malandrakis, George (15053190100); Papadopoulou, Penelope (55172412100); Gavrilakis, Costas (25647400400); Mogias, Athanasios (8855387200)","15053190100; 55172412100; 25647400400; 8855387200","An education for sustainable development self-efficacy scale for primary pre-service teachers: construction and validation","2019","Journal of Environmental Education","50","1","","23","36","13","29","10.1080/00958964.2018.1492366","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85057531206&doi=10.1080%2f00958964.2018.1492366&partnerID=40&md5=fc8a847149ab915cc712ae8e653f221d","Department of Primary Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece; Department of Early Childhood Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece; Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece; Department of Primary Education, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece","Malandrakis G., Department of Primary Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece; Papadopoulou P., Department of Early Childhood Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece; Gavrilakis C., Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece; Mogias A., Department of Primary Education, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece","A scale was developed to assess primary school Teachers’ Self-Efficacy on Education for Sustainable Development (TSESESD). It includes four domains of competences: values and ethics, systems thinking, emotions and feelings, and actions. The scale development is consistent with key principles of educational and social psychology research. Nine hundred twenty-four (924) primary education student teachers and 88 in-service primary teachers participated in the study. Findings demonstrated that TSESESD has good psychometric properties, strong validity and reliability scores, adequate internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.97), and satisfactory mean inter-correlation of items within domains (M = 0.78). TSESESD is considered a reliable instrument for teacher preparation programs aiming to develop primary school teachers’ self-efficacy in ESD. © 2019, © 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.","education for sustainable development; pre-service teachers; self-efficacy scale","","","","","","","","Bandura A., Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychological Review, 84, 2, pp. 191-215, (1977); Bandura A., Social cognitive theory, Annals of child development. Vol.6. Six theories of child development, pp. 1-60, (1989); Bandura A., Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, (1997); Bandura A., Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales, Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, pp. 307-337, (2006); Benson J., Clark F., A guide for instrument development and validation, The American Journal of Occupational Therapy: Official Publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association, 36, 12, pp. 789-800, (1982); Bleicher R.E., Lindgren J., Success in learning science and preservice science teaching self-efficacy, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 3, pp. 205-225, (2005); Boon H., Beliefs and education for sustainability in rural and regional Australia, Education in Rural Australia, 21, 2, pp. 37-54, (2011); Bray-Clark N., Bates R., Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development, Professional Educator, 26, 1, pp. 13-22, (2003); Caprara G.V., Barbaranelli C., Steca P., Malone P.S., Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level, Journal of School Psychology, 44, 6, pp. 473-490, (2006); Cebrian G., Junyent M., Competencies in education for sustainable development: Exploring the student teachers’ views, Sustainability, 7, 3, pp. 2768-2786, (2015); DeWaters J., Qaqish B., Graham M., Powers S., Designing an energy literacy questionnaire for middle and high school youth, The Journal of Environmental Education, 44, 1, pp. 56-78, (2013); Effeney G., Davis J., Education for sustainability: A case study of pre-service primary teachers’ knowledge and efficacy, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38, 5, pp. 32-46, (2013); Enochs L., Riggs I., Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: A pre-service elementary scale, School Science and Mathematics, 90, 8, pp. 694-706, (1990); Evans N., Stevenson R.B., Lasen M., Ferreira J.-A., Davis J., Approaches to embedding sustainability in teacher education: A synthesis of the literature, Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, pp. 405-417, (2017); Fabrigar L.R., Wegener D.T., MacCallum R.C., Strahan E.J., Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research, Psychological Methods, 4, 3, pp. 272-299, (1999); Ferreira J.-A., Ryan L., Tilbury D., Planning for success: Factors influencing change in teacher education, Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 1, pp. 136-146, (2014); Gardner C.C., (2009); Gardner D.G., Pierce J.L., Self-esteem and self-efficacy within organizational context, Group and Organization Management, 23, 1, pp. 48-70, (1998); Heimlich J.E., Braus J., Olivolo B., McKeown-Ice R., Barringer-Smith L., Environmental education and preservice teacher preparation: A national study, The Journal of Environmental Education, 35, 2, pp. 17-60, (2004); Hollweg K.S., Taylor J.R., Bybee R.W., Marcinkowski T.J., McBeth W.C., Zoido P., Developing a Framework for Assessing Environmental Literacy, (2011); Hoy A., Davis H.A., Teacher self-efficacy and its influence on the achievement of adolescents, Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, pp. 117-137, (2006); Jensen B.B., Schnack K., The action competence approach in environmental education, Environmental Education Research, 3, 2, pp. 163-178, (1997); Kennelly J., Taylor N., Maxwell T.W., Addressing the challenge of preparing Australian pre-service primary teachers in environmental education: An evaluation of a dedicated unit, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 2, 2, pp. 141-156, (2008); Klassen R.M., Tze V.M.C., Betts S.M., Gordon K.A., Teacher efficacy research 1998–2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise?, Educational Psychology Review, 23, 1, pp. 21-43, (2011); Lee M.-H., Tsai C.-C., Exploring teachers’ perceived self-efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web, Instructional Science, 38, 1, pp. 1-21, (2010); Leeming F.C., Dwyer W.O., Bracken B.A., Children’s environmental attitude and knowledge scale: Construction and validation, The Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 3, pp. 22-31, (1995); Lloyd J.K., Smith R.G., Fay C.L., Khang G.N., Wah L.L.K., Sai C.L., Subject knowledge for science teaching at primary level: A comparison of preservice teachers in England and Singapore, International Journal of Science Education, 20, 5, pp. 521-532, (1998); Malandrakis G., Papadopoulou P., Gavrilakis C., Mogias A., Designing and testing an education for sustainable development self-efficacy scale for pre-service teachers: preliminary findings, Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference. Science education research: Engaging learners for a sustainable future, pp. 1280-1292, (2016); Martinussen R., Ferrari J., Aitken M., Willows D., Pre-service teachers’ knowledge of phonemic awareness: relationship to perceived knowledge, self-efficacy beliefs, and exposure to a multimedia-enhanced lecture, Annals of Dyslexia, 65, 3, pp. 142-158, (2015); McBride B.B., Brewer C.A., Berkowitz A.R., Borrie W.T., Environmental literacy, ecological literacy, and ecoliteracy: What do we mean and how did we get here?, Ecosphere, 4, 5, (2013); McCoach D.B., Gable R.K., Madura J.P., Instrument Development in the Affective Domain, (2013); McKeown-Ice R., Environmental education in the United States: A survey of preservice teacher education programs, The Journal of Environmental Education, 32, 1, pp. 4-11, (2000); Mogias A., Boubonari T., Markos A., Kevrekidis T., Greek pre-service teachers’ knowledge of ocean sciences issues and attitudes toward ocean stewardship, The Journal of Environmental Education, 46, 4, pp. 251-270, (2015); Moseley C., Taylor B., Analysis of environmental and general science teaching efficacy among instructors with contrasting class ethnicity distributions: A four-dimensional assessment, School Science and Mathematics, 111, 5, pp. 199-208, (2011); Moseley C., Huss J., Utley J., Assessing k–12 teachers’ personal environmental education teaching efficacy and outcome expectancy, Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 9, 1, pp. 5-17, (2010); Moseley C., Reinke K., Bookout V., The effect of teaching outdoor environmental education on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward self-efficacy and outcome expectancy, The Journal of Environmental Education, 34, 1, pp. 9-15, (2002); Moseley C., Reinke K., Bookout V., The effect of teaching outdoor environmental education on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15, 1, pp. 1-14, (2003); Guidelines for the Preparation and Professional Development for Environmental Educators, (2004); Nolet V., Preparing sustainability-literate teachers, Teachers College Record, 111, 2, pp. 409-442, (2009); (2002); TALIS 2013 Results, (2014); Ormrod J.E., Human Learning, (2012); Otto C.A., Everett S.A., An instructional strategy to introduce pedagogical content knowledge using Venn diagrams, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 2, pp. 391-403, (2013); Pajares F., Self-efficacy Beliefs in Academic Contexts, (2002); Palmer D.H., Sources of self-efficacy in a science methods course for primary teacher education students, Research in Science Education, 36, 4, pp. 337-353, (2006); Park S., Oliver J.S., Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (pck): pck as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals, Research in Science Education, 38, 3, pp. 261-284, (2008); Saribas D., Teksoz G., Ertepinar H., The relationship between environmental literacy and self-efficacy beliefs toward environmental education, Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2014, pp. 3664-3668, (2014); Schoon K.J., Boone W.J., Self-efficacy and alternative conceptions of science of preservice elementary teachers, Science Education, 82, 5, pp. 553-568, (1998); Shulman L.S., Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching, Educational Researcher, 15, 2, pp. 4-14, (1986); Sia A.P., Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Perceived Efficacy in Teaching Environmental Education: A Preliminary Study, (1992); Sleurs W., (2008); Tschannen-Moran M., Barr M., Fostering student learning: The relationship of collective teacher efficacy and student achievement, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3, 3, pp. 189-209, (2004); Tschannen-Moran M., Hoy A., Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct, Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 7, pp. 783-805, (2001); The Future We Want: Outcome Document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio +20, (2012); Learning for the Future: Competences in Education for Sustainable Development; UNECE, (2012); United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014): International Implementation Scheme, (2005); Guidelines and Recommendations for Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainability, (2005); (2010); Aichi-Nagoya Declaration on Education for Sustainable Development, (2014); Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development, (2014); Education for Sustainable Development, (2018); Wals A.E.J., Shaping the Education of Tomorrow: 2012 Full-length Report on the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, (2012); Warren A., Archambault L., Foley R.W., Sustainability education framework for teachers: Developing sustainability literacy through futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking, Journal of Sustainability Education, 6, pp. 1-10, (2014); Zimmerman B.J., Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 1, (2000)","G. Malandrakis; Department of Primary Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, 3rd Km of Florina-Niki National Road, 53100, Greece; email: gmalandrakis@uowm.gr","","Routledge","","","","","","00958964","","","","English","J. Environ. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85057531206"
"Peppler K.; Thompson N.; Danish J.; Moczek A.; Han S.","Peppler, Kylie (23005878600); Thompson, Naomi (56375182900); Danish, Joshua (16027612700); Moczek, Armin (6701552693); Han, Shenshen (57203985816)","23005878600; 56375182900; 16027612700; 6701552693; 57203985816","Indoor positioning technology and enhanced engagement in early elementary systems thinking and science learning","2018","Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS ","2","2018-June","","1077","1080","3","2","","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85053937490&partnerID=40&md5=1a0c8c19a0409d09ff47f87eb7759ded","Indiana University, United States","Peppler K., Indiana University, United States; Thompson N., Indiana University, United States; Danish J., Indiana University, United States; Moczek A., Indiana University, United States; Han S., Indiana University, United States","Indoor positioning (IP) technology is sought after for applications in gaming, commercial spaces, and education. While several types of IP systems have become available, none offer tracking of multiple agents that balances high accuracy with low cost. This paper highlights new 3D IP technology designed for educational contexts, which coordinates as few as 4 and as many as 80 physical “tags.” The tags act both as anchors to delineate the play space and as trackers that send high-accuracy location data to a server in real time that can later be played back. To test the impact of the technology on learning, we compared it to a parallel non-IP environment that approximates locations between two points in classroom settings. Findings demonstrate how the IP technology supports students in engaging deeply with complex systems concepts that require students to look closely at the local behavior of an organism such as an ant. © ISLS.","","Indoor positioning systems; Multi agent systems; Students; Classroom settings; Educational context; Elementary systems; Indoor positioning; IP technology; Location data; Multiple agents; Science learning; E-learning","","","","","Armin Moczek; National Science Foundation, NSF, (1324047)","This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1324047 awarded to Kylie Peppler, Joshua Danish, and Armin Moczek. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Thank you to Janis Watson, and the many teachers and students who made this work possible.","Colella V., Participatory Simulations: Building Collaborative Understanding Through Immersive Dynamic Modeling, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 4, pp. 471-500, (2000); Cook B., Buckberry G., Scowcroft I., Mitchell J., Allen T., Indoor Location Using Trilateration Characteristics. in Proc. London Communications Symposium, pp. 147-150, (2005); Danish J.A., Applying an activity theory lens to designing instruction for learning about the structure, behavior, and function of a honeybee system, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23, 2, pp. 100-148, (2014); Danish J., Thoroughgood L., Thompson N., Peppler K., BeeSim: Re-Mediating Students’ Engagement with Honeybees Collecting Nectar from a First and Third-Person Perspective, Presentation at 2017 Annual Meeting of AERA, (2017); Karbownik P., Krukar G., Shaporova A., Franke N., von der Grun T., Evaluation of Indoor Real Time Localization Systems on the UWB Based System Case, 2015 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation, (2015); Klopfer E., Yoon S., Rivas L., Comparative analysis of Palm and wearable computers for Participatory Simulations, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 5, pp. 347-359, (2004); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, pp. 53-62, (2006); Montemayor J., Druin A., Farber A., Simms S., Churaman W., D'amour A., Physical programming: Designing tools for children to create physical interactive environments, In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 299-306, (2002); Resnick M., Decentralized modeling and decentralized thinking, Modeling and Simulation in Precollege Science and Mathematics, pp. 114-137, (1999)","","Luckin R.; Kay J.","International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS)","","13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2018: Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age: Making the Learning Sciences Count","23 June 2018 through 27 June 2018","London","138742","18149316","","","","English","Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Sci., ICLS ","Conference paper","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85053937490"
"Eutsler L.; Long C.S.","Eutsler, Lauren (57199649122); Long, Christopher Sean (57195637955)","57199649122; 57195637955","Don’t put the Cart Before the Horse: Self-Study on Using VR in Education","2024","TechTrends","68","1","","136","148","12","0","10.1007/s11528-023-00897-z","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85176363436&doi=10.1007%2fs11528-023-00897-z&partnerID=40&md5=c0e97362eecd4a48aca9fdcaed051213","University of North Texas, Learning Technologies, Discovery Park G-183, 3940 N. Elm St, Denton, 76207, TX, United States; University of North Texas, Teacher Education and Administration, Matthews Hall 218-J, 1155 Union Circle #310740, Denton, 76203-5017, TX, United States","Eutsler L., University of North Texas, Learning Technologies, Discovery Park G-183, 3940 N. Elm St, Denton, 76207, TX, United States; Long C.S., University of North Texas, Teacher Education and Administration, Matthews Hall 218-J, 1155 Union Circle #310740, Denton, 76203-5017, TX, United States","Virtual reality is a rapidly growing technological innovation that continues to garner attention for use in education. This self-study of two teacher educators spans immersive head-mounted virtual reality implementation from 2014–2023 with middle-grades students, preservice teachers, and adult learners. Empirical data sources include learner perceptions and researcher generated teaching vignettes and reflective diaries. Framed by a systems thinking approach to design, results highlight the experiences and growing insights during each of the four chronologically ordered implementation phases. Phase one emphasizes the responsibility of project constituents and lack of organizational support. Phase two highlights the ripening of education virtual reality resources and adapting pedagogy to learner characteristics. Phase three explains the application and transfer within a new context. Phase four encapsulates shifts among external factors with a desire to improve performance needs. Findings compare and contrast education virtual reality with entertainment virtual reality, to advance instructional design and development to improve learning. Insights and practical recommendations apply to teacher educators, educational technologists, and computer scientists. © 2023, Association for Educational Communications & Technology.","Evaluation; Instructional Design; Middle Grades; Science Education; Self-Study; Systems Thinking; Teacher Preparation; Virtual Reality","","","","","","","","BIO-VR: Design and implementation of virtual reality-based simulated biology laboratory using Google Cardboard with an emphasis on virtual education, In Inventive Computation and Information Technologies: Proceedings of ICICIT 2022, pp. 867-883, (2023); Aldridge J.M., Fraser B.J., Outcomes-Focused Learning Environments: Determinants and Effects., (2008); Virtual reality headsets: Challenges in educational adoption, Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, pp. 1083-1085, (2023); Barreda-Angeles M., Aleix-Guillaume S., Pereda-Banos A., Virtual reality storytelling as a double-edged sword: Immersive presentation of nonfiction 360°-video is associated with impaired cognitive information processing, Communication Monographs, 88, 2, pp. 154-173, (2020); Bowen M.M., Effect of virtual reality on motivation and achievement of middle-school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), (2018); Brenner C., DesPortes K., Ochoa Hendrix J., Holford M., GeoForge: Investigating integrated virtual reality and personalized websites for collaboration in middle school science, Information and Learning Science, 122, 7-8, pp. 546-564, (2021); Canning C.G., Allen N.E., Nackaerts E., Paul S.S., Nieuwboer A., Gilat M., Virtual reality in research and rehabilitation of gait and balance in Parkinson disease, Nature Reviews. Neurology, 16, 8, pp. 409-425, (2020); Cassidy K.C., Sefcik J., Raghav Y., Chang A., Durrant J.D., ProteinVR: Web-based molecular visualization in virtual reality, PLoS Computational Biology, 16, 3, (2020); Chen Y.L., The effects of virtual reality learning environment on student cognitive and linguistic development, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25, pp. 637-646, (2016); Chin K., Wang C., The effectiveness of a VR-based mobile learning system for university students to learn geological knowledge, Interactive Learning Environments, (2023); Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R., User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, 35, 8, pp. 982-1003, (1989); Google Expeditions app is discontinued as of June 30, Eduporium Blog., (2021); Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule (""COPPA""), (2023); Eutsler L., Long C.S., Preservice teachers' acceptance of virtual reality to plan science instruction, Educational Technology and Society, 24, 2, pp. 28-43, (2021); Instructional mechanisms in immersive virtual reality serious games: Earthquake emergency training for children, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37, pp. 542-556, (2021); Fowler C., Virtual reality and learning: Where is the pedagogy?, British Journal of Educational Technology, 46, 2, pp. 412-422, (2015); Francisco de Paula F.P., Klimova B., A systematic review of virtual reality in the acquisition of second language, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 17, 15, pp. 43-53, (2022); Fraser B.J., The evolution of the field of learning environments research, Education Sciences, 13, 3, (2023); Using virtual reality to augment museum-based field trips in a preservice elementary science methods course, Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19, 4, pp. 687-707, (2019); Harvey M., Deuel A., Marlatt R., “To be, or not to be”: Modernizing Shakespeare with multimodal learning stations, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63, 5, pp. 559-568, (2020); Ioannou M., Ioannou A., Technology-enhanced embodied learning: Designing and evaluating a new classroom experience, Educational Technology & Society, 23, 3, pp. 81-94, (2020); Jayanth A., Stone D., Dhanda J., Smith C.F., Using digital innovation to support anatomy and surgical education during the pandemic, The FASEB Journal, 36, S1, (2022); Johnson C.D., Using virtual reality and 360-degree video in the religious studies classroom: An experiment, Teaching Theology & Religion, 21, 3, pp. 228-241, (2018); Kavanagh S., Luxton-Reilly A., Wuensche B., Plimmer B., A systematic review of virtual reality in education, Themes in Science and Technology Education, 10, 2, pp. 85-119, (2017); Khukalenko J., Kaplan-Rakowski R., An Y., Iushina V., Teachers’ perceptions of using virtual reality technology in classrooms: A large-scale survey, Education and Information Technologies, 27, pp. 11591-11613, (2022); LaBoskey V.K., The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings, International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices, pp. 817-869, (2004); Lee C.K., Shea M., Exploring the use of virtual reality by pre-service elementary teachers for teaching science in the elementary classroom, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52, 2, pp. 163-177, (2020); Lee S.H., Sergueeva K., Catangui M., Kandaurova M., Assessing Google Cardboard virtual reality as a content delivery system in business classrooms, Journal of Education for Business, 92, 4, pp. 153-160, (2017); Li C., Ip H.H.S., Wong Y.M., Lam W.S., An empirical study on using virtual reality for enhancing the youth's intercultural sensitivity in Hong Kong, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36, pp. 625-635, (2020); Liu R., Wang L., Lei J., Wang Q., Ren Y., Effects of an immersive virtual reality-based classroom on students’ learning performance in science lessons, British Journal of Educational Technology, 51, 6, pp. 2034-2049, (2020); Long C.S., Eutsler L., Engaging with VR: Where will you take your students?, Science Scope, 43, 9, (2020); Long C., Eutsler L., Student perceptions of the learning environment using virtual reality in science. [Paper Presentation], American Educational Research Association Conference, (2022); Luo H., Li G., Feng Q., Yang Y., Zuo M., Virtual reality in K-12 and higher education: A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2019, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37, 3, pp. 887-901, (2021); Lytras M.D., Damiani E., Mathkour H., Virtual reality in learning, collaboration and behaviour: Content, systems, strategies, context designs, Behaviour & Information Technology, 35, 11, pp. 877-878, (2016); Maas M.J., Hughes J.M., Virtual, augmented and mixed reality in K–12 education: A review of the literature, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 29, 2, pp. 231-249, (2020); Marougkas A., Troussas C., Krouska A., Sgouropoulou C., How personalized and effective is immersive virtual reality in education? A systematic literature review for the last decade, Multimedia Tools and Applications, pp. 1-49, (2023); Patterson T., Han I., Learning to teach with virtual reality: Lessons from one elementary teacher, TechTrends, 63, 4, pp. 463-469, (2019); Predescu S.L., Caramihai S.I., Moisescu M.A., Impact of VR application in an academic context, Applied Sciences, 13, 8, (2023); Radianti J., Majchrzak T.A., Fromm J., Wohlgenannt I., A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda, Computers & Education, 147, (2020); Smartphone based virtual reality systems in classroom teaching—a study on the effects of learning outcome, In 2016 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E, pp. 68-71, (2016); Inc R., Getting Started with Virtual Reality., (2018); Rogers S.L., Cheap, accessible, and virtual experiences as tools for immersive study: a proof of concept study, Research in Learning Technology, 28, (2020); Samaras A.P., Self-Study Teacher Research: Improving Your Practice through Collaborative Inquiry, (2010); Samaras A.P., Freese A.R., Self-study of teaching practices, (2006); Looking back and looking forward: A historical overview of the self-study school, Self-Study Research Methodologies for Teacher Educators, pp. 3-19, (2009); Schott C., Marshall S., Virtual reality and situated experiential education: A conceptualization and exploratory trial, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34, pp. 843-852, (2018); Sherman W.R., Craig A.B., Understanding virtual reality: Interface, application, and design, (2018); Smith J.R., Snapp B., Madar S., Brown J.R., Fowler J., Andersen M., Porter C.D., Orban C., A smartphone-based virtual reality plotting system for STEM Education, Primus, 33, 1, pp. 1-15, (2022); Stefaniak J., The utility of design thinking to promote systemic instructional design practices in the workplace, TechTrends, 64, 2, pp. 202-210, (2020); Stefaniak J., Xu M., An examination of the systemic reach of instructional design models: a systematic review, TechTrends, 64, pp. 710-719, (2020); Theelen H., van den Beemt A., den Brok P., Developing preservice teachers’ interpersonal knowledge with 360-degree videos in teacher education, Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, (2020); Valenti S., Lund B., Wang T., Virtual reality as a tool for student orientation in distance education programs, Information Technology and Libraries, 39, 2, (2020); Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., Davis F.D., User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, 27, 3, pp. 425-478, (2003); Wu S., Hung A., The effects of virtual reality infused instruction on elementary school students’ english-speaking performance, willingness to communicate, and learning autonomy, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60, 6, pp. 1558-1587, (2022); Wu J., Guo R., Wang Z., Zeng R., Integrating spherical video-based virtual reality into elementary school students’ scientific inquiry instruction: Effects on their problem-solving performance, Interactive Learning Environments, 29, 3, pp. 496-509, (2021); Yildirim B., Topalcengiz E.S., Arikan G., Timur S., Using virtual reality in the classroom: Reflections of STEM teachers on the use of teaching and learning tools, Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 6, 3, pp. 231-245, (2020)","L. Eutsler; University of North Texas, Learning Technologies, Denton, Discovery Park G-183, 3940 N. Elm St, 76207, United States; email: lauren.eutsler@unt.edu","","Springer","","","","","","87563894","","","","English","TechTrends","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85176363436"
"Uskola A.; Zamalloa T.; Achurra A.","Uskola, Araitz (6508016235); Zamalloa, Teresa (26533704500); Achurra, Ainara (23767149600)","6508016235; 26533704500; 23767149600","Using multiple strategies in deepening the understanding of the digestive system","2024","Journal of Biological Education","58","2","","364","382","18","3","10.1080/00219266.2022.2064896","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85129331849&doi=10.1080%2f00219266.2022.2064896&partnerID=40&md5=58d9d08daf401a4543ab9b78bb6d80cb","Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Leioa, Spain; Faculty of Education and Sports, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain","Uskola A., Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Leioa, Spain; Zamalloa T., Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Leioa, Spain; Achurra A., Faculty of Education and Sports, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain","The digestive system (DS) is a fundamental topic in biological science teaching. However, the literature indicates that students have difficulties in learning about it. In the present work, we focus on how early childhood Pre-Service Teachers (PSTs) develop their understanding of the DS regarding the CMP (Components-Mechanisms-Phenomena) framework of systems thinking. A teaching sequence was designed, implemented and iteratively improved over the course of three years, and in Year 3 included the construction of a physical model and the design and performance of a role-play. Data collection was performed using individual questionnaires before and after participating in the practical activities. The physical models and the role-plays were also analysed. The results show that participation in the sequence improved the understanding of the DS in all dimensions of systems thinking, especially in Year 3. The construction of physical models mainly fostered learning Components and the role-play seemed to facilitate a deeper understanding of Mechanisms. It is concluded that the combined use of both modes of representation constitutes a valuable strategy for science education. © 2022 Royal Society of Biology.","Digestive system; physical model; pre-service teachers; role-play; science teaching","","","","","","","","Abed O.H., Drama-based Science Teaching and Its Effect on Students’ Understanding of Scientific Concepts and Their Attitudes Towards Science Learning, International Education Studies, 9, 10, pp. 163-173, (2016); Aduriz-Bravo A., Gomez A., Marquez C., Sanmarti N., La mediación analógica en la ciencia escolar. Propuesta de la “función modelo teórico”, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, número extra VII Congreso, pp. 1-5, (2005); Ainsworth S., The Functions of Multiple Representations, Computers & Education, 33, 2-3, pp. 131-152, (1999); Ainsworth S., DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for considering Learning with Multiple Representations, Learning and Instruction, 16, 3, pp. 183-198, (2006); Alrutz M., Granting Science a Dramatic License: Exploring a 4th Grade Science Classroom and the Possibilities for Integrating Drama, Teaching Artist Journal, 2, 1, pp. 31-39, (2004); Aydin S., To what extent do Turkish high school students know about their body organs and organ systems?, Journal of Human Sciences, 13, pp. 1094-1106, (2016); Aydin S., Keles P.U., Determination of Fifth Grade Students’ Perceptions on Digestive Organs, In Human Body.” Turkish Studies, 13, 4, pp. 1413-1421, (2018); Bahamonde N., Gomez Galindo A.A., Caracterización de modelos de digestión humana a partir de sus representaciones y análisis de su evolución en un grupo de docentes y auxiliares académicos, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 34, pp. 129-147, (2016); Banet E., Obstáculos y alternativas para que los estudiantes de educación secundaria comprendan los procesos de nutrición humana, Alambique: Didáctica de las ciencias experimentales, 58, pp. 34-55, (2008); Bechtel W., Abrahamsen A., Explanation: A Mechanist Alternative, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36, 2, pp. 421-441, (2005); Benarroch A., Una simulación teatral para la enseñanza de la nutrición humana en la educación primaria, Alambique: Didáctica de las ciencias experimentales, 55, pp. 96-103, (2008); Boland M., Human Digestion–A Processing Perspective, Journal of the Science Food and Agriculture, 96, 7, pp. 2275-2283, (2016); Braund M., Ahmed Z., Drama as Physical Role-play: Actions and Outcomes for Life Science Lessons in South Africa, Journal of Biological Education, 53, 4, pp. 412-421, (2019); Burgoa B., Uskola A., Maguregi G., Zamalloa T., Achurra A., Estudio de las representaciones de los Modelos Sistema Inmunológico y Sistema Digestivo a través de dibujos y explicaciones escritas del alumnado del grado de Magisterio, 28° Encuentros de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales. Iluminando el cambio educativo, (2017); Carvalho G., Alves G., Values and Science Contents in Portuguese Primary School Textbooks on the Topic Human Reproduction and Sex, (2004); Cuthbert A.J., Do Children Have a Holistic View of Their Internal Body Maps?, School Science Review, 82, 299, pp. 25-32, (2000); Dempster E.R., Stears M., Accessing Students’ Knowledge in a Context of Linguistic and Socioeconomic Diversity: The Case of Internal Human Anatomy, African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17, 3, pp. 185-195, (2013); Dempster E., Stears M., An Analysis of Children’s Drawings of What They Think Is inside Their Bodies: A South African Regional Study, Journal of Biological Education, 48, 2, pp. 71-79, (2014); Dorion K., Science through Drama: A Multiple Case Exploration of the Characteristics of Drama Activities Used in Secondary Science Lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 16, pp. 2247-2270, (2009); Ferk V., Vrtacnik M., Blejec A., Gril A., Students’ Understanding of Molecular Structure Representations, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 10, pp. 1227-1245, (2003); Garcia-Barros S., Martinez-Losada C., Garrido M., What Do Children Aged Four to Seven Know about the Digestive System and the Respiratory System of the Human Being and of Other Animals?, International Journal of Science Education, 33, 15, pp. 2095-2122, (2011); Garcia B., Mateos A., Comparación entre la realización de maquetas y la visualización para mejorar la alfabetización visual en anatomía humana en futuros docentes, Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 15, 3, (2018); Gilbert J.K., Visualization: A Metacognitive Skill in Science and Science Education, Visualization in Science Education. Models and Modeling in Science Education, pp. 9-27, (2005); Goldstone R.L., Wilensky U., Promoting Transfer by Grounding Complex Systems Principles, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 4, pp. 465-516, (2008); Gomez A., Construcción de explicaciones multimodales: ¿Qué aportan los diversos registros semióticos?, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos (Colombia), 4, 2, pp. 83-99, (2008); Grabowski B.L., Generative Learning: Past, Present, and Future, Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, pp. 897-918, (1996); Granklint Enochson P., Redfors A., Dempster E.R., Tibell L.A.E., Ideas about the Human Body among Secondary Students in South Africa, African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19, 2, pp. 199-211, (2015); Hall J.E., Guyton and Hall Textbook of Medical Physiology e-Book, (2016); Han M., Kim H.B., Elementary Students’ Modeling Using Analogy Models to Reveal the Hidden Mechanism of the Human Respiratory System, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 5, pp. 923-942, (2019); Hattie J., Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to Achievement, (2008); Haugwitz M., Sandmann A., Collaborative Modelling of the Vascular System–Designing and Evaluating a New Learning Method for Secondary Students, Journal of Biological Education, 44, 3, pp. 136-140, (2010); Henze I., van Driel J.H., Verloop N., Science Teachers’ Knowledge about Teaching Models and Modelling in the Context of a New Syllabus on Public Understanding of Science, Research in Science Education, 37, 2, pp. 99-122, (2007); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems Learning with A Conceptual Representation: A Quasi-experimental Study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing Expert and Novice Understanding of a Complex System from the Perspective of Structures, Behaviors, and Functions, Cognitive Science, 28, 1, pp. 127-138, (2004); Jorba J., Sanmarti N., Enseñar, aprender y evaluar: Un proceso de regulación continua: Propuestas didácticas para las áreas de ciencias de la naturaleza y matemáticas, (1996); Justi R.S., Gilbert J.K., Science Teachers’ Knowledge about and Attitudes Towards the Use of Models and Modelling in Learning Science, International Journal of Science Education, 24, 12, pp. 1273-1292, (2002); Khan S., What’s Missing in Model-based Teaching, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 6, pp. 535-560, (2011); King C., Geoscience Education: An Overview, Studies in Science Education, 44, 2, pp. 187-222, (2008); Kiroglu K., Turk C., Erdogan I., Which One Is More Effective in Teaching the Phases of the Moon and Eclipses: Hands-on or Computer Simulation?, Research in Science Education, 51, 3, pp. 733-760, (2021); Kozma R., Chin E., Russell J., Marx N., The Roles of Representations and Tools in the Chemistry Laboratory, (1997); Leite L.M., Rotta J.C., Digerindo a química biologicamente: A ressignificação de conteúdos a partir de um jogo, Química nova escola, 38, 1, pp. 12-19, (2016); Lenhard W., Lenhard A., Calculation of Effect Sizes, (2016); Maia P.F., Justi R., Learning of Chemical Equilibrium through Modelling Based Teaching, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 5, pp. 603-630, (2009); Mattos Feijo L., Andrade V.A., Coutinho-Silva R., A Journey through the Digestive System: Analysis of A Practical Activity’s Use as A Didactic Resource for Undergraduate Students, Journal of Biological Education, pp. 1-33, (2020); McGregor D., Dramatising Science Learning: Findings from a Pilot Study to Re-invigorate Elementary Science Pedagogy for Five-to-seven Years Olds, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 8, pp. 1145-1165, (2012); McSharry G., Jones S., Role-play in Science Teaching and Learning, School Science Review, 82, pp. 73-82, (2000); Metcalfe R.J.A., Abbott S., Bray P., Exley J., Wisnia D., Teaching Science through Drama: An Empirical Investigation, Research in Science & Technological Education, 2, 1, pp. 77-81, (1984); Mohapatra A.K., Roy A., Exploring Drawing Skills and Mental Images of Secondary Students on Human Digestive System through Hand Drawing, The Journal of Indian Education, 44, 2, pp. 94-107, (2018); Murcia I., Crespo-Blanc A., La formación de océanos y cadenas de montañas a partir de modelos analógicos: Maquetas y nuevos materiales, Enseñanza de las Ciencias de la Tierra, 16, 2, pp. 173-177, (2008); Odegaard M., Dramatic Science. A Critical Review of Drama in Science Education, Studies in Science Education, 39, 1, pp. 75-101, (2003); Ogan-Bekiroglu F., Effects of Model-based Teaching on Pre-service Physics Teachers’ Conceptions of the Moon, Moon Phases, and Other Lunar Phenomena, International Journal of Science Education, 29, 5, pp. 555-593, (2007); Oh P.S., Oh S.J., What Teachers of Science Need to Know about Models: An Overview, International Journal of Science Education, 33, 8, pp. 1109-1130, (2011); Osborne R., Wittrock M., The Generative Learning Model and Its Implications for Science Education, Studies in Science Education, 12, 1, pp. 59-87, (1985); Ozsevgec L.C., What Do Turkish Students at Different Ages Know about Their Internal Body Parts Both Visually and Verbally?, Turkish Science Education, 4, 2, pp. 31-44, (2007); Padalkar S., Ramadas J., Designed and Spontaneous Gestures in Elementary Astronomy Education, International Journal of Science Education, 33, 12, pp. 1703-1739, (2011); Reiss M.J., Tunnicliffe S.D., Students’ Understandings of Human Organs and Organ Systems, Research in Science Education, 31, 3, pp. 383-399, (2001); Reiss M.J., Tunnicliffe S.D., Andersen A.M., Bartoszeck A., Carvalho G.S., Chen S.Y., Jarman R., Et al., An International Study of Young Peoples’ Drawings of What Is inside Themselves, Journal of Biological Education, 36, 2, pp. 58-64, (2002); Schonborn K.J., Host G.E., Lundin Palmerius K.E., Interactive Visualization for Learning and Teaching Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Global Perspectives of Nanoscience and Engineering Education, (2016); Shen J., Confrey J., From Conceptual Change to Transformative Modeling: A Case Study of an Elementary Teacher in Learning Astronomy, Science Education, 91, 6, pp. 948-966, (2007); Simonneaux L., Role-play or Debate to Promote Students’ Argumentation and Justification on an Issue in Animal Transgenesis, International Journal of Science Education, 23, 9, pp. 903-927, (2001); Smetana L.K., Bell R.L., Computer Simulations to Support Science Instruction and Learning: A Critical Review of the Literature, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 9, pp. 1337-1370, (2012); Snapir Z., Eberbach C., Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Hmelo-Silver C., Tripto J., Characterising the Development of the Understanding of Human Body Systems in High-school Biology Students–A Longitudinal Study, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 15, pp. 2092-2127, (2017); Sorgo A., Hajdinjak Z., Briski D., The Journey of a Sandwich: Computer-based Laboratory Experiments about the Human Digestive System in High School Biology Teaching, Advances in Physiological Education, 32, 1, pp. 92-99, (2008); Stagg B.C., Meeting Linnaeus: Improving Comprehension of Biological Classification and Attitudes to Plants Using Drama in Primary Science Education, Research in Science & Technological Education, 38, 3, pp. 253-271, (2020); Steer D.N., Knight C.C., Owens K.D., Mcconnell D.A., Challenging Students Ideas about Earth’s Interior Structure Using a Model-based, Conceptual Change Approach in a Large Class Setting, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 4, pp. 415-421, (2005); Talamoni B., Carolina A., de Andrade Caldeira A.M., Ensino e aprendizagem de conteúdos científicos nas séries iniciais do ensino fundamental: O sistema digestório, Investigações Em Ensino De Ciências, 22, 3, pp. 1-15, (2017); Teixeira F.M., What Happens to the Food We Eat? Children’s Conceptions of the Structure and Function of the Digestive System, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 5, pp. 507-520, (2000); Torres J., Vasconcelos C., Models in Geoscience Classes: How Can Teachers Use Them?, Geoscience Education, pp. 25-42, (2016); Vilkoniene M., Influence of Augmented Reality Technology upon Pupils’ Knowledge about Human Digestive System: The Results of the Experiment, US-China Education Review, 6, 1, pp. 36-43, (2009); Walan S., Pre-service Teachers’ Reflections When Drama Was Integrated in a Science Teacher Education Program, Journal of Biological Education, pp. 1-14, (2020); Weaver G.C., Strategies in K-12 Science Instruction to Promote Conceptual Change, Science Education, 82, 4, pp. 455-472, (1998); Wittrock M.C., Learning as a Generative Process, Educational Psychologist, 11, 2, pp. 87-95, (1974); Zembal-Saul C., Learning to Teach Elementary School Science as Argument, Science Education, 93, 4, pp. 687-719, (2009)","A. Uskola; Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country Upv/ehu, Leioa, Spain; email: araitz.uskola@ehu.eus","","Routledge","","","","","","00219266","","","","English","J. Biol. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85129331849"
"Zidny R.; Sjöström J.; Eilks I.","Zidny, Robby (56669789800); Sjöström, Jesper (7005403149); Eilks, Ingo (16635579300)","56669789800; 7005403149; 16635579300","Indigenous Knowledge and Science and Technology Education","2023","Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education","56","","","165","179","14","1","10.1007/978-3-031-24259-5_12","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85149480251&doi=10.1007%2f978-3-031-24259-5_12&partnerID=40&md5=e87f8d2845110ec1b297d9bdac621b3e","Department of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa, Serang, Indonesia; Malmö University, Faculty of Education and Society, Department of Natural Science, Mathematics and Society, Malmö, Sweden; University of Bremen, Department of Biology and Chemistry, Institute of Science Education, Bremen, Germany","Zidny R., Department of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa, Serang, Indonesia; Sjöström J., Malmö University, Faculty of Education and Society, Department of Natural Science, Mathematics and Society, Malmö, Sweden; Eilks I., University of Bremen, Department of Biology and Chemistry, Institute of Science Education, Bremen, Germany","In recent decades, research on the knowledge of indigenous cultures has gained more and more recognition in the field of science and technology education. Indigenous knowledge was promoted in terms of justice for indigenous peoples, respect for values and indigenous knowledge, the potential for intercultural learning, and chances for supporting education for sustainability. Various efforts have been made by both indigenous and non-indigenous scholars to introduce indigenous knowledge into science and technology curricula. In this chapter, we explore concepts and recent studies on indigenous knowledge in science and technology education, with important questions related to the topic. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.","Education for sustainability; Ethnoscience; Indigenous knowledge; Science education; Systems thinking; Teaching strategies; Technology education","","","","","","","","Abonyi O.S., Effects of an Ethnoscience-Based Instructional Package on students’ Conception of Scientific Phenomena and Interest in Science (Thesis), (1999); Abonyi O.S., Njoku L.A., Adibe M.I., Innovations in science and technology education: A case for ethnoscience based science classrooms, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 5, 1, pp. 52-56, (2014); Aikenhead G.S., Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science, Studies in Science Education, 27, pp. 1-52, (1996); Aikenhead G.S., Integrating Western and aboriginal sciences: Cross-cultural science teaching, Research in Science Education, 31, pp. 337-355, (2001); Aikenhead G.S., Jegede O.J., Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, pp. 269-287, (1999); Aikenhead G.S., Michell H., Bridging Cultures: Indigenous and Scientific Ways of Knowing Nature, (2011); Atteh O.D., Indigenous local knowledge as key to local level development: Possibilities, constraints, and planning issues in the context of Africa, Unpublished Manuscript, (1989); Barnhardt R., Creating a place for indigenous knowledge in education: The Alaska native knowledge network, Place-Based Education in the Global Age: Local Diversity, pp. 113-133, (2007); Barnhardt R., Kawagley A.O., Hill F., Educational renewal in rural Alaska, Proceedings of the International Conference on Rural Communities & Identities in the Global Millennium, pp. 140-145, (2000); Berkes F., Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective. In J. T. Inglis (Ed.), Traditional ecological knowledge: Concepts and cases (pp. 1–9), International Development Research Centre (IRDC) Books, (1993); Bermudez G.M.A., Battiston L.V., Garcia Capocasa M.C., de Longhi A.L., Sociocultural variables that impact high school students’ perceptions of native fauna: A study on the species component of the biodiversity concept, Research in Science Education, 47, pp. 203-235, (2017); Botha L.R., Using expansive learning to include indigenous knowledge, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16, 1, pp. 57-70, (2012); Bullen J., Roberts L., Driving transformative learning within Australian indigenous studies, The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 48, pp. 12-23, (2019); Burger H.G., Ethno-Pedagogy: A Manual in Cultural Sensitivity with Techniques for Improving Cross-Cultural Teaching by Fitting Ethnic Patterns, (1971); Burmeister M., Rauch F., Eilks I., Education for sustainable development (ESD) and chemistry education, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, pp. 59-68, (2012); Chandra D.V., Re-examining the importance of indigenous perspectives in the Western environmental education for sustainability: From tribal to mainstream education, Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 16, pp. 117-127, (2014); Chaudhary S., Kanwar R.K., Sehgal A., Cahill D.M., Barrow C.J., Sehgal R., Kanwar J.R., Progress on Azadirachta indica-based biopesticides in replacing synthetic toxic pesticides, Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 610, pp. 1-13, (2017); de Beer J., Whitlock E., Indigenous knowledge in the life sciences classroom: Put on your de bono hats!, The American Biology Teacher, 71, pp. 209-216, (2009); de Beer J., Petersen N., Ogunniyi M., Indigenous knowledge in science education: Implications for teacher education, Handbook of Research on Science Teacher Education, pp. 340-351, (2022); Siemieniec R., Mente R., 600 V Power Device Technologies for Highly Efficient Power supplies,º in 2021 23Rd European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications; Fasasi R.A., Effects of ethnoscience instruction, school location, and parental educational status on learners’ attitude towards science, International Journal of Science Education, 39, pp. 548-564, (2017); Hamlin M.L., “Yo soy indígena”: Identifying and using traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) to make the teaching of science culturally responsive for Maya girls, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, pp. 759-776, (2013); Herbert S., Collateral learning in science: Students’ responses to a cross-cultural unit of work, International Journal of Science Education, 30, pp. 979-994, (2008); Hernandez C.M., Morales A.R., Shroyer M.G., The development of a model of culturally responsive science and mathematics teaching, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, pp. 803-820, (2013); Hewson M.G., A theory-based faculty development program for clinician-educators, Academic Medicine, 75, pp. 498-501, (2000); Hewson M.G., Integrating indigenous knowledge with science teaching, Embracing Indigenous Knowledge in Science and Medical Teaching, pp. 119-131, (2015); Hiwasaki L., Emmanuel L., Syamsidik S., Shaw R., Local and Indigenous Knowledge for Community Resilience: Hydro-Meteorological Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation in Coastal and Small Island Communities, (2014); Jegede O., Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics education in Africa, Studies in Science Education, 25, pp. 97-137, (1995); Kasanda C., Lubben F., Gaoseb N., Kandjeo-Marenga U., Hileni Kapenda H., Campbell B., The role of everyday contexts in learner-centred teaching: The practice in Namibian secondary schools, International Journal of Science Education, 27, pp. 1805-1823, (2005); Kim E.J.A., Dionne L., Traditional ecological knowledge in science education and its integration in grades 7 and 8 Canadian science curriculum documents, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 14, pp. 311-329, (2014); Kim E.-J.A., Asghar A., Jordan S., A critical review of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in science education, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17, pp. 258-270, (2017); Klayman D.L., Qinghaosu (artemisinin): An antimalarial drug from China, Science, 228, 4703, pp. 1049-1055, (1985); Korver-Glenn E., Chan E., Howard Ecklund E., Perceptions of science education among African American and white evangelicals: A Texas case study, Review of Religious Research, 57, pp. 131-148, (2015); Koutalidi S., Scoullos M., Biogeochemical cycles for combining chemical knowledge and ESD issues in Greek secondary schools part I: Designing the didactic materials, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17, pp. 10-23, (2016); Krauskopf S., Considering the value of indigenous knowledge and practices, The Science Teacher, 89, 1, pp. 8-10, (2021); Lalonde A., African indigenous knowledge and its relevance to sustainable development, Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Concepts and Cases, pp. 55-62, (1993); Mahaffy P., Moving chemistry education into 3D: A tetrahedral metaphor for understanding chemistry: Union carbide award for chemical education, Journal of Chemical Education, 83, pp. 49-55, (2006); Mashoko D., Indigenous knowledge for plant medicine: Inclusion into school science teaching and learning in Zimbabwe, International Journal of English and Education, 33, pp. 2278-4012, (2014); Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Hopf H., Krief A., One-world chemistry and systems thinking, Nature Chemistry, 8, 5, pp. 393-398, (2016); McKinley E., Stewart G.M., Out of place: Indigenous knowledge (IK) in the science curriculum, Second International Handbook of Science Education, pp. 541-554, (2012); Murray J.J., Re-visioning science education in Canada: A new polar identity and purpose, Education Canada, 55, 4, pp. 18-21, (2015); Nakashima D., Indigenous knowledge in global policies and practice for education, science and culture, Chief, (2010); Ogunniyi M.B., The challenge of preparing and equipping science teachers in higher education to integrate scientific and indigenous knowledge systems for their learners, South African Journal of Higher Education, 18, pp. 289-304, (2004); Ogunniyi M.B., Ogawa M., The prospects and challenges of training South African and Japanese educators to enact an indigenized science curriculum, South African Journal of Higher Education, 22, pp. 175-590, (2008); Parmin S., Ashadi S., Fibriana F., Science integrated learning model to enhance the scientific work independence of student teachers in indigenous knowledge transformation, Journal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6, pp. 365-372, (2017); Perin D., Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of evidence, Community College Review, 39, pp. 268-295, (2011); Rahmawati Y., Ridwan A., Nurbaity. (2017). Should we learn culture in chemistry classroom? Integration ethnochemistry in culturally responsive teaching, AIP Conference Proceedings, (1868); Rahmawati Y., Ridwan A., Rahman A., Kurniadewi F., Chemistry students’ identity empowerment through ethnochemistry in culturally responsive transformative teaching (CRTT), Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1156, 1, (2019); Riggs E.M., Field-based education and indigenous knowledge: Essential components for geoscience teaching for Native American communities, Science Education, 89, pp. 296-313, (2003); Rist S., Dahdouh-Guebas F., Ethnosciences – A step towards the integration of scientific and indigenous forms of knowledge in the management of natural resources for the future, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8, pp. 467-493, (2006); Shady A., Negotiating cultural differences in urban science education: An overview of teachers’ first-hand experiences: Reflection of cogen journey, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, pp. 35-51, (2014); Sjostrom J., Science teacher identity and eco-transformation of science education: Comparing Western modernism with Confucianism and reflexive Bildung, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13, pp. 147-161, (2018); Sjostrom J., Eilks I., Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of Bildung, Cognition, Metacognition, and Culture in STEM Education, pp. 65-88, (2018); Sjostrom J., Eilks I., Talanquer V., Didaktik models in chemistry education, Journal of Chemical Education, 97, pp. 910-915, (2020); Smith L.T., Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, (1999); Snively G., Williams W.L., Knowing home: Braiding indigenous science with Western science, book 1, University of Victoria, (2016); Stephens S., Handbook for Culturally Responsive Science Curriculum. Alaska Native Knowledge Network, (2000); Sturtevant W.C., Studies in ethnoscience, American Anthropologist, 66, 3, pp. 99-131, (1964); Local and Indigenous Knowledge Systems (LINKS), (2021); Warren D.M., Brokensha D., Slikkerveer L.J., (Eds.), (1993); Widiyatmoko A., Sudarmin S., Khusniati M., Reconstruct ethnoscience based-science in karimunjawa islands as a mode to build nature care student character. In International Conference on Mathematics, Science, and Education 2015 (ICMSE, 2015, pp. SE 65 SE 70, (2015); Wilson S., Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods, (2008); Siemieniec R., Mente R., 600 V Power Device Technologies for Highly Efficient Power supplies,º in 2021 23Rd European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications; Zidny R., Eilks I., Integrating perspectives from indigenous knowledge and Western science in secondary and higher chemistry learning to contribute to sustainability education, Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy, 16, (2020); Zidny R., Eilks I., Learning about pesticides use adapted from ethnoscience as a contribution to green and sustainable chemistry education, Education Sciences, 12, 4, (2022); Zidny R., Sjostrom J., Eilks I., A multi-perspective reflection on how indigenous knowledge and related ideas can improve science education for sustainability, Science & Education, 29, 1, pp. 145-185, (2020); Zidny R., Solfarina S., Aisyah R.S.S., Eilks I., Exploring indigenous science to identify contents and contexts for science learning in order to promote education for sustainable development, Education Sciences, 11, 3, (2021)","I. Eilks; University of Bremen, Department of Biology and Chemistry, Institute of Science Education, Bremen, Germany; email: ingo.eilks@uni-bremen.de","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","18780482","","","","English","Contemp. Trends Issues Sci. Edu.","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85149480251"
"Riswandi; Wicaksono L.; Mujiyati; Oktaria R.","Riswandi (57212242794); Wicaksono, Lungit (57217865314); Mujiyati (57205355580); Oktaria, Renti (57217869619)","57212242794; 57217865314; 57205355580; 57217869619","Implementation of learning organizations to achieve effective schools in the efforts to develop an elementary school education management model","2020","Universal Journal of Educational Research","8","7","","3034","3040","6","1","10.13189/ujer.2020.080732","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85087784876&doi=10.13189%2fujer.2020.080732&partnerID=40&md5=c37251d7eec9fe76ae13be44b4e02fb8","Department of Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia","Riswandi, Department of Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia; Wicaksono L., Department of Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia; Mujiyati, Department of Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia; Oktaria R., Department of Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia","The purpose of this study is to implement a learning organization to realize an effective school in the framework of developing an elementary school management model. The implementation is carried out by applying five components, namely personal mastery, system thinking, mental models, shared vision and team learning. This research uses a quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental design. The sampling technique used is purposive sampling. Research data collection was carried out using an effective school measurement instrument consisting of 40 assessment indicators. The instruments were analyzed using the Rasch Model approach through the Winstep program. Data analysis techniques used t-test. The results showed that the learning organization in the education management model can improve effective schools in the aspects of input, process, output, and feedback. Data analysis was performed using the Rasch Model approach through the Winsteps program for Effective School scale measurement instruments. Alpha Cronbach's value of 0.75 which measures reliability is the interaction between person and items as a whole that are in the good category. The unidimensionality of instruments is an important measure to evaluate whether the instrument is capable of measuring what it should be. Raw variance data is 26.1%. This shows that a minimum requirement of 20% can be fulfilled. From the calculation, results show that t-count ≥ t-table, which is 5.975 ≥ 1.664. It can be stated that the learning organization in the effective education management model can improve effective schools in primary schools in Pringsewu District. © 2020 Horizon Research Publishing. All rights reserved.","Effective School; Learning Organization; School Education Management","","","","","","University of Lampung","The authors would like to thank the University of Lampung for funding this research.","Adi W., Strategi pembelajaran, (2000); Adiputra S., Mujiyati, Hendorwati T.Y., Perceptions of Inclusion Education by Parents of Elementary School-Aged Children in Lampung, Indonesia, International Journal of Instruction, 12, 1, pp. 199-212, (2019); Any Noor, Management Event, (2009); Arikunto S., Yuliana L., Manajemen pendidikan, (2008); Armaou M., Antoniou A. S., Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions of Job Resources in Learning Organizations, Multilingual Academic Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 6, 1, pp. 4-20, (2018); Bui H., Baruch Y., Creating learning organizations: a systems perspective, The Learning Organization, 17, 3, pp. 208-227, (2010); Bush, Coleman, Leadership and Strategic Management in Education, (2000); Creswell John W., Research Design, Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif dan Mixed, (2010); Hoy W., Miskel C., Education administration: Theroy, research, and practice, (2005); Lezotte L. W., Mckee K. M., Assembly required: A continuous school improvement system, (2002); Marquardt M. J., Building the learning organization: Mastering the 5 elements for corporate learning, (2002); Mulyasa E., Menjadi Guru Profesional menciptakan Pembelajaran Kreatif dan Menyenangkan, (2007); Muri Yusuf A., Metodologi Penelitian, Dasar-dasar Penyelidikan Ilmiah, (2005); Odor H. O., A literature review on organizational learning and learning organizations, International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 7, 1, pp. 1-6, (2018); Pihie Z. A. L., Dahiru A. S., Ramli Basri S. A., Relationship between Entrepreneurial Leadership and School Effectiveness among Secondary Schools, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8, 12, (2018); Preedy M., Managing the effective school, (1993); Purhaghshenas S. H., Esmatnia M., Learning organizations, Interdisciplinary Journal of Comtemporary Research in Business, 4, 7, pp. 243-249, (2012); Ramberg J., Brolin Laftman S., Fransson E., Modin B., School effectiveness and truancy: a multilevel study of upper secondary schools in Stockholm, International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 24, 2, pp. 185-198, (2019); Riswandi R., Pelatihan manajemen sekolah sebagai upaya untuk menciptakan sekolah efektif pada sekolah dasar di Kabupaten Tanggamus, Jurnal Tarbiyah, 22, 1, (2016); Flood Robert L., Romm Norma R.A., A systemic approach to processes of power in learning organizations: Part I - literature, theory, and methodology of triple loop learning, The Learning Organization, 25, 4, pp. 260-272, (2018); Rose R. C., Kumar N., Pak O. G., The effect of organizational learning on organizational commitment, job satisfaction and work performance, Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 25, 6, (2009); Rupcic N., Complexities of learning organizations - addressing key methodological and content issues, The Learning Organization, 25, 6, pp. 443-454, (2018); Scheerens J., Scheerens J., Effective schooling: Research, theory and practice, (1992); Schein E. H., How can organizations learn faster?: the problem of entering the Green Room, (1992); Schermerhorn John R., Hunt James G., Osborn Richard N., Organizational Behavior, (2003); Senge P., On schools as learning organizations: A conversation with Peter Senge, Educational Leadership, 52, 7, pp. 20-23, (1995); Senge Peter M., The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization, (1990); Stoner James A.F., Manajemen, Terjemahan: Antarikso, (2006); Sumintono B., Widhiarso W., Aplikasi model rasch untuk penelitian ilmu-ilmu sosial, (2014); Menulis Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan Berbahasa, (2016); Wahab Solichin, Analisis Kebijakan: Dari Formulasi ke Implementasi Kebijakan Negara Edisi Kedua, (2008); Watkins K. E., Marsick V. J., Dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire, (1997); Widodo T., Kadarwati S., Higher order thinking berbasis pemecahan masalah untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar berorientasi pembentukan karakter siswa, Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 5, 1, (2013); Yukl G., Leadership in Organization, (2010)","","","Horizon Research Publishing","","","","","","23323205","","","","English","Univers. J. Edu. Res.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85087784876"
"Bredeweg B.; Kragten M.","Bredeweg, Bert (6602372016); Kragten, Marco (55498655200)","6602372016; 55498655200","Requirements and challenges for hybrid intelligence: A case-study in education","2022","Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence","5","","891630","","","","5","10.3389/frai.2022.891630","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85136522908&doi=10.3389%2ffrai.2022.891630&partnerID=40&md5=7ea5794a618b88646c0df5766b4ce565","Faculty of Education, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Informatics Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands","Bredeweg B., Faculty of Education, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Informatics Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Kragten M., Faculty of Education, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands","The potential for Artificial Intelligence is widely proclaimed. Yet, in everyday educational settings the use of this technology is limited. Particularly, if we consider smart systems that actually interact with learners in a knowledgeable way and as such support the learning process. It illustrates the fact that teaching professionally is a complex challenge that is beyond the capabilities of current autonomous robots. On the other hand, dedicated forms of Artificial Intelligence can be very good at certain things. For example, computers are excellent chess players and automated route planners easily outperform humans. To deploy this potential, experts argue for a hybrid approach in which humans and smart systems collaboratively accomplish goals. How to realize this for education? What does it entail in practice? In this contribution, we investigate the idea of a hybrid approach in secondary education. As a case-study, we focus on learners acquiring systems thinking skills and our recently for this purpose developed pedagogical approach. Particularly, we discuss the kind of Artificial Intelligence that is needed in this situation, as well as which tasks the software can perform well and which tasks are better, or necessarily, left with the teacher. Copyright © 2022 Bredeweg and Kragten.","hybrid human-AI systems; Qualitative Reasoning; real-world application problems; science education; systems thinking with qualitative representations","","","","","","","","Aicardi C., Bitsch L., Datta Burton S., Evers L., Farisco M., Mahfoud T., Et al., Trust and Transparency in Artificial Intelligence. Technical report D12.5.4, Human Brain Project SGA2, (2020); Akata Z., Balliet D., de Rijke M., Dignum F., Dignum V., Eiben G., Et al., A research agenda for hybrid intelligence: augmenting human intellect with collaborative, adaptive, responsible, and explainable artificial intelligence, Computer, 53, pp. 18-28, (2020); Baker R.S., Stupid tutoring systems, intelligent humans, Int. J. Artif. Intellig. Educ, 26, pp. 600-614, (2016); Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); Interview with Jaap van den Herik, Founding Father of the BNVKI, (2021); Bouwer A., Bredeweg B., Graphical means for inspecting qualitative models of system behaviour, Instruct. Sci, 38, pp. 173-208, (2010); Bratko I., Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence, 4th Edn, (2012); Bredeweg B., Liem J., Beek W., Salles P., Linnebank F., Learning spaces as representational scaffolds for learning conceptual knowledge of system behavior,, Technology Enhanced Learning, LNCS 6383, pp. 46-61, (2010); Bredeweg B., Linnebank F., Bouwer A., Liem J., GARP3 - Workbench for qualitative modelling and simulation, Ecol. Inform, 4, pp. 263-281, (2009); Bredeweg B., Salles P., Qualitative models of ecological systems (Editorial introduction), Ecol. Inform, 4, pp. 261-262, (2009); Chou C.Y., Huang B.H., Lin C.J., Complementary machine intelligence and human intelligence in virtual teaching assistant for tutoring program tracing, Comput. Educ, 57, pp. 2303-2312, (2011); (2021); Davis R., Shrobe H., Szolovits P., What is a knowledge representation?, AI Magazine, 14, pp. 17-33, (1993); Forbus K.D., Qualitative Representations. How People Reason and Learn About the Continuous World, (2018); Gentner D., Stevens A., Mental Models, (1983); Goodfellow I., Bengio Y., Courville A., Deep Learning, (2016); Holstein K., Aleven V., Rummel N., A conceptual framework for human–AI hybrid adaptivity in education, Artificial Intelligence in Education, LNAI, pp. 240-254, (2020); Holstein K., McLaren B.M., Aleven V., Designing for complementarity: teacher and student needs for orchestration support in AI-enhanced classrooms, Artif. Intellig. Educ. LNAI, pp. 157-171, (2019); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, J. Learn. Sci, 15, pp. 11-34, (2006); Kragten M., Spitz L., Bredeweg B., Learning domain knowledge and systems thinking using qualitative representations in secondary education (grade 9-10),, Proceedings of the 34th International Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, (2021); Kuhn M., Johnson K., Feature Engineering and Selection: A Practical Approach for Predictive Models, (2019); Kurzweil R., The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, (2005); LeCun Y., Bengio Y., Hinton G., Deep learning, Nature, 521, pp. 436-444, (2015); Liem J., Supporting conceptual modelling of dynamic systems: A knowledge engineering perspective on qualitative reasoning, (2013); Lindsay P.H., Norman D.A., Human Information Processing - An Introduction to Psychology, 2nd Edn, (1977); Marcus G., Davis E., Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence We can Trust, (2019); McCarthy J., Minsky M.L., Rochester N., Shannon C.E., A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, (1955); McCullogh W.S., Pitts W., A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity, Bull. Math. Biophys, 5, pp. 115-133, (1943); Moschoyiannis S., Penaloza R., Vanthienen J., Soylu A., Roman D., Rules and reasoning,, 5th International Joint Conference RuleML+RR, LNCS 12851, (2021); Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States, (2013); Nirenburg S., Cognitive systems: towards human-level functionality, AI Magazine, 38, pp. 5-12, (2017); Paiva R., Bittencourt I.I., Helping teachers help their students: a human-AI hybrid approach, Artif. Intellig. Educ. LNAI, pp. 448-459, (2020); Prain V., Tytler R., Learning through constructing representations in science: a framework of representational construction affordances, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 34, pp. 2751-2773, (2012); Rosenblatt F., The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain, Psychol. Rev, 65, pp. 386-408, (1958); Rosenshine B., Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know, Am. Educ, 36, pp. 12-39, (2012); Russell S., Peter Norvig P., Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 4th Edn, (2020); Schreiber G., Wielinga B., Breuker J., KADS: A Principled Approach to Knowledge-Based System Development, (1993); Silver D., Huang A., Maddison C.J., Guez A., Sifre L., Driessche G., Et al., Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search, Nature, 529, pp. 484-489, (2016); Silver D., Schrittwieser J., Simonyan K., Antonoglou I., Huang A., Guez A., Et al., Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge, Nature, 550, pp. 354-359, (2017); Skinner B.F., About Behaviorism, (1974); Spitz L., Kragten M., Bredeweg B., Exploring the working and effectiveness of norm-model feedback in conceptual modelling: a preliminary report,, International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, LNCS 12749, pp. 325-330, (2021); Spitz L., Kragten M., Bredeweg B., Learning domain knowledge and systems thinking using qualitative representations in secondary education (grade 8-9),, Proceedings of the 34th International Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, (2021); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, Syst. Dynam. Rev, 23, pp. 285-311, (2007); van Harmelen F., Lifschitz V., Porter B., Handbook of Knowledge Representation, (2008); Vosniadou S., Ioannides C., Dimitrakopoulou A., Papademetriou E., Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science, Learn. Instruct, 11, pp. 381-419, (2001); Weld D.S., de Kleer J., Readings in Qualitative Reasoning About Physical Systems, (1990); Wenger E., Artificial Intelligence and Tutoring Systems: Computational and Cognitive Approaches to the Communication of Knowledge, (1987)","B. Bredeweg; Faculty of Education, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands; email: b.bredeweg@uva.nl","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","26248212","","","","English","Frontier. Artif. Intell.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85136522908"
"Breslyn W.; McGinnis J.R.","Breslyn, Wayne (24280966400); McGinnis, J. Randy (7103274443)","24280966400; 7103274443","Investigating preservice elementary science teachers' understanding of climate change from a computational thinking systems perspective","2019","Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education","15","6","em1696","","","","6","10.29333/ejmste/103566","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85063728737&doi=10.29333%2fejmste%2f103566&partnerID=40&md5=cbe29d93cfc6da3cc86a7339b1af41a5","University of Maryland, College Park, 2226 Benjamin Building, College Park, 20742, MD, United States","Breslyn W., University of Maryland, College Park, 2226 Benjamin Building, College Park, 20742, MD, United States; McGinnis J.R., University of Maryland, College Park, 2226 Benjamin Building, College Park, 20742, MD, United States","There is a need to approach environmental education (EE) topics, such as climate change, with a framework that productively reflects its inherent complexity. This study investigates how computational thinking (CT), specifically systems thinking (ST), may prepare educators to teach climate change. As scientists increasingly rely on computational techniques in their studies of complex EE topics, it is incumbent on science education to provide learners with computational thinking opportunities. We investigated how elementary preservice teachers (PSTs) in a science methods course (N=35) adapted a curricular resource on the climate change topic of sea level rise to integrate the CT practice of ST. Changes in their thinking were analyzed. Findings suggest that PSTs prior to instruction held a limited understanding of climate systems, often conflating weather and climate. Post instruction, their thinking expanded to consider the relationships between carbon dioxide, global warming, ice melt, and sea level rise. Further, many were able to describe these systems in a future EE teaching activity for young learners. A major implication was the need to develop a continuum of CT practices for elementary educators, with an emphasis on ST, for complex environmental education topics, that could frame their pedagogical thinking for climate change education. © 2019 by the authors.","Climate change; Computational thinking; Preservice teachers; Systems thinking","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (1239758, 1639891)","This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1239758 and 1639891. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.","Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Atmatzidou S., Demetriadis S., Advancing students' computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, pp. 661-670, (2016); Banilower E.R., Smith P.S., Weiss I.R., Malzahn K.A., Campbell K.M., Weis A.M., Report of the 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education, (2013); Barr V., Stephenson C., Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community?, ACM Inroads, 2, 1, pp. 48-54, (2011); Berland M., Wilensky U., Comparing virtual and physical robotics environments for supporting complex systems and computational thinking, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 5, pp. 628-647, (2015); Breslyn W., Drewes A., McGinnis J.R., Hestness E., Mouza C., Development of an Empirically-Based Conditional Learning Progression for Climate Change, Science Education International, 28, 3, pp. 214-223, (2017); Breslyn W., McGinnis J.R., McDonald R.C., Hestness E., Developing a learning progression for sea level rise, a major impact of climate change, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 10, pp. 1471-1499, (2016); [Interactive Map of Sea Level Rise Projection Based on Geographic Area], (2018); Cook J., Oreskes N., Doran P.T., Anderegg W.R., Verheggen B., Maibach E.W., . Green S.A., Consensus on consensus: A synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming, Environmental Research Letters, 11, 4, (2016); DiSessa A.A., Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy, (2000); Drewes A., Breslyn W., McGinnis R., Mouza C., Hestness E., Henderson J., Designing and Validating a Climate Change Knowledge Instrument, (2017); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Hestness E., McGinnis J.R., Riedinger K., Marbach-Ad G., A study of teacher candidates' experiences investigating global climate change education within an elementary science methods course, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, pp. 351-369, (2011); Hill D., Redden M., An investigation of the system concept, School Science and Mathematics, 85, pp. 233-239, (1985); Hokayem H., Gotwals A.W., Early elementary students' understanding of complex ecosystems: A learning progression approach, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 10, pp. 1524-1545, (2016); Krathwohl D.R., A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview, Theory into practice, 41, 4, pp. 212-218, (2002); Lave J., Wenger E., Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, (1991); Loughran J., Developing understandings of practice: Science teacher learning, Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, pp. 811-829, (2014); McGinnis J.R., McDonald C., Controversial or sensitive topics in science education: A Literature Review, (2011); McGinnis J.R., Climate change education: What do we know and how might that assist the science classroom teacher?, A keynote presented at Paleoscience Day, (2018); McGinnis J.R., Hestness E., Riedinger K., Changing science teacher education in a changing global climate: Telling a new story, Transformative Eco-Education for Human Survival: Environmental Education in A New Era, pp. 117-133, (2011); McGinnis J.R., McDonald C., Breslyn W., Hestness E., Supporting the inclusion of climate change in U.S. science education curricula by use of learning progressions, Teaching and Learning about Climate Change: A Framework for Educators, pp. 135-151, (2017); Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking, (2010); Report of a Workshop on the Pedagogical Aspects of Computational Thinking, (2011); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Parchmann I., Grasel C., Baer A., Nentwig P., Demuth R., Ralle B., Chemie im Kontext"": A symbiotic implementation of a context-based teaching and learning approach, International Journal of Science Education, 28, 9, pp. 1041-1062, (2006); Plutzer E., McCaffrey M., Hannah A.L., Rosenau J., Berbeco M., Reid A.H., Climate confusion among US teachers, Science, 351, 6274, pp. 664-665, (2016); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A., Niyogi D., Mehta J., Top S., The need to introduce system thinking in teaching climate change, Science Educator, 25, 2, (2017); Sharma A., Global climate change: What has science education got to do with it?, Science & Education, 21, 1, pp. 33-53, (2012); Shepardson D.P., Niyogi D., Choi S., Charusombat U., Seventh grade students' conceptions of global warming and climate change, Environmental Education Research, 15, 5, pp. 549-570, (2009); Shepardson D.P., Niyogi D., Roychoudhury A., Hirsch A., Conceptualizing climate change in the context of a climate system: Implications for climate and environmental education, Environmental Education Research, 18, 3, pp. 323-352, (2012); Shute V.J., Sun C., Asbell-Clarke J., Demystifying computational thinking, Educational Research Review, (2017); Stephenson C., Barr V., Defining Computational Thinking for K-12, (2012); Weintrop D., Beheshti E., Horn M., Orton K., Jona K., Trouille L., Wilensky U., Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 1, pp. 127-147, (2016); Wing J., Research notebook: Computational thinking-What and why?, The Link Newsletter, 6, pp. 1-32, (2011); Wing J.M., Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, 49, 3, pp. 33-35, (2006)","W. Breslyn; University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, 2226 Benjamin Building, 20742, United States; email: waynebreslyn@gmail.com","","Modestum LTD","","","","","","13058215","","","","English","Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85063728737"
"Ceulemans G.; Severijns N.","Ceulemans, Griet (57213743602); Severijns, Nathal (11038805500)","57213743602; 11038805500","Challenges and benefits of student sustainability research projects in view of education for sustainability","2019","International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education","20","3","","482","499","17","18","10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0051","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85067068471&doi=10.1108%2fIJSHE-02-2019-0051&partnerID=40&md5=16a577e1a4a8827a2e957b1861cce0d1","Department of Chemistry, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Physics and Astronomy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Specific Teacher Education Centre of the Natural Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium","Ceulemans G., Department of Chemistry, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, Specific Teacher Education Centre of the Natural Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Severijns N., Department of Physics and Astronomy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium","Purpose: This paper aims to investigate the educational benefits and challenges of introducing natural science students to on-campus and off-campus sustainability research projects as an approach to education for sustainability. Design/methodology/approach: The course “Science and Sustainability” at the University of Leuven is a stand-alone course that aims at providing master students in the natural sciences, education for (the benefit of) sustainability action. It was launched in 2016-2017 and has been running for two years now. The first year focused on getting students acquire a similar level of knowledge in sustainability, while, on a higher level, the experiential learning phase (project work) was supported with specific reflection assignments. In the second year, more specific attention was directed toward allowing students to get acquainted with systems thinking and deal with inter- and transdisciplinary issues by approaching problems from a multi-stakeholder view. Insight in the impact and the appreciation of the setup of the course was obtained from a series of questionnaires offered to all participating students at the beginning, about midway, and again at the end of the course. Findings: Analysis of the students’ self-reported sustainability competence development shows a clear positive impact for almost all students who participated. A clear relation between the observed change and the students’ self-rating and attitude at the start, as well as with their discipline, is observed. Originality/value: Information is gained on a number of factors of importance to impact the students’ attitude toward action for sustainability, and how this can be further improved. © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited.","Course “Science and Sustainability”; Education for sustainability; Impact on campus; Impact on students; Improving impact","","","","","","","","Blewitt J., Understanding Sustainable Development, (2015); Bowen A., Green’ growth: what does it mean?, (2012); Brundiers K., Wiek A., Educating students in real-world sustainability research: vision and implementation, Innovative Higher Education, 36, 2, pp. 107-124, (2011); Burssens S., Solis Fernandez G., Helsen S., Lenaerts P., Van den Eynde R., Severijns N., Ceulemans G., Electricity production plan for Belgium post-2025, Transdisciplinary Insights, 1, 1, pp. 1-8, (2017); Ceulemans G., Severijns N., A pragmatic framework for setting up transdisciplinary sustainability research on-campus that can make a difference, Sustainability in University Campuses: Learning, Skills Building and Best Practices, (2019); Colucci-Gray L., Perazzone A., Dodman M., Camino E., Science education for sustainability, epistemological reflections and educational practices: from natural sciences to trans-disciplinarity, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, 1, pp. 127-183, (2013); Coops N.C., Marcus J., Construt I., Frank E., Kellett R., Mazzi E., Munro A., Nesbit S., Riseman A., Robinson J., Schultz A., Sipos Y., How an entry level, interdisciplinary sustainability course revealed the benefits and challenges of a university-wide initiative for sustainability education, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16, 5, pp. 729-747, (2015); Dedeurwaerdere T., Sustainability Science for Strong Sustainability, (2013); Dryzek J.S., The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, (2013); Holden E., Linnerud K., Banister D., Our common future revisited, Global Environmental Change, 26, pp. 130-139, (2014); Jones P.T., Jacobs R., Terra Incognita – Globalisering, Economie en Rechtvaardige Duurzaamheid, (2006); Disciplinary future self, (2015); Laurenti R., Singh J., Sinha R., Potting J., Frostell B., Unintended environmental consequences of improvement actions: a qualitative analysis of systems’ structure and behavior, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 33, 3, pp. 381-399, (2016); Leuven sustainable earth, (2018); Malfliet K., Sustainability policy @ KU Leuven, (2014); Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens W.W., The Limits to Growth, (1972); Mog J., The Myth of Environmental Sustainability, (2015); Peer V., Stoeglehner G., Universities as change agents for sustainability – framing the role of knowledge transfer and generation in regional development processes, Journal of Cleaner Production, 44, pp. 85-95, (2013); Pelenc J., Ballet J., Dedeurwaerdere T., Weak sustainability versus strong sustainability, Brief for Global Sustainable Development Report, (2015); Pielke R.A., The Honest Broker, (2007); Ploum L., Blok V., Lans T., Omta O., Toward a validated competence famework for sustainable entrepreneurship, Organization and Environment, 3, 2, pp. 113-132, (2018); Raworth K., A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut?, (2012); Raworth K., Doughnut Economics, (2017); Rockstrom J., Steffen W., Noone K., Persson A., Chapin F.S., Lambin E., Lenton T.M., Scheffer M., Folke C., Schellnhuber H.J., Nykvist B., de Wit C.A., Hughes T., van der Leeuw S., Rodhe H., Sorlin S., Snyder P.K., Costanza R., Svedin U., Falkenmark M., Karlberg L., Corell R.W., Fabry V.J., Hansen J., Walker B., Liverman D., Richardson K., Crutzen P., Foley J., A safe operating space for humanity, Nature, 461, 7263, pp. 472-475, (2009); Rockstrom J., Steffen W., Noone K., Persson A., Chapin F.S., Lambin E., Lenton T.M., Scheffer M., Folke C., Schellnhuber H.J., Nykvist B., de Wit C.A., Hughes T., van der Leeuw S., Rodhe H., Sorlin S., Snyder P.K., Costanza R., Svedin U., Falkenmark M., Karlberg L., Corell R.W., Fabry V.J., Hansen J., Walker B., Liverman D., Richardson K., Crutzen P., Foley J., Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity, Ecology and Society, 14, 2, (2009); Sels L., Policy plan for sustainability, (2018); Sirolli E., Uncontained, (2012); Sleurs W., Competencies for ESD (education for sustainable development) teachers - A framework to integrate ESD in the curriculum of teacher training institutes, (2008); Stibbe A., The Handbook of Sustainability Literacy: Skills for a Changing World, (2009); Education for sustainable development toolkit, (2006); Education for sustainable development goals learning objectives, (2017); Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, (1987); Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, (2015); Uphoff U., Systems thinking on intensification and sustainability: systems boundaries, processes and dimensions, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 8, pp. 89-100, (2014); Van Den Bergh J.C.J.M., Disagreement on sustainability policy within the social sciences?, European Review, 24, 1, pp. 83-88, (2016); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C.L., Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, 2, pp. 203-218, (2011); Wijkman A., Skanberg K., The circular economy and benefits for society, (2015)","N. Severijns; Department of Physics and Astronomy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; email: nathal.severijns@kuleuven.be","","Emerald Group Holdings Ltd.","","","","","","14676370","","","","English","Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85067068471"
"Lorenzo-Rial M.-A.; Varela-Losada M.; Pérez-Rodríguez U.; Vega-Marcote P.","Lorenzo-Rial, María-Asunción (57191904877); Varela-Losada, Mercedes (56433678100); Pérez-Rodríguez, Uxío (55521698400); Vega-Marcote, Pedro (36544696100)","57191904877; 56433678100; 55521698400; 36544696100","Developing systems thinking to address climate change","2024","International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education","","","","","","","0","10.1108/IJSHE-12-2022-0404","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85196613914&doi=10.1108%2fIJSHE-12-2022-0404&partnerID=40&md5=7ea9428c6a845d477d7b5b875e26f4fa","Education Sciences and Sports Faculty, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; Education Sciences Faculty, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain","Lorenzo-Rial M.-A., Education Sciences and Sports Faculty, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; Varela-Losada M., Education Sciences and Sports Faculty, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; Pérez-Rodríguez U., Education Sciences and Sports Faculty, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; Vega-Marcote P., Education Sciences Faculty, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain","Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the presence of systems thinking after an educational proposal on climate sustainability based on reflection and video creation. To evaluate this competency, an evaluation rubric was constructed. Design/methodology/approach: This research is a case study with a mixed approach. It was carried out with 82 future teachers of Primary Education, making content analysis of the videos made. For the design of the rubric, a specific review of the literature was conducted. Findings: The results showed that trainee teachers can identify, relate and understand interconnected processes, but have difficulties in thinking temporally or in understanding the hidden dimensions of the system. The results reveal how the development of systems thinking in the Climate Change framework is a complex learning process. The rubric created allowed us to systematize the evaluation by making it possible to assess the subskills involved. Originality/value: To improve the development of systemic thinking, using real data linked to the consequences of this problem and ICT applications that foster an approximation to future realities is suggested. In addition, conscious and fair decision-making should be promoted on the basis of a transformative education that favors this thinking in interaction with other key competences in sustainability. The innovative rubric allows the evaluation of systemic thinking skills for the study of climate change, conceptualized from the interrelationships of the natural, social and economic dimensions and from its implications for life, on different geographical and temporal levels. © 2024, Emerald Publishing Limited.","Climate change; Education for sustainable development; Key competences for sustainability; Systems thinking; Teacher training","","","","","","","","Alm K., Melen M., Aggestam-Pontoppidan C., Advancing SDG competencies in higher education: exploring an interdisciplinary pedagogical approach, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22, 6, pp. 1450-1466, (2021); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A complete set of systems thinking skills, INSIGHT, 20, 3, pp. 9-17, (2017); Bardin L., Análisis de Contenido, (1996); Bauman Z., Consuming Life, (2013); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Bertalanffy L., General System Theory, (1968); Bielik T., Delen I., Krell M., Assaraf O.B.Z., Characterising the literature on the teaching and learning of system thinking and complexity in STEM education: a bibliometric analysis and research synthesis, Journal for STEM Education Research, 6, 2, pp. 1-33, (2023); Bjork R.A., Dunlosky J., Kornell N., Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions, Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 1, pp. 417-444, (2013); Brundiers K., Barth M., Cebrian G., Cohen M., Diaz L., Doucette-Remington S., Dripps W., Habron G., Harre N., Jarchow M., Losch K., Michel J., Mochizuki Y., Rieckmann M., Parnell R., Walker P., Zint M., Key competencies in sustainability in higher education—toward an agreed-upon reference framework, Sustainability Science, 16, 1, pp. 13-29, (2021); Systems Thinking Rubric Grades K-2, (2018); Chomsky N., Pollin R., Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal: The Political Economy of Saving the Planet, (2020); Cicchetti D.V., Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology, Psychological Assessment, 6, 4, pp. 284-290, (1994); Crofton F., Educating for sustainability: opportunities in undergraduate engineering, Journal of Cleaner Production, 8, 5, pp. 397-405, (2000); Daniels H., Edwards Y.E., Gallagher T., Ludvigsen S.R., Activity Theory in Practice. Promoting Learning across Boundaries and Agencies, (2009); de Raadt A., Warrens M.J., Bosker R.J., Kiers H.A.L., A comparison of reliability coefficients for ordinal rating scales, Journal of Classification, 38, 3, pp. 519-543, (2021); Demssie Y.N., Wesselink R., Biemans H.J.A., Mulder M., Think outside the European box: identifying sustainability competencies for a base of the pyramid context, Journal of Cleaner Production, 221, pp. 828-838, (2019); Dyehouse M., Bennett D., Harbor J., Childress A., Dark M., A comparison of linear and systems thinking approaches for program evaluation illustrated using the Indiana interdisciplinary GK-12, Evaluation and Program Planning, 32, 3, pp. 187-196, (2009); Feriver S., Olgan R., Teksoz G., Barth M., Systems thinking skills of preschool children in early childhood education contexts from Turkey and Germany, Sustainability, 11, 5, (2019); Hung W., Enhancing systems‐thinking skills with modelling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 6, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); Hyett N., Kenny A., Dickson-Swift V., Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports, International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 9, 1, (2014); Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, (2022); Jacobson M.J., Markauskaite L., Portolese A., Kapur M., Lai P.K., Roberts G., Designs for learning about climate change as a complex system, Learning and Instruction, 52, pp. 1-14, (2017); Kendall E., Oh S., Amsters D., Whitehead M., Hua J., Robinson P., Palipana D., HabITec: a sociotechnical space for promoting the application of technology to rehabilitation, Societies, 9, 4, (2019); Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Systems thinking of pre-and in-service science and engineering teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 2, pp. 248-279, (2019); Leal Filho W., Pace P., Teaching Education for Sustainable Development at University Level, (2016); Leal Filho W., Levesque V.R., Salvia A.L., University teaching staff and sustainable development: an assessment of competences, Sustainability Science, 16, 1, pp. 101-116, (2021); Lorenzo- Rial M.A., Varela Losada M., Perez-Rodriguez U., Vega Marcote P., Developing systems thinking to comprehensively address climate change and ocean acidification: an educational proposal for trainee teachers, (2023); Mambrey S., Schreiber N., Schmiemann P., Young students’ reasoning about ecosystems: the role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research in Science Education, 52, 1, pp. 79-98, (2020); McGraw K.O., Wong S.P., Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients, Psychological Methods, 1, 1, pp. 30-46, (1996); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Ulrich-Riedhammer E.M., System competence modelling: theoretical foundation and empirical validation of a model involving natural, social and human environment systems, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 5, pp. 685-711, (2018); Mikulcic H., Baleta J., Wang X., Duic N., Dewil R., Sustainable development in period of climate crisis, Journal of Environmental Management, 303, (2022); Monroe M.C., Plate R.R., Oxarart A., Bowers A., Chaves W.A., Identifying effective climate change education strategies: a systematic review of the research, Environmental Education Research, 25, 6, pp. 791-812, (2019); Montana-Hoyos C., Lemaitre F., Systems thinking, disciplinarity and critical thinking in relation to creativity within contemporary arts and design education studies in learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 8, 2, pp. 12-25, (2011); Morin E., Petit N., La Vía: Para El Futuro de La Humanidad, (2011); Oberauer K., Schickl M., Zint M., Liebhaber N., Deisenrieder V., Kubisch S., Parth S., Firck M., Stotter H., Keller L., The impact of teenagers' emotions on their complexity thinking competence related to climate change and its consequences on their future: looking at complex interconnections and implications in climate change education, Sustainability Science, 18, 2, pp. 1-25, (2022); Plano-Clark V.L.P., Ivankova N.V., Mixed Methods Research: A Guide to the Field, 3, (2015); Portney L.G., Watkins M.P., Foundations of Clinical Research: application to Practice, (2000); Rockstrom J., Gupta J., Qin D., Lade S.J., Abrams J.F., Andersen L.S., Zhang X., Safe and just earth system boundaries, Nature, 619, 7968, pp. 1-10, (2023); Rousell D., Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles A., A systematic review of climate change education: giving children and young people a ‘voice’ cand a ‘hand’ in redressing climate change, Children's Geographies, 18, 2, pp. 191-208, (2020); Rowley J., Using case studies in research, Management Research News, 25, 1, pp. 16-27, (2002); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A.S., System thinking and teaching in the context of climate system and climate change, Teaching and Learning about Climate Change, pp. 29-42, (2017); (2008); Steffen W., Broadgate W., Deutsch L., Gaffney O., Ludwig C., The trajectory of the Anthropocene: the great acceleration, The Anthropocene Review, 2, 1, pp. 81-98, (2015); Sterman J.D., Sweeney L.B., Understanding public complacency about climate change: adults’ mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter, Climatic Change, 80, 3, pp. 213-238, (2007); Talizina N., Psicología de la Enseñanza, (1988); Sustainable development agenda: 2030, (2015); Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives, (2017); Education for climate action, (2021); Vanbelle S., A new interpretation of the weighted kappa coefficients, Psychometrika, 81, 2, pp. 399-410, (2016); Varela-Losada M., Arias-Correa A., Perez-Rodriguez U., Vega-Marcote P., How can teachers be encouraged to commit to sustainability? Evaluation of a teacher-training experience in Spain, Sustainability, 11, 16, (2019); Voulvoulis N., Giakoumis T., Hunt C., Kioupi V., Petrou N., Souliotis I., Vaghela C., Systems thinking as a paradigm shift for sustainability transformation, Global Environmental Change, 75, (2022); Weber E.U., What shapes perceptions of climate change?, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 3, pp. 332-342, (2010); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C.L., Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, 2, pp. 203-218, (2011); Yoon S.A., Goh S.E., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K–12 science education: a review of empirical studies 1995–2015, Review of Educational Research, 88, 2, pp. 285-325, (2017); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of systems thinking in STEM education, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019); Barth M., Godemann J., Rieckmann M., Stoltenberg U., Developing key competencies for sustainable development in higher education, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8, 4, pp. 416-430, (2007); Klein N., This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate, (2015); Soeken K.L., Prescott P.A., Issues in the use of kappa to estimate reliability, Medical Care, 24, 8, pp. 733-741, (1986)","M. Varela-Losada; Education Sciences and Sports Faculty, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; email: mercedesvarela@uvigo.es","","Emerald Publishing","","","","","","14676370","","","","English","Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.","Article","Article in press","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85196613914"
"Hokayem H.; Ma J.; Jin H.","Hokayem, Hayat (24080372200); Ma, Jingjing (57221188425); Jin, Hui (55375875900)","24080372200; 57221188425; 55375875900","A Learning Progression for Feedback Loop Reasoning at Lower Elementary Level","2015","Journal of Biological Education","49","3","","246","260","14","33","10.1080/00219266.2014.943789","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85027923400&doi=10.1080%2f00219266.2014.943789&partnerID=40&md5=393ee976b2568063bd85714c85448c42","Texas Christian University, 3000 Bellaire Dr. North, Fort Worth, 76129, TX, United States; Ohio State University, School of Teaching and Learning, Colombus, United States","Hokayem H., Texas Christian University, 3000 Bellaire Dr. North, Fort Worth, 76129, TX, United States; Ma J., Texas Christian University, 3000 Bellaire Dr. North, Fort Worth, 76129, TX, United States; Jin H., Ohio State University, School of Teaching and Learning, Colombus, United States","This study examines to what extent elementary students use feedback loop reasoning, a key component of systems thinking, to reason about interactions among organisms in ecosystems. We conducted clinical interviews with 44 elementary students (1st through 4th grades). We asked students to explain how populations change in two contexts: a sustainable ecosystem and an ecosystem that is missing predators. We used an iterative process to develop a learning progression for feedback loop reasoning, and used the learning progression to code interview episodes. The study produces three findings. First, very few students recognised the cyclical relationships among populations in a sustainable ecosystem (Level 7). Second, very few students identified both reproduction and food as the factors affecting population in a context missing predators (Level 4). Finally, students reasoning was inconsistent across the two contexts. We also discuss the implication of these findings for teaching and learning of food webs at elementary school. © 2014 Society of Biology.","Ecosystem; Elementary education; Feedback loop reasoning; Learning progression","","","","","","","","Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy, (1993); Alonzo A., Eliciting students responses relative to a learning progression, Learning Progressions in Science, pp. 241-254, (2012); Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Capra F., The Web of Life, (1997); Duncan R.G., Hmelo-Silver C., Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 606-609, (2009); Eilam B., System thinking and feeding relations: Learning with a live ecosystem model, Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 40, 2, pp. 213-239, (2012); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicoloaue C., An investigation of the potential 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, pp. 665-674, (2009); Gotwals A., Alonzo A., Leaping into learning progression in science, Learning Progressions in Science, pp. 3-12, (2012); Gotwals A., Songer N., Reasoning up and down a food chain: Using and assessment framework to investigate students middle knowledge, Science Education, 94, pp. 259-281, (2010); Green D.W., Explaining and envisaging an ecological phenomenon, British Journal of Psychology, 88, 2, pp. 199-217, (1997); Griffiths A., Grant B., High school students understanding of food webs: Identification of a learning hierarchy and related misconceptions, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, pp. 421-436, (1985); Grotzer T.A., Basca-Bell B.B., How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students understanding, Journal of Biological Education, 38, 1, pp. 16-29, (2003); Hogan K., Assessing students systems reasoning in ecology, Journal of Biological Education, 35, 1, pp. 22-28, (2000); Hokayem H., Learning Progression of Ecological Reasoning for Lower Elementary Students, (2012); Jin H., Anderson C., Developing assessments for a learning progression on carbon transforming processes in socio-ecological systems, Learning Progressions in Science, pp. 151-181, (2012); Leach J., Driver R., Scott P., Wood-Robinson C., Childrens ideas about ecology 2: Ideas found in children aged 5-16 about interdependency of organisms, International Journal of Science Education, 18, pp. 129-141, (1996); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Seeding evolutionary thinking by engaging children in modeling its foundations, Science Education, 96, pp. 701-724, (2012); Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades k-8, (2007); A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, (2012); Odum E., The emergence of ecology as a new integrative discipline, Science, 195, 4284, pp. 1289-1293, (1977); Odum E., Great ideas in ecology for the 1990s, Bio Science, 42, 7, pp. 542-545, (1992); What do just plain folk know about physics, The Handbook of Education and Human Development, pp. 709-730, (1996); Songer N., Kelcey B., Gotwals A., How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progressing focused on complex reasoning and biodiversity, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, pp. 610-631, (2009); Southerland S., Smith M., Cummins C., What do you mean by that? Using structured interviews to assess science understanding, Assessing Science Understanding, pp. 72-92, (2000); Sweeny L., Sterman J., Thinking about systems: Students and teachers conceptions of natural and social systems, System Dynamics Review, 23, pp. 285-311, (2007); White P.A., Naïve ecology: Causal judgment about a simple ecosystem, Journal of Psychology, 88, 2, pp. 219-233, (1997)","H. Hokayem; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 3000 Bellaire Dr. North, 76129, United States; email: h.hokayem@tcu.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","00219266","","","","English","J. Biol. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85027923400"
"Karaarslan Semiz G.; Teksöz G.","Karaarslan Semiz, Güliz (57204421094); Teksöz, Gaye (55292990600)","57204421094; 55292990600","Tracing System Thinking Skills in Science Curricula: A Case Study from Turkey","2024","International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education","22","3","","515","536","21","3","10.1007/s10763-023-10383-w","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85161213486&doi=10.1007%2fs10763-023-10383-w&partnerID=40&md5=b34e7b79a09b9a4c599b2364291b461e","Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University, Erzurum Yolu, Ağrı, 04100, Turkey; Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey","Karaarslan Semiz G., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University, Erzurum Yolu, Ağrı, 04100, Turkey; Teksöz G., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey","Including systems thinking in science education helps students understand the complex global problems of the present era. The study aimed to trace and evaluate the system thinking (ST) skills in K-8 science curricula, with a focus on sustainability-related subjects and units. Firstly, the authors reviewed the related literature on the systems thinking models and identified the components of systems thinking skills needed to evaluate the science curricula. Secondly, they developed a systems thinking rubric with two parts. The first part included eleven systems thinking components, definitions, key concepts, and sample learning objectives. The second part contained four assessment criteria to evaluate the ST levels (novice, beginning, intermediate and advanced) in the science curricula and science textbooks. Finally, the authors pilot-tested the rubrics to analyze the Turkish K-8 science curricula and textbooks in terms of ST skills. The results revealed that science curricula and textbooks included nine out of eleven systems thinking components; however, they were mostly at the beginning level. This study suggests that the integrated rubric is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the systems thinking components, and science educators can use it to decide how to integrate ST skills into science curricula. © National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.","Assesment; Rubric; Science curricula; Sustainability subjects; Systems thinking","","","","","","","","Akter S., Arslan H.B., Simsek M., Ortaokul ve imam hatip ortaokulu fen bilimleriders kitabı-5 [Middle school science course textbook-5], MEB, (2019); Assaraf B.Z.O., Orion N., The development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, pp. 1-43, (2005); Assaraf B.Z.O., Orion N., Four case studies six years later: Developing systems thinking skills in junior high schooland sustaining them over time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 10, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Ateskan A., Lane F.J., Assessing teachers’ systems thinking skills during a professional development program, Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, pp. 4338-4356, (2018); The Australian Curriculum Science., (2017); Batzri O., Assaraf O., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cycling thinking among university students, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 6, pp. 761-775, (2015); All systems go. Developing a generation of systems smart kind, Rethinking Education on a Changing Planet, pp. 141-331, (2017); Brookhart S.M., How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading, (2013); Candas B., Calik M., The effect of CKCM oriented instruction on grade 8 students’ conceptuals understanding of sustainable development, Journal of Biological Education, (2022); Capra F., Luisi P.L., The systems view of life: A unifying vision, (2014); Cavana R.Y., Forgie V.E., Overview and insights from ‘systems education for a sustainable planet’, Systems, 6, (2018); Chiappetta E.L., Sethna G.H., Fillman D.A., Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes?, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, pp. 787-797, (1993); Demirci S., Exploring Middle School students’ Systems Literacy within the Context of Water System, (2021); Engstrom S., Norstrom P., Soderberg H., A tool for analysing technology teachers’ conceptualising systems thinking and how it is described in technology textbooks for compulsory school, Techne Series, 28, 2, pp. 241-251, (2021); Feldman A., Nation M., Theorizing sustainability: An introduction to science teacher education for sustainability, Educating science teachers for sustainability, pp. 3-13, (2015); Forrester J.W., Road map 1: System dynamics and learner-centered-learning in kindergarten through 12th grade education (MIT system dynamics in education project)., (1992); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Surabhi M., Lei L., Fish swim, rocks Sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hofman-Bergholm M., Could education for sustainable development benefit from a systems thinking approach, Systems, 6, 4, (2018); Hsieh H.F., Shannon S.E., Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qualitative Health Research, 15, 9, pp. 1277-1288, (2005); Huck S.W., Reading Statistics and Research, (2008); Huerta R.L.A., Tong F., Beverly J.I., Developing and validating a science notebook rubric for fifth-grade non-mainstream students, International Journal of Science Education, 36, 11, pp. 1849-1870, (2014); Hung W., Enhancing systems thinking skills with modelling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 6, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); Inaltekin T., Goksu V., A research on visual learning representations of primary and secondary science textbooks in Turkey, International Journal of ProgressiveEducation, 15, 6, pp. 51-65, (2019); Jin H., Shin H.J., Hokayem H., Qureshi F., Jenkins T., Secondary students’ understanding of ecosystems: A learning progression approach, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, pp. 217-235, (2019); Kali Y., Orion N., Eylon B.S., Effect of knowledge integration activities on students' perception of the Earth's crust as a cyclic system, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 6, pp. 545-565, (2003); Karaarslan G., Teksoz G., Developing the systems thinking skills of pre-service science teachers through an outdoor ESD course, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 20, 4, pp. 337-356, (2020); Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Systems thinking of pre- and in-service science and engineering teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 2, pp. 248-279, (2019); Lee O., Eichinger D., Anderson C.W., Berkheimer G.D., Blakeslee T.D., Changing middle school students’ conceptions of matter and molecules, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, pp. 249-270, (1993); Lee T.D., Jones M.G., Chesnut K., Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle, Research in Science Education, 49, pp. 137-173, (2019); Perspectives on ESD from a European member of UNESCO’s high-level panel, with particular reference to Sweden, Schooling for Sustainable Development in Europe, pp. 71-86, (2015); Liu L., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Promoting complex systems learning through the use of conceptual representations in hypermedia, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, pp. 1023-1040, (2009); Logan M., Challenging the anthropocentric approach of science curricula: Ecological systems approaches to enabling the convergence of sustainability, science, and STEM education, Research handbook of childhood nature, pp. 1-28, (2018); Mambrey S., Timm J., Landskron J.J., Schmiemann P., The impact of system specifics on systems thinking, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 10, pp. 1632-1651, (2020); Mambrey S., Schreiber N., Schmiemann P., Young students’ reasoning about ecosystems: The role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research in Science Education, pp. 1-20, (2022); McDonald C.V., Evaluating junior secondary science textbook usage in Australian schools, Research in Science Education, 46, 4, pp. 481-509, (2016); Meadows D., Thinking in systems: A primer, Earth Scan, (2008); Merriam S.B., Qualitative research and case study applications in education, (1998); Turkish science curriculum (Grades 3–8), Ministry of National Education (Mone) (2018), (2018); National ministry of education textbooks and educational materials regulations, (2021); İklim değişikliği Eylem planı [Climate Action Plan], (2022); Munkebye E., Scheie E., Gabrielsen A., Jordet A., Misund S., Nergard T., Bergljot Oyehaug A., Interdisciplinary primary school curriculum units for sustainable development, Environmental Education Research, 26, 6, pp. 795-811, (2020); Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and 21St Century Skills. a Workshop Summary, (2012); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Nuhoglu H., Güncel sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik sistem dinamiği temelli kurulan öğrenci modellerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of student models of current socio-scientific topics based on systems dynamics, Educational Sciences Theory Practice, 14, pp. 1957-1975, (2014); Ogan-Bekiroglu F., To what degree do the currently used physics textbooks meet the expectations?, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, pp. 599-628, (2007); Ohman J., Ostman L., Different teaching traditions in environmental and sustainability education, Sustainable development teaching, pp. 70-82, (2019); Okan B., Kaya E., Exploring the inclusion of nature of science in Turkish Middle school science extbooks, Science & Education, (2022); Ormanci U., Cepni S., Balim A.G., Ortaokul 6. Sınıf öğrencilerinin sistem düşünme becerilerine ilişkin durumlarının belirlenmesi [The determination of secondary school 6th grade students' status regarding system thinking skills], Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [PAU Journal of Education], 44, 44, pp. 15-27, (2018); Ormond C., McClaren M., Zandvliet D., Robertson P., Leddy S., Mayer C., Metcalfe S., Pre-service teacher experiences in a teacher education program reoriented to address sustainability, Educating science teachers for sustainability, pp. 31-48, (2015); Penney K., Norris S.P., Phillips L.M., Clark G., The anatomy of high school science textbooks, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 3, 4, pp. 415-436, (2003); Potter W.J., Levine-Donnerstein D., Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27, pp. 258-284, (1999); Ribeiro T., Orion N., Educating for a holistic view of the Earth system: A review, Geosciencesi, 11, 12, (2021); Richmond B., Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, Systems Dynamics Review, 9, pp. 113-133, (1993); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A.S., Systems thinking and teaching in the context of climate system and climate change, Teaching and learning about climate change: A framework for educators, pp. 29-42, (2017); Senge P.M., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization, (1990); Seyrek A., Turker S., Bozkaya T., Ucuncu Z., Ortaokul ve imam hatip ortaokulu fen bilimleri ders kitabı-7 [Middle school science course textbook-7], MEB, (2019); Shepardson D.P., Roychoudhury A., Hirsch A.S., Top S.M., Students’ conception of a climate system. Implications for teaching and learning, Teaching and Learning about Climate Change: A Framework for Educators, pp. 70-84, (2017); Stave K., Hopper M., What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy, In Proceedings of the 25Th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society., (2007); Sterling S., Maiteny P., Irving D., Salter J., Linking thinking: New perspectives on thinking and learning for sustainability, WWF, (2005); Sterling S., Whole Systems Thinking as a Basis for Paradigm Change in Education: Explorations in the Context for Sustainability, (2003); Stern L., Roseman J., Can middle school science textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from Project 2061’curriculum evaluation study: Life science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 6, pp. 538-568, (2004); Summers M., Childs A., Corney G., Education for sustainable development in initial teacher training: Issues for interdisciplinary collaboration, Environmental Education Research, 11, 5, pp. 623-647, (2005); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Competences in education for sustainable development, Learning for the Future, (2011); Road map implementing global action program on education for sustainable development, (2014); UN decade education for sustainable development (2005–2014b) Final Report, Shaping the Future We Want., (2014); Education for Sustainable Development, (2020); Vasconcelos C., Orion N., Earth science education as a key component of education for sustainability, Sustainability, 13, (2021); Vojir K., Rusek M., Science education textbook research trends: A systematic literature review, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 11, pp. 1496-1516, (2019); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C.L., Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, 2, pp. 203-218, (2011); Yaman E., Akan R., Dogan M., Sari O., İlkokul fen bilimleri ders kitabı-4 [Primary school science course textbook-4, MEB., (2019); Yanci M.V., Ortaokul ve imam hatip ortaokulu fen bilimler ders kitabı-8, (2019); Systems thinking—Ludwig Von Bertalanffy, Peter Senge, and Donella Meadows, Science Education in Theory and Practice, pp. 419-436, (2020)","G. Karaarslan Semiz; Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University, Ağrı, Erzurum Yolu, 04100, Turkey; email: gkaraarslan@agri.edu.tr","","Springer Science and Business Media B.V.","","","","","","15710068","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85161213486"
"DeMatthews D.","DeMatthews, David (55805173500)","55805173500","Undoing systems of exclusion: exploring inclusive leadership and systems thinking in two inclusive elementary schools","2021","Journal of Educational Administration","59","1","","5","21","16","13","10.1108/JEA-02-2020-0044","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85094980380&doi=10.1108%2fJEA-02-2020-0044&partnerID=40&md5=894e05e2b131b2f628dfa80b60570dd0","University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States","DeMatthews D., University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States","Purpose: Most education systems were not initially designed to include students with disabilities. However, over the past 25 years, great strives have been taken to ensure students with disabilities have access to the general education classroom and to important social, emotional and academic opportunities. Within the USA, researchers have begun to focus on the principal's role in creating and sustaining effective inclusive schools. The purpose of this article is to examine the leadership practices and perceptions associated with creating effective inclusive schools for students with disabilities. Design/methodology/approach: This qualitative study examined how two elementary school principals created an effective inclusive school and how they understood the challenges and change processes associated with inclusion. Each principal was interviewed and observed four times over one school year. Teachers and district administrators were also interviewed to gain insights into the school's progress with inclusion and to verify principals’ interview data. Findings: This study added to existing research by identifying the following leadership practices critical to creating effective inclusive schools: (1) creating a culture of change-oriented collaboration, (2) planning and evaluating, (3) building capacity and (4) developing/revising plans. The principals felt that these practices enabled inclusion to take root, despite challenges and the chaotic nature of life in schools. A total of three additional themes emerged related to how principals understood change processes and challenges associated with inclusion: collaborative inquiry, information flow and crises/distractions/fatigue. Practical implications: Several key leadership practices were identified in this study, including practices associated to systems thinking (ST). These practices hold promise and might be applied to thoughtfully design inclusive reforms. Faculty in principal preparation programs might also consider exposing aspiring leaders to the literature on leadership for effective inclusive schools as well as systems thinking. Originality/value: The paper identifies the leadership practices of two principals who created effective inclusive schools. The paper is unique as it applies a ST lens to the investigation of leadership for inclusion. © 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited.","Inclusion; Leadership; Special education; Systems thinking","","","","","","","","Ainscow M., Sandill A., Developing inclusive education systems: the role of organisational cultures and leadership, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14, 4, pp. 401-416, (2010); Angelle P., Bilton L.M., Confronting the unknown: principal preparation training in issues related to special education, AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 4, 4, pp. 5-9, (2009); Billingsley B., DeMatthews D., Connally K., McLeskey J., Leadership for effective inclusive schools: considerations for preparation and reform, Australasian Journal of Special and Inclusive Education, 42, 1, pp. 65-81, (2018); Blanchett W.J., Disproportionate representation of African American students in special education: acknowledging the role of white privilege and racism, Educational Researcher, 35, 6, pp. 24-28, (2006); Bogdan R.C., Biklen S.K., Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods, (2007); Bray L.E., Russell J.L., Going off script: structure and agency in individualized education program meetings, American Journal of Education, 122, 3, pp. 367-398, (2016); Cabrera D.A., Boundary critique: a minimal concept theory of systems thinking, Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the ISSS-2006, (2006); Carter S., Abawi L.A., Leadership, inclusion, and quality education for all, Australasian Journal of Special and Inclusive Education, 42, 1, pp. 49-64, (2018); Conley S., You S., Key influences on special education teachers' intentions to leave: the effects of administrative support and teacher team efficacy in a mediational model, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 45, 3, pp. 521-540, (2017); DeMatthews D.E., Making sense of social justice leadership: a case study of a principal's experiences to create a more inclusive school, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 14, pp. 139-166, (2015); DeMatthews D.E., Mahinney H., Addressing the inclusion imperative: an urban school district's responses, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21, 61, (2013); DeMatthews D.E., Mawhinney H.B., Social justice leadership and inclusion: exploring challenges in an urban district struggling to address inequities, Educational Administration Quarterly, 50, 5, pp. 844-881, (2014); DeMatthews D.E., Kotok S., Serafini A., Leadership preparation for special education and inclusive schools: beliefs and recommendations from successful principals, Journal of Research on Leadership Education, (2019); DeMatthews D.E., Billingsley B., McLeskey J., Sharma U., Principal leadership for students with disabilities in effective inclusive schools, Journal of Educational Administration, (2020); DeMatthews D.E., Serafini A., Watson T., Leading inclusive schools: principal perceptions, practices, and challenges to meaningful change, Educational Administration Quarterly, (2020); Dunn L.M., Special education for the mildly retarded—is much of it justifiable?, Exceptional Children, 35, 1, pp. 5-22, (1968); 20 U.S.C. §1401 et seq; Francis G.L., Blue-Banning M., Turnbull A.P., Hill C., Haines S.J., Gross J.M., Culture in inclusive schools: parental perspectives on trusting family-professional partnerships, Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 51, 3, pp. 281-293, (2016); Gharajedaghi J., Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity: A Platform for Designing Business Architecture, (2011); Hoppey D., McLeskey J., A case study of principal leadership in an effective inclusive school, The Journal of Special Education, 46, 4, pp. 245-256, (2013); P.L. 108-446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq; Kensler L.A., Reames E., Murray J., Patrick L., Systems thinking tools for improving evidence-based practice: a cross-case analysis of two high school leadership teams, High School Journal, 95, 2, pp. 32-53, (2012); Kurth J.A., Love H., Pirtle J., Parent perspectives of their involvement in IEP development for children with autism, Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 35, 1, pp. 36-46, (2020); Leithwood K., Harris A., Hopkins D., Seven strong claims about successful school leadership, School Leadership and Management, 28, 1, pp. 27-42, (2008); Levin B.B., Schrum L., Using systems thinking to leverage technology for school improvement: lessons learned from award-winning secondary schools/districts, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46, 1, pp. 29-51, (2013); Lyons W.E., Thompson S.A., Timmons V., ‘We are inclusive. We are a team. Let's just do it’: commitment, collective efficacy, and agency in four inclusive schools, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20, 8, pp. 889-907, (2016); MacFarlane K., Woolfson L.M., Teacher attitudes and behavior toward the inclusion of children with social, emotional and behavioral difficulties in mainstream schools: an application of the theory of planned behavior, Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, pp. 46-52, (2013); Maxwell J.A., Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, (2012); Mayrowetz D., Weinstein C.S., Sources of leadership for inclusive education: creating schools for all children, Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 3, pp. 423-449, (1999); Minarik M.M., Thornton B., Perreault G., Systems thinking can improve teacher retention, The Clearing House, 76, 5, pp. 230-234, (2003); Osgood R.L., The History of Inclusion in United States, (2005); Patton M.Q., Qualitative Research and Evaluating Methods, (2015); Rallis S., Lawrence R., Systems thinking to drive school turnaround, Leading Holistically: How Schools, Districts, and States Improve Systemically, pp. 23-38, (2018); Richmond B., Systems thinking: critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, System Dynamics Review, 9, 2, pp. 113-133, (1993); Richmond B., The ‘Thinking’ in Systems Thinking: Seven Essential Skills, (2000); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, (2006); Shaked H., Schechter C., Seeing wholes: the concept of systems thinking and its implementation in school leadership, International Review of Education, 59, 6, pp. 771-791, (2013); Shaked H., Schechter C., Systems school leadership: exploring an emerging construct, Journal of Educational Administration, 52, 6, pp. 792-811, (2014); Shaked H., Schechter C., Sources of systems thinking in school leadership, Journal of School Leadership, 26, 3, pp. 468-494, (2016); Shaked H., Schechter C., Systems thinking among school middle leaders, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 45, 4, pp. 699-718, (2017); Shogren K.A., McCart A.B., Lyon K.J., Sailor W.S., All means all: building knowledge for inclusive schoolwide transformation, Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 4, 3, pp. 173-191, (2015); Sterman J.D., Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, (2000); Talbott E., Mayrowetz D., Maggin D.M., Tozer S.E., A distributed model of special education leadership for individualized education program teams, Journal of Special Education Leadership, 29, 1, pp. 1-10, (2016); Theoharis G., Social justice educational leaders and resistance: toward a theory of social justice leadership, Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 2, pp. 221-258, (2007); Trainor A.A., Diverse approaches to parent advocacy during special education home—school interactions: identification and use of cultural and social capital, Remedial and Special Education, 31, 1, pp. 34-47, (2010); Tsang K., Secondary pupils' perceptions and experiences towards studying in an inclusive classroom, International Journal of Whole Schooling, 9, 2, pp. 39-60, (2013); Tyack D.B., The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education, (1974); 40th annual report to congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act, 2018, (2018); Wakeman S.Y., Browder D.M., Flowers C., Ahlgrim-Delzell L., Principals' knowledge of fundamental and current issues in special education, NASSP Bulletin, 90, 2, pp. 153-174, (2006); Waldron N.L., McLeskey J., Redd L., Setting the direction: the role of the principal in developing an effective, inclusive school, Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24, 2, pp. 51-60, (2011); Wells C., Keane W.G., Building capacity for professional learning communities through a systems approach: a toolbox for superintendents, AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 4, 4, pp. 24-32, (2008); Williamson P., Hoppey D., McLeskey J., Bergmann E., Moore H., Trends in LRE placement rates over the past 25 years, Journal of Special Education, 53, 4, pp. 236-244, (2020); Billingsley B.S., McLeskey J., Crockett J.B., Principal leadership: moving towards inclusive and high-achieving schools for students with disabilities, CEEDAR Document, 101, pp. 1-67, (2014); Guzman N., Leadership for successful inclusive schools: a study of principal behaviours, Journal of Educational Administration, 35, 5, pp. 439-450, (1997); Pivik J., McComas J., Laflamme M., Barriers and facilitators to inclusive education, Exceptional Children, 69, 1, pp. 97-107, (2002)","D. DeMatthews; University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States; email: ddematthews@austin.utexas.edu","","Emerald Group Holdings Ltd.","","","","","","09578234","","","","English","J. Educ. Adm.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85094980380"
"Bozkurt E.","Bozkurt, Erkan (58987722900)","58987722900","A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking Research in Science Education 1991–2022","2023","Science Education International","34","3","","225","234","9","1","10.33828/sei.v34.i3.6","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85173482183&doi=10.33828%2fsei.v34.i3.6&partnerID=40&md5=6489f85110c14b065bbea1c9f10763d1","Department of Social Studies Education, Faculty of Education, Uşak University, Uşak, Turkey","Bozkurt E., Department of Social Studies Education, Faculty of Education, Uşak University, Uşak, Turkey","This study aimed to exhibit a bibliometric analysis of systems thinking (ST) research in the field of science education. A total of 340 articles from 201 sources indexed in the Web of Science database in the years 1991–2022 were used in the analysis. The analysis aimed to provide a review of systems thinking research in science education by identifying the dynamics of research by presenting the periodical process, current situation, and future directions. Research on systems thinking has been acknowledged to demonstrate a significant increase in recent years. Bibliometric data prove that systems thinking research concerning studies in science education exhibits a parallel increase too. This is mainly due to UNESCO’s (2015) declaration of The Education for 2030 Framework for Action. There systems thinking was defined as a key competency among eight competencies for education for sustainable development. Correspondingly, the analysis in this study suggests that systems thinking research in science education is a lively and developing subject in the past decade. © 2023 The Author(s).","Bibliometric analysis; chemistry education; education for sustainable development; philosophy of education; science education; systems thinking","","","","","","","","Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A Definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Beaver D., Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future, Scientometrics, 52, 3, pp. 365-377, (2001); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Four case studies, six years later: Developing system thinking skills in junior high school and sustaining them over time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 10, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Blatti J.L., Garcia J., Cave D., Monge F., Cuccinello A., Portillo J., Juarez B., Chan E., Schwebel F., Systems thinking in science education and outreach toward a sustainable future, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2852-2862, (2019); Boersma K., Waarlo A.J., Klaassen K., The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education, Journal of Biological Education, 45, 4, pp. 190-197, (2011); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Grosssched J., Assessing system thinking through different concept-mapping practices, International Journal of Science Education, 34, 14, pp. 2147-2170, (2012); Checkland P., Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, (1981); Donthu N., Kumar S., Mukherjee D., Pandey N., Lim W.M., How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines, Journal of Business Research, 133, pp. 285-296, (2021); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Ferreira C., Robertson J., Examining the boundaries of entrepreneurial marketing: A bibliographic analysis, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 22, 2, pp. 161-180, (2020); Garfield E., Bradford’s law and related statistical patterns, Essays of an Information Scientist, 4, 19, pp. 476-483, (1980); Grohs J.R., Kirk G.R., Soledad M.M., Knight D.B., Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, pp. 110-130, (2018); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, pp. 53-72, (2017); Holme T.A., Hutchison J.E., A central learning outcome for the central science, Journal of Chemical Education, 95, pp. 499-501, (2018); Hossain N.U.I., Dayarathna V.L., Nagahi M., Jaradat R., Systems thinking: A review and bibliometric analysis, Systems, 8, 3, (2020); Hung W., Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling, British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, pp. 1099-1120, (2008); Jacobson M.J., Problem-solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices, Complexity, 6, 3, pp. 41-49, (2001); Katz J.S., Martin B.R., What is research collaboration?, Research Policy, 26, 1, pp. 1-18, (1997); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Holme T.A., Mackellar J., Systems thinking for education about the molecular basis of sustainability, Nature Sustainability, 2, pp. 362-370, (2019); Mahaffy P.G., Matlin S.A., Whalen J.M., Holme T.A., Integrating the molecular basis of sustainability into general chemistry through systems thinking, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2730-2741, (2019); Mao X., Guo L., Fu P., Xiang C., The status and trends of coronavirus research: A global bibliometric and visualized analysis, Medicine, 99, 22, (2020); Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Hopf H., Krief A., The role of chemistry in inventing a sustainable future, Nature Chemistry, 7, 12, pp. 941-943, (2015); Meadows D.H., Thinking in Systems: A Primer, (2009); Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J., Introduction to systems thinking for the chemistry education community, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2720-2729, (2019); Pinto M., Fernandez-Pascual R., Caballero-Mariscal D., Sales D., Guerrero D., Uribe A., Scientific production on mobile information literacy in higher education: A bibliometric analysis (2006-2017), Scientometrics, 120, 1, pp. 57-85, (2019); Radhakrishnan S., Erbis S., Isaacs J.A., Kamarthi S., Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature, PLoS One, 12, 3, (2017); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 6, pp. 705-725, (2010); Sabelli N.H., Complexity, technology, science, and education, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 1, pp. 5-9, (2006); Senge P., The Fifth Discipline: The art and Practice of the Learning Organization, (1994); Sommer C., Lucken M., System competence-are elementary students able to deal with a biological system?, Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, 2, pp. 125-143, (2010); Sonnenwald D., Scientific collaboration, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, pp. 643-681, (2007); Steffen W., Richardson K., Rockstrom J., Cornell S.E., Fetzer I., Bennett E.M, Biggs R., Carpenter S.R., de Vries W., De Wit C.A., Folke C., Gerten D., Heinke J., Mace G.M., Persson L.M., Ramanathan V., Reyers B., Sorlin S., Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet, Science, 347, (2015); Sterman J.D., Does formal system dynamics training improve people’s understanding of accumulation?, System Dynamics Review, 26, 4, pp. 316-334, (2010); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: Student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, System Dynamics Review, 23, 2-3, pp. 285-312, (2007); United Nations Millennium Development Goals, (2000); Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, (2015); United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014): International Implementation Scheme, (2005); Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4: Ensure Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education and Promote Lifelong Learning Opportunities for All, (2016); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C.L., Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, pp. 203-218, (2011); Wilensky U., Reisman K., 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, pp. 171-209, (2006); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y.J., Orgill M., Applications of systems thinking in STEM education, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019); Zupic I., Cater T., Bibliometric methods in management and organization, Organizational Research Methods, 18, 3, pp. 429-472, (2015)","E. Bozkurt; Department of Social Studies Education, Faculty of Education, Uşak University, Uşak, Turkey; email: erkan.bozkurt@usak.edu.tr","","International Council of Associations for Science Education (ICASE)","","","","","","20772327","","","","English","Sci. Educ. Int.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85173482183"
"Seijas N.; Uskola A.","Seijas, Nahia (57355645700); Uskola, Araitz (6508016235)","57355645700; 6508016235","Revision and manipulation of physical models as tools for developing the aquifer model by Preservice Elementary Teachers","2022","International Journal of Science Education","44","11","","1715","1737","22","3","10.1080/09500693.2022.2095453","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85133438266&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2022.2095453&partnerID=40&md5=527e40e6f667e8126ed7298f4680f55f","Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain","Seijas N., Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain; Uskola A., Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain","Citizens show misunderstandigs about groundwater that hinder making informed decisions about problems like the deterioration of aquifers. Science education should address this, including modelling practices about the aquifer model. Physical models (PM) have been extensively used in geology teaching, but students rarely construct, evaluate or manipulate them. This study addressed how the revision and manipulation of PMs contributed to the construction of a complete aquifer model by 80 Preservice Elementary Teachers (PETs) of two cohorts (subsequent years) that participated in a modelling teaching sequence that included fieldwork and the construction of a PM The model representations (drawings, writings, oral expressions, PMs) were analysed, based on systems thinking framework, through a constant comparison method. In Year 2 PETs that constructed a complete model tripled those of Year 1. The conversations in groups and the model representations throughout the sequence show that the evaluation of the PM when comparing it with reality during the field trip, and their manipulation guided by teacherś scaffoldings to encourage PETs to make representations and predictions, led them to revise their models in Year 2. Therefore, we conclude that it is the manipulation and revision of PMs that facilitates the revision and improvement of the aquifer model. © 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","Earth science education; models & modelling; multiple representations","","","","","","Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, EHU, (GIU19/008)","This work was supported by the Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea [grant number GIU19/008].","Arthurs L.A., Elwonger J.M., Mental models of groundwater residence: A deeper understanding of students’ preconceptions as a resource for teaching and learning about groundwater and aquifers, Journal of Astronomy & Earth Sciences Education, 5, 1, pp. 53-66, (2018); Bach J., Marquez C., El estudio de los fenómenos geológicos desde una perspectiva sistémica, Enseñanza de las Ciencias de la Tierra, 25, 3, pp. 302-309, (2017); Bahamonde N., Gomez Galindo A.A., Caracterización de modelos de digestión humana a partir de sus representaciones y análisis de su evolución en un grupo de docentes y auxiliares académicos, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 34, 1, pp. 129-147, (2016); Batzri O., Ben Zvi Assaraf O., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the Earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cyclic thinking among university students, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 6, pp. 761-775, (2015); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., A study of junior high students’ perceptions of the water cycle, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 4, pp. 366-373, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of Earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Brown J.S., Collins A., Duguid P., Situated cognition and the culture of learning, Educational Researcher, 18, 1, pp. 32-42, (1989); Bulterman-Bos J., Will a clinical approach make education research more relevant for practice?, Educational Researcher, 37, 7, pp. 412-420, (2008); Bybee R.W., NGSS and the next generation of science teachers, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 211-221, (2014); Chi M.T.H., Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 3, pp. 271-315, (1997); Dickerson D.L., Dawkins K., Eighth grade students’ understandings of groundwater, Journal of Geoscience Education, 52, 2, pp. 178-181, (2004); Dickerson D.L., Penick J.E., Dawkins K.R., Van Sickle M., Groundwater in science education, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 1, pp. 45-61, (2007); Donaldson T., Fore G.A., Filippelli G.M., Hess J.L., A systematic review of the literature on situated learning in the geosciences: Beyond the classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 42, 5, pp. 722-743, (2020); Erickson F., Qualitative methods in research on teaching, Handbook of research on teaching, pp. 119-161, (1986); Fedesco H., Cavin D., Henares R., Field-based learning in higher education, Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 20, 1, pp. 65-84, (2020); Forbes C.T., Zangori L., Schwarz C.V., Empirical validation of integrated learning performances for hydrologic phenomena: 3rd-grade students’ model-driven explanation-construction, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 7, pp. 895-921, (2015); Garcia B., Mateos A., Comparación entre la realización de maquetas y la visualización para mejorar la alfabetización visual en anatomía humana en futuros docentes, Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 15, 3, (2018); Gilbert J.K., Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education, Visualization in science education. Models and modeling in science education, pp. 9-27, (2005); Gilbert J.K., Boulter C.J., Elmer R., Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education, Developing models in science education, pp. 3-17, (2000); Gilbert J.K., Justi R., Modelling-based teaching in science education, (2016); Gomez A.A., Sanmarti N., Pujol R.M., Fundamentación teórica y diseño de una unidad didáctica para la enseñanza del modelo ser vivo en la escuela primaria, Enseñanza de las Ciencias. Revista de Investigación y Experiencias Didácticas, 25, 3, pp. 325-340, (2007); Gray K.R., Owens K.D., Steer D.N., McConnell D.A., Knight C.C., An exploratory study using hands-on physical models in a large introductory Earth science classroom: Student attitudes and lessons learned, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 12, 2, pp. 1-23, (2011); Hardy I., Jonen A., Moller K., Stern E., Effects of instructional support within constructivist learning environments for elementary school students’ understanding of “floating and sinking”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 2, pp. 307-326, (2006); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, 1, pp. 127-138, (2004); (2021); Izquierdo-Aymerich M., Aduriz-Bravo A., Epistemological foundations of school science, Science and Education, 12, 1, pp. 27-43, (2003); Jimenez-Aleixandre M.P., Crujeiras B., Epistemic practices and scientific practices in science education, Science education, pp. 69-80, (2017); Kastens K.A., Rivet A., Using analogical mapping to assess the affordances of scale models used in Earth and environmental science education, Spatial Cognition VII, NNAI 6222, pp. 112-124, (2010); King C., Fostering deep understanding through the use of geoscience investigations, models and thought experiments: The earth science education unit and earth learning idea experiences, Geoscience education, pp. 3-24, (2016); Kirschner P.A., Sweller J., Clark R.E., Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching, Educational Psychologist, 41, 2, pp. 75-86, (2006); Lincoln Y.S., Guba E.G., Naturalistic inquiry, (1985); Mekonnen M.M., Hoekstra A.Y., Four billion people facing severe water scarcity, Science Advances, 2, 2, pp. 1-6, (2016); Miller A.R., Kastens K.A., Investigating the impacts of targeted professional development around models and modeling on teachers’ instructional practice and student learning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 5, pp. 641-663, (2018); Mogk D.W., Goodwin C., Learning in the field: Synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences, Earth and Mind II: A Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences, pp. 131-163, (2012); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Oh P.S., Features of modeling-based abductive reasoning as a disciplinary practice of inquiry in Earth Science, Science and Education, 28, pp. 731-757, (2019); PISA 2024 strategic vision and direction for science, (2020); Osborne J., Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 2, pp. 177-196, (2014); Pan Y.-T., Liu S.-C., Students’ understanding of a groundwater system and attitudes towards groundwater use and conservation, International Journal of Science Education, 40, 5, pp. 564-578, (2018); Petcovic H., Stokes A., Geoscientists’ perceptions of the value of undergraduate field education, GSA Today, 24, 7, pp. 4-10, (2014); Sadler T.D., Nguyen H., Lankford D., Water systems understandings: A framework for designing instruction and considering what learners know about water, WIRES Water, 5, 1, (2016); Santini J., Bloor T., Sensevy G., Modeling conceptualization and investigating teaching effectiveness : A comparative case study of earthquakes studied in classroom practice and in science, Science & Education, 27, 9-10, pp. 921-961, (2018); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Sensevy G., Tiberghien A., Santini J., Laube S., Griggs P., An epistemological approach to modeling: Cases studies and implications for science teaching, Science Education, 92, 3, pp. 424-446, (2008); Snapir Z., Eberbach C., Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Hmelo-Silver C., Tripto J., Characterising the development of the understanding of human body systems in high-school biology students–a longitudinal study, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 15, pp. 2092-2127, (2017); Tiberghien A., Sensevy G., Transposition didactique, Encyclopedia of science education, pp. 1082-1085, (2015); Torres J., Vasconcelos C., Models in geoscience classes: How can teachers use them?, Geoscience education, pp. 25-41, (2016); Unterbruner U., Hilberg S., Schiffl I., Understanding groundwater-students’ pre-conceptions and conceptual change by means of a theory-guided multimedia learning program, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 20, 6, pp. 2251-2266, (2016); Uskola A., Seijas N., Use of data obtained in the field and its contribution to the process of construction of the geological change model by Preservice Elementary teachers, Research in Science and Techonology Education, (2021); Van de Pol J., Volman M., Beishuizen J., Scaffolding in teacher student interaction: A decade of research, Educational Psychology Review, 22, 3, pp. 271-296, (2010); Vo T., Forbes C., Zangori L., Schwarz C.V., Longitudinal investigation of primary inservice teachers’ modelling the hydrological phenomena, International Journal of Science Education, 41, 18, pp. 2788-2807, (2019); Vorosmary C.J., McIntyre P.B., Gessner O., Dudgeon D., Prusevich A., Green P., Glidden S., Bunn S.E., Sullivan C.A., Reidy Liermann C., Davies P.M., Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity, Nature, 467, 7315, pp. 555-561, (2010); Windschitl M., Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice?, Science Education, 87, 1, pp. 112-143, (2003); Zamorano P.O., del Pozo J.R., Tomas M.J.A., (1978); Zembal-Saul C., Learning to teach elementary school science as argument, Science Education, 93, 4, pp. 687-719, (2009)","A. Uskola; Faculty of Education of Bilbao, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, B. Sarriena s/n, 48940, Spain; email: araitz.uskola@ehu.eus","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85133438266"
"Parekh P.; Gee E.; Tran K.; Aguilera E.; Pérez Cortés L.E.; Kessner T.; Siyahhan S.","Parekh, Priyanka (57197764043); Gee, Elisabeth (7103269039); Tran, Kelly (57098758500); Aguilera, Earl (57209972740); Pérez Cortés, Luis E. (57209983409); Kessner, Taylor (57209979766); Siyahhan, Sinem (24345193200)","57197764043; 7103269039; 57098758500; 57209972740; 57209983409; 57209979766; 24345193200","Board game design: an educational tool for understanding environmental issues","2021","International Journal of Science Education","43","13","","2148","2168","20","4","10.1080/09500693.2021.1956701","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85113758647&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2021.1956701&partnerID=40&md5=574409e1e7da8bb037bb2df6a4206ac7","Transylvania University, Lexington, KY, United States; Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States; Applied Game Designer and Co-Founder, Evolved Play, Lake Havasu City, AZ, United States; California State University, Fresno, CA, United States; California State University, San Marcos, CA, United States; Post-Doctoral Associate, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Secondary Social Studies Education, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States","Parekh P., Transylvania University, Lexington, KY, United States; Gee E., Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States; Tran K., Applied Game Designer and Co-Founder, Evolved Play, Lake Havasu City, AZ, United States; Aguilera E., California State University, Fresno, CA, United States; Pérez Cortés L.E., Post-Doctoral Associate, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Kessner T., Secondary Social Studies Education, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States; Siyahhan S., California State University, San Marcos, CA, United States","Framing, implementing, and engaging youth in authentic scientific inquiry are highly valued in science education; however, we have very limited knowledge of the nature and use of tools that accomplish these. Therefore, we proposed that board game design is a meaningful tool for engaging youth in understanding environmental issues. We reported findings from an educational board game design workshop based on real world issues for teens aged 13–17 years conducted at a large public library Makerspace. Using qualitative methods, we analysed the teens’ process of making one such game, Pollutaplop, to understand its merits and argued that board game design nurtured the development of tools for inquiry. In response to the recent surge of interest in creating tools for learning about natural systems, we found that designing board games in authentic contexts engaged youth in building models as well as systems thinking. Intent gamers, including youth, might be well positioned to appreciate the complexities of both games and the contexts they are set in. © 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","Game design; learning tools; model building; systems thinking","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (1623558)","This work was supported by National Science Foundation [grant number: 1623558].","Akcaoglu M., Green L.S., Teaching systems thinking through game design, Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 1, pp. 1-19, (2019); Anderson C.W., Krajcik J., Duschl R., Gunckel K., Tsurusaki B., Draney K., (2008); Ardoin N.M., Bowers A.W., Roth N.W., Holthuis N., Environmental education and K-12 student outcomes: A review and analysis of research, The Journal of Environmental Education, 49, 1, pp. 1-17, (2018); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Bar-Yam Y., Dynamics of complex systems, 213, (1997); Bar-Yam Y., General features of complex systems, Encyclopedia of life support systems (EOLSS), (2002); Batzri O., Assaraf O.B.Z., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cyclic thinking among university students, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, 6, pp. 761-775, (2015); Berland L.K., Schwarz C.V., Krist C., Kenyon L., Lo A.S., Reiser B.J., Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 7, pp. 1082-1112, (2016); Buckley B.C., Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 9, pp. 895-935, (2000); Buckley W., Modern systems research for the behavioral scientist; a sourcebook, (1968); Chi M.T., Roscoe R.D., Slotta J.D., Roy M., Chase C.C., Misconceived causal explanations for emergent processes, Cognitive Science, 36, 1, pp. 1-61, (2012); Clark D., Nelson B., Sengupta P., D'Angelo C., (2009); Clement J., Model based learning as a key research area for science education, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 9, pp. 1041-1053, (2000); Clement J.J., Rea-Ramirez M.A., Model based learning and instruction in science, Model Based Learning and Instruction in Science, pp. 1-9, (2008); Covitt B.A., Gunckel K.L., Anderson C.W., Students’ developing understanding of water in environmental systems, The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, 3, pp. 37-51, (2009); Crawford B.A., Moving the essence of inquiry into the classroom: Engaging teachers and students in authentic science, Issues and challenges in science education research, pp. 25-42, (2012); Creswell J.W., Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, (2007); Darling-Hammond L., Flook L., Cook-Harvey C., Barron B., Osher D., Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development, Applied Developmental Science, 24, 2, pp. 97-140, (2020); De Castell S., Jenson J., OP-ED serious play, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 6, pp. 649-665, (2003); Duschl R., Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals, Review of Research in Education, 32, 1, pp. 268-291, (2008); Ford M.J., Forman E.A., Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts, Review of educational research, 30, (2006); Gardner G.T., Stern P.C., Environmental problems and human behavior, (2002); Giere R.N., How models are used to represent reality, Philosophy of Science, 71, 5, pp. 742-752, (2004); Glaser B., Strauss A., The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, (1967); Gravemeijer K., Cobb P., Bowers J., Whitenack J., Symbolizing, modeling, and instructional design, Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design, (2000); Grosslight L., Unger C., Jay E., Smith C., Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 9, pp. 799-822, (1991); Gunckel K.L., Mohan L., Covitt B.A., Anderson C.W., Addressing challenges in developing learning progressions for environmental science literacy, Learning progressions in science, pp. 37-75, (2012); Hall R., Greeno J.G., Conceptual learning, 21st century education: A reference handbook, 1, pp. 212-221, (2008); Halloun I.A., Mediated modeling in science education, Science & Education, 16, 7-8, pp. 653-697, (2007); Harrison A.G., Treagust D.F., A typology of school science models, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 9, pp. 1011-1026, (2000); Hesse M.B., Models and analogies in science, (1966); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 3, pp. 247-298, (2000); Jin H., Anderson C.W., A learning progression for energy in socio-ecological systems, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 9, pp. 1149-1180, (2012); Kelly G.J., Inquiry, activity, and epistemic practice, Teaching scientific inquiry, pp. 99-117, (2008); Knuuttila T., (2005); Kuhn D., Teaching and learning science as argument, Science Education, 94, 5, pp. 810-824, (2010); Ladyman J., Lambert J., Wiesner K., What is a complex system?, European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 3, 1, pp. 33-67, (2013); Latour B., Drawing things together. Representation in scientific practice, (1990); Latour B., Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies, (1999); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education, (2006); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Carpenter S., Penner D., The inter-related development of inscriptions and conceptual understanding, Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design, pp. 325-360, (2000); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., (2005); Levy S.T., Wilensky U., Inventing a “mid level” to make ends meet: Reasoning between the levels of complexity, Cognition and Instruction, 26, 1, pp. 1-47, (2008); Louca L.T., Zacharia Z.C., Modeling-based learning in science education: Cognitive, metacognitive, social, material and epistemological contributions, Educational Review, 64, 4, pp. 471-492, (2012); Manz E., Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge, Science Education, 96, 6, pp. 1071-1105, (2012); Metz K.E., Young children can be sophisticated scientists, Phi Delta Kappan, 92, 8, pp. 68-71, (2011); Miles M., Huberman A., Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book, (1994); Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8, (2007); Learning science through computer games and simulations, (2011); A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Nersessian N., Model-based reasoning in scientific practice, Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation, (2008); Nersessian N.J., Should physicists preach What they practice? Constructive modeling in Doing and learning physics, Science & Education, 4, 3, pp. 203-226, (1995); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Oh P.S., Oh S.J., What teachers of science need to know about models: An overview, International Journal of Science Education, 33, 8, pp. 1109-1130, (2011); Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J., Introduction to systems thinking for the chemistry education community, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2720-2729, (2019); Papert S., Mindstorms: Computers, children, and powerful ideas, (1980); Passmore C., Stewart J., A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 3, pp. 185-204, (2002); Pavlov O.V., Kim Y.J., Whitlock C., Food fight, Learning, Education, and Games, 3, (2019); Penner D., Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students’ understanding of emergent phenomena, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 8, pp. 784-806, (2000); Plummer J.D., Krajcik J., Building a learning progression for celestial motion: Elementary levels from an earth-based perspective, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 7, pp. 768-787, (2010); Pluta W.J., Chinn C.A., Duncan R.G., Learners’ epistemic criteria for good scientific models, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 5, pp. 486-511, (2011); Puttick G., Tucker-Raymond E., Building systems from scratch: An exploratory study of students learning about climate change, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 4, pp. 306-321, (2018); Salen-Tekinbas K., Gresalfi M., Peppler K., Santo R., Gaming the system: Designing with gamestar mechanic, (2014); Salen-Tekinbas K.S., Zimmerman E., Rules of play: Game design fundamentals, (2004); Salen K., Gaming literacies: A game design study in action, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16, 3, pp. 301-322, (2007); Schwarz C.V., Passmore C., Reiser B.J., Moving beyond “knowing about” science to making sense of the world, Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices, (2017); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Krajcik J., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 6, pp. 632-654, (2009); Sengupta P., Wilensky U., Learning electricity with NIELS: Thinking with electrons and thinking in levels, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14, 1, pp. 21-50, (2009); Taylor I., Barker M., Jones A., Promoting mental model building in astronomy education, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 10, pp. 1205-1225, (2003); Vattam S., Goel A., Rugaber S., Hmelo-Silver C., Jordan R., Gray S., Sinha S., Understanding complex natural systems by articulating structure-behavior-function models, Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 14, 1, pp. 66-81, (2011); Wagh A., Cook-Whitt K., Wilensky U., Bridging inquiry-based science and constructionism: Exploring the alignment between students tinkering with code of computational models and goals of inquiry, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54, 5, pp. 615-641, (2017); Wagh A., Wilensky U., EvoBuild: A quickstart toolkit for programming agent-based models of evolutionary processes, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 2, pp. 131-146, (2018); Wilensky U., GasLab: an extensible modeling toolkit tor exploring statistical mechanics, Computer modeling and simulation in science education, pp. 151-178, (1999); Wilensky U., Reisman K., 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, pp. 171-209, (2006); Windschitl M., Thompson J., Braaten M., Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations, Science Education, 92, 5, pp. 941-967, (2008); Yoon S.A., Hmelo-Silver C., Introduction to special issue: Models and tools for systems learning and instruction, Instructional Science, 45, 1, pp. 1-4, (2017)","P. Parekh; Transylvania University, Lexington, 300 North Broadway, 40508, United States; email: pnparekh@asu.edu","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85113758647"
"Hrin T.N.; Milenković D.D.; Segedinac M.D.; Horvat S.","Hrin, Tamara N. (57236117100); Milenković, Dušica D. (56461020000); Segedinac, Mirjana D. (18042651400); Horvat, Saša (55331619700)","57236117100; 56461020000; 18042651400; 55331619700","Enhancement and assessment of students' systems thinking skills by application of systemic synthesis questions in the organic chemistry course","2016","Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society","81","12","","1455","1471","16","10","10.2298/JSC160811097H","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85009833822&doi=10.2298%2fJSC160811097H&partnerID=40&md5=6106150c19d55207155ad568cf9e36fe","Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, Novi Sad, 21000, Serbia","Hrin T.N., Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, Novi Sad, 21000, Serbia; Milenković D.D., Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, Novi Sad, 21000, Serbia; Segedinac M.D., Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, Novi Sad, 21000, Serbia; Horvat S., Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, Novi Sad, 21000, Serbia","Many studies in the field of science education have emphasized the fact that systems thinking is a very important higher-order thinking skill that should be fostered during classes. However, more attention has been dedicated to the different ways of the assessment of systems thinking skills, and less to their enhancement. Taking this into consideration, the goal of this study was not only to validate the systems thinking skills of secondary school students, but also to help students in the complex process of their development. With this goal, new instructional and assessment tools - systemic synthesis questions [SSynQs], were constructed, and an experiment with one experimental (E) and one control (C) group was conducted during organic chemistry classes. Namely, the instructional teaching/learning method for both E and C groups was the same in processing new contents, but different on classes for the revision of the selected organic chemistry contents. The results showed that students exposed to the new instructional method (E group) achieved higher performance scores on three different types of systems thinking than students from the C group, who were taught by the traditional method. The greatest difference between the groups was found in the most complex dimension of systems thinking construct - in the II level of procedural systems thinking. Along with this dimension, structural systems thinking and the I level of the procedural systems thinking were also observed.","Assessment tool; Higher-order thinking; Instructional tool; Secondary chemistry education; Systemic approach","","","","","","","","Avargil S., Herscovitz O., Dori Y.J., J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 21, (2012); Barak M., Ben-Chaim D., Zoller U., Res. Sci. Educ., 37, (2007); Dori Y.J., Tal R.T., Tsaushu M., Sci. Educ., 87, (2003); Tsaparlis G., Zoller U., Univ. Chem. Educ., 7, (2003); Zoller U., J. Chem. Educ., 70, (1993); Resnick L.B., Education and Learning to Think, (1987); Nakiboglu C., Yildirir H.E., Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 9, (2011); Salisbury D.F., Five Technologies for Educational Change: Systems Thinking, Systems Design, Quality Science, Change Management, Industrial Technology, (1996); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., Int. J. Sci. Educ., 31, (2009); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., J. Res. Sci. Teach., 42, (2005); Yoon S.A., Int. J. Sci. Educ., 30, (2008); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47, (2010); Gulyaev S.A., Stonyer H.R., Int. J. Sci. Educ., 24, (2002); Riess W., Mischo C., Int. J. Sci. Educ., 32, (2010); Sommer C., Lucken M., Nor. Stud. Sci. Educ., 6, (2010); Hung W., Brit. J. Educ. Technol., 39, (2008); Brandstadter K., Harms U., Grossschedl J., Int. J. Sci. Educ., 34, (2012); Dauer J.T., Momsen J.L., Bray Speth E., Makohon-Moore S.C., Long T.M., J. Res. Sci. Teach., 50, (2013); Vachliotis T., Salta K., Tzougraki C., Res. Sci. Educ., 44, (2014); Fahmy A.F.M., Lagowski J.J., Afr. J. Chem. Educ., 2, (2012); Fahmy A.F.M., Lagowski J.J., Afr. J. Chem. Educ., 4, (2014); Fahmy A.F.M., Lagowski J.J., Pure Appl. Chem., 71, (1999); Fahmy A.F.M., Lagowski J.J., J. Chem. Educ., 80, (2003); Vachliotis T., Salta K., Vasiliou P., Tzougraki C., J. Chem. Educ., 88, (2011); Novak J.D., Gowin D.B., Johansen G.T., Sci. Educ., 67, (1983); Hrin T., Milenkovic D., Segedinac M., Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 14, (2016); Hrin T., Fahmy A.F.M., Segedinac M., Milenkovic D., Res. Sci. Educ., 46, (2016); Kwon S.Y., Cifuentes L., Educ. Technol. Soc., 10, (2007); Powell J.V., Aeby U.G., Carpenter-Aeby T., Comput. Educ., 40, (2003); Bracht G.H., Glass G.V., Am. Educ. Res. J., 5, (1968); Jones S.R.G., Am. J. Sociol., 98, (1992); Ozmen H., Demircioglu G., Coll R.K., Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 7, (2009); Lopez E., Kim J., Nandagopal K., Cardin N., Shavelson R.J., Penn J.H., Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 12, (2011); Dunn D.S., Statistics and Data Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, (2001); Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S., Using Multivariate Statistics, (1996); Corder G.W., Foreman D.I., Nonparametric Statistics for Non-statisticians: A Step-by-Step Approach, (2009); Fritz C.O., Morris P.E., Richler J.J., J. Exp. Psychol., 141, (2012); Cohen J., Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, (1988); Van Merrienboer J.J.G., Sweller J., Educ. Psychol. Rev., 17, (2005); Mihalca L., Mengelkamp C., Schnotz W., Paas F., Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 41, (2015); Van Merrienboer J.J.G., Kirschner P.A., Kester L., Educ. Psychol., 38, (2003)","T.N. Hrin; Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Trg D. Obradovića 3, 21000, Serbia; email: tamara.hrin@dh.uns.ac.rs","","Serbian Chemical Society","","","","","","03525139","","JSCSE","","English","J. Serb. Chem. Soc.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Bronze Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85009833822"
"Orion N.","Orion, Nir (6602715125)","6602715125","Earth systems education and the development of environmental insight","2016","Geoscience Education: Indoor and Outdoor","","","","59","72","13","7","10.1007/978-3-319-43319-6_4","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85009685110&doi=10.1007%2f978-3-319-43319-6_4&partnerID=40&md5=503df9f9da982a1df961c6612444c93a","Science Teaching Department, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel","Orion N., Science Teaching Department, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel","Looking closely on its influence of environmental education on the development of environmental literacy indicates that for many cases it never reaches far beyond the level of recycling and cleaning of the schoolyard. One of the reasons for these limited outcomes is focusing mainly on the development of environmental awareness and almost ignoring the development of environmental insight. This environmental insight involves the implementation of the Earth systems approach which is a holistic framework for Earth sciences and science curricula that emphasizes the study of the cyclic pattern of the transformation of matter and energy among the four Earth systems: geosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere, and biosphere. An important part of the educational effectiveness of the Earth systems approach depends on the system thinking abilities of its learners. This chapter presents findings from two independent studies of school students and adult. These studies that used a mixed approach methodology enable to draw a clear linkage between learning through the Earth systems approach and the development of system thinking abilities and a clear linkage between system thinking abilities, which is the heart of environmental insight, and positive environmental behavior. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016.","Earth sciences education; Earth systems education; Environmental insigh","","","","","","","","Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Orion N., The development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, pp. 1-43, (2005); Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, (2010); Chu H., Shin D., Lee M., Chapter 33: Korean students’ environmental literacy and variables affecting environmental literacy, Sharing wisdom for our future, (2005); Chu H.E., Lee E.A., Ko H.R., Shin D.H., Lee M.N., Min B.M., Kang K.H., Korean year 3 children’s environmental literacy: A prerequisite for a Korean environmental education curriculum, International Journal of Science Education, 29, pp. 731-746, (2007); Dunlap R.E., The New Environmental Paradigm scale: From marginality to worldwide use, The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, pp. 3-18, (2008); Dunlap R., Van Liere K., The ""New Environmental Paradigm, The Journal of Environmental Education, 9, pp. 10-19, (1978); Dunlap R.E., Van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., Jones R.E., New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale, Journal of Social Issues, 56, pp. 425-442, (2000); Erdogan M., Fifth grade students’ environmental literacy and the factors affecting students’ environmentally responsible behaviors, (2009); Erdogan M., Ok A., An assessment of Turkish young pupils’ environmental literacy:Nationwide survey, International Journal of Science Education, (2011); Gardner H., Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice, (1992); Goldman D., Yavetz B., Pe'er S., Environmental literacy in teacher training in Israel:Environmental behavior of new students, Journal of Environmental Education, 38, pp. 3-20, (2006); Gudovitch Y., Orion N., The carbon cycle and the earth systems - studying the carbon cycle in an environmental multidisciplinary context, (2001); Levy A., Assessing the variables that infl uence the environmental behavior of adults, (2016); Mayer V.J., Framework for earth systems, Education Science Activities, 28, pp. 8-9, (1991); Mayer V.J., Fortner R.W., Science is a study of earth: A resource guide for science curriculum restructure, (1995); McBeth W., Hungerford H., Marcinkowski T., Volk T., Meyers R., National environmental literacy assessment project: Year 1, National baseline study of middle grades students, (2008); McBeth W., Hungerford H., Marcinkowski T., Volk C.K., National environmental literacy assessment, phase two: Measuring the effectiveness of North American environmental education programs with respect to the parameters of environmental literacy., (2011); Negev M., Sagy G., Garb Y., Salzberg A., Tal A., Evaluating the environmental literacy of Israeli elementary and high school students, The Journal of Environmental Education, 39, pp. 3-20, (2008); Orion N., Earth science education + environmental education = Earth systems education, (1997); Orion N., The development of cognitive skills within geoscience education: An overview., (2001); Orion N., A holistic approach for science education for all, Eurasia Journal for Mathematics, Science and Rechnology Education., 3, pp. 99-106, (2007); Orion N., Ault C., Learning earth sciences, Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, pp. 653-688, (2007); Orion N., Bassis T., Characterization of high school students’ system thinking skills in the context of earth systems, The National Association for Research in Science Teaching, (2008); Orion N., Cohen C., A design-based research of an oceanography module as a part of the Israeli high school earth sciences program, Journal of Geographie und ihre Didaktik, 4, pp. 246-259, (2007); Orion N., Fortner W.R., Mediterranean models for integrating environmental education and earth sciences through earth systems education, Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies, 8, pp. 97-111, (2003); Orion N., Kali Y., The effect of an earth science learning program on students’ scientific thinking skills, Journal of Geosciences Education., 53, pp. 387-393, (2005); Orion N., Libarkin J., Earth systems education, Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, (2014); Orion N., Thompson D.B., King C., Earth sciences education: An extra dimension to science education in schools, Caderonos IG/UNICAMP, 6, pp. 122-133, (1996); Peer S., Goldman D., Yavetz B., Environmental literacy in teacher training: Attitudes, knowledge and environmental behavior of beginning students, Journal of Environmental Education, 39, pp. 45-59, (2007); Sagy G., Factors that contribute to students’ environmental Literacy in Israel’s education system, (2010); Shin D., Chu H., Lee E., Ko H., Lee M., Kang K., Min B., Park J., An assessment of Korean students’ environmental literacy, Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 26, pp. 358-364, (2005); Stern C., Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior, Journal of Social Issues, 56, pp. 407-424, (2000); Tal A., Garb Y., Negev M., Sagy G., Salzberg A., Report: Environmental literacy in Israeli education system., (2007); Tuncer G., Ertepinar H., Tekkaya C., Sungur S., Environmental attitudes of young people in turkey: Effects of school type and gender, Environmental Education Research, 11, pp. 215-233, (2005)","N. Orion; Science Teaching Department, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel; email: nir.orion@weizmann.ac.il","","Springer International Publishing","","","","","","","978-331943319-6; 978-331943318-9","","","English","Geoscience Education: Indoor and Outdoor","Book chapter","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85009685110"
"Abdurrahman A.; Maulina H.; Nurulsari N.; Sukamto I.; Umam A.N.; Mulyana K.M.","Abdurrahman, Abdurrahman (57006623600); Maulina, Hervin (57207957483); Nurulsari, Novinta (57199218231); Sukamto, Ismu (57216270394); Umam, Ahmad Naufal (58186345100); Mulyana, Karlina Maya (58186345200)","57006623600; 57207957483; 57199218231; 57216270394; 58186345100; 58186345200","Impacts of integrating engineering design process into STEM makerspace on renewable energy unit to foster students’ system thinking skills","2023","Heliyon","9","4","e15100","","","","4","10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15100","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85152648804&doi=10.1016%2fj.heliyon.2023.e15100&partnerID=40&md5=10d7c9cdece50179e8d374f11a8c0c9a","Physics Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Elementary Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Daarul Ilmi Senior High School, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia; Fitrah Insani Senior High School, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia","Abdurrahman A., Physics Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Maulina H., Physics Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Nurulsari N., Physics Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Sukamto I., Elementary Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; Umam A.N., Daarul Ilmi Senior High School, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia; Mulyana K.M., Fitrah Insani Senior High School, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia","Currently, science education systems around the world are faced with global challenges, especially in anticipating environmental changes related to sustainable development programs. Complex system problems related to climate change, reduced fossil-based energy reserves, and social environmental problems that have an impact on the economy have made stakeholders aware of the Education for Sustainability Development (ESD) program. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of STEM-PBL integrated Engineering Design Process (EDP) in renewable energy learning units to improve students' system thinking skills. The quantitative experimental research with a non-equivalent control group design was conducted on 67 high school students in XI grades. The results showed that the performance of students who were taught with STEM-EDP was better than students who studied with traditional STEM learning approach. In addition, this learning strategy also encourages students to be actively involved in every EDP process so that they show good performance in mind-on and hands-on activities which have an impact on increasing students' system thinking abilities. Furthermore, the STEM-EDP learning is implemented to develop students' ability to design through applied technology and engineered activities, paying special attention to design-based theory. It does not require students and teachers to prepare super-sophisticated technology, because the integration of technology in this learning design used cheap, simple and ‘easy to find’ equipments, to create more meaningful learning packages. In the critical pedagogy, STEM-PBL integrated EDP can be used to systematically foster students' STEM literacy and thinking skills through the engineering design thinking process, thus expanding students' cognitive building and perspectives in reducing the routine in conventional pedagogy. © 2023 The Authors","Education for sustainable development; STEM; Systems thinking","","","","","","Directorate General of Higher Education, Research and Technology of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia, (114/E5/PG.02.00, PT/2022); EDP, (71,72)","Funding text 1: Based on students' discourse during the learning process of process design, it was found that students in the experimental group tended to pay more attention to developing alternative problem-solving designs preceded by information processing and a number of investigations, while those in the control group spent more time discussing how to complete observation tasks and scientific findings. These findings are also in line with the findings of various experimental studies showed that the use of a series of tasks in developing the work in EDP activities is very effective for growing knowledge construction, intrinsic motivation, and the level of enthusiasm of students [42,67,68]. An important finding that emerged from this study was that STEM-PBL with EDP was able to foster students' systems thinking ability to a better level than students who learned non-EDP PBL-STEM. This result supports previous findings indicating that STEM PBL improves students' thinking skills [69,70].This study provides an overview of the implementation of EDP within the scope of integrated STEM as a strategy for using technology to support student learning. The authors hope to raise awareness of the intersection of technology-supported learning and STEM-EDP learning. Currently, the community's need for technology is very rapid, but both the integrated STEM learning environment and technology have not been fully utilized. The anxiety of teachers and students about how technology can be applied optimally in learning is also found by researchers. In fact, the use of technology in learning can actually facilitate interaction and achievement of learning objectives, it's just how the teacher can work around this [71,72]. The limited research currently available on technology use strategies and integrated STEM learning environments further suggests that linking the two is necessary and important.This study provides empirical support that brief interventions can produce positive changes in how young people interact with STEM activities. Young people can contribute their thoughts and engineering processes especially on renewable energy supply issues, so they have the potential to be involved in revitalizing the education curriculum that triggers youth confidence and creativity that enables them to be interested in a career in STEM. Furthermore, in the critical pedagogy, STEM-PBL integrated EDP can be used to systematically foster students' STEM literacy and thinking skills through the engineering design thinking process, thus expanding students' cognitive building and perspectives in reducing the routine in conventional pedagogy. Finally, further investigation of the role of EDP in science-physics learning based on STEM Education can provide a holistic picture of the pedagogic development in aspects of teacher professional development program.; Funding text 2: This work was supported by Directorate General of Higher Education, Research and Technology of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia [114/E5/PG.02.00.PT/2022]. ","Education for Sustainable Development: A Roadmap, (2020); Castellanos P.M.A., Queiruga-Dios A., From environmental education to education for sustainable development in higher education: a systematic review, Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 23, 3, pp. 622-644, (2021); Ferguson T., Roofe C., Cook L.D., Teachers' perspectives on sustainable development: the implications for education for sustainable development, Environ. Educ. Res., 27, 9, pp. 1343-1359, (2021); Hsiao P.-W., Su C.-H., A study on the impact of STEAM education for sustainable development courses and its effects on student motivation and learning, Sustainability, 13, 7, (2021); Hidayah V.N., Yuliawati F., Kurikulum tematik 2013 dalam framework subtainable development goals DI sekolah dasar, EduHumaniora J. Pendidik. Dasar Kampus Cibiru, 13, 2, (2021); Rulandari N., Study of sustainable development goals (SDGS) quality education in Indonesia in the first three years, Bp. Int. Res. Crit. Inst. BIRCI-J. Humanit. Soc. Sci., 4, 2, pp. 2702-2708, (2021); Suwarto R., Sanjaya Y., Solihat R., Implementation of education for sustainable development and pupils' sustainability consciousness in Adiwiyata School and ESD-based school,” presented at the, J. Phys. Conf., 1806, 1, (2021); Chaleta E., Saraiva M., Leal F., Fialho I., Borralho A., Higher education and sustainable development goals (SDG)—potential contribution of the undergraduate courses of the school of social sciences of the University of Évora, Sustainability, 13, 4, (2021); Clark B., Button C., Sustainability transdisciplinary education model: interface of arts, science, and community (STEM), Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 12, 1, pp. 41-54, (2011); Rogers M., Pfaff T., Hamilton J., Erkan A., Using sustainability themes and multidisciplinary approaches to enhance STEM education, Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 16, 4, pp. 523-536, (2015); Lu S.-Y., Wu C.-L., Huang Y.-M., Evaluation of disabled STEAM-students’ education learning outcomes and creativity under the UN sustainable development goal: project-based learning oriented STEAM curriculum with micro: bit, Sustainability, 14, 2, (2022); Mylvaganam S., Timmerberg J., Halvorsen H.-P., Viumdal H., Sustainability awareness through STEAM+, Nord. J. STEM Educ., 5, 1, (2021); Abdurrahman A., Developing STEM learning makerspace for fostering student's 21st century skills in the fourth industrial revolution Era,” presented at the, J. Phys. Conf., 1155, 1, pp. 1-6, (2019); Blackley S., Sheffield R., Koul R., Using a Makerspace approach to engage Indonesian primary students with STEM, Issues Educ. Res., 28, 1, pp. 18-42, (2018); Stehle S.M., Peters-Burton E.E., Developing student 21st Century skills in selected exemplary inclusive STEM high schools, Int. J. STEM Educ., 6, 1, (2019); Wahono B., Lin P.-L., Chang C.-Y., Evidence of STEM enactment effectiveness in Asian student learning outcomes, Int. J. STEM Educ., 7, 1, (2020); Bertel L.B., Winther M., Routhe H.W., Kolmos A., Framing and facilitating complex problem-solving competences in interdisciplinary megaprojects: an institutional strategy to educate for sustainable development, Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 23, 5, pp. 1173-1191, (2021); Hermann R.R., Bossle M.B., Bringing an entrepreneurial focus to sustainability education: a teaching framework based on content analysis, J. Clean. Prod., 246, (2020); Sousa M.J., Wilks D., Sustainable skills for the world of work in the digital age, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 35, 4, pp. 399-405, (2018); Cabrera L., Sokolow J., Cabrera D., Developing and validating a measurement of systems thinking: The systems thinking and metacognitive inventory (STMI), Routledge Handbook Systems Thinking, pp. 1-42, (2021); Maani K.E., Maharaj V., Systemic Thinking and Complex Problem Solving. A Theory Building Empirical Study,” Presented at the Proceedings of the 19th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society 2001, (2001); Stroh D.P., Systems Thinking for Social Change: A Practical Guide to Solving Complex Problems, Avoiding Unintended Consequences, and Achieving Lasting Results, (2015); Schuler S., Fanta D., Rosenkraenzer F., Riess W., Systems thinking within the scope of education for sustainable development (ESD)–a heuristic competence model as a basis for (science) teacher education, J. Geogr. High Educ., 42, 2, pp. 192-204, (2018); Nuraeni R., Himatul A., Profil kemampuan berpikir sistem siswa kelas XI SMA pada materi sistem pernapasan, Pedagogi Hayati, 4, 1, pp. 1-9, (2020); Hester P.T., Adams K.M., The why of systemic thinking, Systemic Thinking, pp. 125-153, (2014); Buchanan R., Systems thinking and design thinking: the search for principles in the world we are making, She Ji J. Des. Econ. Innov., 5, 2, pp. 85-104, (2019); Nata A., Islam rahmatan lil alamin sebagai model pendidikan Islam memasuki asean community,” makal. Disampaikan pada acara “kuliah tamu” Jur. Pendidik, Agama Islam Fak. Ilmu Tarb. Dan Kegur. UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang Senin, 7, (2016); Meilinda M., Rustaman N., Firman H., Tjasyono B., Does system think in climate change content needs formal operational?, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1157, 2, (2019); Nagahi M., Et al., The impact of practitioners' personality traits on their level of systems-thinking skills preferences, Eng. Manag. J., 33, 3, pp. 156-173, (2021); Jorgenson S.N., Stephens J.C., White B., Environmental education in transition: a critical review of recent research on climate change and energy education, J. Environ. Educ., 50, 3, pp. 160-171, (2019); Ucal M., Xydis G., Multidirectional relationship between energy resources, climate changes and sustainable development: technoeconomic analysis, Sustain. Cities Soc., 60, (2020); Ballew M.T., Goldberg M.H., Rosenthal S.A., Gustafson A., Leiserowitz A., Systems thinking as a pathway to global warming beliefs and attitudes through an ecological worldview, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 116, 17, pp. 8214-8219, (2019); Nousheen A., Zai S.A.Y., Waseem M., Khan S.A., Education for sustainable development (ESD): effects of sustainability education on pre-service teachers' attitude towards sustainable development (SD), J. Clean. Prod., 250, (2020); Tsai C.-Y., The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students' scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes, Comput. Educ., 116, pp. 14-27, (2018); Campbell C., Hobbs L., Xu L., McKinnon J., Speldewinde C., Girls in STEM: addressing SDG 4 in context, Sustainability, 14, 9, (2022); Issa-Salwe A.M., How are SMEs with STEM education critical for a national sustainability development?, J. Sustain. Dev. Stud., 15, (2022); Pigozzi M.J., Implementing the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD): achievements, open questions and strategies for the way forward, Int. Rev. Educ., 56, 2, pp. 255-269, (2010); Margot K., Kettler T., Teachers' perception of stem integration and education: a systematic literature review, Int. J. STEM Educ., 6, 1, (2019); Winarno N., Rusdiana D., Samsudin A., Susilowati E., Ahmad N., AFIFAH R.M.A., The steps of the engineering design process (EDP) in science education: a systematic literature review, J. Educ. Gift. Young Sci., 8, 4, pp. 1345-1360, (2020); Del Cerro Velazquez F., Lozano Rivas F., Education for sustainable development in STEM (technical drawing): learning approach and method for SDG 11 in classrooms, Sustainability, 12, 7, (2020); Li Y., Et al., Design and design thinking in STEM education, J. STEM Educ. Res., 2, 2, pp. 93-104, (2019); Long N.T., Yen N.T.H., Van Hanh N., The role of experiential learning and engineering design process in k-12 stem education, Int. J. Educ. Pract., 8, 4, pp. 720-732, (2020); Jeong J.S., Gonzalez-Gomez D., Yllana Prieto F., Sustainable and flipped STEM education: formative assessment online interface for observing pre-service teachers' performance and motivation, Educ. Sci., 10, 10, (2020); Agbedahin A.V., Sustainable development, education for sustainable development, and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development: emergence, efficacy, eminence, and future, Sustain. Dev., 27, 4, pp. 669-680, (2019); Lavanya B., Saraswathi S., Education for sustainable development, Presented at the National Conference on Management and Social Sciences–Its Impact on Sustainable Development, 25, (2014); Sinakou E., Boeve-de Pauw J., Van Petegem P., Exploring the concept of sustainable development within education for sustainable development: implications for ESD research and practice, Environ. Dev. Sustain., 21, 1, pp. 1-10, (2019); Levchyk I., Chaikovska H., Yankovych O., Kuzma I., Rozhko-Pavlyshyn T., Formation of sustainable development competencies in primary school children, J. Educ. Cult. Soc., 12, 2, pp. 341-360, (2021); Nguyen T.P.L., Nguyen T.H., Tran T.K., STEM education in secondary schools: teachers' perspective towards sustainable development, Sustainability, 12, 21, (2020); Wilhelm S., Forster R., Zimmermann A.B., Implementing competence orientation: towards constructively aligned education for sustainable development in university-level teaching-and-learning, Sustainability, 11, 7, (2019); Prabawani B., Hadi S.P., Zen I.S., Afrizal T., Purbawati D., Education for sustainable development as diffusion of innovation of secondary school students, J. Teach. Educ. Sustain., 22, 1, pp. 84-97, (2020); Dare E.A., Ring-Whalen E.A., Roehrig G.H., Creating a continuum of STEM models: exploring how K-12 science teachers conceptualize STEM education, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 41, 12, pp. 1701-1720, (2019); Gyasi J.F., Zheng L., Zhou Y., Perusing the past to propel the future: a systematic review of STEM learning activity based on activity theory, Sustainability, 13, 16, (2021); Greca Dufranc I.M., Garcia Terceno E., Fridberg M., Cronquist B., Redfors A., Robotics and early-years STEM education: the botSTEM framework and activities, Eur. J. STEM Educ., 1, pp. 1-13, (2020); Roehrig G.H., Dare E.A., Ring-Whalen E., Wieselmann J.R., Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum, Int. J. STEM Educ., 8, 1, (2021); Garcia-Gonzalez E., Jimenez-Fontana R., Azcarate P., Education for sustainability and the sustainable development goals: pre-service teachers' perceptions and knowledge, Sustainability, 12, 18, (2020); Abdurrahman A., Nurulsari N., Maulina H., Ariyani F., Design and validation of inquiry-based STEM learning strategy as a powerful alternative solution to facilitate gift students facing 21st century challenging, J. Educ. Gift. Young Sci., 7, 1, pp. 33-56, (2019); LaForce M., Noble E., Blackwell C., Problem-based learning (PBL) and student interest in STEM careers: the roles of motivation and ability beliefs, Educ. Sci., 7, 4, (2017); Chattaraj S., Education for sustainable development, Int J Trend Sci Res Dev, 2, pp. 131-134, (2017); Zhang T., Shaikh Z.A., Yumashev A.V., Chlad M., Applied model of E-learning in the framework of education for sustainable development, Sustainability, 12, 16, (2020); Bybee R.W., The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities, (2013); Siemens G., Connectivism: learning as network-creation, ASTD Learn. News, 10, 1, pp. 1-28, (2005); Cohen J., Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, (2013); Hutamarn S., Chookaew S., Howimanporn S., A study using the low-cost robot kit as a tool to promote students' engagement in STEM education, J. Educ. KHON KAEN Univ., 44, 3, pp. 128-143, (2021); Hafiz N.R.M., Ayop S.K., Engineering design process in stem education: a systematic, Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., 9, 5, pp. 676-697, (2019); Rosales J., Sulaiman F., The development of integrated STEM-PBL physics module for learning classical mechanics in secondary education, Solid State Technol., 63, 6, pp. 19410-19433, (2020); Bunprom S., Tupsai J., Yuenyong C., Learning activities to promote the concept of engineering design process for grade 10 students' ideas about force and motion through Predict-Observe-Explain (POE),” presented at the, J. Phys. Conf., 1340, 1, (2019); Teevasuthonsakul C., Yuvanatheeme V., Sriput V., Suwandecha S., Design steps for physic STEM education learning in secondary school, J. Phys. Conf., 901, 1, (2017); Lin K.-Y., Wu Y.-T., Hsu Y.-T., Williams P.J., Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers' engineering design thinking, Int. J. STEM Educ., 8, 1, (2021); Christian K.B., Kelly A.M., Bugallo M.F., NGSS-based teacher professional development to implement engineering practices in STEM instruction, Int. J. STEM Educ., 8, 1, pp. 1-18, (2021); Ortiz-Revilla J., Aduriz-Bravo A., Greca I.M., A framework for epistemological discussion on integrated STEM education, Sci. Educ., 29, 4, pp. 857-880, (2020); Yata C., Ohtani T., Isobe M., Conceptual framework of STEM based on Japanese subject principles, Int. J. STEM Educ., 7, 1, (2020); Kangas K., Sormunen K., Korhonen T., Creative learning with technologies in young students' STEAM education, STEM, Robotics, Mobile Apps in Early Childhood and Primary Education, pp. 157-179, (2022); Di C., Zhou Q., Shen J., Li L., Zhou R., Lin J., Innovation event model for STEM education: a constructivism perspective, STEM Educ, 1, 1, (2021); Struyf A., De Loof H., Boeve-de Pauw J., Van Petegem P., Students' engagement in different STEM learning environments: integrated STEM education as promising practice?, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 41, 10, pp. 1387-1407, (2019)","A. Abdurrahman; Physics Education Department, University of Lampung, Indonesia; email: abdurrahman.1968@fkip.unila.ac.id","","Elsevier Ltd","","","","","","24058440","","","","English","Heliyon","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85152648804"
"Ryan Z.; Danish J.; Zhou J.; Stiso C.; Murphy D.; Duncan R.; Chinn C.; Hmelo-Silver C.E.","Ryan, Zach (57222490488); Danish, Joshua (16027612700); Zhou, Jinzhi (58042320200); Stiso, Christina (57222488075); Murphy, Danielle (57192938340); Duncan, Ravit (8790278600); Chinn, Clark (7003704186); Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E. (6507383226)","57222490488; 16027612700; 58042320200; 57222488075; 57192938340; 8790278600; 7003704186; 6507383226","Investigating students’ development of mechanistic reasoning in modeling complex aquatic ecosystems","2023","Frontiers in Education","8","","1159558","","","","0","10.3389/feduc.2023.1159558","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85167582272&doi=10.3389%2ffeduc.2023.1159558&partnerID=40&md5=f9e6bf61758bc1778d43d571bf8ef09e","School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States; School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States","Ryan Z., School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States; Danish J., School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States; Zhou J., School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States; Stiso C., School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States; Murphy D., School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Duncan R., School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Chinn C., School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States; Hmelo-Silver C.E., School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States, School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States","Introduction: This study reports on a classroom intervention where upper-elementary students and their teacher explored the biological phenomena of eutrophication using the Modeling and Evidence Mapping (MEME) software environment and associated learning activities. The MEME software and activities were designed to help students create and refine visual models of an ecosystem based on evidence about the eutrophication phenomena. The current study examines how students utilizing this tool were supported in developing their mechanistic reasoning when modeling complex systems. We ask the following research question: How do designed activities within a model-based software tool support the integrations of complex systems thinking and the practice of scientific modeling for elementary students? Methods: This was a design-based research (DBR) observational study of one classroom. A new mechanistic reasoning coding scheme is used to show how students represented their ideas about mechanisms within their collaboratively developed models. Interaction analysis was then used to examine how students developed their models of mechanism in interaction. Results: Our results revealed that students’ mechanistic reasoning clearly developed across the modeling unit they participated in. Qualitative coding of students’ models across time showed that students’ mechanisms developed from initially simplistic descriptions of cause and effect aspects of a system to intricate connections of how multiple entities within a system chain together in specific processes to effect the entire system. Our interaction analysis revealed that when creating mechanisms within scientific models students’ mechanistic reasoning was mediated by their interpretation/grasp of evidence, their collaborative negotiations on how to link evidence to justify their models, and students’ playful and creative modeling practices that emerged in interaction. Discussion: In this study, we closely examined students’ mechanistic reasoning that emerge in their scientific modeling practices, we offer insights into how these two theoretical frameworks can be effectively integrated in the design of learning activities and software tools to better support young students’ scientific inquiry. Our analysis demonstrates a range of ways that students represent their ideas about mechanism when creating a scientific model, as well as how these unfold in interaction. The rich interactional context in this study revealed students’ mechanistic reasoning around modeling and complex systems that may have otherwise gone unnoticed, suggesting a need to further attend to interaction as a unit of analysis when researching the integration of multiple conceptual frameworks in science education. Copyright © 2023 Ryan, Danish, Zhou, Stiso, Murphy, Duncan, Chinn and Hmelo-Silver.","complex systems; design-based research (DBR); elementary education; modeling; science education","","","","","","","","Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, J. Res. Sci. Teach. The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, (2010); Bakker A., Design research in education: a practical guide for early career researchers, (2018); Barzilai S., Zohar A., Epistemic (meta) cognition: ways of thinking about knowledge and knowing, Handbook of epistemic cognition, pp. 409-424, (2016); Bolger M.S., Kobiela M., Weinberg P.J., Lehrer R., Children’s mechanistic reasoning, Cogn. Instr, 47, pp. 540-563, (2012); Chi M.T., Roscoe R.D., Slotta J.D., Roy M., Chase C.C., Misconceived causal explanations for emergent processes, Cogn. Sci, 36, pp. 1-61, (2012); Cobb P., Confrey J., Di Sessa A.A., Lehrer R., Schauble L., Design experiments in educational research, Educ. Res, 32, pp. 9-13, (2003); Danish J.A., Applying an activity theory lens to designing instruction for learning about the structure, behavior, and function of a honeybee system, J. Learn. Sci, 23, pp. 100-148, (2014); Danish J.A., Enyedy N., Saleh A., Humburg M., Learning in embodied activity framework: A sociocultural framework: A sociocultural framework for embodied cognition, Int. J. Computer-Support Collab Learn, 15, pp. 49-87, (2020); Danish J., Vickery M., Duncan R., Ryan Z., Stiso C., Zhou J., Et al., Scientific model evaluation during a gallery walk, Proceedings of the 15th International conference of the learning sciences-ICLS 2021, pp. 1077-1078, (2021); Duncan R.G., The role of domain-specific knowledge in generative reasoning about complicated multileveled phenomena, Cogn. Instr, 25, pp. 271-336, (2007); Duncan R.G., Chinn C.A., Barzilai S., Grasp of evidence: problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards’ conceptualization of evidence, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 55, pp. 907-937, (2018); Eberbach C., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Taylor J., Hunter R., Multidimensional trajectories for understanding ecosystems, Sci. Educ, 105, pp. 521-540, (2021); Engestrom Y., Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization, J. Educ. Work, 14, pp. 133-156, (2001); Ford M., Grasp of practice as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding, Sci. & Educ, 17, pp. 147-177, (2008); Goldstone R.L., Wilensky U., Promoting transfer by grounding complex systems principles, J. Learn. Sci, 17, pp. 465-516, (2008); Gutierrez K., Rymes B., Larson J., Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v, Board of Education. Harv. Educ. Rev, 65, pp. 445-472, (1995); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: some core challenges, J. Learn. Sci, 15, pp. 53-62, (2006); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Sinha S., Yu Y., Eberbach C., PMC-2E: conceptual representations to promote transfer, Promoting spontaneous use of learning and reasoning strategies, pp. 276-291, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: a quasi-experimental study, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, J. Learn. Sci, 15, pp. 11-34, (2006); Jordan B., Henderson A., Interaction analysis: foundations and practice, J. Learn. Sci, 4, pp. 39-103, (1995); Kuhn T.S., The essential tension: selected studies in scientific tradition and change, (1977); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Developing modeling and argument in the elementary grades, Understanding Mathemat: Cs and science matters, pp. 29-53, (2005); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education, The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 371-387, (2006); Machamer P., Darden L., Craver C.F., Thinking about mechanisms, Philos. Sci, 67, pp. 1-25, (2000); Mathayas N., Brown D.E., Wallon R.C., Lindgren R., Representational gesturing as an epistemic tool for the development of mechanistic explanatory models, Sci. Educ, 103, pp. 1047-1079, (2019); McDonald N., Schoenebeck S., Forte A., Reliability and inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: norms and guidelines for CSCW and HCI practice, Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 3, pp. 1-23, (2019); Moreland M., Vickery M., Ryan Z., Murphy D., Av-Shalom N., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Et al., Representing modeling relationships in systems: student use of arrows, The Interdisciplinarity of the learning sciences, 14th International conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) 2020, 3, pp. 1773-1774, (2020); Murphy D., Duncan R.G., Chinn C., Danish J., Hmelo-Silver C., Ryan Z., Et al., Students’ justifications for epistemic criteria for good scientific models, 15th International conference of the learning sciences – ICLS 2021, pp. 203-210, (2021); A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Next generation science standards: for states, by states, (2013); Pierson A.E., Clark D.B., Sherard M.K., Learning progressions in context: tensions and insights from a semester-long middle school modeling curriculum, Sci. Educ, 101, pp. 1061-1088, (2017); Pluta W.J., Chinn C.A., Duncan R.G., Learners' epistemic criteria for good scientific models, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 48, pp. 486-511, (2011); Quintana C., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Krajcik J., Fretz E., Duncan R.G., Et al., A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry, J. Learn. Sci, 13, pp. 337-386, (2004); Ruppert J., Duncan R.G., Chinn C.A., Disentangling the role of domain-specific knowledge in student modeling, Res. Sci. Educ, 49, pp. 921-948, (2019); Russ R.S., Scherr R.E., Hammer D., Mikeska J., Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: a framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science, Sci. Educ, 92, pp. 499-525, (2008); Ryan Z., Danish J., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Understanding students’ representations of mechanism through modeling complex aquatic ecosystems, Proceedings of the 15th International conference of the learning sciences – ICLS 2021, pp. 601-604, (2021); Safayeni F., Derbentseva N., Canas A.J., A theoretical note on concepts and the need for cyclic concept maps, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 42, pp. 741-766, (2005); Saleh A., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Glazewski K.D., Mott B., Chen Y., Rowe J.P., Et al., Collaborative inquiry play: a design case to frame integration of collaborative problem solving with story-centric games, Inf. Learn. Sci, 120, pp. 547-566, (2019); Sandoval W.A., Developing learning theory by refining conjectures embodied in educational designs, Educ. Psychol, 39, pp. 213-223, (2004); Sandoval W.A., Conjecture mapping: an approach to systematic educational design research, J. Learn. Sci, 23, pp. 18-36, (2014); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Et al., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 632-654, (2009); Schwarz C.V., White B.Y., Metamodeling knowledge: developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling, Cogn. Instr, 23, pp. 165-205, (2005); Stroup W.M., Wilensky U., On the embedded complementarity of agent-based and aggregate reasoning in students’ developing understanding of dynamic systems, Technol. Knowl. Learn, 19, pp. 19-52, (2014); Vygotsky L.S., Mind in society: development of higher psychological processes, (1978); Walton D., Reed C., Macagno F., Argumentation schemes, (2008); Wertsch J.V., Mediated action, A companion to cognitive science, pp. 518-525, (2017); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 8, pp. 3-19, (1999); Yoon S.A., Goh S., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K-12 science education: a review of empirical studies 1995-2015, Rev. Educ. Res, 88, pp. 285-325, (2018)","Z. Ryan; School of Education, Indiana University – Bloomington, Bloomington, United States; email: zryan@iu.edu","","Frontiers Media SA","","","","","","2504284X","","","","English","Front. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85167582272"
"Seher Budak U.; Defne Ceyhan G.","Seher Budak, Ulku (58538879200); Defne Ceyhan, Gaye (57203463892)","58538879200; 57203463892","Research trends on systems thinking approach in science education","2024","International Journal of Science Education","46","5","","485","502","17","3","10.1080/09500693.2023.2245106","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85168089583&doi=10.1080%2f09500693.2023.2245106&partnerID=40&md5=0dac402dc38c9c6575da57df86e2b064","Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey","Seher Budak U., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey; Defne Ceyhan G., Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey","The systems thinking approach requires understanding and interpreting complex systems. This review investigated how the systems thinking approach in science education is positioned in peer-reviewed empirical research articles and to identify the trends used in the current literature. A systematic review of open-access, empirical peer-reviewed articles indexed in the Web of Science database from first mention through the end of 2022 was conducted to analyze the studies on systems thinking in science education. This qualitative study used a content analysis approach to identify trends in the research area of systems thinking in science education. The results revealed that research on systems thinking in science education has increased in recent years, mainly from the United States and Germany. Most studies focused on middle and high school students, and ecosystems were the most frequently addressed domain-specific topic. More than half of the reviewed articles used complexity, relationships, components, interactions, interrelationships, and dynamics as characteristics of systems thinking. The results showed that there was uncertainty in the use of the characteristics, skills, and abilities of systems thinking, and that these three terms were used interchangeably. This research can provide evidence-based indications of areas that need further investigation in future research. © 2023 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.","journal content analysis; science education; Systems thinking","","","","","","","","Aikenhead G.S., Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice, (2006); Alexander P.A., Methodological guidance paper: The art and science of quality systematic reviews, Review of Educational Research, 90, 1, pp. 6-23, (2020); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Assaraf B.O., Dodick J., Tripto J., High school students’ understanding of the human body system, Research in Science Education, 43, 1, pp. 33-56, (2013); Assaraf B.O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 5, pp. 518-560, (2005); Assaraf B.O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); Azevedo R., Hadwin A.F., Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition–implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds, Instructional Science, 33, 5-6, pp. 367-379, (2005); Bennett J., Lubben F., Hogarth S., Campbell B., A systematic review of the use of small group discussions in science teaching with students aged 11–18, and their effects on students’ understanding in science or attitude to science, Research evidence in education library, (2004); Bergan-Roller H.E., Galt N.J., Chizinski C.J., Helikar T., Dauer J.T., Simulated computational model lesson improves foundational systems thinking skills and conceptual knowledge in biology students, BioScience, 68, 8, pp. 612-621, (2018); Bianchi G., Pisiotis U., Cabrera M., Greencomp, the European sustainability competence framework, (2022); Bielik T., Stephens L., McIntyre C., Damelin D., Krajcik J.S., Supporting student system modelling practice through curriculum and technology design, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31, 2, pp. 217-231, (2022); Birkle C., Pendlebury D.A., Schnell J., Adams J., Web of science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity, Quantitative Science Studies, 1, 1, pp. 363-376, (2020); Boardman J., Sauser B., Systems thinking, (2008); Chang Y., Chang C., Tseng Y., Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 4, pp. 315-331, (2010); Eberbach C., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Taylor J., Hunter R., Multidimensional trajectories for understanding ecosystems, Science Education, 105, 3, pp. 521-540, (2021); Elmas R., Arslan H.O., Pamuk S., Pesman H., Sozbilir M., Fen eğitiminde yeni bir yaklaşım olarak sistemsel düşünme, Turkiye Kimya Dernegi Dergisi Kısım C: Kimya Egitimi, 6, 1, pp. 107-132, (2021); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Fischer H., Gonzalez C., Making sense of dynamic systems: how our understanding of stocks and flows depends on a global perspective, Cognitive Science, 40, 2, pp. 496-512, (2016); Fisher D.M., Systems thinking activities used in K-12 for up to two decades, Frontiers in Education, 8, (2023); Forrester J.W., System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR, System Dynamics Review, 10, 2-3, pp. 245-256, (1994); Ghalichi N., Schuchardt A., Roehrig G., Systems object framework: A framework for describing students’ depiction of object organisation within systems, International Journal of Science Education, 43, 10, pp. 1618-1639, (2021); Gilissen M.G.R., Knippels M.C.P.J., van Joolingen W.R., Bringing systems thinking into the classroom, International Journal of Science Education, 42, 8, pp. 1253-1280, (2020); Golan R., Reiser B., Investigating students’ reasoning about the complexity manifested in molecular genetics phenomena, Paper presented at the Proceeding of American Educational Research Association, (2004); Grotzer T.A., Basca B.B., How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding?, Journal of Biological Education, 38, 1, pp. 16-29, (2003); Haas A., Grapin S.E., Wendel D., Llosa L., Lee O., How fifth-grade English learners engage in systems thinking using computational models, Systems, 8, 4, (2020); Hayes C., Stott K., Lamb K.J., Hurst G.A., “Making every second count”: Utilizing TikTok and systems thinking to facilitate scientific public engagement and contextualization of chemistry at home, Journal of Chemical Education, 97, 10, pp. 3858-3866, (2020); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 3, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hrin T.N., Milenkovic D.D., Segedinac M.D., Horvat S., Enhancement and assessment of students’ systems thinking skills by application of systemic synthesis questions in the organic chemistry course, Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society, 81, 12, pp. 1455-1471, (2016); Jacobson M., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 1, pp. 11-34, (2006); Jacobson M.J., Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices, Complexity, 6, 3, pp. 41-49, (2001); Johnson C., Boon H., Dinan Thompson M., Cognitive demands of the reformed Queensland physics, chemistry and biology syllabus: An analysis framed by the new taxonomy of educational objectives, Research in Science Education, 52, 5, pp. 1603-1622, (2022); Kucuk Z.D., Saysel A.K., Developing seventh grade students’ understanding of complex environmental problems with systems tools and representations: A quasi-experimental study, Research in Science Education, 48, 2, pp. 491-514, (2018); Lee M., Wu Y., Tsai C., Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publications in selected journals, International Journal of Science Education, 31, 15, pp. 1999-2020, (2009); Mahler D., Grossschedl J., Harms U., Using doubly latent multilevel analysis to elucidate relationships between science teachers’ professional knowledge and students’ performance, International Journal of Science Education, 39, 2, pp. 213-237, (2017); Mambrey S., Schreiber N., Schmiemann P., Young students’ reasoning about ecosystems: The role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research in Science Education, 52, 1, pp. 79-98, (2022); Mambrey S., Timm J., Landskron J.J., Schmiemann P., The impact of system specifics on systems thinking, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 10, pp. 1632-1651, (2020); Meadows D.H., Thinking in systems: A primer, (2008); Pierson A.E., Brady C.E., Expanding opportunities for systems thinking, conceptual learning, and participation through embodied and computational modeling, Systems, 8, 4, (2020); Puig B., Uskola A., Understanding pandemics such as covid-19 through the lenses of the “one health” approach, Sustainability, 13, 23, (2021); Ratinen I.J., Primary student-teachers’ conceptual understanding of the greenhouse effect: A mixed method study, International Journal of Science Education, 35, 6, pp. 929-955, (2013); (2019); Roychoudhury A., Shepardson D.P., Hirsch A., Niyogi D., Mehta J., Top S., The need to introduce system thinking in teaching climate change, Science Educator, 25, 2, pp. 73-81, (2017); Sajjadi P., Bagher M.M., Myrick J., Guerriero J.G., White T.S., Klippel A., Swim J.K., Promoting systems thinking and pro-environmental policy support through serious games, Frontiers in Environmental Science, (2022); Senge P.M., The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, (1990); Sommer C., Lucken M., System competence–Are elementary students able to deal with a biological system?, Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, 2, pp. 125-143, (2012); Spellman K.V., Deutsch A., Mulder C.P.H., Carsten-Conner L.D., Metacognitive learning in the ecology classroom: A tool for preparing problem solvers in a time of rapid change?, Ecosphere (washington, D C), 7, 8, (2016); Stave K.A., Hopper M., What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy, (2007); Stern D.G., Heraclitus’ and wittgenstein's river images : Stepping twice into the same river: Heraclitu, The Monist, 74, 4, pp. 579-604, (1991); Stevens L.L., Whitehead C., Singhal A., Cultivating cooperative relationships: Identifying learning gaps when teaching students systems thinking biomimicry, Biomimetics, 7, 4, (2022); Strapasson A., Ferreira M., Cruz-Cano D., Woods J., do Nascimento Maia Soares M.P., da Silva Filho O.L., The use of system dynamics for energy and environmental education, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, 1, (2022); Tolppanen S., Karkkainen S., The blame-game: Pre-service teachers views on who is responsible and what needs to be done to mitigate climate change, International Journal of Science Education, 43, 14, pp. 2402-2425, (2021); Learning for the future: Competences in education for sustainable development, (2012); Uskola A., Puig B., Exploring primary preservice teachers’ agency and systems thinking in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, Frontiers in Education, 7, (2022); Vachliotis T., Salta K., Tzougraki C., Meaningful understanding and systems thinking in organic chemistry: validating measurement and exploring relationships, Research in Science Education, 44, 2, pp. 239-266, (2014); Vaismoradi M., Turunen H., Bondas T., Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study, Nursing & Health Sciences, 15, 3, pp. 398-405, (2013); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 4, pp. 543-568, (2008); White P.A., Naive analysis of food web dynamics: A study of causal judgment about complex physical systems, Cognitive Science, 24, 4, pp. 605-650, (2000); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 1, pp. 3-19, (1999); Wilson-Lopez A., Mejia J.A., Hasbun I.M., Kasun G.S., Latina/o adolescents’ funds of knowledge related to engineering, Journal of Engineering Education, 105, 2, pp. 278-311, (2016); Zidny R., Eilks I., Learning about pesticide Use adapted from ethnoscience as a contribution to green and sustainable chemistry education, Education Sciences, 12, 4, (2022); Zoller U., Research-based transformative science/STEM/STES/STESEP education for “sustainability thinking”: From teaching to “know” to learning to “think”, Sustainability, 7, 4, pp. 4474-4491, (2015)","U. Seher Budak; Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey; email: ulku.budak@boun.edu.tr","","Routledge","","","","","","09500693","","","","English","Int. J. Sci. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85168089583"
"Susilowati; Wilujeng I.; Hastuti P.W.","Susilowati (57209773596); Wilujeng, Insih (56613477100); Hastuti, Purwanti Widhy (57196087333)","57209773596; 56613477100; 57196087333","Development the Science Learning Plan Based on Pedagogy for Sustainability to Grow Environmental Literacy Students","2019","Journal of Physics: Conference Series","1233","1","012108","","","","1","10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012108","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85068728084&doi=10.1088%2f1742-6596%2f1233%2f1%2f012108&partnerID=40&md5=1e4c3688e80e12726abbf869991d392e","Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia","Susilowati, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia; Wilujeng I., Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia; Hastuti P.W., Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia","The objectives of this research are (1) to find out the characteristics of pedagogy for sustainability developed to cultivate environmental literacy in global warming themes; (2) to produce science learning design-oriented pedagogy for sustainability that has been validated and qualified to be tested in school. This research used development design (Research and Development) refers to Borg and Gall model (1983: 775). Data collection techniques that were used in this study were the assessment of pedagogy for sustainability planning (lesson plan, worksheet, and assessment instruments). The data were analyzed descriptively through qualitative and quantitative. This research succeeded in developing science learning tools based on pedagogy for sustainability that had been validated by experts with a very good category. The science learning developed has characteristics that have pedagogy for sustainability components and it potential to cultivate environmental literacy. The pedagogy for sustainability components that were embedded in the science instruction includes (1) system thinking and understanding of interconnectedness, (2) longterm, foresighted reasoning, and strategizing, (3) stakeholder engagement and group collaboration, (4) action orientation and change-agent skills. © 2019 Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd.","Characteristics of pedagogy; Design; Students","Design; Education computing; Global warming; Students; Action-orientation; Assessment instruments; Characteristics of pedagogy; Development designs; Group collaboration; Research and development; Science instructions; Stakeholder engagement; Sustainable development","","","","","Institute of Research and Community Service; Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, YSU","The authors thank to the Institute of Research and Community Service, Yogyakarta State University for the funding of this work through DIPA Yogyakarta State University 2017.","Redman E., International Journal of Enviromental & Science Education, 8, pp. 1-34, (2013); Burchett J.H., Enviromental Literacy and Its Implications for Effective Public Policy Formation, (2015); Gall M.D., Borg W.R., Gall J.P., Educational Research: An Introduction, (1996); Carin A.A., Sund R.B., Teaching Modern Science, (1967); Hewitt P.G., Conceptual Integrated Science, (2007); Trefil J., Hazen R., The Sciences, An Integrated Approach, (2007); Rowe D., Environmental literacy and sustainability as core requirements: Success stories and models, Teaching Sustainability at Universities, pp. 79-103, (2002); Suparno P., Peningkatan Mutu Pendidikan MIPA untuk Menunjang Pembangunan Berkelanjutan (S\ustainable Development), Prosiding Seminar Nasional FMIPA UNDIKSHA, (2012); Hollweg K.S., Taylor J.R., Bybee R.W., Marcinkowski T.J., McBeth W.C., Zoido P., Developing a Framework for Assessing Environmental Literacy, (2011); North American Association for Environmental Educaation, (2011); Chiapetta E.L., Koballa T.R., Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary Schools, (2010); Shafa O., Graduate Students Study of Environmental Literaccy and Sustainables, International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 4, (2014); Swanepoel C.H., Loubser C.P., Chacko C.P.C., Measuring the environmental literacy of teachers, South African Journal of Education, 22, pp. 286-292, (2002)","","Herawan T.","Institute of Physics Publishing","","4th International Seminar on Science Education, ISSE 2018","13 October 2018","Yogyakarta","149257","17426588","","","","English","J. Phys. Conf. Ser.","Conference paper","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85068728084"
"Ke L.; Kirk E.; Lesnefsky R.; Sadler T.D.","Ke, Li (56735640300); Kirk, Eric (58569331000); Lesnefsky, Rebecca (58568897400); Sadler, Troy D. (7006721381)","56735640300; 58569331000; 58568897400; 7006721381","Exploring system dynamics of complex societal issues through socio-scientific models","2023","Frontiers in Education","8","","1219224","","","","2","10.3389/feduc.2023.1219224","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85173959093&doi=10.3389%2ffeduc.2023.1219224&partnerID=40&md5=de9c6ba7537b112168b1aea383adc038","College of Education and Human Development, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, United States; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States","Ke L., College of Education and Human Development, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, United States; Kirk E., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States; Lesnefsky R., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States; Sadler T.D., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States","Research on socio-scientific issues (SSI) has revealed that it is critical for learners to develop a systematic understanding of the underlying issue. In this paper, we explore how modeling can facilitate students’ systems thinking in the context of SSI. Building on evidence from prior research in promoting systems thinking skills through modeling in scientific contexts, we hypothesize that a similar modeling approach could effectively foster students’ systematic understanding of complex societal issues. In particular, we investigate the affordances of socio-scientific models in promoting students’ systems thinking in the context of COVID-19. We examine learners’ experiences and reflections concerning three unique epistemic features of socio-scientific models, (1) knowledge representation, (2) knowledge justification, and (3) systems thinking. The findings of this study demonstrate that, due to the epistemic differences from traditional scientific modeling approach, engaging learners in developing socio-scientific models presents unique opportunities and challenges for SSI teaching and learning. It provides evidence that, socio-scientific models can serve as not only an effective but also an equitable tool for addressing this issue. Copyright © 2023 Ke, Kirk, Lesnefsky and Sadler.","epistemology; modeling; science education; socio-scientific issues (SSI); systems thinking","","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (2101083)","This work was supported by National Science Foundation under Grant 2101083. Ideas expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. ","Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 540-563, (2009); Berland L.K., Schwarz C.V., Krist C., Kenyon L., Lo A.S., Reiser B.J., Epistemologies in practice: making scientific practices meaningful for students, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 53, pp. 1082-1112, (2016); Bielik T., Stephens L., McIntyre C., Damelin D., Krajcik J., Supporting student system modelling practice through curriculum and technology design, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 31, pp. 217-231, (2022); Calabrese Barton A., Greenberg D., Turner C., Riter D., Perez M., Tasker T., Et al., Youth critical data practices in the COVID-19 multipandemic, AERA Open, 7, (2021); Chen Y.-C., Benus M., Hernandez J., Managing uncertainty in scientific argumentation, Sci. Educ, 103, pp. 1235-1276, (2019); De Boer G., Scientific literacy: another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 37, pp. 582-601, (2000); Dickes A.C., Sengupta P., Learning natural selection in 4th grade with multi-agent-gased computational models, Res. Sci. Educ, 43, pp. 921-953, (2013); Evagorou M., Puig-Mauriz B., Engaging elementary school pre-service teachers in modeling a socioscientific issue as a way to help them appreciate the social aspects of science, Intern J Educ Maths, Sci Technol, 5, pp. 113-123, (2017); Feinstein N.W., Kirchgasler K.L., Sustainability in science education? How the next generation science standards approach sustainability, and why it matters, Sci. Educ, 99, pp. 121-144, (2015); Friedrichsen P., Ke L., Sadler T.D., Zangori L., Enacting co-designed socio-scientific issue-based curriculum units: a case study of secondary science teacher learning, J. Sci. Teach. Educ, 32, pp. 85-106, (2021); Glaser B.G., Strauss A.L., The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, (1967); Hancock T.S., Friedrichsen P.J., Kinslow A.T., Sadler T.D., Selecting socio-scientific issues for teaching, Sci. & Educ, 28, pp. 639-667, (2019); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 9, pp. 247-298, (2000); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: some core challenges, J. Learn. Sci, 15, pp. 53-61, (2006); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cogn. Sci, 28, pp. 127-138, (2004); Hmelo-Silver C., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hogan K., A sociocultural analysis of school and community settings as sites for developing environmental practitioners, Environ. Educ. Res, 8, pp. 413-437, (2002); Jacobson M.J., Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: differences between experts and novices, Complexity, 6, pp. 41-49, (2001); Ke L., Friedrichsen P., Rawson R., Sadler T.D., Teacher learning through collaborative curriculum design in the midst of a pandemic: a cultural historical activity theory investigation, Teach. Teach. Educ, 122, (2023); Ke L., Sadler T.D., Zangori L., Friedrichsen P.J., Students’ perceptions of socio-scientific issue-based learning and their appropriation of epistemic tools for systems thinking, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 42, pp. 1339-1361, (2020); Ke L., Sadler T.D., Zangori L., Friedrichsen P.J., Developing and using multiple models to promote scientific literacy in the context of socio-scientific issues, Sci. & Educ, 30, pp. 589-607, (2021); Ke L., Schwarz C.V., Supporting students' meaningful engagement in scientific modeling through epistemological messages: a case study of contrasting teaching approaches, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 58, pp. 335-365, (2021); Krist C., Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Identifying essential epistemic heuristics for guiding mechanistic reasoning in science learning, J. Learn. Sci, 28, pp. 160-205, (2019); Lehrer R., Schauble L., Scientific thinking and science literacy: supporting development in learning in contexts, Handbook of child psychology, (2006); Liu L., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Promoting complex systems learning through the use of conceptual representations in hypermedia, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 1023-1040, (2009); Manz E., Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge, Sci. Educ, 96, pp. 1071-1105, (2012); Manz E., Suarez E., Supporting teachers to negotiate uncertainty for science, students, and teaching, Sci. Educ, 102, pp. 771-795, (2018); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Nersessian N.J., Creating scientific concepts, (2008); Nguyen H., Santagata R., Impact of computer modeling on learning and teaching systems thinking, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 58, pp. 661-688, (2021); Perkins D.N., Grotzer T.A., Models and moves: focusing on dimensions of causal complexity to achieve deeper scientific understanding [paper presentation], Annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, (2000); Pluta W.J., Chinn C.A., Duncan R.G., Learners’ epistemic criteria for good scientific models, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 48, pp. 486-511, (2011); Rawson Lesnefsky R., Sadler T.D., Ke L., Friedrichsen P., Instructional pathways to considering social dimensions within socioscientific issues, Innov. Sci. Teacher Educ, 8, (2023); Sadler T.D., Situated learning in science education: socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice, Stud. Sci. Educ, 45, pp. 1-42, (2009); Sadler T.D., Barab S., Scott B., What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?, Res. Sci. Educ, 37, pp. 371-391, (2007); Schwarz C.V., Ke L., Salgado M., Man E., Beyond assessing modeling knowledge: moving towards expansive, equitable, and meaningful modeling practice, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 59, pp. 1086-1096, (2022); Schwarz C.V., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., Kenyon L., Acher A., Fortus D., Et al., Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 632-654, (2009); Stratford S.J., Krajcik J., Soloway E., Secondary students’ dynamic modeling processes: analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 7, pp. 215-234, (1998); Tidemand S., Nielsen J.A., The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: from the perspective of teachers, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 39, pp. 44-61, (2017); Wilensky U., NetLogo, (1999); Wilensky U., Reisman K., Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach, Cogn. Instr, 24, pp. 171-209, (2006); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 8, pp. 3-19, (1999); Windschitl M., Thompson J., Braaten M., Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations, Sci. Educ, 92, pp. 941-967, (2008); Yoon S., An evolutionary approach to harnessing complex systems thinking in the science and technology classroom, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 30, pp. 1-32, (2008); Yoon S.A., Goh S.-E., Park M., Teaching and learning about complex systems in K–12 science education: a review of empirical studies 1995–2015, Rev. Educ. Res, 88, pp. 285-325, (2018); Yoon S.A., Hmelo-Silver C., Introduction to special issue: models and tools for systems learning and instruction, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 1-4, (2017); Zangori L., Peel A., Kinslow A., Friedrichsen P., Sadler T.D., Student development of model-based reasoning about carbon cycling and climate change in a socio-scientific issues unit, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 54, pp. 1249-1273, (2017); Zeidler D.L., Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: theory, research and practice, Handbook of research on science education, pp. 697-726, (2014)","T.D. Sadler; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States; email: tsadler@unc.edu","","Frontiers Media SA","","","","","","2504284X","","","","English","Front. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85173959093"
"Lally D.; Forbes C.T.","Lally, Diane (57208237134); Forbes, Cory T. (24724345700)","57208237134; 24724345700","Sociohydrologic systems thinking: An analysis of undergraduate students' operationalization and modeling of coupled human-water systems","2020","Water (Switzerland)","12","4","1040","","","","14","10.3390/W12041040","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85086636627&doi=10.3390%2fW12041040&partnerID=40&md5=e57ed9c5919616a116aee57eb4ee12a5","School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, 68583, NE, United States","Lally D., School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, 68583, NE, United States; Forbes C.T., School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, 68583, NE, United States","One of the keys to science and environmental literacy is systems thinking. Learning how to think about the interactions between systems, the far-reaching effects of a system, and the dynamic nature of systems are all critical outcomes of science learning. However, students need support to develop systems thinking skills in undergraduate geoscience classrooms. While systems thinking-focused instruction has the potential to benefit student learning, gaps exist in our understanding of students' use of systems thinking to operationalize and model SHS, as well as their metacognitive evaluation of systems thinking. To address this need, we have designed, implemented, refined, and studied an introductory-level, interdisciplinary course focused on coupled human-water, or sociohydrologic, systems. Data for this study comes from three consecutive iterations of the course and involves student models and explanations for a socio-hydrologic issue (n = 163). To analyze this data, we counted themed features of the drawn models and applied an operationalization rubric to the written responses. Analyses of the written explanations reveal statistically-significant differences between underlying categories of systems thinking (F(5, 768) = 401.6, p < 0.05). Students were best able to operationalize their systems thinking about problem identification (M = 2.22, SD = 0.73) as compared to unintended consequences (M = 1.43, SD = 1.11). Student-generated systems thinking models revealed statistically significant differences between system components, patterns, and mechanisms, F(2, 132) = 3.06, p < 0.05. Students focused most strongly on system components (M = 13.54, SD = 7.15) as compared to related processes or mechanisms. Qualitative data demonstrated three types of model limitation including scope/scale, temporal, and specific components/mechanisms/patterns excluded. These findings have implications for supporting systems thinking in undergraduate geoscience classrooms, as well as insight into links between these two skills. © 2020 by the authors.","Geoscience; Systems thinking; Undergraduate; Water","Geology; Petroleum reservoir evaluation; Solar buildings; Students; System theory; Interdisciplinary course; Problem identification; Specific component; Statistically significant difference; Supporting systems; System components; Undergraduate students; Unintended consequences; cognition; design; environmental education; learning; perception; qualitative analysis; student; Learning systems","","","","","National Science Foundation, NSF, (DUE-1609598)","Funding: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (DUE-1609598). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.","Richmond B., Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, Syst. Dyn. Rev, 9, pp. 113-133, (1993); Hmelo-Silver C., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: A quasi-experimental study, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 53-72, (2016); Yoon S.A., Hmelo-Silver C., Introduction to special issue: Models and tools for systems learning and instruction, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 1-4, (2017); Assaraf O.B.Z., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Petitt D.N., Forbes C.T., Values Use in Undergraduate Students' Socio-Hydrological Reasoning: A Comparative Study, Nat. Sci. Educ, 48, pp. 1-12, (2019); Sabel J.L., Vo T., Alred A., Dauer J.M., Forbes C.T., Undergraduate students' scientifically-informed decision-making about socio-hydrological issues, J. Coll. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 64-72, (2017); Covitt B.A., Gunckel K.L., Anderson C.W., Students' Developing Understanding of Water in Environmental Systems, J. Environ. Educ, 40, pp. 37-51, (2009); Gunckel K.L., Covitt B.A., Salinas I., Anderson C.W., A learning progression for water in socio-ecological systems, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 49, pp. 843-868, (2012); Sibley D.F., Heidemann M., Merrill J., Parker J., Szymanski D.W., Anderson C.W., Box Diagrams to Assess Students' Systems Thinking about the Rock, Water and Carbon Cycles, J. Geosci. Educ, 55, pp. 138-146, (2007); Shepardson D.P., Wee B., Priddy M., Schellenberger L., Harbor J., Harbor J., Water Transformation and Storage in the Mountains and at the Coast: Midwest students' disconnected conceptions of the hydrologic cycle, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 31, pp. 1447-1471, (2009); Batzri O., Assaraf O.B.Z., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the Earth Systems: Expressions of Dynamic and Cyclic Thinking Among University Students, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 24, pp. 761-775, (2015); Vo T., Forbes C.T., Zangori L., Schwarz C., Fostering Third-Grade Students? Use of Scientific Models with the Water Cycle: Elementary teachers? conceptions and practices, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 37, pp. 2411-2432, (2015); Cardak O., Science Students' Misconceptions of the Water Cycle According to their Drawings, J. Appl. Sci, 9, pp. 865-873, (2009); Halvorson S.J., Wescoat J.L., Problem-Based Inquiry on World Water Problems in Large Undergraduate Classes, J. Geogr, 101, pp. 91-102, (2002); Duda M.D., Americans' Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Water and Water-Related Issues, (2005); Costu B., Ayas A., Niaz M., Promoting conceptual change in first year students' understanding of evaporation, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract, 11, pp. 5-16, (2010); Canpolat N., Turkish Undergraduates' Misconceptions of Evaporation, Evaporation Rate, and Vapour Pressure, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 28, pp. 1757-1770, (2006); Bawden R.J., Macadam R.D., Packham R.J., Valentine I., Systems thinking and practices in the education of agriculturalists, Agric. Syst, 13, pp. 205-225, (1984); Bawden R., Knowing systems and the environment, The SAGE Handbook of Environment and Society, pp. 224-234, (2007); Jordan R., Sorensen A.E., Hmelo-Silver C., A Conceptual Representation to Support Ecological Systems Learning, Nat. Sci. Educ, 43, pp. 141-146, (2014); Grohs J., Kirk G., Soledad M., Knight D., Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems, Think. Ski. Creat, 28, pp. 110-130, (2018); Lally D., Forbes C.T., Modelling water systems in an introductory undergraduate course: Students' use and evaluation of data-driven, computer-based models, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 41, pp. 1999-2023, (2019); Zangori L., Vo T., Forbes C.T., Schwarz C., Supporting 3rd-grade students model-based explanations about groundwater: A quasi-experimental study of a curricular intervention, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 39, pp. 1-22, (2017); Coll R.K., France B., Taylor I., The role of models/and analogies in science education: Implications from research, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 27, pp. 183-198, (2005); Gouvea J., Passmore C., Models of 'versus' models for, Sci. Educ, 26, pp. 49-63, (2017); Pluta W.J., Chinn C.A., Duncan R.G., Learners' epistemic criteria for good scientific models, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 48, pp. 486-511, (2011); Lally D., Forbes C.T., McNeal K.S., Soltis N.A., National Geoscience Faculty Survey 2016: Prevalence of systems thinking and scientific modeling learning opportunities, J. Geosci. Educ, 67, pp. 174-191, (2019); Jordan R.C., Brooks W., Hmelo-Silver C., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Balancing broad ideas with context: An evaluation of student accuracy in describing ecosystem processes after a system-level intervention, J. Boil. Educ, 48, pp. 57-62, (2013); Kastens K.A., Manduca C.A., Cervato C., Frodeman R., Goodwin C., Liben L.S., Titus S., How geoscientists think and learn, Eos Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 90, pp. 265-266, (2009); Rates C.A., Mulvey B., Feldon D.F., Promoting Conceptual Change for Complex Systems Understanding: Outcomes of an Agent-Based Participatory Simulation, J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 25, pp. 610-627, (2016); Danish J., Saleh A., Andrade A., Bryan B., Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development, Instr. Sci, 45, pp. 5-24, (2016); Forbes C.T., Brozovic N., Franz T., Lally D., Petitt D., Water in Society: An interdisciplinary course to support undergraduate students' water literacy, J. Coll. Sci. Teach, 48, pp. 36-42, (2018); Rodgers G., Eller D., Environmentalists say ruling could slow water quality efforts, Des Moines Register; Pfannenstiel B., Eller D., Key achievement or drop in the bucket? What $282 million water quality bill means for Iowans, Des Moines Register, (2018); Royte E., The simple river-cleaning tactics that big farms ignore, National Geographic, (2017); Lombard M., Snyder-Duch J., Bracken C.C., Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability, Hum. Commun. Res, 28, pp. 587-604, (2002)","D. Lally; School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, 68583, United States; email: dlally@huskers.unl.edu","","MDPI AG","","","","","","20734441","","","","English","Water","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85086636627"
"Verhoeff R.P.; Knippels M.-C.P.J.; Gilissen M.G.R.; Boersma K.T.","Verhoeff, Roald P. (57188727324); Knippels, Marie-Christine P. J. (8667213600); Gilissen, Melde G. R. (57208573308); Boersma, Kerst T. (8980646400)","57188727324; 8667213600; 57208573308; 8980646400","The Theoretical Nature of Systems Thinking. Perspectives on Systems Thinking in Biology Education","2018","Frontiers in Education","3","","40","","","","75","10.3389/feduc.2018.00040","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85061279128&doi=10.3389%2ffeduc.2018.00040&partnerID=40&md5=e11177b11f5abb92ee2f262abecff31f","Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands","Verhoeff R.P., Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; Knippels M.-C.P.J., Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; Gilissen M.G.R., Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; Boersma K.T., Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands","Systems thinking has become synonymous to developing coherent understanding of complex biological processes and phenomena from the molecular level to the level of ecosystems. The importance of systems and systems models in science education has been widely recognized, as illustrated by its definition as crosscutting concept by the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013). However, there still seems no consensus on what systems thinking exactly implies or how it can be fostered by adequate learning and teaching strategies. This paper stresses the theoretical or abstract nature of systems thinking. Systems thinking is not just perceived here as “coherent understanding,” but as a learning strategy in which systems theoretical concepts are deliberately used to explain and predict natural phenomena. As such, we argue that systems thinking is not to be defined as a set of skills, that can be learned “one by one,” but instead asks for consideration of systems characteristics and the systems theories they are derived from. After a short elaboration of the conceptual nature of systems thinking, we portray the diversity of educational approaches to foster systems thinking that have been reported in the empirical literature. Our frame of analysis focuses on the extent to which attention has been given to the matching of natural phenomena to one of three systems theories, the integration of different systems thinking skills and the role of modeling. Subsequently, we discuss the epistemological nature of the systems concept and we present some conclusions on embedding systems thinking in the secondary biology curriculum. © Copyright © 2018 Verhoeff, Knippels, Gilissen and Boersma.","biology education; cognitive skill; coherent understanding; modeling; qualitative analysis; systems theory; systems thinking","","","","","","","","Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Four case studies, six years later: developing system thinking skills in junior high school and sustaining them over time, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 47, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Boersma K., Bouwstenen Voor Begripsontwikkeling in Het Biologieonderwijs. [Building Blocks for Conceptual Development in Biology Education], (2016); Boersma K.T., Kamp M.J.A., Van den Oever L., Schalk H.H., Naar Actueel, Relevant en Samenhangend Biologieonderwijs, (2010); Boersma K.T., Waarlo A.J., Klaassen K., Rethinking the introduction of systems thinking in biology education, J. Biol. Educ, 45, pp. 190-197, (2011); Booth Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory, Syst. Dyn. Rev, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Capra F., Luigi Luisi P., The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision, (2014); Eilam B., Reisfeld D., A curriculum unit for promoting complex system thinking: the case of combined system dynamics and agent based models for population growth, J. Adv. Educ. Res, 2, pp. 39-60, (2017); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 31, pp. 655-674, (2009); Gray W., Rizzo N., Unity through Diversity. A Festschrift for Ludwig von Bertalanffy, (1973); Hempel C., Philosophy of Natural Science, (1966); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, J. Learn. Sci, 9, pp. 247-298, (2000); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Jordan R., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Systems learning with a conceptual representation: a quasi-experimental study, Instruc. Sci, 45, pp. 53-72, (2017); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Lui L., Jordan R., Visual representation of a multidimensional codingscheme for understanding technology-mediated learning about complex natural systems, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhan. Learn. Environ, 4, pp. 253-280, (2009); Jacobsen M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, J. Learn. Sci, 15, pp. 11-34, (2006); Jordan R.C., Brooks W.R., Hmelo-Silver C., Eberbach C., Sinha S., Balancing broad ideas with context: an evaluation of student accuracy in describing ecosystem processes after a system-level intervention, J. Biol. Educ, 48, pp. 57-62, (2014); Knippels M.C.P.J., Coping With the Abstract and Complex Nature of Genetics in Biology Education, (2002); Koestler A., The tree and the candle, Unity through diversity. A Festschrift for Ludwig von Bertalanffy, pp. 287-314, (1973); Koningsveld H., Het Verschijnsel Wetenschap, (1987); Levy T.S., Wilensky U., Inventing a ‘mid-level’ to make ends meet: reasoning between the levels of complexity, Cogn. Instr, 26, pp. 1-47, (2008); Liu L., Hmelo-Silver C.E., Promoting complex systems learning through the use of conceptual representations in hypermedia, J. Res. Sci. Teach, 46, pp. 1023-1040, (2009); A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2011); Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States, Achieve, Inc. on Behalf of the Twenty-Six States and Partners That Collaborated on the NGSS, (2013); Popper C., Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, (1963); Rocke A.J., Image and Reality. Kekulé, Kopp, and the Scientific Imagination, (2010); Sommer C., Untersuchung der Systemkompetenz von Grundschulern im Bereich Biologie. [Study on the Primary Students' Systems Competence of in Biology], (2005); Tripto J., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Snapir Z., Amit M., A reflection interview – “What is a system” as a knowledge integration activity for high school students' understanding of complex systems in human biology, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 38, pp. 564-595, (2016); Tripto J., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Snapir Z., Amit M., How is the body's systemic nature manifested amongst high school biology students?, Instruc. Sci, 45, pp. 73-98, (2017); Van Aalsvoort J.G.M., Chemistry in Products. A Cultural-Historical Approach to Initial Chemical Education, (2000); Verhoeff R.P., Towards Systems Thinking in Cell Biology Education, (2003); Verhoeff R.P., Boersma K.T., Waarlo A.J., Multiple representations in modeling strategies for the development of systems thinking in biology education, Multiple Representations in Biological Education, pp. 331-348, (2013); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development coherent understanding of cell biology, Int. J. Sci. Educ, 30, pp. 543-568, (2008); von Bertalanffy L., General System Theory. Foundations, Development, Applications, (1968); Westra R., Learning and Teaching Ecosystem Behavior in Secondary Education, (2008)","R.P. Verhoeff; Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; email: r.p.verhoeff@uu.nl","","Frontiers Media S.A.","","","","","","2504284X","","","","English","Front. Educ.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85061279128"
"Cascarosa E.; Mazas B.; Peña B.M.; Quílez M.J.G.","Cascarosa, Esther (37110630800); Mazas, Beatriz (55808200300); Peña, Begoña Martínez (7003395465); Quílez, María José Gil (6505724806)","37110630800; 55808200300; 7003395465; 6505724806","What do students think they should know about vertebrate fish?","2020","Journal of Biological Education","54","5","","530","539","9","4","10.1080/00219266.2019.1620313","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85066868664&doi=10.1080%2f00219266.2019.1620313&partnerID=40&md5=f6e46a4c57bbeeef1549049fb29a7157","Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain","Cascarosa E., Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain; Mazas B., Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain; Peña B.M., Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain; Quílez M.J.G., Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain","The present work was carried out with students of compulsory secondary education. The research was prompted by the idea that scientific vocation among young people is shrinking and that this has a significant impact on our society. Consequently, a science project based on the students’ interests was proposed. They were able to work as a single group and design the methodology to achieve the goal they set: ‘understanding how fish function and knowing all the organs they need to live underwater’. As this objective involves considering fish within a broader system, it seems their research work inspired system thinking. Nevertheless, during the experiment session, they tried to link their comments to a traditional evaluation. Their research questions were completely conditioned by what they thought they would be assessed on under usual conditions. On this basis, they only chose to know the name of the parts and their practical uses. Therefore, although they initially considered the environment as a part to study to learn how fish function, evaluation limited their research to finalist questions. Other results, such as observation of the peer learning process, are also shown. © 2019 Royal Society of Biology.","Biology project; collaborative group; motivation; science learning","","","","","","Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, MINECO","This work was supported by the National Project [EDU2016-76743-P (MINECO)]. The authors would like to thank to the National Project EDU2016-76743-P, and the BEAGLE group and the IUCA research institute for their support in this work.","Alda B., Luis F., La biología en enseñanzas medias y primer curso de la Universidad: análisis de los currículos oficiales mediante ontologías semánticas, PhD diss., (2015); Barmby P., Kind P.M., Jones K., Examining Changing Attitudes in Secondary School Science, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 8, pp. 1075-1093, (2008); Chin C., Osborne J., Students’ Questions: A Potential Resource for Teaching and Learning Science, Studies in Science Education, 44, pp. 1-39, (2008); Coetzee D., Lim S., Fox A., Hartmann B., Hearst M.A., Structuring Interactions for Large-Scale Synchronous Peer Learning, CSCW ’2015 Proceeding sof the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 1139–1152, (2015); Ebenezer J.V., Zoller U., Grade 10 Students’ Perceptions of and Attitudes toward Science Teaching and School Science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, pp. 175-186, (1993); Franklin S., Peat M., Lewis A., Traditional versus Computer-Based Dissections in Enhancing Learning in a Tertiary Setting: A Student Perspective, Journal of Biological Education, 36, 3, pp. 124-129, (2002); Fraser B.J., Classroom Learning Environments, Handbook of Research on Science Education, pp. 103-124, (2007); Fraser B.J., Walberg H.J., Research on Teacher-Student Relationships and Learning Environments: Context, Retrospect and Prospect, International Journal of Educational Research, 43, pp. 103-109, (2005); George R., A Cross-Domain Analysis of Change in Students’ Attitudes toward Science and Attitudes about the Utility of Science, International Journal of Science Education, 28, 6, pp. 571-589, (2006); Gil Quilez M.J., de la Gandara Gomez M., Dies Alvarez M.E., Martinez Pena B., Animales extraordinarios: construcción y uso de modelos en la Escuela Primaria, Investigación en la Escuela, 74, pp. 89-100, (2011); Gil-Flores J., Actitudes del alumnado español hacia las ciencias en la evaluación PISA 2006, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 30, 2, pp. 131-152, (2012); Graesser A., Person N.K., Question Asking during Tutoring, American Educational Research Journal, 31, pp. 104-137, (1994); Harlen W., Teaching, Learning and Assessing Science, (2004); Hoffman J., Multiage Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices, Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 18, 1, pp. 5-17, (2003); Holstermann N., Grube D., Bogeholz S., The Influence of Emotion on Students´ Performance in Dissection Exercises, Journal of Biological Education, 43, 4, pp. 164-168, (2009); Kattman U., Aquatics, Flyers, Creepers and Terrestrials- Students’ Conceptions of Animal Classification, Journal of Biological Education, 35, 5, pp. 141-147, (2001); Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning, (2000); Responsible Use of Live Animals and Dissection in the Science Classroom, NSTA Position Statement, (2005); Osborne J., Dillon J., Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections, A Report to the Nuffield Foundation, (2008); Osborne J., Simon S., Collins S., Attitudes Towards Science: A Review of the Literature and Its Implications, International Journal of Science Education, 25, 9, pp. 1049-1079, (2003); Palmer D.H., Student Interest Generated during and Inquiry Skills Lesson, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 2, pp. 147-165, (2009); Pedrinaci E., Caamano A., Canal P., de Pro A., 11 ideas clave. El desarrollo de la competencia científica [11 key ideas. The development of scientific competence, (2012); Potvin P., Hasni A., Interest, Motivation and Attitude Towards Science and Technology at K-12 Levels: A Systematic Review of 12 Years of Educational Research, Studies in Science Education, 50, 1, pp. 85-129, (2014); Roca M., Marquez C., Sanmarti N., Las preguntas de los alumnos: una propuesta de análisis, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 31, 1, pp. 95-114, (2013); Rodrigues A., Mattos C., Contexto, negociación y actividad en una clase de física, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 29, 2, pp. 263-274, (2011); Solbes J., Montserrat R., Furio C., El desinterés del alumnado hacia el aprendizaje de la ciencia: implicaciones en su enseñanza, Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales y Sociales, 21, pp. 91-117, (2007); Swarat S., Ortony A., Revelle W., Activity Matters: Understanding Student Interest in School Science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 4, pp. 515-537, (2012); Topping K.J., Trends in Peer Learning, Educational Psychology, 25, 6, pp. 631-645, (2005); Torres T., Preguntas de los estudiantes sobre dispositivos experimentales en distintas situaciones didácticas: Génesis y tipología, PhD diss., (2013); Valle A., Gonzalez A., Rodriguez S., Reflexiones sobre la motivación y el aprendizaje a partir de la ley orgánica de educación (L.O.E.): ‘del dicho al hecho…’, Papeles del Psicólogo, 27, 3, pp. 135-138, (2006); Wartofsky M.W., Introducción a la filosofía de la ciencia [Introduction to the philosophy os science, (1976); Wheeler A.G., Justifying the Dissection of Animals in Biology Teaching, Australian Science Teachers Journal, 39, pp. 30-35, (1993); Windschitl M., Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice?, Science Education, 87, 1, pp. 112-143, (2003); Wubbels T., Brekelmans M., Two Decades of Research on Teacher-Student Relationships in Class, International Journal of Educational Research, 43, pp. 6-24, (2005)","E. Cascarosa; Department of Didactics of Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain; email: ecascano@unizar.es","","Routledge","","","","","","00219266","","","","English","J. Biol. Educ.","Article","Final","","Scopus","2-s2.0-85066868664"
"Mambrey S.; Timm J.; Landskron J.J.; Schmiemann P.","Mambrey, Sophia (57215420805); Timm, Justin (57210977815); Landskron, Jana Julia (57218163071); Schmiemann, Philipp (57196048872)","57215420805; 57210977815; 57218163071; 57196048872","The impact of system specifics on systems thinking","2020","Journal of Research in Science Teaching","57","10","","1632","1651","19","35","10.1002/tea.21649","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85088135807&doi=10.1002%2ftea.21649&partnerID=40&md5=3f76cb5e302d0e8a47a5368e02c7ad2e","Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany","Mambrey S., Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Timm J., Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Landskron J.J., Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Schmiemann P., Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany","Present and future social and ecological challenges are complex both to understand and to attempt to solve. To comprehend the complex systems underlying these issues, students need systems thinking skills. However, in science education, a uniform delineation of systems thinking across contexts has yet to be established. While there seems to be consensus on a number of key skills from a theoretical perspective, it remains uncertain whether it is possible to distinguish levels of systems thinking, and if so, how they would be determined. In this study, we investigated the impact of the specifics of a system on the skills and levels of systems thinking. We administered a 36-item multiple-choice test to 196 Grade 5 and 6 students. For our analysis, we followed a quantitative approach, applying a systems thinking model that incorporates the latest insights on the levels and skills of systems thinking in geography to the context of ecology. By following an Item Response Theory approach, we confirmed a set of systems thinking skills that are necessary to understand complex systems in ecology: identifying system organization, analyzing system behavior, and system modeling. We examined whether individual skill levels can be distinguished to determine whether a system's general principle or system-specific features cause difficulty for students. Our results indicate that system specifics, such as type of relation within ecosystems (e.g., predator–prey), appear to determine the formation of levels. Students struggled most with the difference between basic, direct cause-and-effect relationships and indirect effects. Once they understood the relevance of indirect relationships in moderately complex systems, a further increase in complexity caused little additional difficulty. Accordingly, we suggest that systems thinking should be examined from a variety of perspectives. To promote interdisciplinary learning, a systems thinking model that defines key commonalities across fields while leaving space for system specifics is needed. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.","biology education; interdisciplinary education; systems thinking","Ecology; Education computing; System theory; Cause-and-effect relationships; Identifying system; Indirect effects; Individual skills; Interdisciplinary learning; Item response theory; Quantitative approach; Science education; Students","","","","","Interdisciplinary Centre for Educational Research; Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine‐Westphalia; Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF, (01PL16075); Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science, MRIS; Universität Duisburg-Essen, UDE","Funding text 1: This project was conducted under the auspices of the graduate school for primary education “SUSe I” of the University of Duisburg‐Essen and was financially supported by the Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine‐Westphalia, and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) under reference number 01PL16075. We contracted professional editing services by Editage and Wiley Editing Service, financially supported by the IZfB (Interdisciplinary Centre for Educational Research) of the University of Duisburg‐Essen. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders. We confirm that there are no potential conflicts arising from these arrangements. ; Funding text 2: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Grant/Award Number: 01PL16075; Interdisciplinary Centre for Educational Research (IZfB) of the University of Duisburg‐Essen; Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine‐Westphalia: Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL Funding information ","Batzri O., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Cohen C., Orion N., Understanding the earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cyclic thinking among university students, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24, pp. 761-775, (2015); Begon M., Townsend C.R., Harper J.L., Ecology: From individuals to ecosystems, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, pp. 540-563, (2010); Boersma K., Waarlo A.J., Klaassen K., The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education, Journal of Biological Education, 45, pp. 190-197, (2011); Bond T.G., Fox C.M., Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences, (2007); Booth Sweeney L., Sterman J.D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Booth Sweeney L., Sterman J.D., Thinking about systems: Student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems, System Dynamics Review, 23, pp. 285-311, (2007); Duschl R., Maeng S., Sezen A., Learning progressions and teaching sequences: A review and analysis, Studies in Science Education, 47, pp. 123-182, (2011); Eilam B., Reisfeld D., A curriculum unit for promoting complex system thinking: The case of combined system dynamics and agent based models for population growth, Journal of Advances in Education Research, 2, pp. 39-60, (2017); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., 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, pp. 655-674, (2009); Field A., Miles J., Field Z., Discovering statistics using R, (2012); Griffiths A.K., Grant B.A.C., High school students' understanding of food webs: Identification of a learning hierarchy and related misconceptions, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, pp. 421-436, (1985); Grimm N.B., Chapin F.S., Bierwagen B., Gonzalez P., Groffman P.M., Luo Y., Williamson C.E., The impacts of climate change on ecosystem structure and function, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11, pp. 474-482, (2013); Grotzer T.A., Solis S.L., Action at an attentional distance: A study of children's reasoning about causes and effects involving spatial and attentional discontinuity, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, pp. 1003-1030, (2015); Hallmann C.A., Sorg M., Jongejans E., Siepel H., Hofland N., Schwan H., de Kroon H., More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas, PLoS ONE, 12, (2017); Hartig J., Hohler J., Multidimensional IRT models for the assessment of competencies, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35, pp. 57-63, (2009); Hmelo C.E., Holton D.L., Kolodner J.L., Designing to learn about complex systems, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, pp. 247-298, (2000); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Azevedo R., Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, pp. 53-61, (2006); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Marathe S., Liu L., Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, pp. 307-331, (2007); Hmelo-Silver C.E., Pfeffer M.G., Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions, Cognitive Science, 28, pp. 127-138, (2004); Hogan K., Assessing students' systems reasoning in ecology, Journal of Biological Education, 35, pp. 22-28, (2000); Hokayem H., Patterns of reasoning about ecological system reasoning for early elementary students, Science Education International, 27, pp. 117-135, (2016); Hokayem H., Gotwals A.W., Early elementary students' understanding of complex ecosystems: A learning progression approach, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, pp. 1524-1545, (2016); Hokayem H., Ma J., Jin H., A learning progression for feedback loop reasoning at lower elementary level, Journal of Biological Education, 49, pp. 246-260, (2015); Jacobson M.J., Wilensky U., Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, pp. 11-34, (2006); Jordan R.C., Hmelo-Silver C., Liu L., Gray S.A., Fostering reasoning about complex systems: Using the aquarium to teach systems thinking, Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 12, pp. 55-64, (2013); Kang T., Cohen A.S., IRT model selection methods for dichotomous items, Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, pp. 331-358, (2007); Kass R.E., Raftery A.E., Bayes factors, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, pp. 773-795, (1995); Knippels M.C.P.J., Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education: The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy, (2002); Lee T.D., Jones M.G., Chesnutt K., Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle, Research in Science Education, 49, pp. 137-172, (2019); Mambrey S., Schreiber N., Schmiemann P., Young students' reasoning about ecosystems: The role of systems thinking, knowledge, conceptions, and representation, Research of Science Education., (2020); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Ulrich-Riedhammer E.M., System competence modelling: Theoretical foundation and empirical validation of a model involving natural, social, and human-environment systems, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, pp. 685-711, (2018); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Ulrich-Riedhammer E.M., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Wie lässt sich Systemdenken messen? Darstellung eines empirisch validierten Kompetenzmodells zur Erfassung geographischer Systemkompetenz [How can systems thinking be measured? Representation of an empirically validated competence model for the assessment of geographic system competence], Geographie, Aktuell & Schule, 37, pp. 4-16, (2015); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Ulrich-Riedhammer E.M., Buchholz J., Hartig J., Systemkompetenz im Geographieunterricht: Ein theoretisch hergeleitetes und empirisch überprüftes Kompetenzstrukturmodell. [system competence in geography lessons: A theoretically derived and empirically verified competence structure model], Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 22, pp. 147-163, (2016); A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, (2012); Next generation science standards: For states, by states, (2013); Neyman J., Pearson E.S., On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part II, Biometrika, 20A, pp. 263-294, (1928); Neyman J., Pearson E.S., On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 231, pp. 289-337, (1933); Orion N., Libarkin J.C., Earth system science education, Handbook of research on science education, volume II, pp. 481-496, (2014); Rempfler A., Uphues R., System competence in geography education: Development of competence models, diagnosing pupils' achievement, European Journal of Geography, 3, pp. 6-22, (2012); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, pp. 705-725, (2010); Robitzsch A., Kiefer T., Wu M., TAM: Test analysis modules, (2018); Samon S., Levy S.T., Interactions between reasoning about complex systems and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, pp. 58-86, (2019); Schneider L., Chalmers R.P., Debelak R., Merkle E.C., Model selection of nested and non-nested item response models using Vuong tests, Multivariate Behavioral Research, (2019); Schwarz G., Estimating the dimension of a model, The Annals of Statistics, 6, pp. 461-464, (1978); Snapir Z., Eberbach C., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Hmelo-Silver C., Tripto J., Characterising the development of the understanding of human body systems in high-school biology students – A longitudinal study, International Journal of Science Education, 39, pp. 2092-2127, (2017); Sommer C., Lucken M., System competence – Are elementary students able to deal with a biological system?, Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, pp. 125-143, (2010); Tripto J., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Snapir Z., Amit M., How is the body's systemic nature manifested amongst high school biology students?, Instructional Science, 45, pp. 73-98, (2017); Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, (2015); Verhoeff R.P., Knippels M.C.P.J., Gilissen M.G.R., Boersma K.T., The theoretical nature of systems thinking. Perspectives on systems thinking in biology education, Frontiers in Education, 3, pp. 518-560, (2018); Verhoeff R.P., Waarlo A.J., Boersma K.T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, International Journal of Science Education, 30, pp. 543-568, (2008); von Bertalanffy L., General system theory: Foundations, development, applications, (1973); Wagenmakers E.-J., A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, pp. 779-804, (2007); Wilensky U., Resnick M., Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, pp. 3-19, (1999)","S. Mambrey; Faculty of Biology, Biology Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; email: sophia.mambrey@uni-due.de","","John Wiley and Sons Inc","","","","","","00224308","","JRSTA","","English","J. Res. Sci. Teach.","Article","Final","All Open Access; Hybrid Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85088135807"
"Bozkurt N.O.; Bozkurt E.","Bozkurt, Nidan Oyman (59125368400); Bozkurt, Erkan (58987722900)","59125368400; 58987722900","Systems Thinking in Education: A Bibliometric Analysis","2024","Egitim ve Bilim","49","218","","205","231","26","0","10.15390/EB.2024.12634","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85192983743&doi=10.15390%2fEB.2024.12634&partnerID=40&md5=6f994fa81e6f9b3c169c1a3948eadea1","Uşak University, Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Sciences, Turkey; Uşak University, Faculty of Education, Department of Turkish and Social Sciences Education, Turkey","Bozkurt N.O., Uşak University, Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Sciences, Turkey; Bozkurt E., Uşak University, Faculty of Education, Department of Turkish and Social Sciences Education, Turkey","The aim of this paper is to exhibit a bibliometric analysis of systems thinking research in the field of education. A total of 1020 articles from 459 sources indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database in the years 1984-2022 were used in the analysis. The analysis aims to provide a review of systems thinking research in education by identifying the dynamics of research by presenting a wide in-depth knowledge concerning the periodical process, current situation, and future directions. Research on systems thinking has been acknowledged to demonstrate a significant increase in recent years. Bibliometric data proves that systems thinking research concerning educational studies exhibits a parallel increase too. This is mainly due to UNESCO's declaration of “The Education for 2030 Framework for Action” in 2015. There, systems thinking was defined as a key competency among eight competencies for education for sustainable development. The analysis suggests that systems thinking research in education is mainly directed to subjects of science education and related fields. Although the current research view does not demonstrate an extensive collaboration among researchers worldwide, researchers can be said to acknowledge each other's work sufficiently. © 2024 Turkish Education Association. All rights reserved.","Bibliometric analysis; Education; Education for sustainable development (ESD); Philosophy of education; Science education; Systems thinking","","","","","","","","The reason behind the use of “system* thinking” for the search query was because “systems thinking” also appears in the publications in related forms such as “system thinking” and “systemic thinking”; Abramo G., D'Angelo C. A., Di Costa F., Research collaboration and productivity: Is there correlation?, Higher Education, 57, pp. 155-171, (2009); Aguilar-Cisneros J. R., Valerdi R., Sullivan B. P., Students' systems thinking competency level detection through software cost estimation concept modeling, Programming and Computing Software, 48, 8, pp. 499-512, (2022); Ahmi A., Bibliometric analysis for beginners: A starter guide to begin with a bibliometric study using Scopus dataset and tools such as Microsoft Excel, Harzing's Publish or Perish and VOSviewer software, (2021); Aria M., Cuccurullo C., Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis, Journal of Informetrics, 11, 4, pp. 959-975, (2017); Arnold R. D., Wade J. P., A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Ateskan A., Lane J. F., Assessing teachers' systems thinking skills during a professional development program in Turkey, Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, (2018); Banathy B. H., Systems design of education: A journey to create the future, (1991); Banathy B. H., Developing a systems view of education, Educational Technology, 35, 3, pp. 53-57, (1995); Bates A., Transcending systems thinking in education reform: Implications for policy-makers and school leaders, Journal of Education Policy, 28, 1, pp. 38-54, (2012); Beaver D., Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future, Scientometrics, 52, 3, pp. 365-377, (2001); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., A study of junior high students' perceptions of the water cycle, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 4, pp. 366-373, (2005); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., System thinking skills at the elementary school level, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 5, pp. 540-563, (2010); Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Orion N., Four case studies, six years later: Developing system thinking skills in junior high school and sustaining them over time, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 10, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Bielik T., Delen I., Krell M., Ben-Zvi Assaraf O., Characterising the literature on the teaching and learning of system thinking and complexity in stem education: A bibliometric analysis and research synthesis, Journal for STEM Education Research, 6, 1, (2023); Boersma K., Waarlo A. J., Klaassen K., The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education, Journal of Biological Education, 45, 4, pp. 190-197, (2011); Bollen J., Sompel H., Hagberg A., Chute R., A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures, Plos One, 6, 4, (2009); Bornmann L., Daniel H. D., What do we know about the h index?, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 9, pp. 1381-1385, (2007); Checkland P., Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, pp. S11-S58, (2000); Chen C., Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature, Journal of Data and Information Science, 2, 2, pp. 1-40, (2017); Churchman C. W., The systems approach, (1968); Clark K., Hoffman A., Educating healthcare students: Strategies to teach systems thinking to prepare new healthcare graduates, Journal of Professional Nursing, 35, 3, pp. 195-200, (2019); Cronbach L. J., Meehl P. E., Construct validity in psychological tests, Psychological Bulletin, 52, 4, pp. 281-302, (1955); Davila F., Plant R., Jacobs B., Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking, Environmental Conservation, 48, 1, pp. 16-24, (2021); Davis A.P., Dent E. B., Wharff D. M., A conceptual model of systems thinking leadership in community colleges, Systemic Practice And Action Research, 28, 4, pp. 333-353, (2015); Dhukaram A. V., Sgouropoulou C., Feldman G., Amini A., Higher education provision using systems thinking approach - case studies, European Journal of Engineering Education, 43, 1, pp. 3-25, (2018); Donthu N., Kumar S., Mukherjee D., Pandey N., Lim W. M., How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines, Journal of Business Research, 133, pp. 285-296, (2021); Dunnion J., O'Donovan B., Systems thinking and higher education: The vanguard method, Systemic Practice And Action Research, 27, pp. 23-37, (2014); Egghe L., Theory and practice of the g-index, Scientometrics, 69, 1, pp. 131-152, (2006); Egghe L., Note on a possible decomposition of the h-Index, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64, 4, pp. 871-871, (2013); Elmas R., Arslan H., Pamuk S., Pesman H., Sozbilir M., Systems thinking approach in science education, Turkiye Kimya Dernegi Dergisi Kisim C Kimya Egitimi, 1, 6, pp. 107-132, (2021); Ferreira C., Robertson J., Examining the boundaries of entrepreneurial marketing: A bibliographic analysis, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 22, 2, pp. 161-180, (2020); Flynn A. B., Orgill M. K., Ho F. M., York S., Matlin S. A., Constable D. J. C., Mahaffy P. G., Future directions for systems thinking in chemistry education: Putting the pieces together, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 3000-3005, (2019); Forrester J. W., Industrial dynamics: A major breakthrough for decision makers, Harvard Business Review, 36, pp. 37-66, (1958); Garfield E., Bradford's law and related statistical patterns, Essays of an Information Scientist, 4, 19, pp. 476-483, (1980); Gero A., Zach E., High school programme in electro-optics: A case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking, The International Journal of Engineering Education, 30, 5, pp. 1190-1199, (2014); Gregorcic T., Torkar G., Using the structure-behavior-function model in conjunction with augmented reality helps students understand the complexity of the circulatory system, Advances in Physiology Education, 46, 3, pp. 367-374, (2022); Grohs J. R., Kirk G. R., Soledad M. M., Knight D. B., Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, pp. 110-130, (2018); Hallinger P., Kovacevic J., A bibliometric review of research on educational administration: Science mapping the literature, 1960 to 2018, Review of Educational Research, 89, 3, pp. 335-369, (2019); Heradio R., De La Torre L., Galan D., Cabrerizo F. J., Herrera-Viedma E., Dormido S., Virtual and remote labs in education: A bibliometric analysis, Computers & Education, 98, pp. 14-38, (2016); Hirsch J. E., An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 46, pp. 16569-16572, (2005); Hirsch J. E., Does the h-index have predictive power?, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 49, pp. 19193-19198, (2007); Hmelo-Silver C., Barrows H., Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning facilitator, Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 1, pp. 21-39, (2006); Hossain N. U. I., Dayarathna V. L., Nagahi M., Jaradat R., Systems thinking: A review and bibliometric analysis, Systems, 8, 3, (2020); Hussain N., Zakuan N., Yaacob T., Hashim H., Hasan M., Employee green behavior at workplace: A review and bibliometric analysis, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13, 3, pp. 1679-1690, (2023); Hyk V., Vysochan O., Vysochan O., Integrated reporting of mining enterprises: Bibliometric analysis, Studies in Business and Economics, 3, 17, pp. 90-99, (2022); Jackson M. C., Systems methodology for the management sciences, (1991); Kafai Y., Proctor C., A revaluation of computational thinking in k-12 education: Moving toward computational literacies, Educational Researcher, 2, 51, pp. 146-151, (2021); Kali Y., Orion N., Eylon B.S., Effect of knowledge integration activities on students' perception of the earth's crust as a cyclic system, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 6, pp. 545-565, (2003); Katz J. S., Martin B. R., What is research collaboration?, Research Policy, 26, 1, pp. 1-18, (1997); Kellam N. N., Maher M. A., Peters W. H., The faculty perspective on holistic and systems thinking in American and Australian mechanical engineering programmes, European Journal of Engineering Education, 33, 1, pp. 45-57, (2008); Leydesdorff L., Rafols I., A global map of science based on the isi subject categories, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2, 60, pp. 348-362, (2009); Mahaffy P., Krief A., Hopf H., Mehta G., Matlin S. A., Reorienting chemistry education through systems thinking, Nature Reviews Chemistry, 2, pp. 1-3, (2018); Mahaffy P. G., Matlin S. A., Whalen J. M., Holme T. A., Integrating the molecular basis of sustainability into general chemistry through systems thinking, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2730-2741, (2019); Mao X., Guo L., Fu P., Xiang C., The status and trends of coronavirus research: A global bibliometric and visualized analysis, Medicine, 99, 22, (2020); Martin S., Diaz G., Sancristobal E., Gil R., Castro M., Peire J., New technology trends in education: Seven years of forecasts and convergence, Computers & Education, 57, 3, pp. 1893-1906, (2011); Meadows D. H., Thinking in systems: A primer, (2008); Mehren R., Rempfler A., Assessing systems thinking in geography, Assessment in geographical education: An international perspective, pp. 31-54, (2022); Merigo J. M., Pedrycz W., Weber R., de la Sotta C., Fifty years of information sciences: A bibliometric overview, Information Sciences, 432, pp. 245-268, (2018); Michalopoulou E., Shallcross D. E., Atkins E., Tierney A., Norman N. C., Preist, Ninos I., The end of simple problems: Repositioning chemistry in higher education and society using a systems thinking approach and the United Nations' sustainable development goals as a framework, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2825-2835, (2019); Mikhaylovsky M., Karavanova L., Medved E., Deberdeeva N., Buzinova L., Zaychenko A., The Model of stem education as an innovative technology in the system of higher professional education of the Russian Federation, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 9, 17, (2021); Miller A. N., Kordova S., Grinshpoun T., Shoval S., Identifying a systems thinker: Matching a candidate's systems thinking abilities with the job, Applied System Innovation, 5, 2, (2022); Momsen J., Speth E. B., Wyse S., Long T., Using systems and systems thinking to unify biology education, CBE-Life Sciences Education, 21, 2, (2022); Monat J. P., Gannon T. F., Amissah M., The case for systems thinking in undergraduate engineering education, International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), 12, 3, pp. 50-88, (2022); Muljana P. S., Nissenson P. M., Luo T., Examining factors influencing faculty buy-in and involvement in the accreditation process: A cause analysis grounded in systems thinking, TechTrends, 64, pp. 730-739, (2020); Ndaruhutse S., Jones C., Riggall A., Why systems thinking is important for the education sector, (2019); Ng J., Liu H., Shah A., Wieland L., Moher D., Characteristics of bibliometric analyses of the complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine literature: A scoping review protocol, F1000research, 12, (2023); Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J., Introduction to systems thinking for the chemistry education community, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2720-2729, (2019); Pinto M., Fernandez-Pascual R., Caballero-Mariscal D., Sales D., Guerrero D., Uribe A., Scientific production on mobile information literacy in higher education: A bibliometric analysis (2006-2017), Scientometrics, 120, 1, pp. 57-85, (2019); Qadhi S. M., Al-Thani H., Reimaging continuing professional development in higher education - toward sustainability, The sustainable university of the future, pp. 43-61, (2023); Radhakrishnan S., Erbis S., Isaacs J. A., Kamarthi S., Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature, PLOS ONE, 12, 3, (2017); Rezapouraghdam H., Akhshik A., Tracing the complexity-sustainability nexus in a small Mediterranean island: Implications for hospitality and tourism education, Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 13, 4, pp. 476-487, (2021); Richmond B., Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond, System Dynamics Review, 9, 2, pp. 113-133, (1993); Richmond B., Systems thinking/system dynamics: Let's just get on with it, System Dynamics Review, 10, 2-3, pp. 135-157, (1994); Rieckmann M., Future-oriented higher education: Which key competencies should be fostered through university teaching and learning?, Futures, 44, 2, pp. 127-135, (2012); Riess W., Mischo C., Promoting systems thinking through biology lessons, International Journal of Science Education, 32, 6, pp. 705-725, (2010); Schuler S., Fanta D., Rosenkraenzer F., Riess W., Systems thinking within the scope of education for sustainable development (ESD) - a heuristic competence model as a basis for (science) teacher education, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42, 2, pp. 192-204, (2018); Schultz M., Lai J., Ferguson J., Delaney S., Topics amenable to a systems thinking approach: Secondary and tertiary perspectives, Journal of Chemical Education, 10, 98, pp. 3100-3109, (2021); Senge P., The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, (1994); Shukla D., Modeling systems thinking in action among higher education leaders with fuzzy multi-criteria decision making, Management & Marketing, 13, 2, pp. 946-965, (2018); Singam C., A Vision for universal and standardized access to systems competency education, Insight, 3, 25, pp. 30-34, (2022); Sonnenwald D., Scientific collaboration, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, pp. 643-681, (2007); Sterman J. D., Does formal system dynamics training improve people's understanding of accumulation?, System Dynamics Review, 26, 4, pp. 316-334, (2010); Stevens L. L., Whitehead C., Singhal A., Cultivating cooperative relationships: Identifying learning gaps when teaching students systems thinking biomimicry, Biomimetics, 7, 4, (2022); Suslov A. Y., Salimgareev M. V., Khammatov S. S., Innovative methods of teaching history at modern universities, The Education and Science Journal, 19, 9, pp. 70-85, (2017); Sweeney L. B., Sterman J. D., Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory, System Dynamics Review, 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Szozda A. R., Bruyere K., Lee H., Mahaffy P. G., Flynn A. B., Investigating educators' perspectives toward systems thinking in chemistry education from international contexts, Journal of Chemical Education, 99, 7, pp. 2474-2483, (2022); Taris T., Citation analysis in research evaluation, Gedrag & Organisatie, 2, 19, pp. 204-206, (2006); Ulrich W., Critical heuristics of social planning: A new approach to practical philosophy, (1983); United Nations decade of education for sustainable development (2005-2014): International implementation scheme, (2005); Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all, (2016); United Nations millennium development goals, (2000); Transforming Our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, (2015); Agenda 21, (1992); Verhoeff R. P., Waarlo A. J., Boersma K. T., Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology, International Journal of Science Education, 30, 4, pp. 543-568, (2008); Von Bertalanffy L., General system theory: Foundations, development, (1968); Wiek A., Withycombe L., Redman C. L., Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development, Sustainability Science, 6, pp. 203-218, (2011); Wu Y. C. J., Shen J. P., Higher education for sustainable development: A systematic review, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 17, 5, pp. 633-651, (2016); Yakymenko Y., Poplavko Y., Lavrysh Y., Steam as a factor of ındividual systems thinking development for students of electronics speciality, Advanced Education, 7, 15, pp. 4-11, (2020); York S., Orgill M., ChEMIST table: A tool for designing or modifying instruction for a systems thinking approach in chemistry education, Journal of Chemical Education, 97, 8, pp. 2114-2129, (2020); York S., Lavi R., Dori Y. J., Orgill M., Applications of systems thinking in STEM education, Journal of Chemical Education, 96, 12, pp. 2742-2751, (2019); Zupic I., Cater T., Bibliometric methods in management and organization, Organizational Research Methods, 18, 3, pp. 429-472, (2015)","","","Turkish Education Association","","","","","","13001337","","","","English","Egitim Bilim","Article","Final","All Open Access; Gold Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85192983743"
"Orgill M.; York S.; Mackellar J.","Orgill, MaryKay (15623569000); York, Sarah (57211609177); Mackellar, Jennifer (56744816200)","15623569000; 57211609177; 56744816200","Introduction to Systems Thinking for the Chemistry Education Community","2019","Journal of Chemical Education","96","12","","2720","2729","9","150","10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00169","https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85070638983&doi=10.1021%2facs.jchemed.9b00169&partnerID=40&md5=510855d566de88595c5d3bace1b8ae59","Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States; ACS Green Chemistry Institute, American Chemical Society, Washington, 20036, DC, United States","Orgill M., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States; York S., Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, 89154, NV, United States; Mackellar J., ACS Green Chemistry Institute, American Chemical Society, Washington, 20036, DC, United States","Within recent history, both science research and science education have been largely reductionist in perspective. While the reductionist approach has resulted in a significant increase in our knowledge of the natural world and in great technological advances, it is not sufficient for addressing global world challenges, such as sustainability, pollution, climate change, and poverty. We, as members of the Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education (STICE) project, argue that for science in general, and chemistry in specific, to continue to advance and for citizens to be prepared to participate knowledgeably and democratically in science-related policy decisions, the reductionist approaches that are commonly used in chemistry research and chemistry education must be complemented with a more holistic approach. Systems thinking is such an approach. This article discusses the historical development, describes the key characteristics, and presents some skills and competencies associated with systems thinking. Our intention is to provide chemical educators with enough basic information about systems thinking that they can consider why and how such an approach might be applied in the education of both future chemists and future global citizens. © 2019 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.","General Public; History/Philosophy; Learning Theories; Problem Solving/Decision Making; Systems Thinking","","","","","","","","Mayer V.J., Kumano Y., The Role of System Science in Future School Science Curricula, Stud. Sci. Educ., 34, pp. 71-91, (1999); Arnold R.D., Wade J.P., A Definition of Systems Thinking: A Systems Approach, Procedia Computer Science, 44, pp. 669-678, (2015); Booth Sweeney L., Learning to Connect the Dots: Developing Children's Systems Literacy, Solutions Journal, 3, pp. 55-62, (2012); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Bathtub Dynamics: Initial Results of a Systems Thinking Inventory, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 16, pp. 249-286, (2000); Sweeney L.B., Sterman J.D., Thinking about Systems: Student and Teacher Conceptions of Natural and Social Systems, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 23, pp. 285-311, (2007); Caulfield C.W., Maj S.P., A Case for Systems Thinking and System Dynamics, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, (2001); Cloud J.P., Some Systems Thinking Concepts for Environmental Educators during the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, Appl. Environ. Educ. Comm. Int. J., 4, pp. 225-228, (2005); Evagorou M., Korfiatis K., Nicolaou C., Constantinou C., An Investigation of the Potential of Interactive Simulations for Developing System Thinking Skills in Elementary School: A Case Study with Fifth-Graders, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 31, pp. 655-674, (2009); Fisher D.M., Everybody Thinking Differently"": K-12 Is a Leverage Point, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 27, pp. 394-411, (2011); Forrester J.W., Learning through System Dynamics as Preparation for the 21st Century, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 32, pp. 187-203, (2016); Jacobson M.J., Problem Solving, Cognition, and Complex Systems: Differences between Experts and Novices, Complexity, 6, pp. 41-49, (2001); Jacobson M.J., So H.-J., Lee J., Wilensky U., Blikstein P., Sengupta P., Levy S.T., Noss R., Complex systems and learning: Empirical research, issues, and ""seeing scientific knowledge with new eyes, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on the Learning Sciences, 3, pp. 266-273, (2008); Lyneis D.A., Bringing System Dynamics to a School near You: Suggestions for Introducing and Sustaining System Dynamics in K-12 Education, (2013); Maani K.E., Maharaj V., Links between Systems Thinking and Complex Decision Making, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 20, pp. 21-48, (2004); Mandinach E.B., Cline H.F., Systems, science, and schools, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 195-206, (1993); Mathews L.G., Jones A., Using Systems Thinking to Improve Interdisciplinary Learning Outcomes: Reflections on a Pilot Study in Land Economics, Issues in Integrative Studies, 26, pp. 73-104, (2008); Matlin S.A., Mehta G., Hopf H., Krief A., One-World Chemistry and Systems Thinking, Nat. Chem., 8, pp. 393-398, (2016); Orion N., A Holistic Approach for Science Education for All, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science Technology Education, 3, pp. 111-118, (2007); Richmond B., Systems Thinking: Critical Thinking Skills for the 1990s and beyond, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 9, pp. 113-133, (1993); Sabelli N.H., Complexity, Technology, Science, and Education, J. Learn. Sci., 15, pp. 5-9, (2006); Sheehy N.P., Wylie J.W., McGuinness C., Orchard G., How Children Solve Environmental Problems: Using Computer Simulations to Investigate Systems Thinking, Environ. Educ. Res., 6, pp. 109-126, (2000); Fang F.C., Casadevall A., Reductionistic and Holistic Science, Infect. Immun., 79, pp. 1401-1404, (2011); Wheatly M., Leadership and the New Science: Learning about Organization from an Orderly Universe, (1994); MacInnis C., Holistic and Reductionist Approaches in Special Education: Conflicts and Common Ground, McGill Journal of Education, 30, pp. 7-20, (1995); Allen R.T., Reductionism in Education, Philosophical Inquiry in Education, 5, pp. 20-35, (1991); Odum E.P., The Emergence of Ecology as a New Integrative Discipline, Science, 195, pp. 1289-1293, (1977); Adams D., The Salmon of Doubt: Hitchhiking the Galaxy One Last Time, (2002); How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, (2000); Meadows D.H., Thinking in Systems: A Primer, (2008); Hammond D., Philosophical and Ethical Foundations of Systems Thinking, tripleC, 3, pp. 20-27, (2005); Hammond D., Edson M.C., Buckle Henning P., Sankaran S., Philosophical Foundations of Systems Research, A Guide to Systems Research: Philosophy, Processes and Practice, pp. 1-19, (2017); Hammond D., Toward a Science of Synthesis: The Heritage of General Systems Theory, (1997); Hammond D., Exploring the Genealogy of Systems Thinking, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 19, pp. 429-439, (2002); Eddington A., The Nature of the Physical World, (1928); Bertalanffy L., General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, (1968); Booth Sweeney L., Assadourian E., All Systems Go! Developing a Generation of ""Systems-Smart"" Kids, EarthEd: Rethinking Education on a Changing Planet, pp. 141-153, (2017); Bausch K.C., Roots and Branches: A Brief, Picaresque, Personal History of Systems Theory, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 19, pp. 419-428, (2002); Kim D.H., Introduction to Systems Thinking, (1999); Jegstad K.M., Sinnes A.T., Chemistry Teaching for the Future: A Model for Secondary Chemistry Education for Sustainable Development, Int. J. Sci.Educ., 37, pp. 655-683, (2015); NO<sub>2</sub>/N<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub> Equilibrium Demonstration, University of Oregon ChemDemos website; Price D.S., Brooks D.W., Extensiveness and Perceptions of Lecture Demonstrations in the High School Chemistry Classroom, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 13, pp. 420-427, (2012); Banerjee A.C., Misconceptions of Students and Teachers in Chemical Equilibrium, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 13, pp. 487-484, (1991); Holme T., Murphy K., The ACS Exam Institute Undergraduate Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map I: General Chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 89, pp. 721-723, (2012); Gilbert J.K., On the Nature of ""Context"" in Chemical Education, Int. J. Sci.Educ., 28, pp. 957-976, (2006); Parchmann I., Grasel C., Baer A., Nentwig P., Demuth R., Ralle B., Chemie im Kontext"": A Symbiotic Implementation of a Context-Based Teaching and Learning Approach, Int. J. Sci.Educ., 28, pp. 1041-1062, (2006); Bennett J., Lubben F., Context-Based Chemistry: The Salters Approach, Int. J. Sci.Educ., 28, pp. 999-1015, (2006); Ramsden J.M., How Does a Context-Based Approach Influence Understanding of Key Chemical Ideas at 16+, Int. J. Sci.Educ., 19, pp. 697-710, (1997); Ultay N., Cllk M., A Thematic Review of Studies into the Effectiveness of Context-Based Chemistry Curricula, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 21, pp. 686-701, (2012); Verhoeff R.P., Knippels M.-C.P.J., Gilissen M.G.R., Boersma K.T., (2018). The Theoretical Nature of Systems Thinking. Perspectives on Systems Thinking in Biology Education, Frontiers in Education, 3, pp. 1-11, (2018); Richmond B., The ""Thinking"" in Systems Thinking: How Can We Make It Easier to Master, Systems Thinker, 8, 2, pp. 1-5, (1997); Richmond B., Dynamic Thinking: A Behavioral Context, Systems Thinker, 8, 6, pp. 6-7, (1997); Richmond B., Systems Thinking/System Dynamics: Let's Just Get on with It, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 10, pp. 135-157, (1994); Aubrecht K.B., Dori Y.J., Holme T.A., Levi R., Matlin S.A., Orgill M., Skaza-Acosta H., Graphical Tools for Conceptualizing Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education, J. Chem. Educ., (2019); Assaraf O.B.-Z., Orion N., Development of System Thinking Skills in the Context of Earth System Education, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 42, pp. 518-560, (2005); Ben-Zvi-Assaraf O., Orion N., Four Case Studies, Six Years Later: Developing System Thinking Skills in Junior High School and Sustaining Them over Time, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47, pp. 1253-1280, (2010); Burmeister M., Rauch F., Eilks I., Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and Chemistry Education, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 13, pp. 59-68, (2012); Calhoun J.G., Ramiah K., Weist E.M., Shortell S.M., Development of a Core Competency Model for the Master of Public Health Degree, Am. J. Public Health, 98, pp. 1598-1607, (2008)","M. Orgill; Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, 89154, United States; email: marykay.orgill@unlv.edu","","American Chemical Society","","","","","","00219584","","JCEDA","","English","J Chem Educ","Article","Final","All Open Access; Bronze Open Access","Scopus","2-s2.0-85070638983"