Inventing a "mid level" to make ends meet: Reasoning between the levels of complexity

Cognition and Instruction

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 1-47

  Levy, Sharona T ^a   Wilensky, Uri ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 41549090879     PISSN: 07370008     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07370000701798479     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Abrahamson, D., & Wilensky, U. (2004). S.A.M.P.L.E.R.: Statistics As Multi-Participant Learning-Environment Resource - Axes in design, teaching, and learning. In U. Wilensky (chair) & S. Papert (Discussant), Networking and complexifying the science classroom: Students simulating and making sense of complex systems using the HubNet networked architecture. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 12-16, 2004.
2. Bamberger, J. (1996). Turning music theory on its ear: Do we hear what we see; do we see what we say? International Journal ofComputers for Mathematical Learning, 7(1), 33-55.
3. Bar-Yam, Y. (1997). Dynamics of complex systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, The Advanced Book Program.
4. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.
5. Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New-York: George Braziller.
6. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Casti, J. L. (1994). Complexification: Explaining a paradoxical world through the science of surprise. New York: Harper Collins.
8. Centola, D., McKenzie, E., & Wilensky, U. (2000). Survival of the groupiest: Facilitating students' understanding of multi-level evolution through multi-agent modeling - The EACH Project. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Complex Systems. Nashua, NH: New England Complex Systems Institute.
9. th Cognitive Science (CogSci 04) conference, Chicago, IL.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Cognitive understanding levels. In A. E. Kazkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology, 2, (pp. 146-151). Oxford, NY: APA and Oxford University Press.
11. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199.
12. Colella, V. (2000). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 471-500.
13. Confrey, J. (1995). A theory of intellectual development: Part 3. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15, 36-45.
14. diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225.
16. Dopfer, K., Foster, J., & Potts, J. (2004). Micro meso macro. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14, 263-279.
17. Erez, M., & Gati, E. (2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 583-598.
18. Hammer, D. (1995). Epistemological considerations in teaching introductory physics. Science Education, 79(4), 393-413.
19. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Pfeffer, M. G. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions. Cognitive Science, 28, 127-138.
20. Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Cambridge, MA: Helix Books/Addison-Wesley.
21. Holland, J. H. (1998). Emergence: From citaos to order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
22. Ioannidou, A., Repenning, A., Lewis, C., Cherry, G., & Rader, C. (2003). Making constructionism work in the classroom. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8(1), 63-108 (special issue on agent-based modeling).
23. Jackson, S., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1996). A learner-centered tool for students building models. Communications of the ACM, 39(4), 48-49.
24. Jacobson, M. J. (200.1). Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Complexity, 6(3), 41-49.
25. Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for the laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
26. Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2000). From micro to meso: Critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. Organizational Research Metliods, 3(3), 211-236.
27. Klopfer, E. (2003). Technologies to support the creation of complex systems models - using StarLogo software with students. Biosystems, 77(1-2), 111-122.
28. Klopfer, E., Yoon, S., & Perry, J. (2005). 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), 285-297.
29. Kulikowich, J. M., & Young, M. F. (2001). Locating an ecological psychology methodology for situated action. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 165-202.
30. Laszlo, E. (Ed.) (1991). The new evolutionary paradigm. New York: Gordon and Breach.
31. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 371-387). Cambridge University Press.
32. Lemke, J. (1999). Opening up closure: Semiotics across scales. In J. Chandler & G. van de Vijver (Eds.), Closure: Emergent organizations and their dynamics (pp. 100-111). Belgium: University of Ghent.
33. Lemke, J. (2001). The long and short of it: Comments on multiple timescale studies of human activity. The Journal of the Learning Science, 70(1&2), 17-26.
34. Levy, S. T., Kim, H., & Wilensky, U. (2004). Connected chemistry - A study of secondary students using agent-based models to learn chemistry. In J. Gobert (Chair) and N. H. Sabelli (Discussant), Modeling across the curriculum (MAC): Technology, pedagogy, assessment, & research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 12-16, 2004.
35. Miller, G. A. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
36. Mohan, J. (1996). Accounts of the NHS reforms: Macro-, meso- and micro-level perspectives. Sociology of Health & Illness, 18(5), 675-698.
37. Papert, S. (1972), Teaching children to be mathematicians versus teaching about mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 3(3), 249-262.
38. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
39. Penner, D. E. (2000). Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students' under-standing of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 784-806.
40. Repenning, A., Ionnidou, A., & Zola, J. (2000). AgentsSheets: End-user programmable simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies Social Simulation, 3. http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS/3/3/forum/l.html
41. Resnick, M., & Wilensky, U. (1993). Beyond the deterministic, centralized mindsets: New thinking for new sciences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
42. Resnick, M., & Wilensky, U. (1998). Diving into complexity: Developing probabilistic decentralized thinking through role-playing activities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 153-172.
43. Resnick, M. (1994).Turtles, termites and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Richmond, B., & Peterson, S. (1997). An introduction to systems thinking. Hanover, NH: High. Performance Systems, Inc.
45. Schelling, T. C. (1978). Micromotives and macrobehavior. New York, London: W.W. Norton and Co.
46. Simon, H. A. (1974). How big is a chunk? Science, 755(4124), 482-488.
47. Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M.T. H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 261-289.
48. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., and Rochelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived - A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
49. Soloway, E., Norris, C., Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Kracjik, J., & Marx, R. (2001). Log on education handheld devices are ready-at-hand. Communications of the ACM, 44, 6.
50. Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync: The emerging science of spontaneous order. New York: Theia.
51. Wilensky, U. (1993). Connected matliematics: Building concrete relationships with mathematical knowledge. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts: MIT.
52. Wilensky, U. (1995). Paradox, programming and learning probability: A case study in a connected mathematics framework. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 14, 231-280.
53. Wilensky, U. (1997a). What is normal anyway? Therapy for epistemological anxiety. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33(2), 171-202 (special issue on computational environments in mathematics education).
54. Wilensky, U. (1999a). GasLab: An extensible modeling toolkit for exploring micro- and macro-views of gases. In N. Roberts, W. Feurzeig, & B. Hunter (Eds.), Computer modeling and simulation in science education (pp. 151-178). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
55. Wilensky, U. (2003). Statistical mechanics for secondary school: The GasLab Modeling Toolkit. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 5(1), 1-41 (special issue on agent-based modeling).
56. Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems and restructuration of scientific disciplines: Implications for learning, analysis of social systems, and educational policy. In J. Kolodner (Chair), C. Bereiter (Discussant), & J. D. Bransford (Discussant), Complex systems, learning, and education: Conceptual principles, methodologies, and implications for educational research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, April 7-11.
57. Wilensky, U., & Papert, S. (2006). Restructurations: Reformulations of knowledge disciplines through new representational forms. (Manuscript, in preparation).
58. Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories - An embodied modeling approach. Cognition & Instruction, 24(2), 171-209.
59. Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1995). New thinking for new sciences: Constructionist approaches for exploring complexity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
60. Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems perspective to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(1), 3-19.
61. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. (1999a). Learning through participatory simulations: Network-based design for systems learning in classrooms. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference (CSCL '99). Stanford University, California: December 12-15, 1999.
62. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. (2000). Networked gridlock: Students enacting complex dynamic phenomena with the HubNet architecture. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI, June 14-17.
63. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. (2003). Embedded complementarity of object-based and aggregate reasoning in students developing understanding of dynamic systems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 1-5.
64. Wilensky, U., Papert, S., Sherin, B., diSessa, A. A., Kay, A., & Turkic, S. (2005). Center for Learning and Computation-Based Knowledge (CLICK). Proposal, to the National Science Foundation - Science of Learning Center.
65. Computer Software
66. Wilensky, U. (1997b). NetLogo Party model. http://ccl. northwestern.edu/net.logo/models/Party. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern. University, Evanston, IL.
67. Wilensky, U. (1999b). NetLogo. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. Evanston, IL. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/net.logo.
68. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. (1999b). HubNet Disease model, http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/HubNetDisease. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
69. Wilensky, U., & Stroup, W. (1999c). HubNet Gridlock model, http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/HubNetGridlock. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.