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

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 655-674

  Evagorou, Maria ^a   Korfiatis, Kostas ^b   Nicolaou, Christiana ^b   Constantinou, Costas ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449587078     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690701749313     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Aikenhead, G.S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
2. Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth science system education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 518-560.
3. Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A.F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition-Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367-379
4. Azevedo, R., Winters, F.I., & Moos, D. (2004). Can students collaboratively use hypermedia to learn science? The dynamics of self- and other-regulatory processes in an ecology classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31, 215-245.
5. Booth Sweeney, L. (2000). When a butterfly sneezes: A guide for helping kinds explore interconnections in our world through favourite stories. Waltham, MA: Pegasus.
6. Booth Sweeny, L. & Sterman, J. (2001). Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory. Systems Dynamics Review, 16(4), 249-286.
7. Brand, S., Reimer, T., & Opwis, K. (2007). How do we learn in a negative mood? Effects of a negative mood on transfer and learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 1-16.
8. Essex Report. (2001). The future of system dynamics and learner-centered learning in K-12 education. Paper presented at the International System Dynamics Society Conference, Essex, MA, 23 June-1 July.
9. Feltovich, P.J., Spiro, R.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1989). The nature of conceptual understanding in biomedicine: The deep structure of complex ideas and the development of misconceptions. In D. Evans & V. Patel (Eds.), The cognitive sciences in medicine (pp. 113-172). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
10. Frank, M. (2000). Engineering systems and systems thinking. Systems Engineering, 3, 63-168.
11. Golan, R., & Reiser, B. (2004). Investigating students' reasoning about the complexity manifested in molecular genetics phenomena. Paper presented at the Proceeding of American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, 12-16 April.
12. Goldstone, R.L., & Sakamoto, Y. (2003). The transfer of abstract principles governing complex systems. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 414-466.
13. Grotzer, T., & Bell Basca, B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students' understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38, 16-29.
14. Hannon, B., & Ruth, M. (2000). Dynamic modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
15. Hestenes, D. (1992). Modelling games in the Newtonian world. American Journal of Physics, 60(8), 732-748.
16. Hmelo, C., Holton, D., & Kolodner, J. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247-298.
17. Hmelo-Silver, C.E. & Azevedo, R. (2006). Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 53-61.
18. Hmelo-Silver, C.E. & Pfeffer, M.G. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviours, and functions. Cognitive Science, 28, 127-138.
19. Hogan, K. (2000). Assessing students' system reasoning in ecology. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 22-28.
20. Hogan, K., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cognitive comparison of students' systems modelling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 319-345.
21. Jacobson, M.J. (2001). Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Complexity, 6(3), 4-49.
22. Jacobson, M., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: Scientific and education importance and implications for the learning sciences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 11-34.
23. Kafai, Y.B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world (1-8). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Kim, J. (1999). Making sense of emergence, Philosophical Studies, 96(2-3), 3-36.
25. Klopfer, E., & Resnick, M. (2003). Technologies to support the creation of complex systems models: Using Starlogo software with students. Biosystems, 71, 111-123.
26. Korfiatis, K., Stamou, A.G., & Paraskevopoulos, S. (2004). Images of nature in Greek primary school textbooks. Science Education, 88, 72-89.
27. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R., Bass, K.M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3-4, 313-350.
28. Kurtz dos Santos, A.C., & Ogborn, J. (1994). Sixth form students' ability to engage in computational modelling. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10(33), 182-199.
29. Maani, K., & Maharaj, V. (2004). Links between systems thinking and complex decision making. Systems Dynamics Review, 20(1), 21-48.
30. National Research Council. (2000) How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. In J.D. Bransford, A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking, & S. Donovan (Eds.), Committee on developments in the science of learning and committee on learning research and educational practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Ossimitz, G. (2000). Entwicklung systemischen Denkens. München, Germany: Profil Verlag.
32. Penner, D., (2000). Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students' understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 784-806.
33. Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 1-22.
35. 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, April.
36. Richmond, B. (1994). System dynamics/systems thinking: Let's just get on with it. Systems Dynamics Review, 10(2-3), 135-157.
37. Richmond, B. (2001). An introduction to systems thinking. Lebanon, NH: High Performance Systems, Inc.
38. Sheehy, N.P., Wylie, J.W., McGuinness C., & Orchard, G. (2000). How children solve environmental problems: Using computer simulations to investigate systems thinking. Environmental Education Research, 6, 109-126.
39. Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemistry: Incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of the Science Education and Technology, 12, 285-302.
40. Stratford, S.J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7, 215-234.
41. Von Glaserfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
42. White, P.A. (2000). Naïve analysis of food web dynamics: A study of causal judgment about complex physical systems. Cognitive Science, 24(4), 605-650.
43. Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K., (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories-an embodied modelling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 171-209.
44. Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems perspective to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 3-19.
45. Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers' understandings of model-based inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783-835.