Complex systems in the geosciences and in geoscience learning

Special Paper of the Geological Society of America

Volumn 486, Issue , 2012, Pages 97-111

  Stillings, Neil ^a  

^a HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SYSTEM THEORY;

CURRICULAR INTEGRATION; EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCE; LEARNING AND TEACHINGS; LEARNING PROGRESSIONS; MULTIPLE PROCESS; PROFESSIONAL LEVELS; SCIENCE CURRICULUM; SYSTEMS THINKING;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS;

CURRICULUM; EARTH SCIENCE; EDUCATION; LEARNING;

EID: 84866564699     PISSN: 00721077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1130/2012.2486(17)     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Anderson, J.R., 2009, Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications (7th ed.): New York, Worth Publishers, 608 p.
2. Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M., and Simon, H.A., 1996, Situated learning and education: Educational Researcher, v. 25, no. 4, p. 5-11.
3. Bao, L., and Redish, E.F., 2006, Model analysis: Representing and assessing the dynamics of student learning: Physical Review Special Topics- Physics Education Research, v. 2, no. 1, doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010103.
4. Barker, M., and Carr, M., 1989, Teaching and learning about photosynthesis. Part 1: An assessment in terms of students' prior knowledge: International Journal of Science Education, v. 11, no. 1, p. 49-56, doi:10.1080/0950069890110105.
5. Bates, J.R., 2007, Some considerations of the concept of climate feedback: Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, v. 133, p. 545-560, doi:10.1002/qj.62.
6. Ben-Zvi-Assaraf, O., and Orion, N., 2005a, A study of junior high students' perceptions of the water cycle: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, no. 4, p. 366-373.
7. Ben-Zvi-Assaraf, O., and Orion, N., 2005b, Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 42, no. 5, p. 518-560, doi:10.1002/tea.20061.
8. Ben-Zvi-Assaraf, O., and Orion, N., 2010, 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, v. 47, no. 10, p. 1253-1280, doi:10.1002/tea.20383.
9. Bice, D.M., 2006, STELLA modeling as a tool for understanding the dynamics of earth systems, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geoscientists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 171-185, doi:10.1130/2006.2413(13).
10. Bice, D.M., 2012, Exploring the Dynamics of Earth Systems: A Guide to Constructing and Experimenting with Computer Models of Earth Systems Using STELLA: http://www.geosc.psu.edu/~dbice/DaveSTELLA/entrance.htm (accessed 14 December 2011).
11. Cañal, P., 1999, Photosynthesis and "inverse respiration" in plants: An inevitable misconception?: International Journal of Science Education, v. 21, no. 4, p. 363-371, doi:10.1080/095006999290598.
12. Carey, S., and Smith, C., 1993, On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge: Educational Psychologist, v. 28, no. 3, p. 235-251, doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2803-4.
13. Carpenter, P.A., and Shah, P., 1998, A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension: Journal of Experimental Psychology- Applied, v. 4, no. 2, p. 75-100, doi:10.1037/1076-898X.4.2.75.
14. Chandler, M.A., Richards, S.J., and Shopsin, M.J., 2005, EdGCM: Enhancing climate science education through climate modeling research projects, in Proceedings of the 85th Annual Meeting of the American MeteorologicalSociety, 14th Symposium on Education, 8-14 January 2005: San Diego, California, American Meteorological Society, p. P1.5; online at http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2005/ techprogram/paper-83520.htm. (Information about EdGCM is available at http://edgcm.columbia.edu.)
15. Chi, M.T.H., 2005, Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust: Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 14, no. 2, p. 161-199, doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402-1.
16. Chinn, C.A., and Malhotra, B.A., 2002a, Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks: Science Education, v. 86, p. 175-218, doi:10.1002/sce.10001.
17. Chinn, C.A., and Malhotra, B.A., 2002b, Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded?: Journal of Educational Psychology, v. 94, no. 2, p. 327-343, doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.327.
18. Clark, D., and Linn, M.C., 2003, Designing for knowledge integration: The impact of instructional time: Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 12, no. 4, p. 451-493, doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1204-1.
19. Cleland, C.E., 2001, Historical science, experimental science, and the scientific method: Geology, v. 29, no. 11, p. 987-990, doi:10.1130/0091-7613 (2001)029<0987:HSESAT>2.0.CO;2.
20. Cleland, C.E., 2002, Methodological and epistemic differences between historical science and experimental science: Philosophy of Science, v. 69, p. 474-496, doi:10.1086/342455.
21. Crouch, C.H., and Mazur, E., 2001, Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results: American Journal of Physics, v. 69, no. 9, p. 970-977, doi:10.1119/1.1374249.
22. Duncan, R.G., and Hmelo-Silver, C.E., 2009, Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 46, no. 6, p. 606-609, doi:10.1002/tea.20316.
23. Edelson, D.C., 2001, Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology- supported inquiry activities: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 38, no. 3, p. 355-385, doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355:: AID-TEA1010>3.0.CO;2-M.
24. Edelson, D.C., Pitts, V.M., Salierno, C.M., and Sherin, B.L., 2006, Engineering geosciences learning experiences using the Learning-for-Use design framework, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geoscientists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 131-144, doi:10.1130/2006.2413(10).
25. Feltovich, P.J., Coulson, R.L., and Spiro, R.J., 2001, Learners' (mis) understanding of important and difficult concepts: A challenge to smart machines in education, in Forbus, K.D., and Feltovich, P.J., eds., Smart Machines in Education: Menlo Park, California, AAAI/MIT Press, p. 349-375.
26. Ford, A., 1999, Modeling the Environment: An Introduction: Washington, D.C., Island Press, 415 p.
27. Gabel, D.L., Samuel, K.V., and Hunn, D., 1987, Understanding the particulate nature of matter: Journal of Chemical Education, v. 64, no. 8, p. 695-697, doi:10.1021/ed064p695.
28. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M., and The ABC Research Group, 2000, Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart: New York, Oxford University Press, 416 p.
29. Gobert, J.D., and Pallant, A., 2004, Fostering students' epistemologies of models via authentic model-based tasks: Journal of Science Education and Technology, v. 13, no. 1, p. 7-22, doi:10.1023/B:JOST.0000019635.70068.6f.
30. Grotzer, T.A., and Lincoln, R., 2007, Educating for "intelligent environmental action" in an age of global warming, in Moser, S., and Dilling, L., eds., Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 549 p.
31. Harrison, A.G., and Treagust, D.F., 1996, Secondary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry: Science Education, v. 80, no. 5, p. 509-534, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X (199609)80:5<509::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-F.
32. Herbert, B.E., 2006, Student understanding of complex earth systems, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geoscientists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 95-104, doi:10.1130/2006.2413(07).
33. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., and Swackhamer, G., 1992, Force concept inventory: The Physics Teacher, v. 30, p. 141-158, doi:10.1119/1.2343497.
34. Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Marathe, S., and Liu, L., 2007, Fish swim, rocks sit, lungs breathe: Expert-novice understanding of complex systems: Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 16, no. 3, p. 307-331, doi:10.1080/10508400701413401.
35. Jacobson, M.J., and Wilensky, U., 2006, Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences: Journal of the Learning Sciences, v. 15, no. 1, p. 11-34, doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1501-4.
36. Jones, L., Jordan, K., and Stillings, N., 2001, Molecular Visualization in Science Education: Final Report from the Molecular Visualization in Science Education Workshop, NCSA Access Center, Arlington, Virginia, 12-14 January 2001: http://helios.hampshire.edu/~nasCCS/papers-and-reports/chemviz-workshop-report- final.pdf (accessed 14 December 2011).
37. Jones, L., Jordan, K., and Stillings, N., 2005, Molecular visualization in chemistry education: The role of multidisciplinary collaboration: Chemistry Education Research and Practice, v. 6, no. 3, p. 136-149, doi:10.1039/ b5rp90005k.
38. Khishfe, R., 2008, The development of seventh graders' views of nature of science: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 45, no. 4, p. 470-496, doi:10.1002/tea.20230.
39. Khishfe, R., and Lederman, N., 2006, Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: Integrated versus nonintegrated: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 43, no. 4, p. 395-418, doi:10.1002/tea.20137.
40. Kuhn, D., 1991, The Skills of Argument: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 324 p.
41. Kuhn, D., and Dean, D., 2004, Connecting scientific reasoning and causal inference: Journal of Cognition and Development, v. 5, no. 2, p. 261-288, doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0502-5.
42. Kuhn, D., and Pease, M., 2008, What needs to develop in the development of inquiry skills?: Cognition and Instruction, v. 26, no. 4, p. 512-559, doi:10.1080/07370000802391745.
43. Libarkin, J.C., and Kurdziel, J.P., 2006, Ontology and the teaching of earth system science: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, no. 3, p. 408-413.
44. Magnani, L., Nersessian, N.J., and Thagard, P., eds., 1999, Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery: New York, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 343 p.
45. Mayer, R.E., Griffith, E., Jurkowitz, I.T.N., and Rothman, D., 2008, Increased interestingness of extraneous details in a multimedia science presentation leads to decreased learning: Journal of Experimental Psychology- Applied, v. 14, no. 4, p. 329-339, doi:10.1037/a0013835.
46. McCloskey, M., and Kohl, D., 1983, Naive physics: The curvilinear impetus principle and its role in interactions with moving objects: Journal of Experimental Psychology- Learning, Memory, and Cognition, v. 9, no. 1, p. 146-156, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.9.1.146.
47. McCloskey, M., Caramazza, A., and Green, B., 1980, Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: Naïve beliefs about the motion of objects: Science, v. 210, p. 1139-1141, doi:10.1126/science.210.4474.1139.
48. Michael, J.A., 1998, Students' misconceptions about perceived physiological responses: Advances in Physiology Education, v. 19, no. 1, p. S90-S98.
49. Michael, J.A., Wenderoth, M.P., Modell, H.I., Cliff, W., Horwitz, B., McHale, P., Richardson, D., Silverthorn, D., Williams, S., and Whitescarver, S., 2002, Undergraduates' understanding of cardiovascular phenomena: Advances in Physiology Education, v. 26, p. 72-84.
50. Mitchell, S., 2009, Unsimple Truths: Science, Complexity, and Policy: Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 160 p.
51. Mohan, L., Chen, J., and Anderson, C., 2009, Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systems: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 46, no. 6, p. 675-698, doi:10.1002/tea.20314.
52. Mynatt, C.R., Doherty, M.E., and Tweney, R.D., 1977, Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference: The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, v. 29, no. 1, p. 85-95, doi:10.1080/00335557743000053.
53. Nersessian, N.J., 2002, The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science, in Carruthers, P., and Stich, S., eds., The Cognitive Basis of Science: New York, Cambridge University Press, p. 133-153.
54. Novick, S., and Nussbaum, J., 1978, Junior high school pupils' understanding of the particulate nature of matter: An interview study: Science Education, v. 62, no. 3, p. 273-281, doi:10.1002/sce.3730620303.
55. Perkins, D.N., and Grotzer, T.A., 2005, Dimensions of causal understanding: The role of complex causal models in students' understanding of science: Studies in Science Education, v. 41, p. 117-165, doi:10.1080/ 03057260508560216.
56. Raghavan, K., Sartoris, M.L., and Glaser, R., 1998, Why does it go up? The impact of the MARS curriculum as revealed through changes in student explanations of a helium balloon: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 35, no. 5, p. 547-567, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736 (199805)35:5<547::AID- TEA5>3.0.CO;2-P.
57. Rahmstorf, S., and Vermeer, M., 2009, Ups and Downs of Sea Level Projections: Real Climate: Climate Science from Climate Scientists, 31 August 2009: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/ups-and-downs-of- sea-level-projections/(accessed 14 December 2011).
58. Raia, F., 2005, Students' understanding of complex dynamic systems: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, no. 3, p. 297-308.
59. Raia, F., 2008, Causality in complex dynamic systems: A challenge in earth systems science education: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 56, p. 81-94.
60. Rea-Ramirez, M.A., Nunez-Oviedo, M.C., and Clement, J., 2009, Role of discrepant questioning leading to model element modification: Journal of Science Teacher Education, v. 20, no. 2, p. 95-111, doi:10.1007/s10972-009-9128-9.
61. Roe, G., 2009, Feedbacks, timescales, and seeing red: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 37, p. 93-115, doi:10.1146/annurev.earth. 061008.134734.
62. Sandoval, W.A., 2005, Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry: Science Education, v. 89, no. 4, p. 634-656, doi:10.1002/sce.20065.
63. Schunn, C.D., and Anderson, J.R., 2001, Acquiring expertise in science: Explorations of what, when, and how, in Crowley, K., Schunn, C.D., and Okada, T., eds., Designing for Science: Implications from Everyday, Classroom, and Professional Settings: Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 498 p.
64. Schwarz, C.V., Reiser, B.J., Davis, E.A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., and Krajcik, J., 2009, Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 46, no. 6, p. 632-654, doi:10.1002/tea.20311.
65. Sibley, D.F., Anderson, C.W., Heidemann, M., Merrill, J.E., Parker, J.M., and Szymanski, D.W., 2007, Box diagrams to assess students' systems thinking about the rock, water and carbon cycles: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 55, no. 2, p. 138-146.
66. Slotta, J.D., and Chi, M.T.H., 2006, Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training: Cognition and Instruction, v. 24, no. 2, p. 261-289, doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2402-3.
67. Smith, C.L., and Wenk, L., 2006, Relations among three aspects of first-year college students' epistemologies of science: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 43, no. 8, p. 747-785, doi:10.1002/tea.20113.
68. Sterman, J.D., 2008, Risk communication on climate: Mental models and mass balance: Science, v. 322, p. 532-533, doi:10.1126/science.1162574.
69. Sterman, J.D., and Sweeney, L.B., 2007, Understanding public complacency about climate change: Adults' mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter: Climatic Change, v. 80, no. 3-4, p. 213-238, doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9107-5.
70. Stewart, J., Hafner, R., Johnson, W., and Finkel, E., 1992, Science as model building: Computers and high school genetics: Educational Psychologist, v. 27, p. 317-336, doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2703-4.
71. Trowbridge, D.E., and McDermott, L.C., 1981, Investigation of student understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension: American Journal of Physics, v. 49, no. 3, p. 242-253, doi:10.1119/1.12525.
72. Turcotte, D.L., 1997, Fractals and Chaos in Geology and Geophysics: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 398 p.
73. Turcotte, D.L., 2006, Modeling geocomplexity: A new kind of science," in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 39-50, doi:10.1130/2006.2413(04).
74. Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D., 1974, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases: Science, v. 185, p. 1124-1131, doi:10.1126/science.185. 4157.1124.
75. Tversky, B., Zacks, J., Lee, P., and Heiser, J., 2000, Lines, blobs, crosses, and arrows: Diagrammatic communication with schematic figures, in Anderson, M., Cheng, P., and Haarslev, V., eds., Theory and Application of Diagrams: New York, Springer, p. 221-230.
76. Vosniadou, S., 2007, The cognitive-situative divide and the problem of conceptual change: Educational Psychologist, v. 42, no. 1, p. 55-66, doi:10.1080/00461520709336918.
77. Waldmann, M.R., Hagmayer, Y., and Blaisdell, A.P., 2006, Beyond the information given: Causal models in learning and reasoning: Current Directions in Psychological Science, v. 15, no. 6, p. 307-311, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721. 2006.00458.x.
78. Wason, P.C., and Johnson-Laird, P.N., 1972, Psychology of Reasoning: Structure and Content: Oxford, UK, Harvard University Press, 264 p.
79. Watson, B., and Konicek, R., 1990, 1990, Teaching for conceptual change: Confronting children's experience: Phi Delta Kappan, May, p. 680-685.
80. White, B., and Frederiksen, J., 1998, Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students: Cognition and Instruction, v. 16, no. 1, p. 3-118, doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1601-2.
81. Wilensky, U., and 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 and Instruction, v. 24, no. 2, p. 171-209, doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2402-1.
82. Wilensky, U., and Resnick, M., 1999, Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world: Journal of Science Education and Technology, v. 8, no. 1, p. 3-19, doi:10.1023/A:1009421303064.
83. Williamson, V.M., and Abraham, M.R., 1995, The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 32, no. 5, p. 521-534, doi:10.1002/tea.3660320508.
84. Winter, T.C., Harvey, J.W., Franke, O.L., and Alley, W.M., 1998, Ground Water and Surface Water: A Single Resource: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1139, 79 p. (also online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/circ1139/index.html).