Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 17:33:42 -0700
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu (k-12sd Discussion List)
From: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Proving ideas...
>Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 14:25:56 -0500
>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu (k-12sd Discussion List)
>From: Bob Gorman <bgorman@kncell.org>
>Subject: Proving ideas...
>
>At 11/20/98 04:43 PM -0400, Ed Gallaher wrote: >I continue to
have
>problems trying to "prove" that SD is advantageous, >when it seems
so
>intuitively obvious. How does one "prove" something to >an audience
does
>not understand the conceptual framework that is >required to prove
it?
>I've only found one way to work, they must 1st "experience" it. If
a person
>has never experienced "serenity", you cannot prove, cognitively that
it is
>a worthwhile experience. They have to experience it 1st hand, not
read
>about it, before any meaningful dialogue can begin. I enjoy
soaring or
>gliding, i.e. flying planes without engines. I cannot with a million
words
>on paper prove to you it's fun, exhilarating and relaxing. I can only
try,
>with personal persuasion to convince you to take that leap of faith
>necessary to try it for the first time. Then we can talk about it!
The same
>is true about the "AHA" experience of knowledge transfer! Give them
the
>first few rides for free, and they will be hooked for life.
Bob "To get
>NEW Answers, you must ask NEW Questions!" - Bob Gorman
>
I'd like to respond in two ways.
First, I agree with these comments 100%. However, I have had a
difficult
time convincing my colleagues that it would be worth a couple of hours
of
their time to gain this experience. As Jay Forrester has pointed
out, it
takes 4-8 hours to begin understanding what this is all about.
I have had
enough experience with others to agree with this estimate. A
few (and it
seems to be a very few) will see a demo and "get it" in 5 minutes.
But I
have given seminars numerous times to others who continually *don't*
"get
it". Many of these same people, I believe, would have the AHA!
if they
would spend a modest amount trying it out.
I think we need to keep in mind that many of our older colleagues have
only
their experience with traditional math, calculus, and perhaps an intro
to
diff eqs with which to "visualize" the study of systems, behavior over
time, etc. They "know" what it will take to become conversent
with SD, and
they "know" they don't have the time to devote.
I am equally convinced they are wrong, but how to get them to try the
first
few hours. . . . ???
The other aspect of this answer is a practical one within K-12 or other
educational setting. It is NOT possible to take a laptop to the
SAT exam
and demonstrate to the examiner that SD is a better approach to problem
solving that is simple algebra or calculus. Also, when one writes
a grant
to introduce a new learning tool, it is incumbent upon the researcher
to
"prove" to the grant committee that the new method in fact offers
significant advantages. Again, demonstrating this on paper to
a review
committee is close to impossible.
On the bright side, if you would like to see a demonstration of what
kids
can do with SD, visit a SyM Bowl!! (April 1999, Portland Oregon,
and
Worcester Polytech Institute, Worcester, MA). You'll see some
demos that
will knock your socks off!.
Ed Gallaher
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:51:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Mary Ellen Verona <mverona@mvhs1.mbhs.edu>
To: k-12sd Discussion List <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: offtopic - modeling use of technology
On Monday, my colleague Susan Ragan and I were given the opportunity
to
introduce Systems Thinking and System Dynamics to 15 technology trainers
in our large school system. This group is involved in helping
teacher
integrate use of computers into their curriculum - obviously we're
not
talking about technophobes here! We introduced some curriulum
related
models and then some models from the STELLA systems thinking manual
- one
on teacher rookies/pros and one on burnout (changing it from student
burnout to staff burnout). The latter model was extremely engaging
to
these harried trainers - they loved it.
The head of the group would like to sit down with us and develop a model
that looks at the number of teachers that need to be implementing
technology in a school before critical mass is reached and there is
a
snow-ball effect (exponential growth?). She has some survey data,
etc and
has a good feel for the kind of factors (such as teacher mobility,
administrative support, etc.) to include.
We are starting to look at the Hirsh materials on curriculum innovation
from CLE. (She seemed excited enough that I felt it wasn't overkill).
Any recommendations on how I should procede with this great opportunity?
Mary Ellen Verona
mverona@mvhs1.mbhs.edu
***** new address ******
Maryland Virtual High School
Montgomery Blair High School
51 East University Boulevard
Silver Spring, MD 20901
301-649-2880
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 16:43:13 -0800
From: Richard Turnock <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Transferability
In Fly A Cell by HPS, the teacher's guide covers transferability in
Chapter
3. The three principles covered are Vicious and Virtuous Cycles,
Diffusion, and Homeostasis. The students study the principles
in the
context of cell biology then extend the principles and build generalization
skills.
Your monthly question is about fostering transferability and how to
measure it.
John Gunkler gave a great discussion to help answer these questions.
His
coments talked about techniques and measurement. I'm still missing
a
piece.
What are the transferability or generalization skills students need
to learn?
Richard
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 08:05:22 -0800
From: RICHARD TURNOCK <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Transferability
In Fly A Cell by HPS, the teacher's guide covers Generalization in Chapter
3. The three principles covered are Vicious and Virtuous Cycles,
Diffusion, and Homeostasis. The students study the principles
in the
context of cell biology then extend the principles and build generalization
skills.
Your monthly question is about fostering transferability and how to
measure
it. John Gunkler gave a great discussion to help answer these
questions.
His coments talked about techniques and measurement of results after
students had transferred a concept. However, I'm still missing
a piece.
What are the transferability or generalization skills students need
to
learn?
Richard
From: Kenneth Lee Watson <klw7f@server2.mail.virginia.edu>
To: k-12sd Discussion List <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Cc: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Secondary Social Studies Education ideas...
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:34:15 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
I am a doctoral student enrolled in the University of
Virginia's Curry School of Education. My area of interest
is secondary socials studies education. I am currently
enrolled in the system course via the web and find it very
intriguing and I can imagine this would create a very
dynamic classroom.
I have a few questions regarding the systems application to
the social studies classroom.
(1) Are there any secondary social studies teachers out
there currently using systems?
(2) How often are you applying it? Do you use it for
special projects or has your entire curriculum been changed
to include the systems approach?
(3) How have your students responded to this change in
their classroom?
(4) Are there any secondary socials studies teachers in the
Mid-Atlantic or Southeast regions? If so would you mind if
I visited your class sometime next spring and observe the
systems in use?
Thanks so much for your responses.
From: "John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Proving ideas...
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 16:22:49 -0600
Something Ed Gallaher wrote (quoted below) twigged something in response
(described further below). Ed wrote:
> I think we need to keep in mind that many of our older colleagues
have
only
>their experience with traditional math, calculus, and perhaps an intro
to
>diff eqs with which to "visualize" the study of systems, behavior
over
>time, etc. They "know" what it will take to become conversent
with SD, and
>they "know" they don't have the time to devote.
Perhaps we can take advantage of what our colleagues know to encourage
them
to take a little time to look at SD. Here's what I'm thinking:
if someone
knows differential equations (or even calculus, or linear programming)
then
they also know how difficult it is to deal with non-linearities and
how
difficult it is to solve anything but the simplest problems and how
difficult it is to teach these solution methods to students.
Aren't those all good motivators for learning something that promises
to let
them solve difficult (even non-linear) problems with methods simple
enough
for secondary school students to learn?
As educators we aren't very good, in my humble opinion, at helping
students
understand and feel a need to learn things. We don't make them
struggle
with primitive methods long enough to generate a desire to have something
better. For example, we don't present students with problems
that need
differential or integral calculus to solve (the kinds of problems that
prompted Newton and Leibnitz to create the darned methods) before "giving
them the elegant solution." How much more motivated are students
to learn
calculus after they've figured out that they can't solve certain kinds
of
problems without it!! (Or, at least, until after they've struggled
with
other methods that seem laborious.)
Well, Ed, if you're right these colleagues have come a cropper against
problems too difficult for the methods they know. If we can present
such a
problem (almost any problem for which a classic SD model exists will
do) and
challenge them to solve (or teach the solution method) - then offer
them a
better way ... who knows how they'll respond?
John
From: <dburke@nsf.gov>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 98 17:13:12 EST
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: offtopic - modeling use of technology
Mary Ellen,
You might want to get in touch with Steve Rizzi at Science
Applications International Corporation (Steven.D.Rizzi@cpmx.saic.com).
Steve is in charge of a group at SAIC that has a contract with Disney
to model technology integration at the Celebration School, in
Celebration City, Florida and may have something useful to contribute.
I would also be happy to contribute to the model development, if
appropriate, as I am interested in the same thing for our systemic
sites. I am almost done with the documentation for my models
and will
send them to you within the next week or so.
Dan Burke
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: offtopic - modeling use of technology
Author: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu> at NOTE
Date: 12/1/98 2:10 PM
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:51:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Mary Ellen Verona <mverona@mvhs1.mbhs.edu>
To: k-12sd Discussion List <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: offtopic - modeling use of technology
On Monday, my colleague Susan Ragan and I were given the opportunity
to
introduce Systems Thinking and System Dynamics to 15 technology trainers
in our large school system. This group is involved in helping
teacher
integrate use of computers into their curriculum - obviously we're
not
talking about technophobes here! We introduced some curriulum
related
models and then some models from the STELLA systems thinking manual
- one
on teacher rookies/pros and one on burnout (changing it from student
burnout to staff burnout). The latter model was extremely engaging
to
these harried trainers - they loved it.
The head of the group would like to sit down with us and develop a model
that looks at the number of teachers that need to be implementing
technology in a school before critical mass is reached and there is
a
snow-ball effect (exponential growth?). She has some survey data,
etc and
has a good feel for the kind of factors (such as teacher mobility,
administrative support, etc.) to include.
We are starting to look at the Hirsh materials on curriculum innovation
from CLE. (She seemed excited enough that I felt it wasn't overkill).
Any recommendations on how I should procede with this great opportunity?
Mary Ellen Verona
mverona@mvhs1.mbhs.edu
***** new address ******
Maryland Virtual High School
Montgomery Blair High School
51 East University Boulevard
Silver Spring, MD 20901
301-649-2880
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 11:38:46 +0200
From: Ali Kerem Saysel <saysel@boun.edu.tr>
Organization: Bogazici University Institute of Environmental Sciences
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: an introduction
Hello everyone,
I'm a newcomer to this discussion list. Though I'm getting quite
experienced with system dynamics modelling and my professional interest
was not system dynamics in k-12 education, recently, one of the
highschools in our district in Istanbul approached us with such a
demand. Actually, they did not really know what they want but we have
that opportunity to clean up their mind about philosophy and
applications of system dynamics. I think, we can create an initiative
for system dynamics education in some highschools in our country.
Now, the problem is that, I'm not teaching an individual class in
curriculum such as physics or biology but I'm teaching systems thinking
and computer simulation (to 10th and 11th grade students) and have
to
motivate the students for their own models about those subjects in
their
curriculum. But, as I'm not a highschool teacher, I'm not so much
familiar with educational models. In this process, I'm using MIT Road
Maps for sd education and I'm sure those models on creative learning
exchange site will be very usefull.
I'm waiting for advices of experienced teachers in this field, about
our
point. I think, we need good starting points for applications of sd
in
physics, chemistry and biology classes which can make sense for 10th
and
11th grade students.
Thanks for everyone.
--
Ali Kerem Saysel, Res. Ass.
Bogazici University
Institute of Environmental Sciences
80815 Bebek, Istanbul
Turkey
tel: + 90 212 2631540 - 2145
fax: + 90 212 2575033
Subject: Transferability
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 98 11:35:49 -0800
From: Timothy Joy <tjoy@pps.k12.or.us>
To: "K-12" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
George Richardson wrote the following:
>Where did the principle that
>symptoms and causes are widely separated come from? Or the notion
that if
>people manage to find policy levers that can have impact they usually
push
>them in the wrong direction? Whatever that thinking was, is
the "process
>of transferability" we are talking about teaching.
>
>I would think that others who have written to the list on this topic
are
>right when they say that we won't get transfers of insights without
>actively teaching toward them. The archetypes are transferable
>structure/behavior ideas, and we should probably teach toward them,
but
>they don't show anyone how such transferable archetypical ideas were
>hatched. We have to invent the experiences that help kids (and
my
>graduate students, and me) uncover transferable insights themselves.
I'd
>say some kind of explicit abstracting exercises that move from particulars
>to general and back to other particulars (say, in causal-loop diagrams)
>would be crucial.
I am imagining what a conversation with Jay Forrester about such
discoveries would be like.
When and how do we teach students such a simple thing as, "Hey, that
reminds me of . . . " or "That looks just like . . ."
Some principles come to mind: symmetry, pattern, metaphor, simile,
function, form. Do these not describe beauty and our natural
aching for
it?
In some recent research on metaphor (how one thing is
like another) I came across a curious finding:
those most ready to see metaphor were young children or the nearly
enfeebled, the eldest of the senior citizens. All those caught
in the
squeeze of schooling and living apprehended metaphor very poorly.
Children have it and then lose it. The metaphoric mind has those
qualities
George describes: an ability to see patterns, templates, similarities.
But it is generally regarded among English teachers as a difficult
concept.
The research suggests that children are predisposed for this and so,
consequently, maybe all we need do is continually provide "experiences"
that heighten that deep perception. For many, by fourth or fifth grade,
this capacity has atrophied. And yet, haven't
we been hearing from our colleagues in the K-3 range that their students
gorge themselves on systems concepts?
In October I had the pleasure of walking through Parker School in MASS
and over the entrance hung a banner: "What's the pattern?"
Gregory
Bateson would certainly grin. In that disposition resides the
mental
state George describes. While there is likely a teachable skill
involved, musn't there also be a broader quality of mind, similar to
compassion as quality of heart, that predisposes or allows or invites
{or
something} that taught skill to then see new things? Consider two of
my
writing students: one writes impeccable, though boring prose;
the other
writes flawed, though equisite prose. "Correct" is teachable
(to some
limits), but the vision and art is of a higher order of teaching.
But I believe most of us, if not all of us, have been--at one time or
another--in the presence of that "higher order of teaching," when
experience provided an insight. What George describes may not
be that
elusive. We just need to remember and recreate.
When he says "invent experiences" this idea clearly stretches me beyond
my current experience as student and teacher, makes me recall the leaping
intellectual growth of a two or three year old. There is much
we can
learn from other educational movements here: Waldorf, Montessori,
et al.
Compare this to most of our traditional schooling which consists of
compiling discrete lists and acquiring discrete skills. We compile
and
file, acquire and file, and repeat. It is no wonder that many
of our
greatest leaping thinkers were befuddled in schools (Edison, Einstein,
Blake). George, indirectly (or maybe directly), presents a challenge:
how do we exercise a mind toward a non-school mindset inside a school?
I am moving afield here. My students in American Literature have
recently
read portions of Walden, and their assignment is to create a Thoreau
room:
draw a classroom based on the ideas expressed by Thoreau. This
clash of
ostensibly exclusive subjects (literature and architecture) has yielded
surprising results.
So little supposing goes on in a school. We are generally asking
students
to do what we tell them, rather than asking that they use their own
ingenuity and insight.
When a golfer reads a green, or a quarterback reads a defense, or a
sophomore reads Beaowulf, each is reading from a set of known and evolving
experiences brought to that moment. The more experience each
reader has
from which to draw, and the more attuned the reader is to what experience
adds up to, the more deeply read is that new yawning green, that
new
motion defense, or that new heroic text.
Timothy Joy
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 13:34:29 +0100
From: Niall Palfreyman <Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Proving ideas...
Ed Gallaher wrote:
> How does one "prove" something to an audience does not understand
the
> conceptual framework that is required to prove it? I've only found
> one way to work, they must 1st "experience" it.
> ...
> A few (and it seems to be a very few) will see a demo and "get it"
in
> 5 minutes. But I have given seminars numerous times to others
who
> continually *don't* "get it". Many of these same people, I
believe,
> would have the AHA! if they would spend a modest amount trying it
out.
George Richardson wrote:
> Thorndike around 1913 concluded from his early educational measurement
> studies that transferability of training can take place to the extent
> that there are "identical elements" (I think that was his phrase)
> between the two contexts. My memory was that that principle
still
> held pretty well in the late 1960s. I don't know what current
> research says.
Alan Bandura has done a lot of work on this stuff. His major thesis
was
that we learn not merely through reinforcement (as behaviourists
claimed), but also through modelling others in our environment. This
of
course involves making a transfer from their context to our own.
> But if we take Thorndike's principle and push it toward pedagogy,
it
> would suggest that to get transfer of system dynamics insights from
> one context to another we'd have to help students expose their
> "identical elements."
All these are precisely the reasons why I like to use metaphor in
teaching. In my opinion it is not necessary that the two contexts be
"identical", but merely that they be isomorphic, ie having (roughly)
identical structure. The delight of metaphor is that it is entirely
based upon this matching of structure from one context to another.
So it
is, for example, possible to give someone an experience of serenity
by
telling them a story TO WHICH THEY CAN RELATE (ie, its internal
structure is isomorphic to some aspect of the listener's lefe-context)
about some animal, or tree, or whatever, who experiences serenity.
In another context I have used metaphor to build a 1-hour introduction
to special relativity for novices. Here the audiences definitely did
NOT
"understand the conceptual framework that is required to prove it",
but
they could understand the simple allegorical situations I presented,
which were carefully designed to lead to the fundamental impasse which
historically led to the development of relativity.
And as I say, the nice thing about metaphor is that it "practises what
it preaches". It is a perfect model of the transfer of knowledge from
one context to another.
Niall.
--
We have only the world that we can bring forth
with others, and only love helps us bring it forth.
Dr. Niall Palfreyman
mailto:Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com
assyst GmbH, Henschelring 15a
85551 Kirchheim bei Muenchen
Tel: ++49-89-90505-230
Germany.
Fax: ++49-89-90505-102/3
From: "Donahue, David" <ddonahue@jaguar.middlebury.edu>
To: "'k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu'" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: November Question
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 14:42:52 -0500
In reading the responses, I too have been challenged by the assessment
question. As a new member of this list, I propose the following
and invite
feedback from more experienced system thinkers.
If one were to pose a scenario and ask students to identify the problem
(small or perhaps systemic) and to propose a solution - - - would we
expect
students who had been taught/trained using SD to be more apt to see
a system
at work, to transfer their knowledge from previous systems to a new
set of
circumstances, and to propose a solution that addresses a systemic
problem
rather than addressing an acute problem that has a solution or a symptom
that has a cure.
As I said before, I am new to the world of SD and this list and certainly
this is only the beginnings of a method for assessment and comparison
( one
that presents many flaws as well) but perhaps worth considering or
perhaps
it has already been considered?
David Donahue
David Donahue
Assistant Dean of Students
Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT 05753 USA
tel. (802) 443-5382 fax: (802) 443-2063
email: david.donahue@middlebury.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu [SMTP:k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu]
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 1998 11:12 AM
> To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
> Subject: November Question
>
> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:40:06 -0800
> To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
> From: teresa@northwest.com
> Subject: November Question
>
> My response to this question (at least the first part of it) would
> parallel
> my answer to the previous question of the month.
> Again, I think that when introducing systems thinking to students,
the
> greater variety of real world examples the better. From the
beginning,
> students are thus encouraged to apply the concept of a system to
many
> situations.
> As teachers we are all aware that the way we teach something the
first
> time
> is generally what sticks in kids' minds.....it is much harder to
undo
> previous learning.
> It would seem that if they see many interdisciplinary examples of
systems
> thinking and problem solving from the very beginning from that perspective
> that transferability would hopefully be inherant. I think that
we need to
> be careful in trying to make the systems approach always fit something
we
> already teach in our compartmentalized curriculum. Although
it has helped
> me to teach particular concepts better and to greater depth of
> understanding, it is a great tool for this, but I am forever wishing
I
> could dump some of my required curriculum and focus on interdisciplinary
> teaching from a systems approach.
> As for evaluation, this is difficult, that is if you want to make
it
> clearly evident on some type of test
> (which is what we are forced to do) that kids learn more with a systems
> approach. To evaluate whether greater learning occurs by a
particular
> teaching/learning approach, we need to have the freedom and flexibility
to
> to test in the same way that the students learned. You can't
truly
> evaluate the depth of students thinking with standardized multiple
choice
> questions. Perhaps if we could just record the conversations
we hear when
> students work as teams to solve a problem using systems thinking
that
> would
> be enough to tell us and to convince others that they are truly learning.
> Teresa Hazel
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Reply-To: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 10:06:22 -0700
Subject: Re: offtopic - modeling use of technology
Hi, Mary Ellen
Since you seem to be interested in the study of growth you may want
to look at
"The Limits to Growth" archetype. It could provide some insights for
your
model.
Mike Slootmaker
Systems Thinker/System Dynamics mentor
Catalina Foothills High School
Tucson, AZ
From: DessaDancy@aol.com
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 08:57:13 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: offtopic - modeling use of technology
Hello
The enthusiasm you've tapped into sounds great!
I have a question about the goal and the implied process. Is it to have
all
the teachers trained or excited about using technology or system dynamics?
What do you hope would be gained from constructing such a model?
Dessa
From: TSBenson@aol.com
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:56:54 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: transferability story
True story-- An 8th grade boy named Michael was very unhappy with his
math
teacher. Wanting out of the class and at his wits end, he went
to see the
school guidance counselor to get assistance. The counselor asked
him to
describe what was occurring in class-- Full of passion, he began
to report
something like this: "I bug her and then she bugs me and I feel like
she is
always out to get me and I just want to make her mad," and so on.
Suddenly,
in mid-sentence, Michael stopped his stream of complaints and declared,
"It's
just like one of those loopy things, the things we learned in Mr. W's
social
studies class!!" "What do you mean?" asked the counselor.
"It was in 7th
grade, we were studying wars and it was called the escalation something,"
Michael answered. Because the wise counselor had been trained
in the tools of
SD, she whipped out a template of the escalation archetype and asked
him to
retell the story, which he did with much less emotion, yet, according
to the
counselor, amazingly mature insight.
Michael had to also meet with the principal (that would be me) because
his
poor behavior in math had been referred to my office. His father
was also
joining us because he was insisting that Michael be removed from the
class.
Having talked to the counselor about the instance described above,
I began the
meeting with Michael and his father with the escalation archetype in
hand, and
asked Michael to describe the situation using the tool for the benefit
of both
myself and his father. As in the counselor's office, he told
the story of the
escalating conditions that existed between him and his teacher.
He portrayed
the situation from a viewpoint which went beyond his own frustrations
with the
teacher, taking personal responsibility for his actions that contributed
to
the escalating situation. As you might imagine, there was also
some blame as
he described the actions of the teacher, but without much effort, together,
we
arrived at a plan to break the reinforcing cycle. We decided
to share the
tool with the math teacher to help raise awareness of the dynamics
of the
situation in order to gain greater understanding. The awareness
of how the
"system" was working was very helpful in changing the conditions of
the
system. We did not need to identify the specific details
of behaviors in
making a plan, but concentrated on understanding the dynamics that
existed
between these two individuals. The father left the meeting with
a greater
understanding of the situation and a willingness to try out a plan
before
making a change. (As a very successful attorney, he also commented
that those
loopy tools may help him as he argues for his clients.) Michael
left inspired
to make things work, with an enhanced understanding of escalating conditions
in a system. And I left with strong evidence of the transferability
of system
dynamic tools used in curricular areas to the application of the tools
in
helping students and adults understand everyday systems.
The benefits of
this transfer may be too far-reaching to be worthy of traditional measurement;
the power is in the story.
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 14:05:32 -0500
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: Lees Stuntz <stuntzln@tiac.net>
Subject: Latest CLExchange Newsletter
Dear Listserve members,
The latest CLExchange, Late Fall 1998, CLEx07.5 is now available.
The URL
for the CLE page is
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/cle/.
Please tell me if there are any problems downloading it from the Web.
Lees Stuntz
Lees N. Stuntz
Creative Learning Exchange Phone-
978-287-0070
1 Keefe Road
Fax- 978-287-0080
Acton, MA 01720
e-mail- stuntzln@tiac.net
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/cle/
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Reply-To: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 08:32:31 -0700
Subject: Transferability - Biology to Social Studies model
Organization: CFSD
Hello, All
Several months ago Frank Draper and I were discussing the problem of
illegal
immigration in the Southwest. Frank mentioned that he and Steve Peterson
had
developed a model for the study of diffusion and osmosis. He showed
me the
model and we discussed how that model could be used to examine the
immigration
situation. Some very interesting parallels! Does cell wall permeability
parallel boarder crossing barriers? Do nutriant and liquid concentrations
inside and outside cell walls parallel pressures which drive immigrants
to
attempt boarder crossings? Could an osmosis and diffusion model be
used to
explain large or small scale movements of peoples in an historical
setting?
Could biological processes serve as metaphors for social processes?
Mike Slootmaker
Catalina Foothills High School
Tucson, AZ
From: "John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Transferability
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 11:04:20 -0600
Richard Turnock asks:
>What are the transferability or generalization skills students need
to
learn?
While I think there may be ways of responding to this question that
are
useful, before we go forth on this subject we might want to rephrase
the way
we pose the question.
The empirical phenomenon of generalization is said to have occurred
when a
response that has been reinforced in the presence of one set of stimuli
occurs in response to some other stimulus (one that has not been associated
with the response through reinforcement.) Or to put it in more
common
English terms, generalization is a term used to describe any situation
where
knowledge or skills learned in one context are used (applied) in another.
Experiments show that generalization is a naturally occurring phenomenon
(to
some degree.) In fact, behavioral psychologists talk about the
"gradient of
generalization" -- meaning that when generalization occurs it occurs
more
frequently in situations that are similar to the training situation
and is
less and less likely to occur in situations that are less and less
similar
to the training context.
I'm not sure if generalization involves some separable set of specific
skills. Nor whether such skills, if they exist, are themselves
"generalized" (i.e., help a student generalize anything that is being
taught.) But, for me, the question for any teacher is, "What
can we do to
increase the likelihood that what is learned in the artificial context
of
the classroom will be used appropriately in the natural context of
the
student's life?"
There are tested procedures (situations and student actions) that tend
to
help students generalize what they are learning. For example,
by varying
the features of the situation in which we teach (using both verbal
dialogue
and written language, providing learning activities both inside the
classroom and outside the classroom, asking students to work alone
and in
collaboration with others, asking students to solve one kind of problem
and
to solve a very different kind of problem, etc.) we can increase the
likelihood of generalization. Even more important, and seemingly
more
difficult to do, is to find a way to reinforce (recognize, reward,
show
appreciation for) a student's application of new learning in new situations.
I think we, as teachers, can be much more aware of generalization when
it
occurs. For example, if a student has learned a new concept and,
the next
day (or week) uses that concept to make a point -- we ought to shoot
off
fireworks of praise for that. We should at least point out exactly
what has
been generalized and we should show approval of that use.
I would like to see more examples of ways we can provide generalization
experiences, such as these, rather than focus on speculating about
a set of
"skills." What do others think?
John W. Gunkler
jgunkler@sprintmail.com
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 18:47:25 -0500
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Bill Barowy <wbarowy@lesley.edu>
Subject: Re: transferability story
At 03:19 PM 12/9/98 -0400, TSBenson@aol.com posted the transferability story:
Thanks!
That was a great story - I will share it with the classes I teach on
modeling!
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley College, 29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
From: dajoy@hoy.net
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:51:02 -0500
Subject: Dune
Has this list ever discussed the SF Book: Dune?
Above all else, the mentat must be a generalist, not a specialist.
It
is wise to have decision of great moment monitored by generalists.
Experts and specialists lead you quickly into chaos. They are
a source of
useless nit-picking, the ferocious quibble over a comma. The
mentat
generalist, on the other hand, should bring to decision-making a healthy
common sense. He must not cut himself off from the broad sweep
of what
is happening in his universe. He must remain capable of saying:
"There's
no real mystery about this at the moment. This is what we want
now. It
may prove wrong later, but we'll correct that when we come to it."
The
mentat-generalist must understand that anything which can identify
as
our universe is merely part of larger phenomena. But the expert
looks
backward; he looked into the narrow standards of his own specialty.
The
generalist looks outward; he looks for living principles, knowing full
well
that such principles change, that they develop. It is to the
characteristics
of change itself that the mentat-generalist must look. There
can be no
permanent catalogue of such change, no handbook or manual. You
must look
at it with as few preconceptions as possible, asking yourself:
"Now what
is this thing doing?"
--The Mentat Handbook Children of Dune 221
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Ajoy
fajoy@fenix.sis.epn.edu.ec
-------------------------------------------------------------------
o \ o / __o
__| \/ |__
o__ \ o / o
/|\ | /|
__\o \o | o/
o/__ |\ | /|\
/ \ / \ |\ /) |
( \ /o\ / ) | (\ / \ / \
/ \
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Biological Models for Social Phenomena
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 12:09:29 -0600
Mike Slootmaker wonders:
> Does cell wall permeability
> parallel border crossing barriers? Do nutrient and liquid concentrations
> inside and outside cell walls parallel pressures which drive immigrants
to
> attempt border crossings? Could an osmosis and diffusion model be
used to
> explain large- or small-scale movements of peoples in an
> historical setting?
> Could biological processes serve as metaphors for social processes?
>
To which I respond:
Maybe.
Sounds plausible.
That's exciting.
Why not?
Indeed, one thing that making SD models ought to sensitize us to is
just
this -- the possibility of analogues. Models are analogues --
so it just
makes sense to look for other kinds. In fact, there is quite
a rich
scientific history of doing this. The "plumbing" (water flow
through pipes)
analogue for electrical circuits pops to mind immediately, as does
the Bohr
"solar system" model of the atom.
Even if the cross-disciplinary analogue turns out not to be close enough
to
be used as a model, the exercise of thinking about why and why not
should
surface new insights.
From: DessaDancy@aol.com
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:39:43 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
Because introducing system dynamics requires a major investment of class
time
that could be used to cover material on standardized tests, many teachers
fear
that this will hurt studentsā ability to do well on the tests.
At the 1996 STDM conference Doug Cardell, from Sunnyside High School
in
Tucson, said that they had been tracking student performance on standardized
tests and that introducing system dynamics had not affected test scores.
The
fact that it had not hurt studentsā scores was exciting, because like
other
teachers, he knew that his students could also think on an altogether
different and higher level that isnāt measured on that type of test.
Some of the Massachusetts teachers involved in systems thinking and
other
innovative projects were a bit apprehensive about how students in these
projects would do on the new Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment
System
(MCAS) testing that was done in fourth, eighth and tenth grades. Yesterday
the
long awaited and much dreaded results of these tests were released.
The Boston
Globe reports that "failure rates on the stateās tough new standardized
exams
were disappointingly high across Massachusetts."
However, the three schools that have begun introducing systems thinking
and
system dynamics to all middle school students - Carlisle, Concord,
and
Harvard - are at the top of the list of school systems with the best
scores.
According to the report in todayās Boston Globe, students scores in
Carlisle
Public Schools, a K-8 school district, were highest in the state for
grade 8
tests, Concord Middle School students had the next highest scores at
that
level, and Harvardās eighth grade students were in the next highest
bracket.
Students in Harvard, a K- 12 school system, had the highest total combined
scores in the state.
We can't draw any connection between these test results and system dynamics.
Many other good things are happening in these schools. Also, we don't
really
know yet how to assess the impact of system dynamics on student thinking.
Except for wonderful anecdotal reports from teachers, we donāt have
enough
good data or research to make any claims about the impact of system
dynamics
on student learning.
However, because standardized test results are unfortunately used to
judge
students, teachers and schools, these tests have a real hold on what
happens
in the classroom. So, for this reason, it's great to see a bit more
evidence
that the investment that this group of teachers has made in introducing
system
dynamics appears at least not to have hurt their studentsā ability
to do well
on this standardized test!
Dessa
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 15:21:20 -0500
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu, TSBenson@aol.com
From: "Janice C. Kowalczyk" <kowalcjn@ride.ri.net>
Subject: Re: transferability story
Thanks........the power is often in stories...as your story about Michael
illustrates so well.
Janice K.
From: TSBenson@aol.com
>Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:56:54 EST
>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
>Subject: transferability story
>
>True story-- An 8th grade boy named Michael was very unhappy with
his math
>teacher. Wanting out of the class and at his wits end, he went
to see the
>school guidance counselor to get assistance. The counselor asked
him to
>describe what was occurring in class-- Full of passion, he began
to report
>something like this: "I bug her and then she bugs me and I feel like
she is
>always out to get me and I just want to make her mad," and so on.
Suddenly,
>in mid-sentence, Michael stopped his stream of complaints and declared,
"It's
>just like one of those loopy things, the things we learned in Mr.
W's social
>studies class!!" "What do you mean?" asked the counselor.
"It was in 7th
>grade, we were studying wars and it was called the escalation something,"
>Michael answered. Because the wise counselor had been trained
in the tools of
>SD, she whipped out a template of the escalation archetype and asked
him to
>retell the story, which he did with much less emotion, yet, according
to the
>counselor, amazingly mature insight.
>
>Michael had to also meet with the principal (that would be me) because
his
>poor behavior in math had been referred to my office. His father
was also
>joining us because he was insisting that Michael be removed from the
class.
>Having talked to the counselor about the instance described above,
I began the
>meeting with Michael and his father with the escalation archetype
in hand, and
>asked Michael to describe the situation using the tool for the benefit
of both
>myself and his father. As in the counselor's office, he told
the story of the
>escalating conditions that existed between him and his teacher.
He portrayed
>the situation from a viewpoint which went beyond his own frustrations
with the
>teacher, taking personal responsibility for his actions that contributed
to
>the escalating situation. As you might imagine, there was also
some blame as
>he described the actions of the teacher, but without much effort,
together, we
>arrived at a plan to break the reinforcing cycle. We decided
to share the
>tool with the math teacher to help raise awareness of the dynamics
of the
>situation in order to gain greater understanding. The awareness
of how the
>"system" was working was very helpful in changing the conditions of
the
>system. We did not need to identify the specific details
of behaviors in
>making a plan, but concentrated on understanding the dynamics that
existed
>between these two individuals. The father left the meeting with
a greater
>understanding of the situation and a willingness to try out a plan
before
>making a change. (As a very successful attorney, he also commented
that those
>loopy tools may help him as he argues for his clients.) Michael
left inspired
>to make things work, with an enhanced understanding of escalating
conditions
>in a system. And I left with strong evidence of the transferability
of system
>dynamic tools used in curricular areas to the application of the tools
in
>helping students and adults understand everyday systems.
The benefits of
>this transfer may be too far-reaching to be worthy of traditional
measurement;
>the power is in the story.
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:57:39 -0800
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>From: DessaDancy@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:39:43 EST
>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
>Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>
> Yesterday the long awaited and much dreaded results of these tests
were
>released. The Boston
>Globe reports that "failure rates on the stateās tough new standardized
exams
>were disappointingly high across Massachusetts."
>
>However, the three schools that have begun introducing systems thinking
and
>system dynamics to all middle school students - Carlisle, Concord,
and
>Harvard - are at the top of the list of school systems with the best
scores.
>According to the report in todayās Boston Globe, students scores in
Carlisle
>Public Schools, a K-8 school district, were highest in the state for
grade 8
>tests, Concord Middle School students had the next highest scores
at that
>level, and Harvardās eighth grade students were in the next highest
bracket.
>Students in Harvard, a K- 12 school system, had the highest total
combined
>scores in the state.
YES! YES!! YES!!!
>We can't draw any connection between these test results and system dynamics.
ejg note: We can't draw any (statistically valid; defensible) connection
between these test results and system dynamics.
But we can sure (collectively) make some very strong personal inferences!!
Congratulations to all those in Carlisle, Concord, and Harvard districts
for their various achievements.
Ed Gallaher
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Reply-To: mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us (FH Michael Slootmaker)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:50:48 -0700
Subject: Transferability and Systems Archetypes
Hello, all
After reading Tracy Benson's true story of Michael - I wonder if we
can use the
systems archetypes to teach transferability?
Tracy mentioned the use of the Escalation archetype. There are other
archetypes. I'm thinking of "Fixes That Fail", "Tragedy Of The Commons",
"Shifting The Burden/Addiction", "Limits To Success", "Success
To The
Successful", "Growth And Underinvestment", and "Drifting Goals". In
our school
district we have used the Escalation archetype not only with counselors,
but
with social studies and literature teachers. We have built models around
the
Fixes That Fails archetype to help students study themes in certain
pieces of
literature. Some of our History teachers use Fixes That Fail to examine
historical phenomena.
Recognizing generic structures may well be a key upon which to build
transferability skills. Dr. Jeff Potash of Trinity College of Vermont,
our high
school history department, and I have been working on a generic model
of
revolution. The model is used to help students transfer knowledge gained
by
studying one revolution to other revolutions - the idea being to recognize
common patterns and look for similarities in the structures which created
the
patterns.
If you're interested in learning more about the systems archetypes Pegasus
Communications has a nice booklet available. Their web site is www.Pegasus.com
Mike Slootmaker
Catalina Foothills High School
From: BFlast@aol.com
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:01:18 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
In a message dated 12/11/98 12:08:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu writes:
<< at least not to have hurt their studentsā ability to do well
on this standardized test! >>
I would only amend this slightly to say "hurt their students' ability
to do
well on this standardized test more than whatever other unknown factors
helped
their students' ability to do well!" That's the dilemna and the
reason we
need more systematic evaluation.
Regards, Bob Flast
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 13:05:47 +0800 (MYT)
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: martens@pc.jaring.my
Subject: Re: transferability story
Dear TS benson
Thank you for the story about Michael (see below) and how SD can be
used in
everyday
life situations.
It is all very good, what is missing from the story is the mathteacher's
reaction to this new insight and understanding of how to control the
situation.
Is she one of the 'older colleagues' mentioned in other contributions
who do
not see a need for a deeper understanding using a tool she does not
understand?
If so, how does it help the situation, if she does not 'play along',
that
eveybody else had a positive experience? Michael is still left with
the
problem which he might not be able to solve, just because he understands
what causes it.
SD as a tool is great if the purpose is seeking the truth and getting
to the
bottom of the matter, but most actual work serves a different purpose
like
securing power and wealth, Building relations which bring more
power and/or
wealth etc.
A system dynamics project in itself. But where does it lead us? Does
understanding how it works change the dynamics of the system itself?
Best regards
Hans Martens
>From: TSBenson@aol.com
>Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:56:54 EST
>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
>Subject: transferability story
>
>True story-- An 8th grade boy named Michael was very unhappy with
his math
>teacher. Wanting out of the class and at his wits end, he went
to see the
>school guidance counselor to get assistance. The counselor asked
him to
>describe what was occurring in class-- Full of passion, he began
to report
>something like this: "I bug her and then she bugs me and I feel like
she is
>always out to get me and I just want to make her mad," and so on.
Suddenly,
>in mid-sentence, Michael stopped his stream of complaints and declared,
"It's
>just like one of those loopy things, the things we learned in Mr.
W's social
>studies class!!" "What do you mean?" asked the counselor.
"It was in 7th
>grade, we were studying wars and it was called the escalation something,"
>Michael answered. Because the wise counselor had been trained
in the tools of
>SD, she whipped out a template of the escalation archetype and asked
him to
>retell the story, which he did with much less emotion, yet, according
to the
>counselor, amazingly mature insight.
>
>Michael had to also meet with the principal (that would be me) because
his
>poor behavior in math had been referred to my office. His father
was also
>joining us because he was insisting that Michael be removed from the
class.
>Having talked to the counselor about the instance described above,
I began the
>meeting with Michael and his father with the escalation archetype
in hand, and
>asked Michael to describe the situation using the tool for the benefit
of both
>myself and his father. As in the counselor's office, he told
the story of the
>escalating conditions that existed between him and his teacher.
He portrayed
>the situation from a viewpoint which went beyond his own frustrations
with the
>teacher, taking personal responsibility for his actions that contributed
to
>the escalating situation. As you might imagine, there was also
some blame as
>he described the actions of the teacher, but without much effort,
together, we
>arrived at a plan to break the reinforcing cycle. We decided
to share the
>tool with the math teacher to help raise awareness of the dynamics
of the
>situation in order to gain greater understanding. The awareness
of how the
>"system" was working was very helpful in changing the conditions of
the
>system. We did not need to identify the specific details
of behaviors in
>making a plan, but concentrated on understanding the dynamics that
existed
>between these two individuals. The father left the meeting with
a greater
>understanding of the situation and a willingness to try out a plan
before
>making a change. (As a very successful attorney, he also commented
that those
>loopy tools may help him as he argues for his clients.) Michael
left inspired
>to make things work, with an enhanced understanding of escalating
conditions
>in a system. And I left with strong evidence of the transferability
of system
>dynamic tools used in curricular areas to the application of the tools
in
>helping students and adults understand everyday systems.
The benefits of
>this transfer may be too far-reaching to be worthy of traditional
measurement;
>the power is in the story.
Hans Martens
CALITAS (M) Sdn Bhd
Lot 6.7 & 6.8 6th Floor
Wisma Jusco, Section One
Wangsa Maju
53300 Kuala Lumpur
Phone: +603 452 4789
Fax: +603 452 4789
E-mail: martens@pc.jaring.my
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 12:40:39 -0500
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: Debra Lyneis <LyneisD@cle.tiac.net>
Subject: Transferabililty
When I think of transferabililty, I think of Jay Forrester's answer
to last
month's question about the basic concepts of system dynamics. "1. All
activity everywhere occurs within and is controlled by feedback loops.
2.
Feedback loops (and therefore all systems) consist of two and only
two
concepts--levels(accumulations or stocks) and rates (flows)."
That is the
essence of transferability. If we can see these patterns in one
system,
then we can transfer what we have learned about that system to any
other.
It seems simple enough, but, unfortunately, doing it is not so easy
as it
looks! Seeing patterns across disciplines is an "eye" that needs
developing, a skill that takes practice. (I think we all struggle with
this, as evidenced by the lively interest in this month's question.)
One
way to cultivate this skill might be to study system dynanmics applications
that are entirely out of your field. Download CLE curriculum materials
for
a different subject or grade level. Discuss these ideas with teachers
who
specialize in different areas. Ask "dumb" questions.
As teachers, we might find this difficult at first. I remember
Diana
Fisher saying that teachers are uncomfortable when they group teachers
from
different fields together to build models in the NSF training sessions.
I
know I certainly felt foolish when I plunged over my head into the
bathtub
drain physics discussion on this list earlier in the fall. But,
those
teachers do succeed, and I did learn more about physics and, more
importantly, stocks and flows. Somehow, we need to help one another
overcome our "compartmentalisms" and develop a broader view.
(The quote
from "Dune" was perfect!)
Maybe another idea would be to take our cues from the kids. They are
not
yet specialized, and they are not yet afraid of asking dumb questions
and
taking risks because everything is new to them. In Carlisle a
few years
ago, Jim Trierweiler (a master at learner-centered-learning for himself
and
his students) saw kids in his 8th grade science class using more advanced
graphing techniques to analyze their lab data. Surprised, he asked
them
where they had learned that stuff. Their reply: "Oh, this is just what
we've been doing in math; it's all the same thing, you know!" Jim
practically bounced down the hall to Rob Quaden's math class and Carlisle's
first interdisciplinary system dynamics unit grew from there. ("Let
It
Roll" on the CLE list.) Tracy Benson's story is another wonderful example.
One more suggestion might be Road Maps. The ability to see patterns
and
transferabilty probably increases with system dynamics modeling skills.
Road Maps presents a wide variety of examples. Other modeling
training and
workshops are very helpful too. Of course, this isn't easy either,
but
it's also probably not so bad as you'd think if you take it slowly.
If
Forrester could tell us at last summer's conference that he is "still
a
student of system dynamics after 40 years," the rest of us don't have
to
feel bad about being beginners!
To teach transferablility to the kids, we need to sharpen that skill
ourselves, if, as Forrester says, it's everywhere. We can do
that if we
continue to treat ourselves as a community of learners. The exchange
on
this list is very helpful to that end.
Thanks,
Deb Lyneis
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:49:28 +0100
From: Niall Palfreyman <Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Transferability and Systems Archetypes
Michael Slootmaker wrote:
> After reading Tracy Benson's true story of Michael - I wonder if
we
> can use the systems archetypes to teach transferability?
>
> Tracy mentioned the use of the Escalation archetype. There are other
> archetypes. I'm thinking of "Fixes That Fail", "Tragedy Of The
> Commons", "Shifting The Burden/Addiction", "Limits To Success",
> "Success To The Successful", "Growth And Underinvestment", and
> "Drifting Goals".
Yes, I like it! I never thought of it like that before, but an archetype
is nothing other than a story-in-a-nutshell which has proven itself
useful over a wide range of situations. So it's the perfect tool for
teaching transferrability.
Thanks, Michael!
Niall.
--
We have only the world that we can bring forth
with others, and only love helps us bring it forth.
Dr. Niall Palfreyman
mailto:Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com
assyst GmbH, Henschelring 15a
85551 Kirchheim bei Muenchen
Tel: ++49-89-90505-230
Germany.
Fax: ++49-89-90505-102/3
From: <dburke@nsf.gov>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 98 14:24:15 EST
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
I am very supportive of incorporating systems thinking into the
curriculum, but I think it is important to determine how these schools
ranked compared to other schools prior to these exams. My guess
is
that they are high socioeconomic status and were already doing well.
I believe we are still faced with the politically critical question
of
being able to measure the value-added of systems thinking in the
curriculum, before we can make serious inroads into changing the
curriculum.
Dan Burke
______________________________ Reply Separator
Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
Author: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu> at NOTE
Date: 12/15/98 9:57 AM
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:57:39 -0800
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
=46rom: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>From: DessaDancy@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:39:43 EST
>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
>Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>
> Yesterday the long awaited and much dreaded results of these tests
were
>released. The Boston
>Globe reports that "failure rates on the state=92s tough new standardized
e=
xams
>were disappointingly high across Massachusetts."
>
>However, the three schools that have begun introducing systems thinking
and
>system dynamics to all middle school students - Carlisle, Concord,
and
>Harvard - are at the top of the list of school systems with the best
scores=
=2E
>According to the report in today=92s Boston Globe, students scores
in Carli=
sle
>Public Schools, a K-8 school district, were highest in the state for
grade =
8
>tests, Concord Middle School students had the next highest scores
at that
>level, and Harvard=92s eighth grade students were in the next highest
brack=
et.
>Students in Harvard, a K- 12 school system, had the highest total
combined
>scores in the state.
YES! YES!! YES!!!
>We can't draw any connection between these test results and system
dynamics=
=2E
ejg note: We can't draw any (statistically valid; defensible) connection
between these test results and system dynamics.
But we can sure (collectively) make some very strong personal inferences!!
Congratulations to all those in Carlisle, Concord, and Harvard districts
for their various achievements.
Ed Gallaher
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:53:26 -0800
From: RICHARD TURNOCK <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Transferability and Systems Archetypes
I really liked the story of the boy and his understanding of the escalation
archetype. I shared it with others in the office and they enjoyed
the
story. Thank you for sharing it.
As an intuitive person, I was caught up in the ease of causal loop diagrams
and really liked them. I thought they would be neat and easy
to use to
understand complex systems. I've tried unsuccessfully to implement
them.
I've talked to several of the experts and researched this topic.
I've
decided causal loops don't result in detailed critical thinking.
They are
a good way to market the concept of system dynamics quickly to someone
unfamiliar with systems thinking. They encourage intuitive critical
thinking using incomplete information, no quantitative measurements
and no
ability to show behavior over time.
Instead of the causal loop archetypes, I prefer to use templates of
stock
and flow models. For example, the infection model is a complex
system of
stocks and flows to describe how quickly a disease spreads. I've
transferred this model to the context of introducing zero pollution
vehicles to replace combustion engine vehicles in an urban area to
reduce
pollution. The infection model is useful in many situations.
I can show the basic components of a simple feedback loop using stock
and
flow modeling. A condition (stock) has an action (biflow) regulated
by the
discrepancy between a goal and the condition. With this template
I can
test a story to find out if there is a simple feedback loop.
Richard Turnock
Apply Now: PGE will pay three instructors in Oregon to teach
three system
dynamics classes for teachers in Portland, Tigard and Wilsonville starting
in January. call me 464-8503.
From: DessaDancy@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:04:23 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
Yes, I agree!
Dessa
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:32:46 -0500
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Lees Stuntz <stuntzln@tiac.net>
Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
I couldn't agree more. The three systems Dessa was talking about
are all
in the top socio-economic status in the Commonwealth of Mass.
The MCAS
test results followed socio-economic lines with frightening regularity.
There were no statistical analyses done with standard deviations.
The top
25 school systems were all within approximately a 10-20 point spread
over
280 points for each test. Although their scores are probably
significantly
different from the bottom 25- most likely not significantly different
from
each other.
We still need to demonstrate value-added in terms that everyone
understands, which may well be in standard educational terms, with
tests
that make sense to the majority.
Lees Stuntz
>From: <dburke@nsf.gov>
>Date: Wed, 16 Dec 98 14:24:15 EST
>To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>
>I am very supportive of incorporating systems thinking into the
>curriculum, but I think it is important to determine how these schools
>ranked compared to other schools prior to these exams. My guess
is
>that they are high socioeconomic status and were already doing well.
>I believe we are still faced with the politically critical question
of
>being able to measure the value-added of systems thinking in the
>curriculum, before we can make serious inroads into changing the
>curriculum.
>
>Dan Burke
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
>Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>Author: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu> at NOTE
>Date: 12/15/98 9:57 AM
>
>
>Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:57:39 -0800
>To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
>=46rom: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@teleport.com>
>Subject: Re: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>
>>From: DessaDancy@aol.com
>>Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:39:43 EST
>>To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
>>Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>>
>> Yesterday the long awaited and much dreaded results of these tests
were
>>released. The Boston
>>Globe reports that "failure rates on the state=92s tough new standardized
e=
>xams
>>were disappointingly high across Massachusetts."
>>
>>However, the three schools that have begun introducing systems thinking
and
>>system dynamics to all middle school students - Carlisle, Concord,
and
>>Harvard - are at the top of the list of school systems with the best
scores=
>=2E
>>According to the report in today=92s Boston Globe, students scores
in Carli=
>sle
>>Public Schools, a K-8 school district, were highest in the state
for grade =
>8
>>tests, Concord Middle School students had the next highest scores
at that
>>level, and Harvard=92s eighth grade students were in the next highest
brack=
>et.
>>Students in Harvard, a K- 12 school system, had the highest total
combined
>>scores in the state.
>
>YES! YES!! YES!!!
>
>>We can't draw any connection between these test results and system
dynamics=
>=2E
>
>ejg note: We can't draw any (statistically valid; defensible) connection
>between these test results and system dynamics.
>
>But we can sure (collectively) make some very strong personal inferences!!
>
>Congratulations to all those in Carlisle, Concord, and Harvard districts
>for their various achievements.
>
>Ed Gallaher
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:27:11 -0700
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@TELEPORT.COM>
Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
Re test scores:
I agree as well. These were high-achieving schools before systems were
introduced, and were in high socio-economic areas as well (as pointed
out
quite clearly to me by Ron Zaraza during a discussion here in Portland).
What is still required, and we still don't seem to have available, is
a set
of test questions, essay questions, etc. which would illuminate the
potential insights, increased maturity, and ability to handle more
difficult concepts, but in a manner that does not require the mechanics
of
system dynamics as part of the test.
I firmly believe, but do not have the tools to "prove", that SD students
with some study of population models and/or academics would be able
to
discuss these issues with more maturity than those without. The questions,
of course, could not be couched in terms of stock-and-flow models,
which
would be unfamiliar to those without the specific SD training.
I put the word "prove" in quotes above for a very important reason.
We MUST
NOT design experiments to "prove" our pre-conceived notions. This is
an
issue I deal with in graduate education on a daily and weekly basis.
We
state a (testable) hypothesis, and then design an experiment which
allows
us to accept or reject the hypothesis. Statistically, we can
clearly
reject a hypothesis, but if we cannot reject it, we still have not
"proven"
that it is true, we have simply proven that we cannot reject it.
Only after a great deal of evidence has been gathered which are consistent
with the hypothesis should we begin to be confident that the hypothesis
is
"true".
Our current dilemma is due to the 'testable' issue mentioned above.
I can
state the hypothesis that SD students are more 'mature' in their thinking,
but I (we) don't have the tools to -test- this hypothesis. The details
of
such research are way outside my areas of expertise, but I don't see
others
providing us with these tools either. These are difficult quesitons
to
answer with any level of confidence.
Ed Gallaher
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 18:18:47 -0800
From: Richard Turnock <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Transferability
"Transferability of structure and behavior should create a bridge between
science and the humanities. Feedback-loop structures are common
to both.
An understanding of systems creates a common language. Science,
economics,
and human behavior rest on the same kinds of dynamic structures."
from Keynote Address by Jay W. Forrester for Systems Thinking and Dynamic
Modeling Conference for K-12 Education, June 27-29, 1994.
Subject: Transferability Summary - Finally!
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 11:23:13 -0800
From: Timothy Joy <tjoy@pps.k12.or.us>
To: "K12" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
December 21, 1998 - the Winter Solstice
THE QUESTION
Transferability-the capacity a student has to use knowledge from one
area
in a completely new area-recently surfaced as a legitimate assessment
of
>systems' veracity and power. How, then, do we foster transferability?
Second, how do we measure it?
- - - - - - - - - -
"Don't you get it, George? A man's life effects so many others.
When
he's gone, he leaves quite a hole."
Clarence, George Bailey's
guardian angel from "It's A Wonderful Life"
>- - - - - - - - - -
Last month, I inadvertently omitted a colleague's comments.
Serendipitously, Alan Ticotsky's comment on discerning stock from flow
speaks to the heart of this most recent conversation about transfer:
"With young students, we talk about simulate, count and then graph
things
that accumulate and decline, e.g., water in a pond, trees in a forest,
friends in a school." How often have we ever asked our students
to
consider their friends as similar to anything else, let alone water
in a
pond? In that most basic teaching function, Alan reminds us of
what the
good teacher does-give the student a personal starting point upon which
to build new ideas.
Many of us have stories of break through moments, wherein we witness
a
student's light vanquish the darkness. One such story captured
the
essence of this recent conversation: Tracy Benson's story of
Michael, an
8th grader who learned the power of knowing a system. On this
day of
least light, it is good for us to remember that our students bear
extraordinary gifts.
This month's question was divided in two parts, but quickly diverged.
We
found this topic to be full of questions and directions, but only a
few
certainties. It holds for us the likely kernels of proof we are
searching for in our endeavor to demonstrate the veracity and ubiquity
of
system dynamics
FOSTERING TRANSFERABILITY
Use models that clearly need input from other fields. One of the
few
things that we can be certain of regarding our current educational
paradigm-wherein students learn material in discrete bits, sequentially
and separately-is that students have little intellectual initiative;
if
>we don't tell them what to do, many are uncertain about how to proceed.
To the extent that SD problems are cross-disciplinary, students will
be
engaged. Further, to the extent have success in this, they gather
confidence. This seems also to be the case as well for teachers,
since
this is where all the interesting problems are.
Do lots of news items, use the newspaper in any way related to your
subject.
Teach to the big picture. Always consider the context of
the prevailing
specific subject, but keep the larger picture in view.
When introducing SD, the greater the variety of real world examples
the
better; this encourages students to apply the concept of system
to many
situations.
One of the purposes of teaching SD in the classroom is precisely to
foster transferability. Therefore, teach a competency (e.g.,
translate a
narrative description, such as Lord of the Flies, into a BOT graph)
in
one context and then "test" for it in another.
Students may not even be aware of the idea of transfer, so this needs
to
be presented to them. In various insidious ways, we need to engender
archetypal thinking. Many mentioned that high schools
have so
compartmentalized education that subjects other than the one being
taught
are considered "other" and, therefore, unimportant, irrelevant.
And so
our children are mistaught.
Make a direct request for transferability. This is intuitively
obvious
as I type this, but I realize that only people on this list mention
it at
all; it's a rarity inside most schools. In fact, most people
who
contributed this month made at least an oblique mention of this idea.
Pure George Richardson:
To get transfer of system dynamics insights from one context to another
we'd have to help students expose the "identical elements" [of their
problems]. We could design exercises that draw students from
the
particulars of a particular model or map to the 'crucial structure'
of
the model or map, and then from there to an abstract structure of map
. .
. This is the process that produced the [systems] "archetypes."
We need to teach directly to transfer: some kind of explicit abstracting
exercises that move from particulars to general and back to OTHER
particulars.
CAREFUL . . . we ought also to ask students to consider when an idea
or
model is NOT like others? Though we wish students to see across
boundaries, they must do so with a critical eye.
Put another way, to the extent that SD is used for only a single lesson
with no reference or connection to another idea or field, then we may
be
misteaching. Does this mean, EVERY systems problem or model construction
OUGHT to include an archetypal, generic, or transfer component?
We should use storytelling more. Niall Palfreyman reminds us that
metaphor "presuppose[s] an ability to transfer knowledge from one domain
into another." Others continued on this metaphor theme, noting
that this
was a rich field for us. There is a VERY STRONG correlation between
transfer as we are discussing it and metaphor as we know from literature.
As an English teacher, I wonder how much metaphor shows up in
science
and/or mathematics courses. Aristotle tells us that metaphor is the
surest sign of genius. Metaphor "practices what it preaches."
It is a
perfect model of the transfer of knowledge from one context to another.
The metaphoric mind has certain qualities: an ability to see patterns,
templates, similarities.
We tend to learn through modeling others.
Generalization is a naturally occurring phenomenon. By varying
the
features of the situation in which we teach(using both verbal dialogue
and written language, providing learning activities both inside the
classroom and out, asking students to work alone and in collaboration
with others, asking students to solve one kind of problem and to solve
a
very different kind of problem) we can increase the likelihood of
generalization. One of this century's great generalists, Joseph
Campbell
(Public Television's "Power of Myth") said that humanity tells but
one
story-the quest story.
Debra Lyneis also reminded us of Jay Forrester's comments last month:
1)
All activity everywhere occurs within and is controlled by feedback
loops; 2) Feedback loops (and therefore all systems) consist
of two and
only two concepts-levels and rates. As she says, this is the
"essence of
transferability. She suggests we ought to study SD applications
that
are ENTIRELY OUT OF OUR FIELD in order to overcome our propensity to
compartmentalize.
MEASURING TRANSFERABILITY
We need help in this area. There is much we can learn from other
educational movements and their methods of measure. And yet,
maybe our
stories give us a more direct line to parents and politicians:
not
statistics, not educational abstracts, not psychological studies, just
a
myriad of stories akin to Michael.s.
Not sure how we can "measure transferability" without changing the very
structure of schools: probable changes include less content-based
testing, which as many of us discussed last June in New Hampshire,
tends
to pull curricula in a particular direction. Gordon Kubanek (Ottawa)
goes on to suggest that questions ought to "integrate. . . [that we
should] require explicit connections between what a student learned
in
history or
English with . . . Chemistry." In short, there is little in the
current
system to foster this skill. The whole system is utterly
compartmentalized. He mentions that teachers "would have to talk
with
the other subject teachers and see what they have been studying."
A
switch from DEPARTMENTAL to GRADE LEVEL meetings may well accommodate
this as it does at least put the various teachers in the same room.
Suppose a student learns about transfer through BOT graphs through a
variety of incidents in the same novel, but is then tested by a larger
step, a narrative from a different novel. This may provide a
means to
actually "measure" the transferability. John Gunkler's comments
on this
idea were quite interesting (see his posting of 11/16/98) and for those
on this list with interest in assessment, he gives a good thumbnail
sketch of how one might go about this.
Many mentioned that we ought to be collecting anecdotal information
at
every turn: Teresa Hazel mentioned that we ought to record conversations
among student teams as they solve problems.
What should we be expecting to see from students? Would students
trained
in or who are using SD be more apt to see a system and propose a systemic
solution than addressing an "acute problem" that has a solution?
MICHAEL TORE THE ROTE ASUNDER
After waiting a month through our conversing, Tracy Benson shared a
poignant story of young boy named Michael (see 12/9/98) who was "unhappy
with his math teacher." Since he had studied a particular systems
archetype in history class, namely, the "escalation archetype," Michael
was able to identify his troubles as just that-escalation, and he was
able to determine a number of conditions that existed in his relationship
with the teacher. Having identified these conditions, they
put together
a plan to break the cycle. Even the teacher and parent participated
in
the discussion using the systems archetype. It was an extraordinary
story of how a systems approach cuts across the traditional educational
grain.
She concludes: "The benefits of this transfer may be too far-reaching
to
be worthy of traditional measurement; the power is in the story."
Tracy's story capsulizes our transferability discussion. It is
quite
likely many of us have similar stories, and, clearly, we should be
collecting them. Maybe we should call Michael's discovery a "Forrester
moment," what George Richardson declared as the thinking we want to
engender, when rather than merely seeing the temporal, we see the
template.
SOME HOLIDAY READING
Lessons From History, Will and Ariel Durant
In The Mind's Eye, Thomas West
The Unschooled Mind, Howard Gardner
Hero With A Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell
Dune, Frank Herbert
Thinking In Time, Richard Neustadt
Urban Dynamics, Jay Forrester
Mind As Nature, Gregory Bateson
Parabola, a quarterly publication of Shambala devoted to one archetype
an
issue
RESOURCES
Road Maps
Pegasus Books and Publications
Creative Learning Exchange
Our students
QUOTABLES
"Transferability is not something a teacher tacks on to a lesson, but
more fundamentally has to do with how the learning/teaching is done."
John Gunkler
"Never underestimate man's ability to compartmentalize."
Lees Stuntz
"If you want transfer you have to teach for transfer."
Janice Kowalczyk
"To evaluate whether greater learning occurs by a particular
teaching/learning approach, we need to have the freedom and flexibility
to test in the same way that the students learned."
Teresa Hazel
"We have to invent the experiences that help kids . . . uncover
transferable insights themselves."
George Richardson
"It's just like one of those loopy things."
Michael, on seeing a system's archetype in the heat of the moment
"Experts and specialists lead you quickly into chaos . . . The expert
looks backward; he looks into the narrow standards of his own
specialty.
The generalist looks outward; he looks for living principles,
knowing
full well that such principles change, that they develop. It
is to the
characteristics of change itself that the mentat-generalist must look."
The Mentat Handbook Children of
Dune 221
"Models are analogues." John Gunkler
"Recognizing generic structures may well be a key upon which to build
transferability skills."
Mike Slootmaker
"To teach transferability to the kids, we need to sharpen that skill
ourselves, if as Forrester says, it's everywhere. We can do that
we
continue to treat ourselves as a community of learners"
Debra Lyneis
"I have been a student of system dynamics for over 40 years."
Jay Forrester, via Debra Lyneis
"Transferability of structure and behavior should create a bridge between
science and the humanities. Feedback-loop structures are common
to both.
An understanding of systems creates a common language.
Science,
economics, and human endeavor rest on the same kinds of dynamics
structures."
Jay Forrester, June 28, 1994,
Keynote Address
PARTICIPANTS
Daniel Ajoy, fajoy@fenix.sis.epn.edu.ec
Tracy Benson, TSBenson@aol.com
Bill Barowy, wbarowy@lesley.edu
David Donahue, ddonahue@jaguar.middlebury.edu
Ed Gallaher, gallaher@teleport.com
Bob Gorman, bgorman@kncell.org
John Gunkler, jgunkler@sprintmail.com
Teresa Hazel, teresa@northwest.com
Gordon Kubanek, chust@monisys.ca
Janice C. Kowalczyk, kowalcjn@ride.ri.net
Debra Lyneis, LyneisD@cle.tiac.net
Hans Martens, martens@pc.jaring.my
Niall Palfreyman, Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com
George Richardson, gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu
Mike Slootmaker, mikes@fc.cfsd.k12.az.us
Alan Ticotsky, ticotsky@tiac.net
Richard Turnock, richard_turnock@pgn.com
From: UECKER Ed <Ed.Uecker@ODE-EX1.ODE.STATE.OR.US>
To: 'k-12sd' <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:29:26 -0800
It would seem to me that one of the best ways to look at student performance
and the impact of SD would be to look at analytical papers written
in the
average English or Social Studies class in 12th grade. Writing samples
are
often an excellent ways to study both the nature and depth of a student's
thought processes.
It is beginning to dawn on some folks that the more obvious time
to measure
the impact of learning is something more like 6-8 years out of HS,
after an
individual has had time to integrate and test the utility of what was
learned. We might also find that if we were to "test" students in a
mode
strictly oriented toward trouble-shooting and problem-solving scenarios,
my
instinct tells me that the difference in those students with SD available
as
strategy for analysis might become more obvious.
The whole problem with keying any validation of SD instruction to test
scores is that test scores are a pretty bogus way to measure achievement
or
potential. Most standard tests will not reveal the impact of SD training
because they do not test for it. Tests that seek to measure for right
and
wrong answers are not capable of revealing the deeper and more complex
processes involved in SD. SD is not just a tool, and its certainly
not a
"subject". It is a way of seeing and thinking about the world. In a
culture
that seeks to "fix" symptoms, rather than to address causality, this
kind of
skill is not measured because most people (obviously) fail to understand
its
value.
Ed Uecker
> -----Original Message-----
> From: k-12sd [SMTP:k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu]
> Sent: Monday, December 21, 1998 7:21 AM
> To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
> Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and
Test Scores
>
> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:27:11 -0700
> To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
> From: Ed Gallaher <gallaher@TELEPORT.COM>
> Subject: Re[2]: System Dynamics and Test Scores
>
> Re test scores:
>
> I agree as well. These were high-achieving schools before systems
were
> introduced, and were in high socio-economic areas as well (as pointed
out
> quite clearly to me by Ron Zaraza during a discussion here in Portland).
>
> What is still required, and we still don't seem to have available,
is a
> set
> of test questions, essay questions, etc. which would illuminate the
> potential insights, increased maturity, and ability to handle more
> difficult concepts, but in a manner that does not require the mechanics
of
> system dynamics as part of the test.
>
> I firmly believe, but do not have the tools to "prove", that SD students
> with some study of population models and/or academics would be able
to
> discuss these issues with more maturity than those without. The questions,
> of course, could not be couched in terms of stock-and-flow models,
which
> would be unfamiliar to those without the specific SD training.
>
> I put the word "prove" in quotes above for a very important reason.
We
> MUST
> NOT design experiments to "prove" our pre-conceived notions. This
is an
> issue I deal with in graduate education on a daily and weekly basis.
We
> state a (testable) hypothesis, and then design an experiment which
allows
> us to accept or reject the hypothesis. Statistically, we can
clearly
> reject a hypothesis, but if we cannot reject it, we still have not
> "proven"
> that it is true, we have simply proven that we cannot reject it.
>
> Only after a great deal of evidence has been gathered which are consistent
> with the hypothesis should we begin to be confident that the hypothesis
is
> "true".
>
> Our current dilemma is due to the 'testable' issue mentioned above.
I can
> state the hypothesis that SD students are more 'mature' in their
thinking,
> but I (we) don't have the tools to -test- this hypothesis. The details
of
> such research are way outside my areas of expertise, but I don't
see
> others
> providing us with these tools either. These are difficult quesitons
to
> answer with any level of confidence.
>
> Ed Gallaher
From: KCStarguy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 13:57:10 EST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:Introduction
Greetings
My name is Eric Flescher. I finished my doctorate recently at the University
of Kansas with my dissertation on Discovery and Experiential-
Based Learning
with Computer Simulations.
I teach gifted students for the Kansas City, Kansas school district.
I begaun
operating computer camps 12 years ago and became interested in the
value and
use of simulations for teaching and learning which led to my dissertation.
Currently I have developed worksheets for simulations that I use in
my camps
and schools and I am gradually letting people access them through my
website
to use and help improve them. I also just took a workshop with the
modeling
language STELLA and software NIH/Scion out of U of Arizona.
If use sims check out my site. I will gradually add more.
Also I have a newsletter for mac using educators and anyone interesting
can
subscribe by sending me email and say subscribe macsUNITE and tell
me where
you are from.
Looking forward to interacting with this new group and hearing from
you all.
Eric Flescher, Ed.D (KCStarguy@aol.com)
Coordinator, Project S.I.M. (Simulations, Interdisciplinary Internet
and
Metacognitive activities)Simulation Station website :
http://members.aol.com/kcstarguy/sim/
Webmaster- Computer Magic and Worlds to
Explorehttp://members.aol.com/kcstarguy/camp/
Webmaster- Eric's Black Sun Eclipse Website
http://members.aol.com/kcstarguy/blacksun/eclipse.htm
From: <dburke@nsf.gov>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 98 09:37:29 EST
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
I'd like to follow up on Ed Gallaher's comments. I also think
that
students with SD training will be more 'mature' in their thinking and
I agree with Ed that this needs to be measured in a context outside
of
an SD test and be compared to students who have not had SD training.
A thought that struck me is that one could set up open ended questions
that require in depth understanding, seeing the 'big picture' and
feedbacks in order to be able to construct a high-quality response
and
have a student's response be judged by an expert in the area of the
question. A variation on this is to ask a student to build a concept
map of a particular area and measure its correspondence to that of
experts in the area. SD-trained student responses could be compared
to nonSD-trained students to get at the value-added of the training.
I must admit that this reflects my bias which is to presume that most
of us are not generic good thinkers and problem solvers, but good
thinkers and problem solvers in areas in which we have built a
knowledge base. I'll leave discussion of this position and
'general transferability' to another time because I think that the
first
demonstration of the value of SD and its impact on 'transferability'
should be
within a specific area.
This area specific approach has the utility of giving teachers
feedback that they can use in their instruction and, for convincing
the key education stakeholders has the imprematuer of being validated
by
experts. I don't think that real discipline experts would be
too narrow to
judge student responses, because it has been my experience that really
competent people are cross-discipline, systems thinkers no matter what
their original training.
Dan Burke
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 00:52:28 +0800
From: Fischer & Mellbin <fischer-mellbin@fischer-mellbin.com>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: System Dynamics and Test Scores
We should decide for ourselves why we
think System Dynamics is useful in
education. If high test scores are a
main reason for using System Dynamics I
am uncertain if one can clearly measure
the benefits.
Thus, I do not believe in trying to
evaluate System Dynamics by looking at
student test scores. This is because I
am not confident that the highest test
scores are given to the students that
will perform best in real life
situations. There is ample evidence that
current tests favor those students that
"fit in", while actually failing to
identify some talented and even gifted
children.
I work with System Dynamics because it
is a real life tool. It can provoke
better insight, improve the decision
making process and ultimately lead to
better end results for users. This is
the winning situation that I would like
to pass on to students.
(I have worked with real life tests at
the College level and there is no reason
why it cannot be done with K-12
students. No more Math Test Monday,
English Test Tuesday, Science Test
Wednesday... Give students open-ended
problems, then let students themselves
decide how they want to solve it, some
may go for a science approach, others a
socioeconomic balanced solution, others
again will try going for profit
maximization. Wow! Just like real life!)
Franz-Michael S. Mellbin
--
Fischer & Mellbin
1 Dong Wu Jie, San Li Tun
100600 Beijing, China
Tlf: +86 (10) 6532 2434
Fax: +86 (10) 6532 2434
E-mail:
fischer-mellbin@fischer-mellbin.com
URL: http://www.fischer-mellbin.com/
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 14:26:50 -0500 (EST)
From: George Richardson <gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu>
Subject: Transferability
To: k-12 listserve <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Reply-to: George Richardson <gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu>
In an earlier life I recall studying some of the educational literature
on
transferability. My memory is that Thorndike around 1913 concluded
from
his early educational measurement studies that transferability of training
can take place to the extent that there are "identical elements" (I
think
that was his phrase) between the two contexts. My memory was
that that
principle still held pretty well in the late 1960s. I don't know
what
current research says.
But if we take Thorndike's principle and push it toward pedagogy, it
would
suggest that to get transfer of system dynamics insights from one context
to another we'd have to help students expose their "indentical elements."
Fortunately, our tools are great for that.
We could design exercises that draw students from the particulars of
a
particular model or map to the "crucial structure" of the model or
map,
and then from there to an abstract structure or map. It would
be this
structure that could be the "identical elements" that transfer.
This is the process that produced the "archetypes." A good exercise
for
teachers is to go back to chapter six of Forrester's Urban Dynamics,
where
most of the archetypes we now talk about were first articulated.
Looking
at that chapter it is fascinating to contemplate what Forrester must
have
been doing mentally to generate the list. Where did the principle
that
symptoms and causes are widely separated come from? Or the notion
that if
people manage to find policy levers that can have impact they usually
push
them in the wrong direction? Whatever that thinking was, is the
"process
of transferability" we are talking about teaching.
I would think that others who have written to the list on this topic
are
right when they say that we won't get transfers of insights without
actively teaching toward them. The archetypes are transferable
structure/behavior ideas, and we should probably teach toward them,
but
they don't show anyone how such transferable archetypical ideas were
hatched. We have to invent the experiences that help kids (and
my
graduate students, and me) uncover transferable insights themselves.
I'd
say some kind of explicit abstracting exercises that move from particulars
to general and back to other particulars (say, in causal-loop diagrams)
would be crucial.
Without exposing processes that help us get transferable "identical
elements" between, say, predator/prey oscillations and the motion of
a
slinky, my guess is that Thorndike's 80-year-old principle would still
get
in our way.
...GPR
End of December 1998
This is a monitored list for discussion of system dynamics in K-12
education.
For past discussions see:
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/k-12sd-email-list/archive/home.html
Send contributions and all requests to subscribe and unsubscribe to:
k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu