Subject: Alain Lafontaine Introduction
Hello, let me introduce myself as a new member of the K-12 discussion group. My name is Alain Lafontaine, I am from Montreal Canada (French Canadian) and now doing a Master in Piano-Pedagogy at San Diego State University. I have been teaching piano for thirteen years before I decided to return to school. During those thirteen years I have always wanted to learn something convinced that a teacher should always learn and put himself/ herself in the same position that his/her student. Among the things I have studied, (lucky guy·) I have been introduced to "System Thinking" by Claire Nuer from Learning as Leadership who worked with Peter Sense. I have studied the Rational Behavior Therapy with Pr Maxie Maultsby, himself student of Albert Elis. I have also done some workshops with Dr Carl O. Simonton whose approach has been among the first systemic in the field of health.
My last research paper was on systemic thinking in individualized piano instruction. I am thereby very happy to discover your research group, and hope that we will have some very creative learning exchange and I am happy to contribute to this group. . Some areas of discussion on which I am interested in
-Use of system dynamic in individualized piano instruction
and would like to exchange with you as well as getting some guidance are:
-How to conduct my research and where to find bibliographic resources?
-Do you think the STELLA II software can be used for piano instruction?
-The importance of the psycho-emotional components in a systemic view of education.
I look forward to discuss with you and exchange our knowledge and insight.
Alain Lafontaine
Subject: Lorenz Stella model
I had a Lorenz Stella model and now I can't find it. Someone on this listserv pointed me in the right direction last time I was looking for an example of a chaotic system. Could someone help again, where is it on the web?
Thanks
Richard
Subject: Announcing SyM Bowl East '99
Announcing:
SyM Bowl East °99
An exhibition of student work in the field of system dynamics
Saturday, April 17th, 1999 at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA
SyM Bowl East is:
- a student exhibition of systems thinking and dynamic modeling
- an opportunity for students to see the modeling work of others
- a venue for novice students to display their work
- a celebration for students, families, and teachers
The SyM Bowl Concept:
SyM Bowl began with the creativity and energy of Edward Gallaher, a
research pharmacologist and SD in K-12 supporter, from Portland, Oregon.
Teams of 2-4 students identify a problem (any area), identify reference
behaviors, find experts and reference materials, build a model (simple to
start with!), state assumptions, discuss parameter values, conduct
sensitivity analyses, consider loop behaviors, and draw conclusions. A
final report and poster session complete the process. A select group of
projects are asked to present their work in a general session.
NEW!! This year we also encourage beginning modelers to submit a
poster session (only) for evaluation and commendation in a non-competitive
arena. These students will have an opportunity to see others students
work, get feedback, and improve their abilities for future SyM Bowl events!
Wayne Wakeland, Ph.D., Systems Science Dept., Portland State
University and Edward Gallaher have evolved excellent judging criteria over
the past 3 years of SyM Bowl competition.
The Event Itself:
A paper (50%) is required (in advance). The writing, formulation of
the problem, etc. provides 25% of the score; modeling expertise provides
25% of the score.
Poster presentation (25%). On the day of the event, teams present
their models in an open-house forum (9:00-11:30). Each team has a table and
a computer, and they develop a background poster to illustrate their
project. This session is open to the public, and students are encouraged to
circulate and observe other projects.
Formal presentation (25%): Studies are selected to present a 15-min
talk to the entire audience in an auditorium. After a 30-min break we
conclude with an awards ceremony for all participants. Award amounts will
be determined based on the level of financial support obtained in
fundraising.
We look forward to having you join us! We thank WPI for their support and
for hosting the 1st Sym Bowl East!
(see:http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Depts/SSPS/Majors/SD.html)
For applications and arrangements contact:
Will Costello
Waters Center for System Dynamics
Trinity College of Vermont
Burlington, Vermont 05491
will@cvu.cssd.k12.vt.us
Subject: Re: Alain Lafontaine Introduction
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, k-12sd wrote:
> From: Lafpiano@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:15:20 EST
> To: K-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
> Subject: Alain Lafontaine Introduction
>
> Some areas of discussion on which I am interested
> in and would like to exchange with you as well as getting some guidance are:
> -Use of system dynamic in individualized piano instruction.
Couldn't possibly do this. As a serious musician and system dynamicist,
both for more than 25 years, I believe they have nothing to do with each
other.
> -How to conduct my research and where to find bibliographic resources?
The system dynamics bibliography available on line is a good start:
<http://www.std.com/vensim/sdmail/sdbib.html>
> -Do you think the STELLA II software can be used for piano instruction?
Absolutely not. It's nowhere on the route to Carnegie Hall...
...GPR
George Richardson
University at Albany
Subject: Re: Alain Lafontaine Introduction
I do not agree with the previous respondant who saw no role for SD in piano
instruction. I, myself, am not a musician but I believe there is a place
for SD
in just about everything, especially any form of teaching. I believe in
systematic approach and am sure there are good applications for SD in what you
do. It all depends on what level of detail you are working on. For
example, you
could plan and structure your discrete lessons using a systematic approach.
You
could use SD to model the music, themes, rhythm, beat etc. You may not find it
yields a complex model, but it is nonetheless a useful way to capture and
convey
this information for your students. The part that seems unsuited would be the
individual, subjective interpretation. But every other aspect of music is
closely
related to language and literature. I have used SD very effectively in
language
instruction and literary analysis for many years.
Good luck!
Lynne Bernstein
k-12sd wrote:
> From: Lafpiano@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:15:20 EST
> To: K-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
> Cc: Lafpiano@aol.com
> Subject: Alain Lafontaine Introduction
>
> Hello, let me introduce myself as a new member of the K-12 discussion group.
> My name is Alain Lafontaine, I am from Montreal Canada (French Canadian) and
> now doing a Master in Piano-Pedagogy at San Diego State University.
> I have been teaching piano for thirteen years before I decided to return to
> school. During those thirteen years I have always wanted to learn something
> convinced that a teacher should always learn and put himself/ herself in the
> same position that his/her student. Among the things I have studied, (lucky
> guy·) I have been introduced to "System Thinking" by Claire Nuer from
>Learning
> as Leadership who worked with Peter Sense. I have studied the Rational
> Behavior Therapy with Pr Maxie Maultsby, himself student of Albert Elis. I
> have also done some workshops with Dr Carl O. Simonton whose approach has
>been
> among the first systemic in the field of health.
> My last research paper was on systemic thinking in individualized piano
> instruction. I am thereby very happy to discover your research group, and
>hope
> that we will have some very creative learning exchange and I am happy to
> contribute to this group. . Some areas of discussion on which I am interested
> in and would like to exchange with you as well as getting some guidance are:
> -Use of system dynamic in individualized piano instruction.
> -How to conduct my research and where to find bibliographic resources?
> -Do you think the STELLA II software can be used for piano instruction?
> -The importance of the psycho-emotional components in a systemic view of
> education.
> I look forward to discuss with you and exchange our knowledge and insight.
> Alain Lafontaine
Subject: Re: Reply to Lafontaine Introduction
George Richardson wrote:
> > -Use of system dynamic in individualized piano instruction.
> Couldn't possibly do this. As a serious musician and system
> dynamicist, both for more than 25 years, I believe they have nothing
> to do with each other.
What, REALLY, George? What a pity. I don't play the piano and I can't
say I've been at system dynamics for very long, but I was under the
impression that there was nothing on this Earth with which SD didn't
have SOMETHING to do. What about the way in which music can build up
tension and then resolve it? That seems pretty SD-ish to me.
Best wishes,
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
Subject: Re: Confirmation
I am a (unemployed) High School science teacher in Geogia but I was born,
grew up, and have lived in Brazil for most of my life. I have taught
Chemistry and Biology (on and off) for the last 15 years.I've been here for
the last 3, and am currently enrolled in a masters program at GSU. I am
excited about the possibility of using system dynamics models as a
teaching-learning tool with my students. I still have a long way to go.
Does anybody know of any reaserch that has been done on the overall affect
of using system dynamics modelling in the classroom on student thinking
skills or student test scores?
Thanks,Flo
Subject: Music applications
Dear George and Alain,
How about this positive causal loop in learning music:
The more you practice, the better your skills, the higher your enjoyment of
playing, the more you want to practice, and so on.
Of course, this also works in the downward direction:
The less you practice, the worse your skills become, the less you enjoy
playing, the less you want to practice, etc.
We've seen this work both ways in our family. And, I'll confess, even
pointing out the causal loop didn't help much with reversing the downward
spiral in practicing! Still, it's a nice loop that might help some kids
understand the relationship between their practicing, their skill, and
especially their enjoyment of music-- or whatever else they choose to pursue.
I don't think a model would add much insight to this simple loop, though.
And it doesn't really teach music itself either. But, getting on that
positive loop might get you to Carnegie Hall!
Deb Lyneis
Subject: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
Dear Listserve members,
This is an interesting conversation which was carried on, in part, on the
system dynamics listserve. I actually took the first three comments from
the listserve to send to Bob Tinker to follow up on a conversation we had
had earlier. His reply is at the end. The question asked was "how to use
spreadsheets for dynamic modeling."
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/
Comment #1 by David Gillespie
Manual for the ithink program from High Performance Systems has a section on
"the poverty of spreadsheets." Inquire http://www.hps-inc.com/
From: "David Gillespie" <davidfg@fidnet.com>
Comment #2 by George Richardson
There is a world (view) of difference between modeling in spreadsheets and
system dynammics modeling. The essence of the difference is that
spreadsheets capture DISCRETE year-to-year (or time unit-to-time unit)
changes while system dynamics simulations attempt to capture a CONTINUOUS
view of change.
One can build an exact replica of a system dynamics model in a
spreadsheet, but then one would have to have (in the most likely format) a
column for each Time Step (DT) in the simulation. For a time step of,
say, .25 year, one would need four columns to move from one year to the
next. Usually, people don't do that, preferring to let the successive
columns be the successive years (or whatever the time unit). Spreadsheets
in which successive columns represent successive time units are capturing
difference equation models, not continuous time models.
It can make a big difference. In a spreadsheet model representing a
difference equation structure, one does not have to obey our presumption
of at least one stock in every feedback loop. A variable can be set equal
to some variable "in the last period," and the loops that result may not
have any stocks in them. In a system dynamics model, there is no "last
period" -- the perspective is of a continuous system, with time flowing
continuously. Forrester had quite a bit to say about this in Industrial
Dynamics.
In the hands of careful experts, I think either modeling perspective can
yield robust results. But the discrete approach that most spreadsheet
users would produce is frought with peril. In Feedback Thought in Social
Science and Systems Theory, there is a lot on discrete and continuous
views. If you can find the book, look up "continuity and discreteness,"
"continuous point of view," "discreteness," and "events." It's a sobering
and instructive set of stories...
...George
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Phone: 518-442-5257
University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #3 by John Sterman
I fully endorse George's comments on the difficulties of spreadsheets for
dynamic modeling.
But there are other pragmatic reasons not to do this as well. While it is
possible to represent a system dynamics model in excel, I strongly advise
against it.
Properly capturing feedbacks and stock-flow structure in a spreadsheet is
tedious, and it is easy for errors to creep in undetected. Further, since
the spreadsheet emphasizes the contents of a cell, it is hard to visualize
the relationships in and overall structure of the model. It is a tool
designed for detail, not dynamic complexity.
Consequently, models built in excel are hard to document, explain, and
modify. These properties make it difficult to conduct the modeling process
in an open, inquiring mode, a mode in which client feedback can lead to
revisions with a short cycle time. Therefore client understanding and
confidence fall, and chances of meaningful implementation plummet, even, as
george says, in the hands of careful experts.
If a spreadsheet interface is required, a much better option is to build
the model in e.g. vensim, powersim or ithink, then send the data to and
from the spreadsheet via DDE.
In short, don't use spreadsheets when dynamic models of feedback systems
are appropriate.
John Sterman
John Sterman
J. Spencer Standish Professor of Management
Director, MIT System Dynamics Group
MIT Sloan School of Management
E53-351
30 Wadsworth Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
617/253-1951 (voice); 617/258-7579 (fax), jsterman@mit.edu
http://web.mit.edu/jsterman/www
Comment #4 by Bob Tinker
(N.B.the model is not enclosed here, but I (Lees Stuntz) have it available,
if you would like it, just send an e-mail to stuntzln@tiac.net)
I enclose a spreadsheet model that both substantiates and refutes various
points made in your enclosures. It is true that "errors creep in" (I had
to do a little fix that conserves energy). On the other hand, this model is
very simple to set up and modify. The cell values use variable names that
are obvious and easy to modify. To change a variable, simply type in
another number for any of the bold numbers in column B.
The model is instantly re-calculated and graphed, giving the user lots of
opportunities to explore. In the latest Excel, you can even attach these to
slide bars. All the unique equations are in D4:G4, the rest of the table
can be made by replicating these down the page as far as you like.
The great advantage in this is that all the math is transparent and
involves simple algebra. Most modeling environments hide all the math, so
the naive user really has no idea what she or he is doing from a
mathematical point of view. The finite-step approach we use is far more
understandable. By making the time step a variable, we lead the user to an
understanding that the model is more accurate for smaller steps. This gets
around the problem of thinking about a past time influencing the present
when the reality is that present rates influence present stocks.
Of course, the resulting models are not as accurate using what is, in
effect, the Euler method. That is the flip side of making the math
accessible. Euler will never be as accurate as a higher-order
approximation. But when the goal is model-building, accuracy is not as
important as comprehension. We have tested modeling extensively with
typical 9th graders and convinced ourselves that the algebraic/spreadsheet
approach is far more comprehensible and more likely to lead to accurate
models than Stella.
In the end, a mix of approaches probably makes the most sense. A
qualitative modeling system like Model-It is probably the best way to get
kids hooked on the idea of modeling and to introduce some of the key ideas.
But it also hides the mathematics, and I would move next to spreadsheets to
show the math and sharpen the ideas. Once comfortable with the math and
key concepts, a modeling environment like Stella would be best.
Sincerely.
Bob
Robert Tinker, President,
The Concord Consortium http://www.concord.org
37 Thoreau St., Concord, MA 01742
978-369-4367, fax: 978 371-0696
Implementing the educational promise of technology
Subject: Re: Music applications
>From: Debra Lyneis <LyneisD@cle.tiac.net>
>Subject: Music applications
>Dear George and Alain,
>How about this positive causal loop in learning music:
>The more you practice, the better your skills, the higher your enjoyment of
>playing, the more you want to practice, and so on.
As a 12-year System Dynamics student and 30-year amateur musician I think
George and Debra are both correct. If we consider a generic description of
effort and results, learning, knowledge, motivation, and so on, then of
course SD could be applied to any subject under the sun, including baseball
and piano.
On the other hand, does SD have something -specific- to contribute to the
study of music? If so, it is not at all clear to me what it might be. If
anyone has any suggestions I'll be glad to apply them to my current
attempts to play the 4-string tenor banjo and the hammered dulcimer!
Ed Gallaher
Subject: System dynamics in music instruction
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Reply-to: George Richardson <gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu>
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, k-12sd wrote on the use of system dynamcis in music
instruction:
> From: Amberock <lynne@csnet.net> do.
> It all depends on what level of detail you are working on. For example,
> you could plan and structure your discrete lessons using a systematic
> approach.
(But a "systematic approach" is not necessarily system dynamics.)
> You could use SD to model the music, themes, rhythm, beat
> etc. You may not find it yields a complex model, but it is nonetheless
> a useful way to capture and convey this information for your students.
These claims are intriguing to me, because for the life of me I can't see
how I'd do it, or why, and as I consequence I can't see how it would be
helpful to music students.
Can Lynne (or somebody out there) show us in detail how one could use a
formal system dynamics model to help someone grow in musical skils or
sensitivity?
I responded quickly to the initial person asking about system dynamics in
music instruction because I hoped to save him from a fruitless quest. But
I'd be really interested if somebody on this list can show us all how
system dynamics can really be helpful in music instruction.
...George
P.S. I don't think Deb Lyneis's positive loop of "practice ---> skill
---> motivation ---> practice" is helpful in learning musical skills or
sensitivities. It's a statement about learning. I bet there's lots one
might do thinking of learning as a dynamic phenomenon (although I don't
know what additional insights would come from formal modeling in this
area).
And to Niall -- yes, (sadly?), I do think there are wonderful things out
there that system dynamics don't contribute to. (But you knew that.) I
think learning how to read music or draw melifluous sounds from an
instrument or a voice are a couple of them. But I'd love to be proved
wrong here!
Subject: Music etc.
Hello Allain, Hello George, Hello all you.
Was Einstein less Einstein because he was a poor violinist? Somewhere (maybe
Readers Digest...) someone told how Einstein showed him what music was all
about, and scratched his violin to make a point. Both were very happy.
Could I compare myself to Einstein because I am as miserable a player as he?
Never as a scientist, of course, but how much I enjoy listening to music!
A Brazilian Music Instrument Manufacturer was best buy for at least 3 years
(then
my duty was done) at the International Music Instruments Fair in Frankfurt. I
helped; and without my knowledge of musician's minds (we had some of the very
best with us) we never would find the mutual understanding so necessary to
fruitful teamwork.
This is a comment about transferability.
This is no excuse for mediocrity. If you are not born for Carnegie Hall, set
another priority, and be as good as you can. Without SD in your mind you can't:
whatever you do, using SD you can do it better!
Fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: Fritz Introduction
Hello Nan, Hello all you.
German born Brazilian, I came here 1951. Engineer since 61, I started as
trainee in Volkswagen (1/2 year back in Germany), but left 5 years later. I
feared to become a specialist about stamping only; so I started teaching. From
there on I usually had one leg in Industry and one in school. São Paulo has its
fascination, as Nan said, and I am proud that I evolved with the city. Some of
the really good professionals were my students. But that's one face of the
coin.
I heard about SD during pres. Kennedy's administration and forgot about. A
couple years ago I inherited a german translation of "Toward Global
Equilibrium"
and nothing more was the same. Recently I joined the Net, and how rich I was
downloading Road maps and Vensim PLE! Retired, I'm turning back to
University of
São Paulo, (as student...) but I feel that the courses of SD to young people
here around will be a better use of time. That's why we are together.
Usually I talk to much. Brazilian usance.
Bemvindos a minha casa (welcome to my home)
Fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: Spreadsheets and equations
During our inlation period - 1% per DAY - Apple with Visicalc was the best we
could find. A bit linear programming optimized the "overnight" applications. It
worked fine and without a mainframe computer.
But... If all you have is a hammer, everything becomes a nail. Are there really
reasons - beyond Desert Island - to use less adequate tools to solve problems?
My question delves a bit deeper. I admire the way mathematics are reduced to
simple language in all those texts around Road Maps. Only once I saw something
similar; Dr. Heinrich Blasius's "heuristic method" of learnig and thinking.
Reading books by Hermann Oberth or Wernher von Braun I admire their convincing
visual reasoning. Almost no differential equations, but everything exact.
Yes, I agree
that in a curriculum of theoretical physics this
may not be the line to adopt, but our business is problem solving; or well and
fully documented or the best we can do with incomplete data. Now, if there
is no
other way, Excel is much better than the slide rule. But we should warn our
students.
I look forward for your comments.
Fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
Lees Stuntz wrote (essentially):
> Dynamic modelling in spreadsheets is crap, but maybe not quite as
> crappy as some might think.
I'd be hard put to it to disagree with this view, at the same time I'm
aware of one compelling reason for me to use spreadsheets for modelling.
I don't use SD directly in my work. Rather, I'm using it to build up an
understanding of complexity issues relating to the design of a highly
decentralised decision system. I'm using it to build up my intuitions
about complex systems in GENERAL, rather than some specific system.
Hence it's useful for me to be able to whip out a computer at any moment
on a train, plane, or in the lunch break, and have a little play. Now
the only 'whip-outable' computer I have is a Psion Series 5 palmtop,
which unfortunately does not yet sport any SD modelling software. So
instead I use the Psion's own spreadsheet program.
The force of circumstances can work wonders, huh? In my case they make
spreadsheets absolutely the best possible (ie, ONLY!) tool for dynamic
modelling.
Best wishes,
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
Subject: Definition
When I asked for a definition of system dynamics, a middle school student said,
"The quest for a new state of mind."
I thought about it and I like it. When I mentioned it to a group of
teachers later, one said the student had been watching too much Star Trek.
OK, it's out there and probably beyond what the middle school student might
understand when you dig into the many meanings of the words.
Here's how I thought about it:
1. Quest -- Because all simulation models are wrong, (they are not the
real world, they are limited and have defined boundaries) then we are
constantly searching for better models. Also, we search for models of
systems we don't yet understand. We are on a never ending quest in search
of more and better models. Joseph Campbell said there is only one story,
the quest story.
2. Simulation models are a way of making visible our mental models of the
world. So, I'm always adjusting my perception of the real world by
expanding my library of simulation models that I understand and use. This
would move me into a "new state of mind." I now use the infection model
and talk about it.
OK, all this is too corny and I'm not a philosopher.
Maybe someone else has a better explanation.
Richard
Subject: Re: Music applications
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 16:11:30 -0400 k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu (k-12sd) wrote:
>On the other hand, does SD have something -specific- to contribute to
>the
>study of music? If so, it is not at all clear to me what it might be.
>If
>anyone has any suggestions I'll be glad to apply them to my current
>attempts to play the 4-string tenor banjo and the hammered dulcimer!
>
>Ed Gallaher
Just a thought, but when I play around with the coswav(x,y) functions
I'm always reminded of my music synthesis days, with carrier waves and
wave forms, envelopes, filters, etc as the vocabulary of planning
compositional elements like notes and textures, and of the structural
aspects too. I have not fiddled with the loop diagram aspects of how to
represent carrier and signal, but I bet one could do a nice simulation
of basic waveform interaction of for example, the harmonic series, and
of the mixture relationships in say the sine wave level of analysis of a
ramp or sawtooth wave. Those shapes could then be exported directly out
(or symbolically linked to an export out) to a direct sound module that
would illustrate the aural result of the synthesis.
One could also certainly loop a compostional process like a "round" or "
simple fugue."
But just sitting on the porch with the banjo might be more satisfying in
certain aspects...:-)
Subject: when is system dynamics useful?
I think that the point of whether system dynamics can be useful in music
can be generalized to - how do we decide whether sd is worth the trouble
for a particular discipline - or a particular application.
We do a lot of sd in bio and physics - very naturally. But folks are
always trying to use STELLA when the particular bio/physics app is so
simple that a calculator or spreadsheet will do. Should this be
discouraged since some would draw the conclusion that we are making a
big deal about nothing? Or should such first efforts by teachers be
encouraged?
Then there are entire domains when it may be more trouble than its worth -
especially if disallusioned teachers discourage others. We find that
there are good applications in environmental chem, chem engineering, and
chemcon but that for ordinary hs academic chemistry - the compelling
applications are few and far between. Or haven't we looked hard enough?
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
Subject: re: Definition
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Richard Turnock offers up a student's definition of system dynamics as "The
quest for a new state of mind."
I think that's absolutely marvelous. SD is very much a quest for a new way
of looking at matters and I have absolutely no difficulty whatsoever in
equating that to 'a new state of mind.'
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:22:59 -0400
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Definition
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 08:37:28 +0100
From: Niall Palfreyman <Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Definition
Richard Turnock wrote:
> SD = "The quest for a new state of mind."
Yes Richard. Given your elucidation, I like this definition as well.
However I'm also aware that for me there is something important missing
from it, and that involves this, for me central, idea of holism which
lies at the heart of SD. That we cannot find a new state of mind in the
individual pieces alone, but rather in the global organisation, or
relationships, of those pieces. I therefore humbly propose:
SD = "The quest for a new relationship with the world."
Comments?
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
Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and equations
Thanks to Lees Stuntz for relaying the spreadsheet vs STELLA discussion to the
k12 list!
I discovered as an undergraduate that the awesome power of many physical
models come with a „catch‰: Most of situations that were interesting on a
macroscopic level were not „solvable‰ (at least by me) analytically.
(„Physicist: Let the cow be a sphere....‰)
When a math professor showed me that difference equations could be used in
BASIC programs to generate graphs of the motion of physical systems, I was
hooked on modeling physical systems numerically. (Richard Feymann‚s
introductory lecture on Newton‚s Laws discussed how NL‚s could be used with
the Euler method to chart the motion of the planets in 1962! (If initial
conditions are known:))
Prof. Charles Misner wrote a small book called „Spreadsheet Physics‰ which
taught a coherent set of techniques for using a spreadsheet to model physical
systems. He treated issues of spreadsheet organization, error estimates, etc.
When I taught these techniques to my advanced physics students, the focus of
the activities was the exploration of the physical systems based on the
resulting graphs.
When I discovered STELLA and SD, I was skeptical of the interface which
obviously hid the very familiar mathematics just below the surface. But as I
read more material on System Thinking and the documentation for STELLA, I
understood some of the software features that enhance the modeling experience,
including:
_ multileveled environment corresponding to the multiple levels of
>>conceptualization used to building a model
_ sketchable graphs for „voicing‰ hypotheses
_ graphical inputs which allow influences not readily expressible as equations
_ sensitivity analysis
_ painless switching between numerical methods
I have benefitted many times by staring at the pictures of the models I have
started. For example: Physics teachers commonly illustrate the conservation
of mechanical energy with roller coaster examples, representing the change of
energy from gravitational potential to kinetic as a flow between containers.
But what happens to the energy contained in batteries of an electric vehicle
during operation? By representing the energy cycle as a closed flow cycle
between stocks forced me to account for the battery energy, and consequently
altered the way I present the topic to my students. (I realized that most of
the energy ends up as kinetic energy of the air molecules around the car!)
My conclusion is that while teaching the mechanics of building models driven
by well defined equations may be simpler using spreadsheets, the use of
programs such as STELLA facilitate the teaching of System Thinking, and the
process of conceptualizing a model where the mental model precedes the a
mathematical framework.
Jay Fogleman
Energy Power Transportation Cluster
Howard County Technology Magnet Program
Columbia, MD
Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
Dear Niall,
I was merely reporting a conversation amongst others which I found
interesting and stimulating. If I were to say, in essence, what you said,
I would have stated it a bit more delicately. :-)
Lees
>Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:46:28 +0100
>From: Niall Palfreyman <Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com>
>To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
>
>Lees Stuntz wrote (essentially):
>> Dynamic modelling in spreadsheets is crap, but maybe not quite as
>> crappy as some might think.
>
>I'd be hard put to it to disagree with this view, at the same time I'm
>aware of one compelling reason for me to use spreadsheets for modelling.
>
>I don't use SD directly in my work. Rather, I'm using it to build up an
>understanding of complexity issues relating to the design of a highly
>decentralised decision system. I'm using it to build up my intuitions
>about complex systems in GENERAL, rather than some specific system.
>Hence it's useful for me to be able to whip out a computer at any moment
>on a train, plane, or in the lunch break, and have a little play. Now
>the only 'whip-outable' computer I have is a Psion Series 5 palmtop,
>which unfortunately does not yet sport any SD modelling software. So
>instead I use the Psion's own spreadsheet program.
>
>The force of circumstances can work wonders, huh? In my case they make
>spreadsheets absolutely the best possible (ie, ONLY!) tool for dynamic
>modelling.
>
>Best wishes,
>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
>
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/
Fred Nickols, Executive Director
Strategic Planning & Management Services
Educational Testing Service [01-D]
Princeton, NJ 08541
Tel = 609.734.5077 Fax = 609.734.5590
e-mail = fnickols@ets.org
Views expressed are the author's, not ETS's.
-------------
Original Text
From "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>, on 2/11/99 3:24 PM:
To: SMTP@CIPS06@Servers[<k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>]
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:02:42 -0800
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Definition
When I asked for a definition of system dynamics, a middle school student
said,
"The quest for a new state of mind."
I thought about it and I like it. When I mentioned it to a group of
teachers later, one said the student had been watching too much Star Trek.
OK, it's out there and probably beyond what the middle school student might
understand when you dig into the many meanings of the words.
Here's how I thought about it:
1. Quest -- Because all simulation models are wrong, (they are not the
real world, they are limited and have defined boundaries) then we are
constantly searching for better models. Also, we search for models of
systems we don't yet understand. We are on a never ending quest in search
of more and better models. Joseph Campbell said there is only one story,
the quest story.
2. Simulation models are a way of making visible our mental models of the
world. So, I'm always adjusting my perception of the real world by
expanding my library of simulation models that I understand and use. This
would move me into a "new state of mind." I now use the infection model
and talk about it.
OK, all this is too corny and I'm not a philosopher.
Maybe someone else has a better explanation.
Richard
Subject: Re: Definition
I don't think that
<< The quest for a new state of mind >>
is a proper definition
systems thinking goes into a combination of exploration, thinking, creating
and online persistance in problem solving and decision making modeling.
Eric Flescher, Ed.D (KCStarguy@aol.com)
The word 'engage' is what Jean Luc Picard says for the Enterprise to go
somewhere- it should not be used to indicate what students are learning with
computers and technology:
Coordinator, Project S.I.M. (Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and
Metacognitive activities)
Simulation Station website - http: //members.aol.com/kcstarguy/sim/
Subject: Re: Definition
Richard Turnock wrote:
> SD = "The quest for a new state of mind."
Yes Richard. Given your elucidation, I like this definition as well.
However I'm also aware that for me there is something important missing
from it, and that involves this, for me central, idea of holism which
lies at the heart of SD. That we cannot find a new state of mind in the
individual pieces alone, but rather in the global organisation, or
relationships, of those pieces. I therefore humbly propose:
SD = "The quest for a new relationship with the world."
Comments?
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
Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
Dear Niall,
I was merely reporting a conversation amongst others which I found
interesting and stimulating. If I were to say, in essence, what you said,
I would have stated it a bit more delicately. :-)
Lees
>Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:46:28 +0100
>From: Niall Palfreyman <Niall.Palfreyman@assyst-intl.com>
>To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
>
>Lees Stuntz wrote (essentially):
>> Dynamic modelling in spreadsheets is crap, but maybe not quite as
>> crappy as some might think.
>
>I'd be hard put to it to disagree with this view, at the same time I'm
>aware of one compelling reason for me to use spreadsheets for modelling.
>
>I don't use SD directly in my work. Rather, I'm using it to build up an
>understanding of complexity issues relating to the design of a highly
>decentralised decision system. I'm using it to build up my intuitions
>about complex systems in GENERAL, rather than some specific system.
>Hence it's useful for me to be able to whip out a computer at any moment
>on a train, plane, or in the lunch break, and have a little play. Now
>the only 'whip-outable' computer I have is a Psion Series 5 palmtop,
>which unfortunately does not yet sport any SD modelling software. So
>instead I use the Psion's own spreadsheet program.
>
>The force of circumstances can work wonders, huh? In my case they make
>spreadsheets absolutely the best possible (ie, ONLY!) tool for dynamic
>modelling.
>
>Best wishes,
>Niall.
x>--
>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
>
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/
Subject: January question
Dear Listserve,
Back in the middle of January, I posed a series of questions which
I will re-print here to refresh your memories. There has been no
discussion on them. I am not trying to create a discussion about which no
one is interested-but I find it absolutely fascinating the total lack of
response on this topic. The topic itself, assessment, in the context of
current K-12 education, is inherently of some interest, intellectual,
emotional, or professional and probably all three. I would like to add a
fourth question to this list:
Why are we not discussing assessment more actively amongst ourselves??
What is it about assessment we don't want to tackle?
If anyone else can come up with a question on the subject of assessment
which IS of interest- please don't hesitate to pose it. If not, perhaps we
should go on to more burning issues.
The January questions:
What strategies are you using now to assess systems learning and which do
you think are the most effective?
How can we be sure students are learning systems concepts in a way that
will be effective in the long run?
In your ideal world, which includes (centers on) systems education, what is
its inherent, logical, reasonable and reportable assessment system?
Lees
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/
Subject: Re: January question
Regarding:
<<
Why are we not discussing assessment more actively amongst ourselves??
What is it about assessment we don't want to tackle? >>
I spent 6 years plus working on a qualitative analysis dissertation study of
simulation use. I did this because I knew I could not find what I wanted via
quantitative. It took a lot of time but I found what I wanted.
Most assessment are to be quick and not to get the whole picture and the many
parts. That is what I needed.
I think assessment that deal with technology
(1) should go beyond stuyding attitudes
(2) not focus on just engagement qualities
(3) should involve analysis of thinking skills
(4) focus on the use of other intelligence modes not just logic
(5) focus on what users do and do not do under many circumstances
(6) study more than the ability of computers to help us improve test scores
(7) study complex thinking skills
(8) use more than standard statistics
(9) focus on different variables
Eric Flescher, Ed.D (KCStarguy@aol.com)
The word 'engage' is what Jean Luc Picard says for the Enterprise to go
somewhere- it should not be used to indicate what students are learning with
computers and technology:
Coordinator, Project S.I.M. (Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and
Metacognitive activities)Simulation Station website - http:
//members.aol.com/kcstarguy/sim/
Editor/Webmaster, MacsU.N.I.T.E.-MacIntosh Users Network for Integrating
Technology into Education- subscribe via macsunite-subscribe@egroups.com
or at -http://members.aol.com/kcstarguy/macsunite/unite.htm
Subject: Re: January question
What we have done to begin to assess student learning involving our
modeling activities is to 1) use some generic expectations - (taken from
common themes of the AAAS science benchmarks) 2) then rewrite them in
terms of the particular content and 3) write questions that address the
output of 2.
As an example of a "generic" expectation: Student describes an aspect of
the system that cannot be ascribed to a particular component. (wording not
right - will send the url later).
The more seriously we take assessment the more seriously others will take
us.
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
Subject: Re: when is system dynamics useful?
From: "Albert L. Powers" <apowers@massed.net>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
SD can be extremely helpful when investigating the dynamics of equilibria!
Check with the Creative Learning Exchange for models that facilitate this.
All to often, students fail to get the big picture... e.g., I had a student
react with astonishment when she observed the interdependent behaviors of
reaction rates, concentrations, and the mass action value. Until that
point, in her own words, "I thought one thing happened... and then the next.
Now, I see that everything happens all at once... everything depends on
everything else!" This student's performance leaped from a so-so B to
straight A's from that point onward. She had always enjoyed chemistry. But
then she fell in love with it... and planned to pursue it in college. I've
lost touch with her... but I often wonder what she's up to these days.
The vast majority of my students function as users of models that I have
constructed. These applications do involve their making modifications
within the models as they explore system behaviors. But most of their work
centers on observing, predicting, and reconciling predictions once the
simulations have been run. Some do want to pursue the modeling and I think
that's super, but I'm not convinced of the real need for all to become
modelers.
I also use models when exploring topics such as specific heat (the depiction
of heat content as a stock and temperature as a value calculated within a
converter is really useful for driving home the difference between these two
parameters). And there are great possibilities in thermodynamics and the
modeling of oscillating phenomena.
Be creative... you'll come up with a number of truly helpful uses for SD in
chem ed. This can be a tremendous boost for visual learners who find
mathematical expressions not unlike black boxes that yield numerical
answers. These students can set up problems, crunch numbers, and present
you with answers with very little appreciation of what is happening within
the chemical system. But watch their transformation when they see the
dynamics unfolding on an SD plot. Their appreciation and understanding leaps
to a whole new level... it's exciting!
Albert L. Powers
358 East St.
P. O. Box 60
Carlisle, MA 01741
(978) 369-0009
Subject: re: Definition
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
While I love the thought that a student thought system dynamics is a quest
for a new state of mind, I agree with a couple of the other writers to
this list who said that's not a definition of the field. After all, lots
of things are quests for a new state of mind -- prayer, meditation,
listening to music, falling in love, and so on... Still, it is wonderful
that the student saw (felt?) such a momentous shift in perspective.
As a definition of systems thinking and system dynamics I tend to favor:
"Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources of
system behavior." "System dynamics is computer simulation model in
support of systems thinking." Of course, what makes these work at all is
the deep significance of that word "endogenous," which means "born from
within" and thus contains notions of holism, system boundary, and a point
of view about what is worth paying attention to. Forrester gives a
somewhat longer definition that exposes more clearly the purpose of
studying the dynamics of complex systems in an effort to understand and
usually improve their behavior.
...GPR
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Phone: 518-442-5257
University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Reply to Lafontaine Introduction
Dear George, first thank you for your honest response. I still would like to
ad some information on what we are doing at SDSU with DR Kolar in piano-
pedagogy. This is something maybe unusual in piano instruction, but our
philosophy is to teach the structure of music (not performance only) to allow
the student's transfer of knowledge so that he becomes the best musician,
whether he/she chooses to be a performer, a composer, a musicologist or
someone who improvises. We don't aim for Carnegie Hall, (which is for the very
rare and exceptional student) because it would be harmful for the other
students.
At SDSU, DR Kolar has also created two piano labs equipped with the latest
technology in Digital keyboards; each keyboard is equipped with a computer
and access to Internet. Each computer has many tutorial programs for theory,
ear training, and so forth. The scope of piano and music teaching has changed
a lot since I began to teach, thirteen years ago. I have shown DR Kolar some
documents on system thinking and system dynamics, and she seems very
enthusiast to help me model some application for piano teaching.
I worked on motivation in individualized piano instruction and I
noticed loops between student's perception of school (or student's perception
of teacher's goal), and his motivation.
When the student perceives that the school or the teacher have
evaluation
and competitive goals rather than learning goals, it affects his motivation.
This, will affect his daily practice and therefore his performance and
consequently the teacher's perception of the student. This process changes the
teacher's communication and goals with the student and affects student's
results. The perception of the later about his/her capacity to accomplish the
task successfully is now diminished and this reinforces the teacher's own
perception of the student's potential. This is an example of loop that a piano
teacher or other teachers should consider. This is an example of the use of
systemic thinking in piano instruction at the psychological level.
For the use of the software Stella II, I still would like to leave
some possibility before abandoning the idea and I invite people to share their
thoughts Motivation is determinant in education, it determines whether a child
(or an adult) will develop a skill, pursue an activity or not.
George, please let me know what do you think about it.
Thanks
Alain Lafontaine
Subject: Re: January question
On Friday, Lees Stuntz wrote:
>4. Why are we not discussing assessment more actively amongst ourselves??
>What is it about assessment we don't want to tackle?
>If anyone else can come up with a question on the subject of assessment
>which IS of interest- please don't hesitate to pose it. If not, perhaps we
>should go on to more burning issues.
>The January questions:
>1. What strategies are you using now to assess systems learning and which do
>you think are the most effective?
>2. How can we be sure students are learning systems concepts in a way that
>will be effective in the long run?
>3. In your ideal world, which includes (centers on) systems education, what is
>its inherent, logical, reasonable and reportable assessment system?
Q#4 1st:
I think these are -very important- questions, but I realize that doing
competent work in this arena is out of my league. I have my own subjective
(intuitive) measures, but again, I realize they won't hold up in a
peer-reviewed educational journal. All the same, I am getting increasingly
confident with my intuition!
Q#1. Assessment strategies:
A. I teach pharmacokinetics to 2nd year medical students, to first- and
second-year biomedical doctoral students, to mixed high school teacher
trainees (science, math, and social science teachers), and to high school
students. I KNOW that given 2-3 hours I can bring any one of these groups
to a higher level of understanding of the real underlying biological
processes and dynamics.
I recently worked with an enthusiastic h.s. student (in Tim Joy's class)
with an ibuprophem drug model that was relevant to his life. (This was not
a 3.9 GPA student who is going to be taking AP calculus). Using some
examples from worksheets developed by myself and Diana Fisher he built a
prototype model. We then talked over the phone once or twice to insert
ibuprophen-specific parameters and he worked on it for another 2 weeks.
* * We then met in my office and he proceeded to show me page after page of
sensitivity runs to illustrate changes in absorption and elimination rates;
small, medium, and large doses; single and multiple doses at different
intervals, etc. * *
This was not my model; it was HIS model!
This young man now has an intuitive feel for pharmacokinetics which exceeds
that of second-year medical students. I don't have statistics, but I have
damned good intuition!
B. This morning I was reviewing a mid-term exam with a 2nd-year grad
student, who then asked me about pain control and drug regimens. I pointed
her to a paper I had written 2 years ago and we will discuss it in another
week or so. This relates to a friend or family member with cancer. I KNOW
that we can provide the patients' husband (an engineer) with an
-understandable- model that will help him help his wife, just as I helped
mine after surgery two years ago. With all my knowledge of pharmacokinetics
I literally could not have done this without hourly and daily referral to a
system dynamics model and -specific, patient-oriented- input data.
I'll keep you posted on this scenario over the next few weeks.
C. The h.s. student mentioned in (A) could literally serve as a helper if
such a scenario were to intrude on his family. How do we convince the
world of this?
#2. Are we teaching the right things?
I think we are just getting to the point where we can, and must, evaluate
this very carefully. This can be accomplished in a number of ways.
A. In addition to providing a forum for students, SyM Bowl itself
constitutes a very powerful negative feedback (balancing) loop. If student
projects continually miss the boat, or illustrate outright faulty modeling
structure or practice, it is out there, exposed, for the world to see. This
has been an eye-opener for all involved, and has provided critical feedback
to judges, CC-STADUS mentors, individual teachers, and students. We are
working to improve the information provided by this route.
B. We have been extraordinarily careful to develop judging criteria that
encourage good modeling practice. Wayne Wakeland, Prof. of Systems Science
at Portland State University has been absolutely invaluable in this regard.
However, further review by individuals such as Jay F, George, and others,
will allow us validate and tune up these criteria.
C. The availability of Diana Fisher's new book should provide others with a
critical window on what is being taught. It certainly is not perfect, but
by opening it up to others it should receive careful review and constant
improvement.
#3. Reasonable assessment.
As I said above, this is out of my league.
However, I have stated before that if a high school phys ed teacher turned
out dozens of "average" students (not varsity baseball players) that could
hit .175-.250 against a typical major league pitcher (not Randy Johnson),
someone might just sit up and take notice (?!).
If a high school music teacher turned out "average" violin students who
could play Beethoven's violin concerto, or trumpet players who could play
Hadyn's trumpet concerto, perhaps someone would sit up and take notice (?!).
If an "average" high school student can carefully and systematically
discuss drug absorption and elimination half-lives, and multiple dosage
regimens, along with second-year medical students, perhaps someone should
sit up and take notice (?!).
Do we need a lot of complicated statistics to make the point?
Food for thought?
I hope there is a lot of discussion/disagreement about these opinions. . .
Ed Gallaher, Ph.D.
VA Research Pharmacologist
Assoc. Prof. Behav Neurosc, Physiol-Pharmacol
Oregon Health Sciences Univ
Portland OR
Subject: Re: Reply to Lafontaine Introduction
Dear George, first thank you for your honest response. I still would like to
ad some information on what we are doing at SDSU with DR Kolar in piano-
pedagogy. This is something maybe unusual in piano instruction, but our
philosophy is to teach the structure of music (not performance only) to allow
the student's transfer of knowledge so that he becomes the best musician,
whether he/she chooses to be a performer, a composer, a musicologist or
someone who improvises. We don't aim for Carnegie Hall, (which is for the very
rare and exceptional student) because it would be harmful for the other
students.
At SDSU, DR Kolar has also created two piano labs equipped with the latest
technology in Digital keyboards; each keyboard is equipped with a computer
and access to Internet. Each computer has many tutorial programs for theory,
ear training, and so forth. The scope of piano and music teaching has changed
a lot since I began to teach, thirteen years ago. I have shown DR Kolar some
documents on system thinking and system dynamics, and she seems very
enthusiast to help me model some application for piano teaching.
I worked on motivation in individualized piano instruction and I
noticed loops between student's perception of school (or student's perception
of teacher's goal), and his motivation.
When the student perceives that the school or the teacher have
evaluation
and competitive goals rather than learning goals, it affects his motivation.
This, will affect his daily practice and therefore his performance and
consequently the teacher's perception of the student. This process changes the
teacher's communication and goals with the student and affects student's
results. The perception of the later about his/her capacity to accomplish the
task successfully is now diminished and this reinforces the teacher's own
perception of the student's potential. This is an example of loop that a piano
teacher or other teachers should consider. This is an example of the use of
systemic thinking in piano instruction at the psychological level.
For the use of the software Stella II, I still would like to leave
some possibility before abandoning the idea and I invite people to share their
thoughts Motivation is determinant in education, it determines whether a child
(or an adult) will develop a skill, pursue an activity or not.
George, please let me know what do you think about it.
Thanks
Alain Lafontaine
Subject: Re: January question
Dear Lees:
You are right about the lack of discussionon evaluation. In my case, the
question about evaluation data is being avoided, since my data is still
beginning
to yield information. Evaluation itself is not being ignored, particularly
formative evaluation, but you maybe right. Nonetheless your point is well taken
and at your urging I would like to share some of our work with the members for
their comments. I hope you view it as a design in progress and forgive the fact
that it is woefully incomplete.
My students (graduate students of educational research) are being engaged in an
experiment designed to test several systems learning hypotheses. That, 1)
mental
models posed as systems learning are learned quicker than mental models
posed as
textbook and lecture models, 2) mental models posed as systems learning are
retained longer than mental models posed as textbook and lecture models and 3)
mental models posed as systems learning are more accurately understood than
mental models posed as textbook and lecture models.
I have begun to set up experiments and to train teachers to help me conduct
them.
We have no systems learning classrooms in our little college town or
surrounding
districts to use in the experiment. In order for the experiment to begin we
need
first to develop qualified teachers. We think by next January we'll have enough
to conduct an statistically significant test.
We do know from early testing that in one class of 6th graders being taught
simple physics content using models gathered from______________site, and
compared
to three other classroom being taught the same subject matter at the same
school,
a) systems learner took less time to declare they were ready to take the
quiz on
the concepts being taught...(3.2 fewer days on the average), b) did better
in the
quiz (Mean score 90 on scale of 100, versus mean score of 75 for the non
systems
learners and c) retained it better after summer school vacation. (These
last data
cannot be relied on yet. I collected it by arranging for the now seventh grades
taught with systems, upon return from summer vacation in August, to be asked to
try and rebuild one of the models taught (_________). They succeeded within one
class period, with no assistance from the teacher, but collaboration among the
students was required for every student to complete the model successfully.
Only
25% of the individual models were completed unassisted by other students.
We have
no comparison data for the post summer group. However as a person familiar with
data on post summer re-teaching of previous grade material, I should have
expected no success at all unless the teacher intervened. In other words, the
hypotheses number 2 suggested above, may indeed be the most important finding
that can be sustained by repeating the study with a generalizable sample.
But we are a long way from being able to test the hypotheses beyond the
ungeneralizable pilot study. We need teacher volunteers or a budget to pay them
for their extra work and they must come from the same schools than the
comparison
groups. Follow ups on cohorts of students are facilitated by my community's
stability, but many more would have to be selected than would normally be
available post summer.
If anyone has ideas on research funding or knows of other research work
along the
same lines, that would also be appreciated.
Hope this helps get the discussion moving.
J. R. Llanes, Professor
Organization and Leadership
University of Texas Pan American
http://llanes.panam.edu
Subject: Re: January question
Dear Lees:
You are right about the lack of discussionon evaluation. In my case, the
question about evaluation data is being avoided, since my data is still
beginning
to yield information. Evaluation itself is not being ignored, particularly
formative evaluation, but you maybe right. Nonetheless your point is well taken
and at your urging I would like to share some of our work with the members for
their comments. I hope you view it as a design in progress and forgive the fact
that it is woefully incomplete.
My students (graduate students of educational research) are being engaged in an
experiment designed to test several systems learning hypotheses. That, 1)
mental
models posed as systems learning are learned quicker than mental models
posed as
textbook and lecture models, 2) mental models posed as systems learning are
retained longer than mental models posed as textbook and lecture models and 3)
mental models posed as systems learning are more accurately understood than
mental models posed as textbook and lecture models.
I have begun to set up experiments and to train teachers to help me conduct
them.
We have no systems learning classrooms in our little college town or
surrounding
districts to use in the experiment. In order for the experiment to begin we
need
first to develop qualified teachers. We think by next January we'll have enough
to conduct an statistically significant test.
We do know from early testing that in one class of 6th graders being taught
simple physics content using models gathered from______________site, and
compared
to three other classroom being taught the same subject matter at the same
school,
a) systems learner took less time to declare they were ready to take the
quiz on
the concepts being taught...(3.2 fewer days on the average), b) did better
in the
quiz (Mean score 90 on scale of 100, versus mean score of 75 for the non
systems
learners and c) retained it better after summer school vacation. (These
last data
cannot be relied on yet. I collected it by arranging for the now seventh grades
taught with systems, upon return from summer vacation in August, to be asked to
try and rebuild one of the models taught (_________). They succeeded within one
class period, with no assistance from the teacher, but collaboration among the
students was required for every student to complete the model successfully.
Only
25% of the individual models were completed unassisted by other students.
We have
no comparison data for the post summer group. However as a person familiar with
data on post summer re-teaching of previous grade material, I should have
expected no success at all unless the teacher intervened. In other words, the
hypotheses number 2 suggested above, may indeed be the most important finding
that can be sustained by repeating the study with a generalizable sample.
But we are a long way from being able to test the hypotheses beyond the
ungeneralizable pilot study. We need teacher volunteers or a budget to pay them
for their extra work and they must come from the same schools than the
comparison
groups. Follow ups on cohorts of students are facilitated by my community's
stability, but many more would have to be selected than would normally be
available post summer.
If anyone has ideas on research funding or knows of other research work
along the
same lines, that would also be appreciated.
Hope this helps get the discussion moving.
J. R. Llanes, Professor
Organization and Leadership
University of Texas Pan American
http://llanes.panam.edu
Subject: Re: Definition
Since we're talking about definitions, I think that Eric Flescher's
comment provides an interesting conundrum (A problem admitting of no
satisfactory solution.)
On Stardate Feb. 12, Eric wrote:
>>The word 'engage' is what Jean Luc Picard says for the Enterprise to go
>>somewhere- it should not be used to indicate what students are learning with
>>computers and technology.
I think we should be cautious about allowing science fiction television
writers to erase the centuries of evolution of the English language or pose
limitations on multiple meanings.
Even though in our family we speak of driving at Warp 6 instead of 60mph,
the meaning has not replaced other uses of the word, such as having a
warped sense of humor (morally twisted), or warping a loom for weaving
(arranging the lengthwise threads) .
If, as Eric suggests, a new and singular meaning for "engage" no longer
applies to encouraging student learning, where can I find a copy of a
Starfleet Dictionary to look up the new word for a "promise to marry"? And
if computer simulations don't "involve" students and "attract and hold
[their] attention"--meanings of "engage" formed the 16th and 17th
century--then why bother?
Common usages of words do change over time, and perhaps 20th century
writers who have studied Klingon know more about the language we will be
using in the 24th century than I.
On the other hand, their prescience does not appear to extend to
transporation technology. I engage and disengage every day when I drive a
manual transmission. When Captain Picard says "engage," he's really only
saying "pop the clutch."
It seems to me that the purpose of computers and technology is to shift
students into gear to help them move forward, and, ultimately, become more
enterprising.
Make it so,
Janis Dutton
Subject: Re: Spreadsheets and dynamic modeling
Lees Stuntz wrote:
> I was merely reporting a conversation amongst others which I found
> interesting and stimulating. If I were to say, in essence, what you
> said, I would have stated it a bit more delicately. :-)
> >Lees Stuntz wrote (essentially):
> >> Dynamic modelling in spreadsheets is crap, but maybe not quite as
> >> crappy as some might think.
Ah, yes: "delicacy". I know I've heard that word somewhere - I just
could never work out what it meant. ;-)
Sorry, Lees. I didn't mean to malign your intentions - it was just my
indelicate way of summarising what I understood as your gist.
Best wishes,
Niall "Mea maxima culpa" Palfreyman
--
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
Subject: Re: January question
Lees Stuntz wrote:
> I find it absolutely fascinating the total lack of response on this
> topic:
> > What strategies are you using now to assess systems learning and
> > which do you think are the most effective?
Speaking for myself, I think I've always had a bit of a hang-up about
assessment. I love teaching, but as soon as it comes to assessment I can
feel all my enthusiasm dripping away down the plughole. Which is
probably why I didn't respond.
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
Subject: Assessment questions
About those assessment questions . . .
Teachers are using a wide array of assessment tools with their own students ˆ
but because this level of assessment is tied to their own specific goals, most
of these assessments aren‚t really applicable in other settings. I don‚t know
of anyone who is gathering information from teachers and students that could
help answer the bigger question about the effectiveness of systems dynamics
and a systems approach to learning.
Funders for our own project ask: What is the impact of this on students?
How do you know? What evidence do you have?
Is it an effective tool for all students? Or for just a few?
These are important and legitimate questions that we should be able to answer.
However, we‚re not able to do this yet. Because system dynamics is not
introduced as a separate subject in our project but integrated into other
subjects, there‚s considerable variety regarding when, how and what is being
covered. Teachers are still discovering what is possible.
It‚s exciting education, but so far it‚s a real challenge to describe and
evaluate - particularly when traditional standardized tests cannot measure the
level and kinds of thinking that occur with a systems approach to learning.
We lack funding to do good assessment and evaluation. With funding, it will
take several years, I think, before we have data that can help us understand
the impact on students.
In the few schools where students are now being introduced to system dynamics
as a separate subject, assessment and evaluation seems more feasible. This
would be a good place to start. Those students could be compared to similar
students who have not been exposed to systems thinking and system dynamics.
Perhaps this is already happening. If so, how is this being done? Are any
reports available?
The focus of my doctoral studies is the implementation of system dynamics into
K-12 education and the questions you pose are central to this work. This
spring I‚ll be interviewing some of the people involved in our project to
gather information relating to the questions you pose, and I‚ll also meeting
with two or three researchers to hear their views about this.
We might then want to set up a meeting with researchers and practitioners to
explore how we can begin to collect data that could help us evaluate the
effectiveness of this approach.
Dessa
Subject: Music and related matters
Hello
Here go some of my doubts about music. If insight could be attained,
teaching is
the next step.
Maybe I reinvent a wheel. Ten years I abandoned this matter; please can someone
bring me back to beat?!
First - how do people hear? Is this old question about "absolutes Gehoer", or
absolute pitch or perfect pitch
resolved? It has to do with some people being born with enormous facility to
identify musical tones, specially pitch. This is observed fact, (how...?) but
the rest is
silence. I heard of a study in an Canadian University, but no details. Part of
the affair is physics and math, part Physiology. Then comes a lot of pedagogy,
esthetics, behavioral studies, history, you name it. SD?
Second - pitch. Alternatives to this modern electronic temperament. Could
possibly
Bachs well tempered scale be of this kind? (I know a lot of contrary
arguments!)
More than just physics. What about the various pre-tempered scales? How was the
transition? SD?
Third - Ancient style instruments with modern equidistant tuning? Be warned, a
hot iron! History, physics, physiology, taste, merchandising... SD?
Helmholtz On The Sensation Of Tone (Dover) is as modern as ever. Some
scientific
affirmations are obsolete, but in his concluding paragraph he explains that
music is much more than exact science, and he left very many matters open. I
find inspiration for many discussions. SD?
George, you are right, none of this matters is resolved with a small model. A
lot of research and preparative work will take its time. But it seems that all
trials to elucidate these questions without SD failed. This is not to say that
complete success with SD is warranted. But I mean that a couple of people will
gain new insight, even if the models don't ripe out to the computer. This
insight should result in better teachers and students.
Ed, how do you tune the "Hackbrett"? The same temperament as the banjo? Please,
let me
know more.
Debra, what about this one: a instrument maker unable to
play his products?
Gibson, can you please tell a bit - maybe without disturbing the discussions of
the group - about the modern electronics in music? Compression methods, stereo
perception, and so forth... Should active musicians have some knowledge of what
goes on? About computer composed classical music, I suppose you can find
something under the heading AI.
Mary Ellen, I comment your message in a moment.
I couldn't hope for such a happy conversation. I changed my mind more than
once...
Thanks to all
Fritz
fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: RE: Definition
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999
The definition mentioned by Richard is definitely wide but nonetheless
interesting. The fact that a middle school student had spend time to think
of a definition must had made SD important to him/her.
I for one would subscribe to a less grander definition.
"A method to try and understand how social systems change over time".
Regards,
Fareen S. Ali
Subject: Re: Reply to Lafontaine Introduction
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
On Tue, 16 Feb 1999, Alain wrote:
> I worked on motivation in individualized piano instruction and I
> noticed loops between student's perception of school (or student's perception
> of teacher's goal), and his motivation.
> When the student perceives that the school or the teacher have
> evaluation and competitive goals rather than learning goals, it affects
> his motivation. This, will affect his daily practice and therefore his
> performance and consequently the teacher's perception of the student.
> This process changes the teacher's communication and goals with the
> student and affects student's results. The perception of the later about
> his/her capacity to accomplish the task successfully is now diminished
> and this reinforces the teacher's own perception of the student's
> potential. This is an example of loop that a piano teacher or other
> teachers should consider. This is an example of the use of systemic
> thinking in piano instruction at the psychological level.
Right on! This has the potential to help people learn about learning, or
learn about teaching. Learning and teaching are dynamic phenomena
(involve things that change over time) and the interactions between
tutor, tutee, motivation, effort, progress, perceptions, cues, strategies,
and so on are certainly grounds for feedback/dynamic analysis.
That sort of analysis will not by itself help a student one whit to play
the piccolo part from a Souza march or sing Ave Maria, but it might make
the student and the teacher more sensitive to the ups and downs of
learning and motivation and progress.
So it's not about learning music, it's about learning about learning -- a
kind of "meta-analysis." And systems thinking and system dynamics ought
to be able to contribute here.
> For the use of the software Stella II, I still would like to leave
> some possibility before abandoning the idea and I invite people to share
>their
> thoughts Motivation is determinant in education, it determines whether a
>child
> (or an adult) will develop a skill, pursue an activity or not.
Great topic. In a music curriculum, or in any curriculum. Lots of good
conceptualization ought to go on before one gets too close to a computer,
and that should definitely include the dynamics one wants to talk about
as well as structures that might explain them, but like you I wouldn't say
at this point that computer modeling in this area would be useless.
Thanks to Alain for elucidating...
...GPR
Subject: Re: Definition
Janis - what wonderful writing! (Tim Joy will sit up and take notice, too
. . . )
Last summer at the CLE ST/SD meeting in Durham, NH I was talking to JWF
about SyM Bowl, and showing him some of the student papers (15-25 pages).
Of course I knew he would be looking carefully at the models and SD
practice. Then he asked, "Is there any -systematic- effort within the
schools to provide writing feedback for these students in their SD work?"
This simple question (once again) provided me with a new perspective on SD,
and on Jay's efforts to extend the field. I have visited the MIT undergrads
on several occassions during their Friday work sessions with Jay. it is
very clear that he places -very high- value on clear writing, and of course
on the clear thinking that must underlie the writing.
This contributes to some of the discussions on SD definitions. George
recently posted:
"Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources of
system behavior." "System dynamics is computer simulation model in
support of systems thinking."
Putting this all together, our collecitve goal should not be to develop
whiz-bang technical models; our goal should be to -think clearly- about
system behavior.
This includes, of course, identifying the problem, the purpose of the
model, and the intended audience. It also means -communicating- ALL the
releeant information surrounding the issue at hand (structure, assumptions,
reference behavior). At the same time we need to -carefully- leave out the
irrelevant distractions.
There's the art!
Over the weekend I read the first 9 pages of Urban Dynamics. * Every
sentence is carefully crafted. * Clear; concise. If you haven't read
this I highly recommend it.
Ed Gallaher
*Jay W. Forrester: Published by Pegasus Communications, One Moody Street,
Waltham, MA 02453 (800) 272-0945.
Subject: Re: January question
(Good) Teaching is very hard work, and can be a lot of fun.
Evaluation is even harder work, and probably a lot less fun.
. . . but Mary Ellen is absolutely correct.
>----------------------------------------------------------
>The more seriously we take assessment the more seriously others will take
>us.
>
>Mary Ellen Verona
>----------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Assessment questions
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999
Dessa suggests:
>In the few schools where students are now being introduced to system
dynamics
as a separate subject, assessment and evaluation seems more feasible. This
would be a good place to start.<
I respectfully disagree. I think that starting to assess the impact of SD
in K-12 by assessing it as a separate subject is wrong-headed in two ways:
1. It sends the "wrong" message -- namely, that SD is something other than
what it is; that SD is a 'subject' to be learned, rather than a thinking
tool to be used.
2. Testing SD knowledge or skill separately will require new
tests/assessments that have no track record and, therefore, no initial
credibility with teachers and others who are responsible for adopting SD.
On the other hand, using SD within other subjects (which is exactly what we
want the teachers and the students to do!) means that we can assess
subject-matter learning in the ways teachers have been assessing learning.
And we should be able to show a difference between those classes where
students have integrated SD into their thinking and classes where this was
not attempted. Using the same assessments that are now being used should
mean that the findings have face credibility to the teachers. [Of course,
IMHO most current assessment methods aren't very good to begin with. But
that's another issue, isn't it? Or is it?]
What do others think?
Subject: assessment
I'll throw my 2 cents in about this subject. Since I teach/taught at the
university level I never really had to come to grips with the concept of
assessment that I hear so often when k-12 members gather. My opinion was
that they were assessing, or trying to, right after something new had been
instituted. I though this was very artifical since it takes TIME for our
student to absorb/understand concepts etc so that these concepts etc make a
change in their life.. In my humble view the concept of assessment has TIME
embedded in it. For example, the effectiveness of my teaching can not be
measured month by month or over a 4 year period. Thus to survey students
still in college (i.e. over a 4 year span) only sees part of result, the
short term impact, if there is any. However, if we survey student
2,5,7,9,11 years after graduation we then may have a true "assessment" of
our teachiing etc.
Rolfe Stanley
Stanley Computer Center
Fletcher Extension
Subject: Re: Definition
George.....
What happened to "exogenous" influences, esp. since so many of the SD
models are
representing eco-variables as well as endogenous ones? In the cognitive
sciences we have come to refer to "situated cognition", e.g., routinely.
Cheers........Bill.
k-12sd wrote:
> Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 12:47:07 -0500 (EST)
> From: George Richardson <gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu>
> Subject: re: Definition
> To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
>
> While I love the thought that a student thought system dynamics is a quest
> for a new state of mind, I agree with a couple of the other writers to
> this list who said that's not a definition of the field. After all, lots
> of things are quests for a new state of mind -- prayer, meditation,
> listening to music, falling in love, and so on... Still, it is wonderful
> that the student saw (felt?) such a momentous shift in perspective.
>
> As a definition of systems thinking and system dynamics I tend to favor:
> "Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources of
> system behavior." "System dynamics is computer simulation model in
> support of systems thinking." Of course, what makes these work at all is
> the deep significance of that word "endogenous," which means "born from
> within" and thus contains notions of holism, system boundary, and a point
> of view about what is worth paying attention to. Forrester gives a
> somewhat longer definition that exposes more clearly the purpose of
> studying the dynamics of complex systems in an effort to understand and
> usually improve their behavior.
>
> ...GPR
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
> Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Phone: 518-442-5257
> University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
> http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: drinking in school
Does anyone have a model that describes the problem of excess drinking in
school?
Rolfe Stanley
Stanley Computer Center
Fletcher Extension
Subject: Re: Assessment questions
About those assessment questions . . .
I thought it was interesting that it was said there is a lack of funding to do
assessment on system use. You don't need more money- you need ingenuity. You
don't need quantitative methods you need qualitative. You don't need
statistics- you need to look at more defined variables, thinkings skills and
much more.
Eric Flescher, Ed.D (KCStarguy@aol.com)
The word 'engage' is what Jean Luc Picard says for the Enterprise to go
somewhere- it should not be used to indicate what students are learning with
computers and technology:
Coordinator, Project S.I.M. (Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and
Metacognitive activities)
Simulation Station website - http: //members.aol.com/kcstarguy/sim/
<< From: DessaDancy@aol.com
(snip)
We lack funding to do good assessment and evaluation. With funding, it will
take several years, I think, before we have data that can help us understand
the impact on students.
(snip)
Subject: RE: January question
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999
From the perspective of someone working in an organization trying to foster
school reform, I very much like Mary Ellen's idea. I also agree with her
last statement. Unless SD assessment reaches a broad community and
convinces them that it is aligned with the overall goals of change in
instruction through standards and inquiry-based instruction, it will not
take off. Clearly, SD in the curriculum is aligned with these goals, so we
should be able to demonstrate it.
Dan Burke
Subject: January question -Reply
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999
I'm a novice struggling to better understand and apply
sd in education policy, but I'd like to respond and
hopefully prompt further discussion of this assessment
question. it's a good question. Hopefully this will help.
Before one can assess something about learning, that
something needs to be delineated and , to some
extent, operationally defined. Sytems
dynamics/systems learning, I find, is very complicated,
difficult to define and put into a language that
promotes understanding by various audiences. To
assess sytems learning, one may virtually have to
experience a dynamic situation and then analyze it
using a sd lense and concepts. I'm thinking that the
first step to assessing systems learning is to better
describe what the "student" should know and be able
to do as a result of being a proficient sd learner; define
the knowledge, skills, reasoning, actions etc that's
embedded in the learner goal; and develop some type
of a rubric/scale that leads to a holistic picture of the
learner's capability to demonstrate "proficient" sd skills.
So, my position is that before we assess...define what it
is we are assessing. If we do a good job of definition,
tha assessment piece should be a little easier.
Comments? Ideas? please share...
Will
****
Will Ashmore
Goals 2000 Consultant
WDPI
PO Box 7841
Madison, WI 53707-7841
608/267-9179
608/264-9553(Fax)
ashmowh@mail.state.wi.us(e-mail)
Subject: Re: Definition
George Richardson wrote:
> As a definition of systems thinking ... I tend to favor:
> "Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources
> of system behavior."
Hmm. Not as snappy as "questing for a new state of mind", is it? On the
other hand I can't think of anything snappier, and I definitely like the
holistic and systemic connotations of that word "endogenous"; I'm just
not generally keen on big words in snappy sentences. I think to me the
central idea of systems thinking lies in the notion that system
behaviour is determined not by the parts of the system, but by the way
they are structurally organised. So how about:
"Systems thinking is the quest for a basis for behaviour in structure"?
Again, not so snappy, but containing at least MY personal feelings about
systems thinking.
Happy days all round,
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
Subject: A Parent's Question
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999
Hi, k-12sd listers.
I'm a home schooling parent, and my 9 year old son has shown some interest
in systems dynamics. He saw a chart on a website that I was browsing that
sparked his interest. I know enough to know its value, but not enough to
teach him, at this point. I'm late to the field, but find it very helpful.
I would like to know some materials/resources that I could use to encourage
his interest. He has shown a facility with math, though he won't admit to
it.
Any assistance will be appreciated.
Ed Brenegar
Hendersonville, NC
Subject: Re: Definition
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, k-12sd wrote:
> What happened to "exogenous" influences, esp. since so many of the SD
> models are
> representing eco-variables as well as endogenous ones? In the cognitive
> sciences we have come to refer to "situated cognition", e.g., routinely.
I should leap up and say "AHA!" because this is the big point. System
dynamics thinking and models don't have much to contribute on the subject
of exogenously driven dynamics, and exogenous theories of dynamics are (to
a system dynamicist) inherent unteresting! Our expertise and the defining
focus of our field concerns endogenous explanations of complex system
behavior.
Of course, there are exogenously set scenarios, parameters, and even
dynamics, but they are definitely not the focus of a study. At best
exogenous dynamics serve to trigger the endogenous dynamics we want to
study.
I'm claiming in my definition of systems thinking that exogenous
explanations of dynamics are not what I'd call systems thinking, and I
mean to be making that distinction.
...Geo
My book Feedback Thought has a lot on the exogenous/endogenous issue and
how it has appeared over time. I think I put a lot of what I want to say
about this big issue in among the pages of that book. As is probably now
obvious, I've come to think this is Forrester's most significant
contribution in the perspectives he put together to form the system
dynamcis approach.
> Cheers........Bill.
>
> k-12sd wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 12:47:07 -0500 (EST)
> > From: George Richardson <gr383@cnsvax.albany.edu>
> > Subject: re: Definition
> > To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
> >
> > While I love the thought that a student thought system dynamics is a quest
> > for a new state of mind, I agree with a couple of the other writers to
> > this list who said that's not a definition of the field. After all, lots
> > of things are quests for a new state of mind -- prayer, meditation,
> > listening to music, falling in love, and so on... Still, it is wonderful
> > that the student saw (felt?) such a momentous shift in perspective.
> >
> > As a definition of systems thinking and system dynamics I tend to favor:
> > "Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources of
> > system behavior." "System dynamics is computer simulation model in
> > support of systems thinking." Of course, what makes these work at all is
> > the deep significance of that word "endogenous," which means "born from
> > within" and thus contains notions of holism, system boundary, and a point
> > of view about what is worth paying attention to. Forrester gives a
> > somewhat longer definition that exposes more clearly the purpose of
> > studying the dynamics of complex systems in an effort to understand and
> > usually improve their behavior.
> >
> > ...GPR
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
> > Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Phone: 518-442-5257
> > University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
> > http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: January Assessment questions
In contrast to Dessa's description of the advantages to assessing system
dynamics abilities when taught as a separate subject, I think there may be
advantages and a need for assessments looking at how systems dynamics is
appropriated by children in different contexts. My interest is in how the
use of the ideas and the tools are differently learned when applied in
these different subject areas, and how the use of tools like stella are
different across contexts and contents, and, of course, what is different
in what the children are able"to do". My underlying concern is that if
taught as a separate subject, SD will go the way of all other disciplines,
becoming narrow in scope, or marginalized away from broad application. I'd
rather see the ability to recognize such things as interdependence become
as commonplace as the ability to recognize a written word. Our
ecological/economic system seems to cry out for it.
"To do" needs some unpacking, hence the reason for the quotes. The
Chandler and Boutier article that I refered to earlier on this list claims
a developmental sequence for students knowing systems concepts. The
article is on research done in which there is no intervention, hence the
work might be described as a study of "spontaneous reasoning" as are
similar Piagetian studies - what kids know without being deliberately
taught. Interestingly enough, a graph of the 'quantity' of knowledge
children demonstrate looks like a logistic curve when plotted with age.
This study is not a bad stepping stone, but it is about one-half of the
picture.
The other half of the picture emerges if you assume a developmental
perspective based upon Vygotsky's work rather than Piaget's. Here, what
the child is able to do without intervention, without the mediation
afforded by tools, is a partial measure of what they are able to do.
Instead, thinking about a "zone of proximal development" leads one to look
for what the child can do with tools in her hands such as stella,
model-it, a spreadsheet, causal diagrams, star-logo, inspiration, etc. and
in a supportive social environment that may include a teacher or peers, and
taking into account what is the task they are asked to do, whether it is
anything ranging from a participatory simulation as found in "schools are
for fish" to creating and testing a model in Stella. Of course we expect
performance to lead competance in such settings - both Piaget and Vygotsky
recognized this, and I think we must face some hard questions about what it
is we want to measure.
Ellen Mandinach puts it in a different, but concordant way:
" The systems thinking approach and similar computer-based leaming
environments create a need for new measurement techniques that can capture
the cognitive activity that is ongoing and the product of such
environments. These environments shift the focus of assessment from
learning outcomes to the processes of learning. Correspondingly, they
emphasize procedural as well as declarative knowledge. Procedural skills,
such as self-regulation, metacognition, and general problem solving, are
assumed to be generalizable across domains. [My comment: this remains to be
seen.] Consequently, traditional measures do not adequately capture the
products and processes resultant from the leaming environment. Moreover,
such systems provide the rationale and opportunity to integrate assessment
with instruction and learning. No longer need there be distinctions between
testing and teaching. Instead, testing and teaching can become interactive
components merged to facilitate more effective and efficient learning
activities for individual students."
What I perceive in front of us is an enormous task of cataloging what
students are able to do in these different learning situations, and
devising measures that reflect the learning goals defined in the design of
the tasks that students complete. I do not have any solutions, but I am
willing to engage with others who also have an interest. I think
assessment of systems thinking/doing is a very important issue that is
going to need the collective brain power of teachers, assessment experts,
tool designers, researchers, and probably even kids.
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley College, 31 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."]
Subject: Assessment thoughts
To: k-12 listserve <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
The assessment discussion is interesting and very worthwhile. It has made
me wonder if we need to distinguish different "levels" of assessment
related to systems thinking / system dynamics teaching and learning.
At one level, the highest or deepest, we'd love to be able to show that
ST/SD improve students' general abilities to think, to address problems in
powerful ways, to score higher on SATs and GREs, to think and act in ways
leading to a sustainable, just planet, and so on.
At some lower or shallower level, we'd be happy to show that students can
do what we taught them -- tell a dynamic story from a feedback loop, tell
a richer story from several interconnected feedback loops, identify the
stocks and flows in a dynamic stituation, sketch graphs over time to help
in the analysis and understanding of some dynamic problem, build a first-
or second-order system dynamics model in response to a description of the
system's structure and dynamics, sketch feedback loops in a newspaper
clipping or magazine article and show how they tell the story in the
article, correctly put pluses and minuses on a word-and-arrow diagram,
find flaws in a flawed causal-loop diagram that doesn't properly match a
story or has some techincal error, and so on and on.
I have trouble thinking about the first ("higher, deeper") level of
assessment. But we can all think about the second ("lower, shallower")
level, and we teachers make up tests every month that do this sort of
thing. We do it in English, Geometry, History, Civics, Health, or
whatever. If pressed, we'd say we assess at this level in English-etc.
because we're convinced developing skills in English-etc. leads toward the
first ("higher, deeper") level of accomplishment, and we don't much
question that.
If we accept this crude distinction between levels of assessment, and
we're not too sure how to do the first, let's agree to do a good job of
the second kind. The assessment tools (tests or whatever) we'd develop
would fit our particular classes (which is OK) and show others what we
think we're striving for in our own classes (which would probably be
really great). And we would feel it would be OK to put off for a while
(forever?) the puzzles of assessing at that first, greatly significantly
level that we don't know how to do very well.
The bottom line: Let's assess whether kids are getting what we're trying
to give them, and show each other how we're doing that (just like sharing
math tests or the design of geography trivia games or spelling bees or
whatever). Then see what happens...
...GPR
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Phone: 518-442-5257
University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: January question
Here is the address for the "Science Benchmarks Online"
http://project2061.aaas.org/tools/benchol/bolframe.html
We are basing part of our assessment of student learning around Chapter
11 - click on that link and check out the ideas about systems and the
other themes that fit right in.
I would be happy to post how we have dealt with these general expectations
when I have a chance.
On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, k-12sd wrote:
> From: "Burke, Daniel D" <dburke@nsf.gov>
>
> >From the perspective of someone working in an organization trying to foster
> school reform, I very much like Mary Ellen's idea. I also agree with her
> last statement. Unless SD assessment reaches a broad community and
> convinces them that it is aligned with the overall goals of change in
> instruction through standards and inquiry-based instruction, it will not
> take off. Clearly, SD in the curriculum is aligned with these goals, so we
> should be able to demonstrate it.
>
> Dan Burke
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
Subject: Jan question
January Question
A caveat about assessment.
In the sixties our Govt. introduced a assessment of teachers in what you call
K-12. (no general K here...) The idea was: if the student doesn't learn, the
teacher is
bad. I know that this can work very well, under given circumstances.
Standards
still are: for teachers low failure of students, but none defined for students.
You guess it: in university I had to teach matters that some time ago were
usual
as admittance exams.
Fritz
fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: Re: Definition
Subject: Re:Definition
Modeling in engineering skepticism about the simulation becomes a second
nature. Boundary and endogenous, as George put it, should be almost synonymous
concepts. I studied again some of the fundamental texts of SD, and discovered
what it's all about. Modeling by careless formulators really can be very, very
dangerous!
About SD, I consider the differences to other (good) simulation tools: ease of
understanding, (maybe too much), inclusion of non-mensurables in math sense
(hopes, feelings, morale...) and low time and money cost. Accessory is the ease
for K-12. (recent German experiences etc.) (Pardon())
The real value of SD, in my opinion, is the accumulated experience and all
knowledge accumulated in the last 50 years. We know that in very near future
almost everything will change. Here around you can feel it! There is, maybe, a
painful way around disaster, but without SD almost nobody sees that!
Is this an engineering definition rather than an exact one in philosophic
sense? Be it! I will be
satisfied if some of our people will feel or realize like Richard's
student. And you will be proud about!
But please, put me on the right track...
Fritz
fritz@cebinet.com.br
São Bernardo SP Brazil
55 11 4351 4466
Subject: RE: January question -Reply
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999
Will Ashmore suggests that the assessment issue in our January question is
an issue of assessing SD learning.
I'd rather prefer to think that "the assessment issue for SD in K-12" is one
of assessing the impact that (learning SD and) using it as a tool has on a
student's learning of other curriculum areas.
With that perspective, the question becomes "In what ways can SD
positively/negatively affect the learning of geography? algebra? history?
literature? ...?" or "How do we expect students who use SD to help them
learn geography/algebra/...etc./ to differ from students who do not?"
Subject: Assessment
Regarding the January questions.....
It seems that the question of assessment has come up several times at the
CLE conferences and elsewhere and as expected has never come close to
resolution. But, have the other assessment methods we use proven to assess
what we are really trying to teach kids either???
We all know students who perform well on standardized tests who can't think
very well.
My thoughts are....
(1) What we are really trying to assess is....
"if students become better at problem analysis/problem solving using
systems thinking and systems dynamics as a tool to extend their mental
capacity for that" and "can they do this better with this tool than without
it or something similar". That would mean that assessment for this would
not necessarily be statistical but there must be other ways to observe this
type of learning. First it must be interdisciplinary....that's how we hope
they will use it in the real world and how it would be effective in the
long run (to answer Lees question).
I agree with Ed's comments that clear and concise writing or speaking to
convey the purpose of their problem analysis/solving, the process they
used, results, predictions, future outcomes of posed solutions, etc. would
be a genuine (authentic) assessment of how this tool contributes to these
skills.
Basically I'm saying...listen to the kids!!!
(2) Assessment of a skill/process should be done in the same way the the
teaching/learning of the skill/process is approached.
How are the MIT students assessed in the work that they do toward mastery
of ST/SD??? Maybe that would give us k-12 people some insight in how to
adapt some of their assessment methods to our students.
I think that using ST/SD with students in as many different problem
situations as possible and then giving them similar problems to solve
(smaller in scope)in time would be an authentic assessment of
skills/processes that they have acquired. They would be expected to convey
their understanding of the problem, analysis, and solution through either
written or oral communication.
I can't see how any of this could be assessed with any type of paper and
pencil statistical type test.
Teresa Hazel
Valley Catholic High School
Beaverton, OR
Subject: Re: Definition
Niall wrote:
>Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:10:26 +0100
>George Richardson wrote:
>> As a definition of systems thinking ... I tend to favor:
>> "Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources
>> of system behavior."
>
>Hmm. Not as snappy as "questing for a new state of mind", is it? On the
>other hand I can't think of anything snappier, and I definitely like the
>holistic and systemic connotations of that word "endogenous"; I'm just
>not generally keen on big words in snappy sentences.
I agree with Niall that it would be nice to avoid big words in snappy
sentences. But this is only true when the big words are introduced
unnecessarily, for pedantic reasons, or to create an erudite flavor.
(I think Niall is trying to say, "Eschew obfuscation"!)
In this case I know that GPR has given a great deal of thought to
distilling these definitions, and I like them. The concept of 'endogenous
sources of system behavior' is largely overlooked in other analytical
approaches, and is one of the critical features of SD as originally
described by JWF.
Therefore, I believe that we need to -include- this phrase, and then
help/encourage newcomers recognize its importance. Only then will they
begin to realize what System Dynamics provides.
EJG
Subject: Re: A Parent's Question
Ed Brenegar wrote:
> I would like to know some materials/resources that I could use to
> encourage [my 9 year old son's] interest.
Linda Booth Sweeney has done a couple of things which might be relevant
to this. You listening, Linda? I can't remember the names of the
materials.
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
Subject: re: Assessment thoughts
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
George Richardson writes in part (reformatted by yours truly)...
>>At some lower or shallower level, we'd be happy to show that students can
do what we taught them --
o tell a dynamic story from a feedback loop,
o tell a richer story from several interconnected feedback loops,
o identify the stocks and flows in a dynamic stituation,
o sketch graphs over time to help in the analysis and understanding of
some dynamic problem,
o build a first-or second-order system dynamics model in response to a
description of the system's structure and dynamics,
o sketch feedback loops in a newspaper clipping or magazine article and
o show how they tell the story in the article,
o correctly put pluses and minuses on a word-and-arrow diagram,
o find flaws in a flawed causal-loop diagram that doesn't properly
match a story or has some techincal error,
o and so on and on.
>>
That looks to me like a fine starter set of learning objectives, George.
Do others on this list have a similar or related set? I'd love to see
them.
Fred Nickols, Executive Director
Strategic Planning & Management Services
Educational Testing Service [01-D]
Princeton, NJ 08541
Tel = 609.734.5077 Fax = 609.734.5590
e-mail = fnickols@ets.org
Views expressed are the author's, not ETS's.
Subject: Re: Definition
Ed Gallaher wrote:
> (I think Niall is trying to say, "Eschew obfuscation"!)
Oh, you took Plain Simple English 101 as well, did you Ed? ;-)
> Therefore, I believe that we need to -include- this phrase
> [endongenous], and then help/encourage newcomers recognize its
> importance. Only then will they begin to realize what System Dynamics
> provides.
Yes, in the light of the past discussion I've definitely come to
appreciate the subtle meanings of 'endogenous' - nice one, George.
However I find I am left with two challenges which I unfortunately have
not yet been able to solve:
1. There -must- be a simpler word or phrase which distills together the
same or equivalent meanings as 'endogenous'. I imagine that word to be
just so offputting to a newcomer that I feel we must find a Plain Simple
English variant.
2. I'm still missing the structural connotation. Yes, I take George's
point that 'endogenous' implies the INTERNAL aspects of the genesis of
behaviour, and that this necessarily implies that we can't look to
'black boxes' as a description of behaviour, but still I should like to
see the structural aspect of this made explicit. George says: "behaviour
has a solely endogenous basis", and I agree wholeheartedly. I say
"behaviour has its sole basis in structural organisation". For me both
of these statements are key to the entire idea of SD, and should be made
explicit:
"Hallo world - are you listening? We are no longer in the business of
looking for external excuses to blame for our behaviour. We're
interested in how WE create our behaviour from moment to moment through
our past and present engagement with our environment and with ourselves,
and in how we can influence this."
I've just noticed that this statement also doesn't contain the
structural statement, and I find it distinctly unsnappy to say the
least, but believe me: it was wonderfully cathartic to write!
Best wishes all round,
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
Subject: RE: January question
Here is an example of the generic rubric, specific rubric, question and
sample scoring levels. This has since been revised, but I would be happy
to entertain improvements!
Generic standard: Student allows for feedback in their model. They
understand that feedback can have varying effects on different models and
can have an impact on the stability of the model. (from C 11, benchmarks)
Standard applied: Student understands that feedback between the
temperature difference and the rate of cooling results in a non-constant
rate of cooling.
Question: Consider your model and the graph of temperature. Why is the
graph not linear? What aspect of the model causes this?