February 2001
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001
Subject: Winter Questing
From: Tim Joy <tjoy@pps.k12.or.us>
To: K12
Good New Millennium to all!
Out west, we have weathered semester exams and lean now into the headwinds
of winter's last blasts. Consequently, taking stock (pun intended, of
course!) is most fitting-just what have our students learned from our
efforts? Just before the holiday break, Lees asked us to recount our early
"falling for systems" days, that time when the idea first took us. This,
then, seems an appropriate follow up.
One of Jay Forrester's students once commented that his studies gave him
"an entirely new way of reading the newspapers." It is a pithy line. And
it gives us hope, doesn't it? Further, are we not often asked just what is
the point of our work? One La Salle High School student, through no fault
of my own, stated simply that "exponential change has been fascinating to
think about." And, so my good colleagues, here's a thought:
If you would, briefly tell how your students see the world differently after
working with systems concepts. What are they saying? What are they doing?
You might even just ask them to write down a few lines, glean a bit, and
then post to this list.
All the best to all of you,
Tim
--
Timothy Joy
La Salle High School
11999 SE Fuller Road
Milwaukie OR 97222
503.659.4155
503.659.2535 {FAX}
tjoy@jps.net
-------------------------------
From: "Janice Hansel" <hansel@texas.net>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: New to the group
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001
Janice Hansel
Austin, TX
From: "Scott Lipton" <scottl@griffinschool.org>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: New to the group
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001
Scott Lipton
Austin, TX
From: "John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Standards & Accountability
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001
It's a minor point in an interesting dialogue, but Scott Thompson wrote:
"In the factory system, time is the constant and results vary (some kids
pass, some fail,
some are fast tracked and other remediated.) In a standards-based system,
the standard is the constant and time becomes the variable; this recognizes
that students are individual with very different developmental needs and
learning styles; students who need additional "time and opportunity" to
master challenging content or skills must be provided that time and
opportunity or there is simply no valid claim to the name authentic
standards-based reform."
And Marion Brady mentioned, in his reply,
"Yes, yes, of course. But I could dig back through some of my old 1960s
files and find paragraphs the wording of which is interchangeable with the
above."
I remember that one of the most respected of educational psychologists in
the 1960's, John Carroll, wrote a small gem of a book titled "Mastery
Learning" that made the point extremely well. He believed, backed by some
evidence, that about 95% of all children in the U.S. could learn anything in
the K-12 curriculum given enough time.
I think most people blew it off as "true" but "impractical" because it
seemed to require that each pupil spend a different amount of time on each
"lesson." Thus the classroom would soon be "out of synch" and teachers
would be put in the position of providing individual tutoring to 30 kids at
a time. They missed the point! Carroll's ideas were very practical. Allow
me to give one example of how to implement a mastery learning approach.
Instead of assuming that the fact that different children require different
amounts of time to "master" a lesson requires that lesson plans be out of
synch, assume that the amount of time per lesson is the same for all (or at
least 95%) of the children in your class. With that assumption -- that you
will spend exactly one hour fifteen minutes on Lesson 12C -- what would
mastery learning concepts imply that a teacher should do?
1. Understand that some children will "master" the lesson in 15 minutes;
others will take 45; others will require the entire scheduled time.
2. Provide "enrichment" materials (sub-lesson plans) for children who
achieve mastery early.
3. NOW HERE'S THE KEY TO THE WHOLE METHOD: Do NOT make the enrichment
materials take students farther along in the subject matter (i.e., do not
steal from the subsequent "mainstream" lesson plans for these enrichment
materials.) Instead, let the enrichment materials explore a deeper level of
understanding of the same subject as the main lesson. This may include
exploration of cross-curricular connections or more opportunities to apply
the learning from the main lesson, etc. If you design enrichment materials
sufficient to keep the children who achieve mastery earliest engaged, then
you will have materials for all who finish earlier than the scheduled time.
This seems so obvious to me (and it did in the '60's when I first figured it
out for myself) that I never wrote anything about it -- assuming that
everyone (or lots of others) would "get it" too. But it doesn't seem that
lots of others did.
Most relevant to the subject of this thread (Standards and Accountability),
Carroll's careful operational definition of "mastery" is still a good model
of how to go about defining standards for learning.
John W. Gunkler
-----------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Question
I heard a criticism of System Dynamics as a graduate level course. I'm wondering how others might describe the mathematical complexity of system dynamics and respond to this type of statement. "System Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as a graduate level course." or "There's not hard enough math in system dynamics for it to be a graduate level course."
Richard Turnock
Adjunct Instructor, Portland State University
Educational Services, Portland General Electric
----------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
From: George Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Subject: Dana Meadows' passing
Forwarded to the "k-12sd" list by George Richardson:
------Original Message------
From: Frederick Meyerson <Frederick_Meyerson@brown.edu>
To: susincom@sustainer.org
Sent: February 21, 2001 4:43:31 AM GMT
Subject: Dana Meadows
Dear friends:
This is very, very sad news. Dana was my college advisor, mentor,
and friend, and she has been my guiding light since I first heard of
her as a teenager in the early 1970s. My deep sympathy and love to
all of you working to realize one of her great dreams.
Peace...Fred Meyerson
Dear friends and colleagues,
Some of you may already know this, but I wanted all of you to know that the
world has lost one of the true giants in the quest for a just and
sustainable world, Dana Meadows.
The thought of the world without one of the brightest, most thoughtful,
insightful, caring souls who truly lived the values she espoused is almost
unbearable. Dana was a visionary, the first of the great systems thinkers
that have helped us all see the world in a holistic and interdependent way,
a great teacher, an outstanding mentor to thousands of people (including
me)
and a gifted communicator. She used all of those and many other wonderful
attributes to benefit all people and the rest of the natural world. Dana
was always one step ahead of everyone in anticipating or seeing the next
challenge humans and the rest of the natural world would face and offering
creative strategies to deal with them. She was the Cassandra (as Alan
Atkisson would say) that people believed. She never shied away from
calling
governments, industries, environmentalists, journalists and others to task
for policies, behaviors or actions that were unjust, harmful, ineffective
or
just plain dumb. She never let people who read her weekly column, "The
Global Citizen", people she interacted with in other ways or her students
get away with denial of things that have been wrong in the world. And Dana
did it in a way that made you stop, think and be willing to look yourself
in
the face and see the truth or to take action to right a wrong.
Dana was always hopeful and inspiring and a strong believer in the ability
of humans to change and reach a higher, more just and ethical way of being.
But Dana's most endearing and admirable quality was to give of herself and
her ideas with great humility and joy to everyone who would accept her
incredible gifts. I know that these few words are inadequate to express
all
that Dana has meant to me and to the world. In the days ahead others who
are far more eloquent will be filling cyberspace and other media with the
tributes Dana so richly deserves. She was too young, too vibrant and too
important to the world to die this young. I am grateful for all the years
that she was alive, for everything that she had to and did share and that I
had the privilege of knowing her and learning from her. May we always
remember the things she has taught us and the example that she set for us
all to emulate.
With gratitude, deep sadness and much love,
Tony
p.s. See note from Joan Davis and obituary below.
----------------------
Anthony Cortese, Sc.D.
President
Second Nature, Inc.
99 Chauncy Street, Sixth Floor
Boston, MA 02111 USA
Tel: 617-292-7771 ext. 120
Fax: 617-292-0150
Email: acortese@secondnature.org
http://www.secondnature.org
----------
From: Joan Davis <davis@EAWAG.CH>
Reply-To: Joan Davis <davis@EAWAG.CH>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:2
To: BALATON@LISTSERV.DARTMOUTH.EDU
Subject: Re: Dana's obituary for international newspapers
Dear Friends,
Please find attached (in rtf) the obituary, which Alan Atkisson has written
for international circulation.
Would you kindly forward this to local/national/international newspapers,
news services and other media.
In some cases it may need to be translated before forwarding.
Thank you for helping to pass on the sad news of Dana's death to the many
around the world who have known her... or at least of her.
In appreciation,
Joan and Aro (and Alan)
P.S. It would be very much appreciated, if you would forward a copy of the
text as used - either via email (davis@eawag.ch), fax (+41/1/8305735) or
normal mail (Bergliweg 12 / 8304 Wallisellen / Switzerland).
--------
Donella Meadows, Lead Author of The Limits to Growth, Has Died
Donella H. Meadows, 59, a pioneering environmental scientist and writer,
died Tuesday in New Hampshire after a brief illness. She was best known to
the world as the lead author of the international bestselling book The
Limits to Growth, published in 1972. The book, which reported on a study
of
long-term global trends in population, economics, and the environment, sold
millions of copies and was translated into 28 languages. She was also the
lead author of the twenty-year follow-up study, Beyond the Limits (1992),
with original co-authors Dennis Meadows and Jørgen Randers.
Professor Meadows, known as "Dana" to friends and colleagues, was a leading
voice in what has become known as the "sustainability movement," an
international effort to reverse damaging trends in the environment,
economy,
and social systems. Her work is widely recognized as a formative influence
on hundreds of other academic studies, government policy initiatives, and
international agreements.
Dana Meadows was also a devoted teacher of environmental systems, ethics,
and journalism to her students at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New
Hampshire, where she taught for 29 years. In addition to her many original
contributions to systems theory and global trend analysis, she managed a
small farm and was a vibrant member of her local community. Genuinely
unconcerned with her international fame, she often referred to herself
simply as "a farmer and a writer."
Donella Meadows was born March 13, 1941 in Elgin, Illinois, and educated in
science, earning a B.A. in chemistry from Carleton College in 1963 and a
Ph.D. in biophysics from Harvard University in 1968. As a research fellow
at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, she was a protégé of Jay
Forrester, the inventor of system dynamics as well as the principle of
magnetic data storage for computers.
In 1972 she was on the MIT team that produced the global computer model
"World3" for the Club of Rome and provided the basis for The Limits to
Growth. The book made headlines around the world, and began a debate about
the limits of the Earth's capacity to support human economic expansion, a
debate that continues to this day. Her writing - appearing most often in
the form of a weekly column called "The Global Citizen," nominated for the
Pulitzer Prize in 1991 -- has been published regularly in the international
press since that time.
In 1981, together with her former husband Dennis Meadows, Donella Meadows
founded the International Network of Resource Information Centers (INRIC),
also called the Balaton Group (after the lake in Hungary where the group
meets annually). The group built early and critical avenues of exchange
between scientists on both sides of the Iron Curtain at the height of the
Cold War.
As the Balaton Group's coordinator for eighteen years, she facilitated what
grew to become an unusually effective global process of information sharing
and collaboration among hundreds of leading academics, researchers, and
activists in the broader sustainability movement. Professor Meadows also
served on many national and international boards and scientific committees,
and taught and lectured all over the world. She was recognized as a 1991
Pew Scholar and as a 1994 MacArthur Fellow for her work. In 1992 the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) presented her with an honorary
doctorate.
In 1997, Professor Meadows founded the Sustainability Institute, which she
described as a "think-do-tank." The Institute combines cutting edge
research
in global systems with practical demonstrations of sustainable living,
including the development of an ecological village and organic farm in
Hartland Four Corners, Vermont.
Donella Meadows is survived by her mother, Phoebe Quist of Tahlequah
Oklahoma; her father, Don Hager of the Chicago area; a brother, Jason
Hager,
of Wisconsin; cousins and nephews; and a large community of colleagues and
friends, both international and local, in the organizations that she
founded
and assisted.
____________________
Obituary prepared by members of the Balaton Group (INRIC)
For further information contact:
In USA: alan@atkisson.com
(In New England: bmiller@vermontel.net)
In Europe: davis@eawag.ch
In Asia:arevi@taru.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Chair, Public Administration and Policy Ph: 518-442-5258
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Fx: 518-442-5298
University at Albany, Albany, NY 12222 <http://www.albany.edu/~gpr>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: JnDLunsford@aol.com
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001
Subject: The Math in SD is too simple for a grad level course
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Jim Lunsford
4151 Whitney Place
Concord, NC 28027
jndlunsford@aol.com
From: "Terry McCarthy" <irishtmc@hotmail.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Response to Gene Stammell
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001
Hi Gene,
Thank you for responding to my posting. You have some wonderful ideas, and a LOT more experience working with SD/ST in the primary grades than I. I would very much appreciate any lessons you would be willing to share. I would be more than happy to reciprocate with any SD/ST work we are doing in my classroom...
I am wondering if you have used Inspiration or Kidspiration with your students in your classroom or computer lab. These software programs are "graphic organizers" with a vast number of images to fit a wide variety of applications. The programs contain example projects and templates for easy integration in all curricular areas. I have found Kidspiration to be wonderful vehicle for my first grade students(fluent, emergent, and non-readers alike...) to express their understanding about various systems and systemic relationships. You can download a free 30 demo version of both by going to www.Inspiration.com. on the web. If you're not familiar with the programs, I suggest you give them a try and see what you and your students think about them.
Looking forward to hearing from you again!
Regards,
Terry McCarthy
McCarver Elementary School
Tacoma, WA
(
-------------------------
From: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
To: k-12mas@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: reply to Terry
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:46:22 -0500
From: "Gene Stamell" <gstamell@hotmail.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Re-joining the group
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:44:53 -0500
Dear Terry,
I teach third grade in an upper middle class rural community outside
of Boston. I've been using BOTG's for several years and have a few
suggestions for types of lessons/topics that might be successful with
your first graders ( I think it's great that you're introducing
systems to 6 and 7 year olds.):
* Weather: daily , weekly, or by seasons. kids can sketch (not draw
-- let them experience the general idea of a graph, the idea that
things change as time passes -- the temperature in broad terms.
* Friendship and Social Issues: When issues arise (as they always
do). a quick sketch that represents the "ups and downs of
friendship" might be useful;
* Concrete Feelings: ie, one day, you might keep track of how hungry
students are as the day goes by -- keep a class graph going (kids
might be interested to see the changes before and after lunch...)
* Character Change: You might already do this with stories, but
several times during the year, we graph literary characters' feelings:
ie, "How does Sarah's sense of happiness (or self-confidence) change
from chapter to chapter? In first grade, I might use fairy tales and
choose an appropriate character trait to graph as the story
progresses......
These ideas may not be new to you, but I hope they are of some help....
Gene Stamell
Grade 3
Carlisle, MA
Hello,
My name is Terry McCarthy. I am a teacher in the primary grades at an urban
school located in Tacoma, WA. I joined this listserv once before, hoping for
help in locating materials/information that would help me complete coursework
(Microworlds, Models, and Simulations) for my Masters in Ed degree through
Lesely University. I received much support and generous help from folks out
there who were willing to give me some direction. Unfortunately, computer
problems, and a complicated series of events in my life resulted in my losing
contact with those individuals who originally offered to continue
correspondence with me...
As a result of the help I originally received, I not only successfully
completed the course requirements, but in the process began my personal
journey into the world of system dynamics and systems thinking as a means for
re-structuring the curriculum for my first grade students. Although still
very much a novice, I am actively attempting to authentically introduce SD
and ST terminology and concepts into my students' learning and life
experiences. Thus far, we have learned about cause and effect relationships
through investigating various models found in children's literature, BOT's
through reflection on student learning, and stocks and flows through physical
activities.
I realize that I am only beginning to scratch the surface of SD/ST
potentiality in the primary grades, but I continue to devote as much time and
effort as I possibly can to becoming more informed. I would be greatful to
any kind souls willing to discuss their work with SD/ST in the
primary/elementary grades...
I am currently setting up a DSL line connection at home, and will be changing
my private email address when that change becomes effective. In the
meantime, I will receive messages at either: irishtmc@aol.com --or--
tmccart@tacoma.k12.wa.us
Regards,
Terry McCarthy
--------------------------------
From: KCStarguy@aol.com
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001
Subject: Question
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu, dooley@sirius.com, gstamell@hotmail.com,
tmccart@tacoma.k12.wa.us, Irishtmc@aol.com
I agree with the statement below. While the last thing I would want to do is
to use stella to do calculus (I still remember my angst about matrices in
12th grade) , I think it is tool that you can use in many ways if you try to
extend "thinking" and focus on "problem solving " and not just the math. It
is a way to "see math. " I always hate when math teachers say "but it is so
logical." When you can't see it you can't see it and this is a way to maybe
see how the formulas and numbers work.
I like Gene's ideas in regards to Terry (what is email address?).
I use a lot of simulations (simcity2000, Simlife, Earth, Simfarm- I think
they are more then toys and can be used to teach patterns, economics and more
and have developed sim sheets for others to use - if you want please contact
me directly) and do workshops for teachers about them , I am new to stella.
I am a novice to stella. I think the reason I have had a hard time with it is
is taught with words and numbers and not enough focus is on the visual of wh
ich I see it's greatest potential. I need to work with it more. What bothers
me most about stella and possibly GIS is that the way they are taught focuses
on logic and numbers and not the visual aspects, instead of the other way
around. I have to internalize how all these parts come into the visual whole
, take it apart and then see how the numbers and aspects fit together.
anyone else have this problem- disagree or agree?
Dr. Eric Flescher (KCStarguy@aol.com) -adjunct faculty- Lesley College-
multimedia instructor- 20+ ways to use the internet and EJAWs alternative
assessment sheet < http://ada.lesley.edu/faculty/flescher/team1.htm>
Project S.I.M.-Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and metacognitive
activities
From: "Gene Stamell" <gstamell@hotmail.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Re-joining the group
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:44:53 -0500
Dear Terry,
I teach third grade in an upper middle class rural community outside
of Boston. I've been using BOTG's for several years and have a few
suggestions for types of lessons/topics that might be successful with
your first graders ( I think it's great that you're introducing
systems to 6 and 7 year olds.):
* Weather: daily , weekly, or by seasons. kids can sketch (not draw
-- let them experience the general idea of a graph, the idea that
things change as time passes -- the temperature in broad terms.
* Friendship and Social Issues: When issues arise (as they always
do). a quick sketch that represents the "ups and downs of
ffriendship" might be useful;
* Concrete Feelings: ie, one day, you might keep track of how hungry
students are as the day goes by -- keep a class graph going (kids
might be intersted to see the changes before and after lunch...)
* Character Change: You might already do this with stories, but
several times during the year, we graph literary characers' feelings:
ie, "How does Sarah's sense of happiness (or self-confidence) change
from chaptger to chapter? In first grade, I might use fairy tales and
choose an appropriate character trait to graph as the story
progresses......
These ideas may not be new to you, but I hope they are of some help....
Gene Stamell
Grade 3
Carlisle, MA
Hello,
My name is Terry McCarthy. I am a teacher in the primary grades at an urban
school located in Tacoma, WA. I joined this listserv once before, hoping for
help in locating materials/information that would help me complete coursework
(Microworlds, Models, and Simulations) for my Masters in Ed degree through
Lesely University. I received much support and generous help from folks out
there who were willing to give me some direction. Unfortunately, computer
problems, and a complicated series of events in my life resulted in my losing
contact with those individuals who originally offered to continue
correspondence with me...
As a result of the help I originally received, I not only successfully
completed the course requirements, but in the process began my personal
journey into the world of system dynamics and systems thinking as a means for
re-structuring the curriculum for my first grade students. Although still
very much a novice, I am actively attempting to authentically introduce SD
and ST terminology and concepts into my students' learning and life
experiences. Thus far, we have learned about cause and effect relationships
through investigating various models found in children's literature, BOT's
through reflection on student learning, and stocks and flows through physical
activities.
I realize that I am only beginning to scratch the surface of SD/ST
potentiality in the primary grades, but I continue to devote as much time and
effort as I possibly can to becoming more informed. I would be greatful to
any kind souls willing to discuss their work with SD/ST in the
primary/elementary grades...
I am currently setting up a DSL line connection at home, and will be changing
my private email address when that change becomes effective. In the
meantime, I will receive messages at either: irishtmc@aol.com --or--
tmccart@tacoma.k12.wa.us
Regards,
Terry McCarthy
-- ----------------
From: Jeff Dooley <dooley@sirius.com>
Subject: Question
That criticism is about the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a
very long time. Aside from the rejoinder that a visual, dynamic
mapping of calculus seems not inappropriate at the graduate level,
what could possibly be a problem with a collaborative tool for
hypothesizing systemic structures and behavior, in a way that
preserves mathematical integrity around the loops, surfaces different
mental models and puts them to a test, and that leads often to
resolving or at least managing the real world mess in question?
So what if the math seems simple?!?!
Don't we send graduate students out to grapple with real world
breakdowns anymore?
SD is a tool for collaborative systemic problem-solving, in
conversation with other people all along the way. The skills this
activity requires are so rare in organizational problem-solving today
that I would place the proper study of SD very high on the priorities
list for curriculum development at the graduate level.
>>
---------------------- From:
I agree with the statement below. While the last thing I would want to do is
to use stella to do calculus (I still remember my angst about matrices in
12th grade) , I think it is tool that you can use in many ways if you try to
extend "thinking" and focus on "problem solving " and not just the math. It
is a way to "see math. " I always hate when math teachers say "but it is so
logical." When you can't see it you can't see it and this is a way to maybe
see how the formulas and numbers work.
I like Gene's ideas in regards to Terry (what is email address?).
I use a lot of simulations (simcity2000, Simlife, Earth, Simfarm- I think
they are more then toys and can be used to teach patterns, economics and more
and have developed sim sheets for others to use - if you want please contact
me directly) and do workshops for teachers about them , I am new to stella.
I am a novice to stella. I think the reason I have had a hard time with it is
is taught with words and numbers and not enough focus is on the visual of wh
ich I see it's greatest potential. I need to work with it more. What bothers
me most about stella and possibly GIS is that the way they are taught focuses
on logic and numbers and not the visual aspects, instead of the other way
around. I have to internalize how all these parts come into the visual whole
, take it apart and then see how the numbers and aspects fit together.
anyone else have this problem- disagree or agree?
Dr. Eric Flescher (KCStarguy@aol.com) -adjunct faculty- Lesley College-
multimedia instructor- 20+ ways to use the internet and EJAWs alternative
assessment sheet < http://ada.lesley.edu/faculty/flescher/team1.htm>
Project S.I.M.-Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and metacognitive
Activities
--------------------
From: "Gene Stamell" <gstamell@hotmail.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Re-joining the group
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001
Dear Terry,
I teach third grade in an upper middle class rural community outside
of Boston. I've been using BOTG's for several years and have a few
suggestions for types of lessons/topics that might be successful with
your first graders ( I think it's great that you're introducing
systems to 6 and 7 year olds.):
* Weather: daily , weekly, or by seasons. kids can sketch (not draw
-- let them experience the general idea of a graph, the idea that
things change as time passes -- the temperature in broad terms.
* Friendship and Social Issues: When issues arise (as they always
do). a quick sketch that represents the "ups and downs of
ffriendship" might be useful;
* Concrete Feelings: ie, one day, you might keep track of how hungry
students are as the day goes by -- keep a class graph going (kids
might be intersted to see the changes before and after lunch...)
* Character Change: You might already do this with stories, but
several times during the year, we graph literary characers' feelings:
ie, "How does Sarah's sense of happiness (or self-confidence) change
from chaptger to chapter? In first grade, I might use fairy tales and
choose an appropriate character trait to graph as the story
progresses......
These ideas may not be new to you, but I hope they are of some help....
Gene Stamell
Grade 3
Carlisle, MA
--------------------
Hello,
My name is Terry McCarthy. I am a teacher in the primary grades at an urban
school located in Tacoma, WA. I joined this listserv once before, hoping for
help in locating materials/information that would help me complete coursework
(Microworlds, Models, and Simulations) for my Masters in Ed degree through
Lesely University. I received much support and generous help from folks out
there who were willing to give me some direction. Unfortunately, computer
problems, and a complicated series of events in my life resulted in my losing
contact with those individuals who originally offered to continue
correspondence with me...
As a result of the help I originally received, I not only successfully
completed the course requirements, but in the process began my personal
journey into the world of system dynamics and systems thinking as a means for
re-structuring the curriculum for my first grade students. Although still
very much a novice, I am actively attempting to authentically introduce SD
and ST terminology and concepts into my students' learning and life
experiences. Thus far, we have learned about cause and effect relationships
through investigating various models found in children's literature, BOT's
through reflection on student learning, and stocks and flows through physical activities.
I realize that I am only beginning to scratch the surface of SD/ST
potentiality in the primary grades, but I continue to devote as much time and
effort as I possibly can to becoming more informed. I would be greatful to
any kind souls willing to discuss their work with SD/ST in the
primary/elementary grades...
I am currently setting up a DSL line connection at home, and will be changing
my private email address when that change becomes effective. In the
meantime, I will receive messages at either: irishtmc@aol.com --or--
tmccart@tacoma.k12.wa.us
Regards,
Terry McCarthy
-------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Complex math
Richard Turnock wrote:
I heard a criticism of System Dynamics as a graduate level course. I'm wondering how others might describe the mathematical complexity of system dynamics and respond to this type of statement. "System Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as a graduate level course." or "There's not hard enough math in system dynamics for it to be a graduate level course."
But is mathematical complexity a goal, or is it a dead end in terms of relevance to real-world problems? Mathematics, in the sense referred to above, has little to offer for understanding high-order, nonlinear, dynamic feedback systems. And those are the systems that describe social, managerial, and economic behavior.
Complex mathematics is often a time-consuming difficult escape from facing the realities or life. In his article:
From: KCStarguy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001
Subject: inspiration
To:
I use inspiration to
(1) make up forms for the students to fill out
(2) have students take notes off the internet for using the webbing format
(3) have them outline topics for their websites
(4) have them import their inspiration outlines or web graphics to their
websites
I still need a lot more work before I use stella as well as GIS in the
classroom though.
I do use simcity2000 and have developed sheets for it's use for students and
teachers. More information if you are interested contact me directly.
Dr. Eric Flescher (KCStarguy@aol.com)
Project S.I.M.-Simulations, Interdisciplinary internet and metacognitive
activities
-----------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: Response to Question to a Question
"Are we talking about a graduate level course in mathematics or are we
talking about graduate level courses in other disciplines that can
use system dynamics?"
Not mathematics. We're talking about graduate students taking a System Dynamics course offered for credit as an elective or part of required classes in MBA, MS or PhD programs in schools of Business, Psychology, Education, Public Policy, Environmental Science, Engineering, System Science, Biology, etc.
The specific source of the critique of the level of math in SD was from individuals with PhD in Physics, in a physics dept at university.
Richard Turnock
Adjunct Instructor, Portland State University
Educational Services, Portland General Electric
Portland OR USA
------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001
To: K-12 listserve <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: George Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Subject: System dynamics in graduate school
Some reportedly say:
"System Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as a graduate level course." or "There's not hard enough math in system dynamics for it to be a graduate level course."
Well, we give a PhD in decision and policy sciences here in the Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, and one of its two tracks is system dynamics. So does the London Business School. And we all know about MIT.
So at one level the quotes are just nonsense. At another, they suggest a deep and sadly common misunderstanding about what the field is about and what one ought to be teaching in it.
As we know, the field is about helping people think over time in complex dynamic systems. And one should be teaching tools for that. Knowing the mathematics behind accumulations, Runge-Kutta integration, or PID controllers is nice and could be taught in graduate school to mollify critics looking for mathematical rigor, but if that's all there is, people would still be mystified about how to tackle dynamic problems that have defied thoughtful people for years.
It's actually EASIER to teach the math and the computing algorithms. The hard parts are teaching conceptualization, analysis with a model, and derivation and implementation of insights.
Someone who makes the comment quoted above has probably never personally experienced those hard parts.
We have to keep our eyes on the right prizes...
...George
-------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Chair, Public Administration and Policy Ph: 518-442-5258
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Fx: 518-442-5298
University at Albany, Albany, NY 12222
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001
From: "Kim Clary" <kclary@roseburg.k12.or.us>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Question to Question
In regards to the question of whether systems dynamics has enough "hard math" to be a graduate level course, I have another question. Are we talking about a graduate level course in mathematics or are we talking about graduate level courses in other disciplines that can use system dynamics?
It seems to me that system dynamics would not be a graduate level math course but that in any other discipline it could be considered graduate level. Though the mathematics may not be complex (and therefore would not be a mathematics graduate course), the application of mathematics and the visual diagrams showing relationships in successful models would require a level of thinking not required in (I would venture to say) a lot of graduate level courses.
Kim Clary
Roseburg High School, Roseburg, Oregon
math teacher, grades 10, 11, and 12
-------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001
From: Niall Palfreyman <niall.palfreyman@fh-weihenstephan.de>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Question
Richard Turnock wrote (or rather quoted):
"System Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as
a graduate level course." or "There's not hard enough math in system
dynamics for it to be a graduate level course."
In a way I agree with this: the maths necessary for doing SD is _not_
sufficient to warrant an entire graduate level course in it. On the
other hand, who says that only maths makes for a good graduate course?
I'm just putting together a graduate course for the coming summer
semester on "Model-building and Simulation" for biotechnologists. In its
first incarnation it consists of just 2 hours a week for a 15-week
semester, and from next year it will then occupy 4 hours per week for
the same number of weeks.
In the shorter incarnation I shall focus entirely on SD, and in the
longer form I shall probably bring in object-oriented and multi-agent
modelling. But I expect the initial (shorter) form to introduce most of
the major aspects of modelling and simulation. At the moment it's
turning into an interesting mix of skills drawn from a number of
disciplines. I'll spend 3 weeks covering the qualitative analysis of
nonlinear differential equations (definitely "hard enough math", I would
say!). I'll spend one week on numerical methods: Euler and Runge-Kutta.
The next 3 weeks will be spent on general model-building skills applied
to a number of real-life projects - I've drawn on Andy Ford's "Modelling
the Environment" here. In the remaining weeks the students will analyse
a whole variety of models drawn from various fields: the 2- and 3-body
problems, Belousov-Zhabotinski reactions, predator-prey, infection
models, cooperation models, chaotic models. My aim is that this will
lead to development of the following three major skills in the students:
1. Application of analytical skills to nonlinear mathematical models.
2. Development of skills in creating a mathematical model from a
real-world situation.
3. Building an awareness of the huge variety of behaviours to be
expected from systems of differential equations.
In sum, I think I'm saying: No, there isn't enough math in SD to warrant
an entire course merely on the maths. But that's not my aim here.
Rather, my aim is that the students learn to understand the
_application_ of maths to the real world, and that they gain a sense of
wonder at the beauty of natural dynamic systems. I'm not seeking to
develop knowledge, so much as skills. And I think that's a good aim for
a graduate course.
Best wishes,
Niall Palfreyman.
----------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Jeff Dooley <dooley@sirius.com>
Subject: Question
That criticism is about the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a very long time. Aside from the rejoinder that a visual, dynamic mapping of calculus seems not inappropriate at the graduate level, what could possibly be a problem with a collaborative tool for hypothesizing systemic structures and behavior, in a way that preserves mathematical integrity around the loops, surfaces different mental models and puts them to a test, and that leads often to resolving or at least managing the real world mess in question?
So what if the math seems simple?!?!
Don't we send graduate students out to grapple with real world breakdowns anymore?
SD is a tool for collaborative systemic problem-solving, in conversation with other people all along the way. The skills this activity requires are so rare in organizational problem-solving today that I would place the proper study of SD very high on the priorities list for curriculum development at the graduate level.
Jeff Dooley
--------------------------------
Jeff Dooley
707-762-1460
dooley@well.com
hinalo@home.com
http://www.well.com/~dooley/
------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: I.Stevenson@ioe.ac.uk (Ian Stevenson)
Subject: Question
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
I heard a criticism of System Dynamics as a graduate level course.
(snip)
This is a very interesting question. I have used STELLA and systems
thinking with undergraduates to teach mathematics. The extension to
"graduate" level is a matter of degree rather than kind, it seemsto me.
In the STELLA system, the stock flow-system approximates first order
differential equation. Building even a simple model can serve as an
introduction to calculus. The approach is start with a model and then
adjust the numerical integration interval to show limiting effects.Next one
can explore the numerical integration algorithms themselves (potentially a
course in its own right).It is a relatively a short step to higher order
systems, through the construction of systems of differential equations in
the process of model building.
The second use of STELLA is to examine the discrete equation system that is
constructed by the software. Again, STELLA is used as a launch pad into the
topic, and also a "scratch pad" for exploring key concepts.
What is "complex" or "hard" mathematics? Does it become so because it is
taught and learnt at graduate level? Surely the interesting question is
whether one can see how advanced mathematical disciplines can be developed
from accessible starting points? System dynamics and various forms of
digital technology can provide the entry for students into advanced
mathematics, and be a means of supporting their development. The question
is not whether one can use systems thinking, but how.
--Ian
______________________________________________________________
Dr Ian Stevenson Tel: +44 (020) 7612 6676
Mathematical Sciences Group Fax: +44 (020) 7612 6686
Institute of Education Office:+44 (020) 7612 6651/4
20 Bedford Way Mobile: 07779 657094
London http://www.ioe.ac.uk/ms/
WC1H OAL e-mail:I.Stevenson@ioe.ac.uk
-----------------------
From: "Gordon Kubanek & Carmen Hust" <chust@monisys.ca>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: The Math in SD is too simple for a grad level course
Date: Thu, 22 February, 2001
Hi Richard,
Responding to:. "System
Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as a graduate
level course."
Have anybody who says this read the latest article in SD Review by Sweeney &
Sterman called "Bathtub Dynamics*:. Their research shows that the "man on the
street " and the "elite MBA students" have about the same level of
conceptual understanding of stock and flow behaviour: sure shatters our
illusions !
Gordon Kubanek
Ottawa
*online at:
------------------------------
From: "John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: The Math in SD is too simple for a grad level course
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001
I earned an undergraduate degree in mathematics before going on to "more
applied" pursuits. I found that in the higher levels of abstraction in
learning mathematics, we spent a lot of (very useful) time trying to learn
to have an "intuition" about what the math was all about. Without such
"intuition" it was very difficult to do anything more than rote memorization
of theorems and of tricks for proving them.
I particularly remember one day, early in my Group Theory class at Reed
College, when we spent an hour "playing" with dice. It turns out that, with
an obvious interpretation, the rotations of a die can be modeled as a
mathematical group operation. This physical manipulation (I think of
Piaget's, and Bruner's, concepts of "concrete operations") provided an
excellent foundation for developing "intuition" into how mathematical groups
worked. And, I may add, the experience added to my growing understanding of
the relationship between mathematics and reality -- and how mathematics ever
can be "useful."
With that long preamble I am now ready to suggest that system dynamics
modeling would have been a godsend in my graduate level differential
equations classes! DiffEq comes to the student all prickly with
difficulties -- requiring an understanding of both differential and integral
calculus (at a time when many students barely grasp those subjects),
bemiring students in the computational details of integration (at a time
when concepts and "intuition" are what is trying to be taught), at seeming
to require the most arduous effort to get to any result no matter how
trivial (I remember as if it were yesterday the entire one-hour period we
spent trying to derive and calculate the equations for coffee cooling --
without success, I might add!) In fact, I don't think I really understood
the dynamics of coffee cooling until I modeled it with system dynamics.
So, should we "teach SD" as a graduate level course? I'm not sure (please
see my next question and answer.) Should SD modeling be used (as a tool) as
part of graduate level mathematics courses? My experience screams, "Yes!"
John W. Gunkler
jgunkler@sprintmail.com
-----------------------
From: "Peter Lakey" <plakey01@earthlink.net>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Question to a Question
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001
This is my first contribution to this list, but I've been paying attention.
I must agree with Kim on the point of system dynamics being generally
applicable as a graduate level course in most disciplines. If the designer
of the course can incorporate examples related to the study of the specific
discipline (e.g., Sociology, Political Science, any hard Science, Economics,
etc.), it would be very appropriate at the graduate level.
Further, It's not clear to me why the math of system dynamics isn't
difficult enough to be strictly a graduate level math course. System
dynamics can deal with highly non-linear systems for which the math has to
be essentially invented. For example, consider the stock market. Pose the
question to your graduate students to derive the mathematics which estimate
or predict stock market behavior.
Such a mathematical model could involve basic algebra, calculus, advanced
statistics as well as methods such as genetic algorithms and fuzzy logic.
If the course is designed properly, I think it would be an ideal and
challenging graduate level math course.
Pete Lakey
Software Research Scientist
Sole Proprietor - Cognitive Concepts
---------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001
From: "Kim Clary" <kclary@roseburg.k12.or.us>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Question to Question
In regards to the question of whether systems dynamics has enough
"hard math" to be a graduate level course, I have another question.
Are we talking about a graduate level course in mathematics or are we
talking about graduate level courses in other disciplines that can
use system dynamics?
It seems to me that system dynamics would not be a graduate level
math course but that in any other discipline it could be considered
graduate level. Though the mathematics may not be complex (and
therefore would not be a mathematics graduate course), the
application of mathematics and the visual diagrams showing
relationships in successful models would require a level of thinking
not required in (I would venture to say) a lot of graduate level
courses.
Kim Clary
Roseburg High School, Roseburg, Oregon
math teacher, grades 10, 11, and 12
------------------------------
From: "Janice C. Kowalczyk" <kowalcjn@ride.ri.net>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: book announcement
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001
Regards,
Janice C. Kowalczyk
Rutgers University
Assistant Director,
Leadership Program In Discrete Mathematics
Office: 401-841-5583
Home: 401-849-7546
9 Beechland Place
Middletown, RI 02842
"We are continually faced by great opportunities brilliantly disguised as insolvable problems"
-------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: Lascelles Anderson <lascelle@uic.edu>
Subject: System dynamics in graduate school
Prof. Richardson, I was glad to see your response to the series of comments about math in SD, fo0r two reasons: You are correct; It allows me to ask you a favor. I would appreciate very much if you could e-mail the course outline(s) that you are using for your own Ph.D. program inn SD. I have a couple of old course and reading lists so would very much love to see how things are structured now in front line programs like your own.
.
Thanks much in advance.
Lascelles Anderson
At 12:18 PM 2/26/01 -0500, you wrote:
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 08:01:31 -0500
To: K-12 listserve <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: George Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Subject: System dynamics in graduate school
Some reportedly say:
"System Dynamics doesn't have enough complex math to justify it as a graduate level course." or "There's not hard enough math in system dynamics for it to be a graduate level course."
Well, we give a PhD in decision and policy sciences here in the Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, and one of its two tracks is system dynamics. So does the London Business School. And we all know about MIT.
So at one level the quotes are just nonsense. At another, they suggest a deep and sadly common misunderstanding about what the field is about and what one ought to be teaching in it.
As we know, the field is about helping people think over time in complex dynamic systems. And one should be teaching tools for that. Knowing the mathematics behind accumulations, Runge-Kutta integration, or PID controllers is nice and could be taught in graduate school to mollify critics looking for mathematical rigor, but if that's all there is, people would still be mystified about how to tackle dynamic problems that have defied thoughtful people for years.
It's actually EASIER to teach the math and the computing algorithms. The hard parts are teaching conceptualization, analysis with a model, and derivation and implementation of insights.
Someone who makes the comment quoted above has probably never personally experienced those hard parts.
We have to keep our eyes on the right prizes...
...George
-------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>
Chair, Public Administration and Policy Ph: 518-442-5258
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy Fx: 518-442-5298
University at Albany, Albany, NY 12222 <http://www.albany.edu/~gpr>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Andy Ford" <FordA@mail.wsu.edu>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Let's Avoid Dead End Modeling
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001
Richard Turnock's question about what to say when our System Dynamics
courses are criticized as "too simple" for graduate level course work has
certainly triggered vigorous and interesting responses. I agree with all
the previous speakers who have explained that this question reveals a poor
understanding of both system dynamics and modeling by the person who is
asking the question.
I teach System Dynamics applications to environmental systems at both the
graduate and the undergraduate level, and I have encountered Richard's
question in various forms, sometimes from other faculty, sometimes from the
students.
Other Faculty:
Other faculty ask the question when they have to justify the difference
between graduate credit and undergraduate credit. They will ask what
distinguishes my graduate course from the undergraduate course, and they are
puzzled when I explain that there are surprizingly few differences. Both
require NO CALCULUS or differential equations as a prerequisite; both use
the Stella software; both cover around 50% the chapters in "Modeling the
Environment" (Island Press 1999); and both conclude with student projects to
improve upon one of the models in the text book. So what makes the graduate
course more substantial? My best answer is that the graduate students are
willing (and eager) to go to the literature to supplement what they read in
the book. The undergraduates expect the book (or other assigned readings)
to provide what they need to learn.
The Students:
Students who have not studied differential equations or calculus seldom ask
this question. But the students who have studied applied mathematics will
often ask why the System Dynamics course does not make direct use of all the
techniques that they mastered in their previous course work. I answer this
question head-on in Chapter 3 of "Modeling the Environment." Chapter 3
explains numerical simulation and how it contrasts with the search for
analytical solutions to differential equations. I remind the students how
difficult it was to search for solutions to linear differential equations.
Many have forgotten how the trial and error search proceeds to a solution,
ONLY if they really know the form of the answer in advance. (This advance
knowledge of the general pattern of behavior is similar to a System Dynamics
practioner drawing a "referece mode" or "target pattern of behavior" in the
early stage of a model building exercise.) Everyone on this discussion
list knows that the real systems of interest are highly nonlinear, so
finding an analytical solution to the differential equations is simply not
possible.
We Are Not Alone:
System Dyanmics practioners and teachers are comfortable with the
construction of nonlinear models which are simulated numerically on the
computer. They get on with the job of learning about the complexity of the
system and its dynamics without asking themselves if the "math is hard
enough" to warrant their time. We should remember that we are not alone in
adopting this pragmatic position. The same position was advocated by
Crawford Holling over thirty years ago. Holling's work on predator prey
systems is widely respected. His work on predation models led him to the
following conclusion (published in 1966) which is still relevant today. In
reviewing predation models relying on "classical" mathematical methods, he
observed that the classical methods are DEAD ENDS:
"It is clear that none of these models include very many of the relevant
components. As a result, they are extremely restrictive. However, each has
been constructed by borrowing the techniques and mathematical language,
largely calculus, of classical physics. This choice was really the only one
available before the advent of computers and it imposes major limitations.
The more components included, the more obvious this becomes since it becomes
progressively more and more difficult to include new componenets in a
differential equation and even more difficult to integrate it. The models
therefore tend to be dead ends, preventing future revision and expansion."
Conclusion:
May we all proceed, unapologetically with a pragmatic, proven approach to
modeling. Let's leave the "dead end" approach to others.
Andy Ford
Program in Environmental Science & Regional Planning
Washington State University
Pullman, WA 99164 - 4430
USA
phone (509) 335-7846
email FordA@mail.wsu.edu
web
------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001
From: Paul Newton <paulnewton@attglobal.net>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: System dynamics in graduate school
George Richardson wrote:
It's actually EASIER to teach the math and the computing algorithms.
The hard parts are teaching conceptualization, analysis with a model,
and derivation and implementation of insights.
Someone who makes the comment quoted above has probably never
personally experienced those hard parts.
We have to keep our eyes on the right prizes...
I am a graduate student in system dynamics who heartily seconds George's comments
from experience. I am a masters student in the system dynamics program at the
University of Bergen, currently working on my thesis model in the Applied
Economics Department at Cornell University. We are using system dynamics to
study problematic price behaviors in the US dairy industry.
After several years studying system dynamics, and over a year building dairy
industry models and studying commodity models, I am finally gaining some
confidence in my ability to conceptualize models useful in studying commodity
problems. And I'm realizing that I'm probably over-confident in my ability to
conceptualize models useful in other areas.
However, I am a long way from feeling confident in my ability to perform, as
George says, "analysis with a model" and "derivation and implementation of
insights." But I intend to keep learning until I'm comfortable with my
confidence level in these two areas.
So, I second George's comments that these three aspects of system dynamics are
difficult to teach and to learn. But wouldn't it be useful to our lives and
society if more of us could do all three things!
As an aside, MIT's internet-based distance learning program is shortly offering
an advanced system dynamics course entitled "Advanced Techniques in System
Dynamics" (taught by Bob Eberlein). This looks to be an excellent, although
expensive, opportunity to learn some techniques useful "analysis with a model.".
If anyone is interested in the course content, let me know, and I can send you
what Bob Eberlein sent to me.
Paul
*******************************************
Paul Newton
667 St. James Circle, Green Bay, WI 54311
(607) 255-5230 (@ Cornell through sometime in the Spring of 2001) &
(920) 465-1896 (permanent in Green Bay), e-fax: (815) 461-9636,
email: paulnewton@attglobal.net
*************************************************************
End of February 2001