Hello.
As I am preparing to teach a cluster class of academically gifted
students this year I was wondering if anyone out there had ideas of how SD
could be a tool for my students developing a deeper understanding of core
concepts that 3rd graders study. These children will cover the basic
material much more quickly than other 3rd graders and I'm searching for a
way
to help them move further into analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Some
of
the concepts include communities, plant growth & adaptation, soil, solar
system, light and heat, citizenship, religious and cultural traditions,
and
healthy living (substance abuse, nutrition, fitness). Does anyone else
use
SD with these kinds of themes? If so, how?
Thanks for any responses.

Heather Kaiser
Westarea Elem. School

Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002
From: Niall Palfreyman <niall.palfreyman@fh-weihenstephan.de>
To: K-12 discussion group <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Is there anybody out there? SD descriptive terms

Hi,
I thought I'd try sending out a mail and see whether there's still
anyone out there on this list. I also have a question.
I'm currently setting up a series of simulations to introduce
school-leavers to our study course in Bioinformatics. The series
consists of a simulation in each of the areas they will be concerned
with here: maths, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. As a thread running
through the series I'm using the basic SD terminology of stocks and
flows, but of course I need to introduce this terminology during the
series. The students using the simulations are intended to be able to
study them independently.
The first simulation is on maths, and they investigate an information
flow which links sine-waves of different wavelengths to their
superposition. The scenario is of waves arriving together on the beach.
The second simulation then looks at the material flow of dynamics: force
is a flow of momentum into a particle which they fire into a cloud
chamber.
Now the usual language of SD is far removed from the background of my
student users. Therefore I've done it like this: In the first (maths)
simulation I present the key concept of the series: influence. I say
that maths is the study of influence - the value of a dependent variable
is influenced by the value of the independent variable. If y=sin(x),
then x influences y.
In the second (physics) simulation I distinguish between two kinds of
influence: specification and change. x _specifies_ the value of sin(x),
but for example a force _changes_ the value of momentum (it doesn't
specify its exact value).
In later simulations on chemistry and biochemistry I then introduce the
terms information flow and material flow as alternative formulations of
these concepts. So the key concepts of the series are: influence,
specification, change, information flow and material flow.
My question is this: the first 3 of these terms are my own invention.
They are my attempt to turn the technical descriptive terms of SD into a
simple, everyday vocabulary suitable for school leavers. But I'm not
particularly attached to them. Indeed I find the terms "specification"
and "change" a little clumsy, so I'd love to hear from anyone who has
alternative terms which might be more amenable to everyday
understanding.
Thanks and best wishes,
Niall Palfreyman.

Xxxxxxxx

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education

I wonder if the summer may be a good time to start collecting ideas
about the longer-term goals for system dynamics in K-12 education.
It seems to me reasonably fair to say that everyone who is teaching
system dynamics is now doing so at an introductory level. This
includes everyone up through the graduate schools. Probably no one
has a solid system dynamics thread that runs more than two years. And
yet, we talk of system dynamics extending from kindergarten through
12th grade, and, of course beyond through undergraduate and graduate
study.
What ideas can people suggest about the progression of material
through 12 years?
What would be appropriate at each age level, if the right material
were available?
What suggestions for new material to be developed?
How about a 12-year sequence aimed at understanding the dynamics of
economic behavior from use of credit cards to fiscal and monetary
policy?
There are applications to subject areas, but also opportunities to
deepen the general understanding of systems so that students acquire
ability to apply generic structures to new situations. Discussion in
this area might be launched from my paper, "Learning through System
Dynamics as Preparation for the 21st Century," available at:
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/people/jay-forrester.html
Can we launch discussion, suggestions, debate, and controversy?

---------------------------------------------------------
Jay W. Forrester
Professor of Management
Sloan School
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E60-156
Cambridge, MA 02139
tel: 617-253-1571
fax: 617-258-9405
Home office:
tel: 978-369-9372
fax: 978-369-9077

Xxxxxxxxx

Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Turnock: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What ideas can people suggest about the progression of material
through 12 years?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The current buzz word is "sustainability" so folks are mapping sustainability topics to state content standards like in Michigan
<http://www.urbanoptions.org/SustainEdHandbook/index.htm>http://www.urbanoptions.org/SustainEdHandbook/index.htm
Like Michigan, Oregon and many other states have standards for all curriculum areas. What someone needs to do is map system dynamics fundamentals to state standards (start with Oregon first please :-), in science, math, language arts and social studies at each benchmark grade level (in Oregon grades 3,5,8,10). Using a web site, have links to a list of activities, models, games, that are designed to cover the content appropriate for that grade level. Then have a an organization (maybe CLE?) provide an easy way for teachers to get their hands on resources they need for each item on the list.
What we need is a "Sustainability Dynamics Handbook for Educators" web site just like the Michigan web site and then deliver the materials and training to teachers. Hmmm, I like the sound of that: "Sustainability Dynamics" - maybe if we integrate system dynamics under the umbrella of Sustainability.....

Richard Turnock
Portland Oregon

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

From: "Steven R. Thompson" <idea@idea.org>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Kaiser: 3rd grade cluster class and SD
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002

Dear Heather,
Check out the web site of the Waters Foundation in Portland, Oregon at
www.watersfoundation.org They have been working for years to do just what
you are planning--teaching students to use systems tools in their own
learning projects. They have project schools in many parts of the country.
The web site is very helpful with all the contact info you will need. Good
luck.

Steve Thompson
|I|D|E|A|
937-434-6969

Xxxxxxxxx

From: Nancy Maville <nmaville@hps-inc.com>
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu
Subject: A Tribute to Barry Richmond
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002

Barry Marshall Richmond
Hanover, NH

From: "Doug Cardell" <cardell@direcway.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Forrester: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002

I now teach in a four year, integrated high school program, IMPACTT. We are
a school within a school at Sunnyside High School in Tucson. One of your
papers, on K-12 Learner Center Learning, System Dynamics, and Curriculum
Integration that I read about 10 years ago was one of the inspirations and
guiding ideas behind our program. We began two years ago and we will start
this year with one class each of Juniors, Sophomores, and Freshmen.
I will try to respond to your question on two levels, the way I would
respond as a teacher in an integrated program (this might help K-8 folks),
and as a single subject teacher (I taught math at SHS before teaching in
IMPACTT and I still teach math at Central Arizona College).
The teachers need to be very well trained. I was in the STACI program for 5
years and I have completed the GSP and have 15 years experience teaching SD.
I think the GSP, or its equivalent, is the minimum necessary training.
I think the most important focal point is that system dynamics CANNOT become
another fragment in a fragmented educational system. Either in an
integrated setting or a content classroom it must be integrated into
everything you do. In my math classes students create a system dynamics
model (always on paper sometimes in VenSim or Stella) for every equation
they write. In IMPACTT students create models of virtually every situation
we deal with (again always on paper sometimes in software). If students
aren't building models every day it won't become a life skill.
As to materials, I use some of the Road-Maps stuff with my classes, the
Graphical Integration packets and Beginning Modeling Exercises are helpful.
I think more of the same would be an asset. Lots of material on the same
things, preferably real world examples. My students do best when I give
them data sets and ask them to construct models based on that data. They
are familiar with generic structures for linear, power, exponential (growth
and decay) and logistic. The freshmen deal with linear and exponential and
the sophomores add asymptotic exponential and logistic.
I try to get to logistic (S-shaped) models ASAP because most natural growth
is logistic so it is a very useful model and it allows one to deal with the
most realistic circumstances.
This year in IMPACTT our third year students will begin working with
oscillations and surge functions. I think that a couple of years experience
with linear, power, exponential (growth, decay, and asymptotic) and logistic
are necessary before more complicated structures are practical.
The difficulty in material development is timeliness. I don't use a lot a
artificial models and I'm not sure one can and adequately motivate students,
this means examples must be drawn from daily experiences, the news (we built
dozens of models after 9/11), other examples from other areas of the
curriculum. This means it is difficult to have materials developed ahead of
time and impossible to have them portable to all users. The kind of thing
that is most helpful is a model bank like the one CLE maintains. It would
be easier to use if it we cross-referenced by generic type not just
discipline. When building a model I find it more useful to look at similar
structures from different disciplines rather than similar topics of
different structure.
Your idea of an economic strand is excellent. I use a lot of economic
models and the are among the students favorites. They are maintain a model
of their financial futures based on their career choices, expected income,
investment rate and rate of return. Their models grow more sophisticated
over time and they are very engaged by them. I can see beginning in K with
a piggy bank model, if you put $0.25 per day into your piggy bank what will
happen? I think if students started here they could be where my 10 graders
are by 5th or 6th.
As to using your paper, "Learning through System Dynamics as Preparation for
the 21st Century", I was at the Concord conference and heard you deliver it,
we spoke about it afterwards. Like the paper I mentioned earlier, it too
has been an inspiration to our program and I am sure it will be a help to
others. I think one of the key things is to stop thinking of education as
increasing knowledge and to begin to think of it as increasing ability. As
a society we don't value people for what they know but for what they can do.
This is the power that SD unleashes. It is not about filling ones head with
facts but about using information to solve problems. To make more inroads
into traditional education this value needs to be more widely shared. The
majority of teachers still believe that the definition of education is
imparting information and if that is one's definition one will not see SD as
an asset. Once teachers are convinced of an improved definition of
education then SD becomes an obvious tool.
Well, I'd better stop and let someone else respond.
Thanks for getting things started again,

Doug
'When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it's a wonder I
can think at all.' - Paul Simon

Doug Cardell
Professor of Mathematics, Central Arizona College
Teacher, IMPACTT Program, Sunnyside High School
cardell@direcway.com

Xxxxxxxxxx

From: "Gallagher, Michael" <Michael.Gallagher@oakland.k12.mi.us>
To: "'k-12sd'" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Forrester: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002

Dynamicists (someday I'll be one),
We are in the age of standards based reform of K12 education with an
national emphasis on accountability mainly through state issued standardized
tests. For system dynamics to be embraced in the curriculum (by those
engaged in the reform movement) it must be demonstrated as an effective
means to increasing student achievement as measured by these tests.
One strategy would be to target an element of the standards from
mathematics, science or social studies and build material that aligns with
the scope and sequence (to the extent that it exists).
Another tack would be to apply systems dynamics to the school reform
movement as a whole. Some states and districts are attempting to be
strategic about school improvement through data driven decision making and
attention to "research" on characteristics of strong schools.
Mike

Xxxxxxxxxx

I think that in order for system dynamics to have maximum effect in K-12
schools, we need to simultaneously push hard to get away from standardized
tests, which simply aren't appropriate any more. I wholeheartedly agree with
the suggestion that system dynamics come into play strongly with regard to
reform in its entirety; this is part and parcel of what I'm pursuing with my
vision of a "chaordic school." The question I have is, what's the best way
for an outsider to start making an impact in this direction?

Kendall Scott

Xxxxxxxxxx

Subject: Re: Cardell: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: "Sally Anderson" <sanderso@jkaf.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002

I have been a silent member listening and learning from the dialogue. I
have been heading up a school improvement effort in Idaho for a private
family foundation. We have designed the approach with a consideration of
several systems principles. I personally believe in a applying systems
dynamics and systems theory to efforts of school reform - in fact, I can no
longer not do that.
One of my many dilemmas in doing this work is that most people are adverse
to this approach. It is so much easier to continue with the myth of silver
bullet - or a new program - a new model, etc. Has any one else had similar
experiences?

Sally Anderson, Ph.D.
Creating High Performance Schools
Lead Design Consultant
Office 208-424-2620

Xxxxxxxxxx

From: "Bill & Cheryl Rathborne" <wfrcar@acncanada.net>
To: "K-12 Systems Dynamics" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: THE first ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON PEACE EDUCATION IN CANADA
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002

SD Experts!,
<http://www.peace.ca/firstannualconferenceonpeaceed.htm>http://www.peace.ca/firstannualconferenceonpeaceed.htm
I would like to try to determine if there is ST/SD material being used that may be of interest to those attending this conference on Peace Education. (opportunity to spread the ST/SD word if appropriate!)
I qualify as an interested, but unskilled ST/SD type. I may be attending the conference on behalf of a Peace Education Organization (<http://www.cisv.org>http://www.cisv.org) , but that is not yet finalized.
Any suggestions would be most appreciated.

Bill Rathborne
London Ontario CANADA

Xxxxxxxxxx

Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu (K-12sd discussion)
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>
Subject: The context for discussing SD in the future

Some comments by Turnock and Gallagher, raise the question of context
and time horizon within which we should be thinking about system
dynamics in the future of K-12 education.
Turnock wrote:
"Like Michigan, Oregon and many other states have standards for all
curriculum areas. What someone needs to do is map system dynamics
fundamentals to state standards"
Likewise, Gallagher suggests:
"We are in the age of standards based reform of K12 education with an
national emphasis on accountability mainly through state issued standardized
tests. For system dynamics to be embraced in the curriculum (by those
engaged in the reform movement) it must be demonstrated as an effective
means to increasing student achievement as measured by these tests."
I believe the full implications of SD in K-12 lie in the 25-year
planning time horizon that was developed in the "Essex report" from
the study group in June, 2001. In that framework, it may be useful
to discuss:
1. Will the present standards movement survive long enough that we
should make it a basis for long-term thinking?
2. Is the current standards movement a good guide to what we should
do in the best interests of future citizens?
3. To what extent do the present standards specifications align with
the skills, insights, and thought processes that we hope to instill?
4. What would we establish as an alternative frame of reference and
set of guiding principles if we were not to be dominated by the
present standards pressures?
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Jay W. Forrester
Professor of Management
Sloan School
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E60-156
Cambridge, MA 02139
tel: 617-253-1571
fax: 617-258-9405
Home office:
tel: 978-369-9372

Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002
From: Della Robertson <frobchen@earthlink.net>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Forrester: The context for discussing SD in the future

Standards: It is my observation that the standards have not varied to any great
degree over the past 20 years. Technology, problem-solving, collaboration have
been integrated into standards. I am familiar with Science Standards in the
state of California, but I have found that teachers from other states are
required to teach very similar concepts. I would venture to say that the
standards aren't going to vanish, nor should they. They give teachers a
framework within which to plan the year.
A new twist: I would suggest finding patterns within the standards of each
discipline that make an easy fit with systems thinking. Barry
Richmond suggested
creating "engines" that can be driven by teachers to facilitate a systems
approach to teaching and learning. Barry described a "continuum of systems
thinking". Not everyone can write sophisticated models, but everyone can tell a
story using the basic tools of systems thinking. This basic level is something
every teacher can master, but someone or someones need to create these
"engines". In July during breakfast at the Systems Thinking/Dynamic Modeling
Conference, I remember Barry suggesting that teachers who want to teach from a
systems approach to "cherry pick" 2 or 3 concepts from their discipline that
they would like to see developed into a systems approach. I think Barry had the
right idea.
Standardized Testing: I am pretty much alone in my appreciation for
standardized
state testing. Prior to the California STAR 9 program, there was
little pressure
to do much to help kids achieve. Now, what a difference! The resourrces, time
and attention that is now given to student achievement should have been given
all along. The test is a good instrument--yes, it is one instrument, I agree,
but it serves as a catalyst to keep districts on their toes.
A new twist: California' Golden State Exam in Biology may replace the biology
portion of the STAR 9. This test is probably unique in that it consists of two
parts: one part is very traditional consisting of 40 multiple choice questions;
the second part is a lab performance activity. Students work individually on a
problem which requires some technical skill; they collect data and analyze it.
While scoring the exams this summer (we follow a rubric and are calibrated so
that each reader is reading at a minimum of 80% accuracy), it occurred to me
that the questions (prompts) could be asked in such a way that
students think is
a systems way. I broached this idea with one of the scoring leaders,
and he said
he would be open to it. Barry Richmond was going to enter into a conversation
with the testing group about "infusing" systems thinking in the
prompts. Barry's
message and thinking will carry us forward. I do believe that.

Della Robertson
Norwalk High School
Norwalk, California

k-12sd wrote:
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002
To: k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu (K-12sd discussion)
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>
Subject: The context for discussing SD in the future
Some comments by Turnock and Gallagher, raise the question of context
and time horizon within which we should be thinking about system
dynamics in the future of K-12 education.
Turnock wrote:
"Like Michigan, Oregon and many other states have standards for all
curriculum areas. What someone needs to do is map system dynamics
fundamentals to state standards"
Likewise, Gallagher suggests:
"We are in the age of standards based reform of K12 education with an
national emphasis on accountability mainly through state issued standardized
tests. For system dynamics to be embraced in the curriculum (by those
engaged in the reform movement) it must be demonstrated as an effective
means to increasing student achievement as measured by these tests."
I believe the full implications of SD in K-12 lie in the 25-year
planning time horizon that was developed in the "Essex report" from
the study group in June, 2001. In that framework, it may be useful
to discuss:
1. Will the present standards movement survive long enough that we
should make it a basis for long-term thinking?
2. Is the current standards movement a good guide to what we should
do in the best interests of future citizens?
3. To what extent do the present standards specifications align with
the skills, insights, and thought processes that we hope to instill?
4. What would we establish as an alternative frame of reference and
set of guiding principles if we were not to be dominated by the
present standards pressures?
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Jay W. Forrester
Professor of Management
Sloan School
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E60-156
Cambridge, MA 02139
tel: 617-253-1571
fax: 617-258-9405
Home office:
tel: 978-369-9372
fax: 978-369-9077

xxxxxxxxxxx

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Forrester: The context for discussing SD in the future

What is "Essex Report"?
Where can I find a copy?
Richard

xxxxxxxxxx

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Forrester: The context for discussing SD in the future

Regarding Jay Forrester's questions about standards movement.
Whether its the standards movement or some other name, we need to get
started by focusing on one thing that teachers can use right away.
We may object to standardized tests, teachers may retire before they
consider changing the way they teach and schools may continue to
experience funding reductions. The technical support for system
dynamics is available. The list of experts in systems is long. There
are many activities and examples of student work building system
models. What we don't have is a marketing plan and a PR plan for
showing our target audience how it improves student achievement and
what's in it for teachers.

Richard

Xxxxxxxxxxx

The loss of Barry Richmond has affected us all and will continue to be felt for a long time.
To help us all help each other through this sadness and celebrate Barry's life and contributions, High Performance Systems has put up a spot on their web site <www.hps-inc.com> for people to write reflections and memories of Barry. They'd welcome your thoughts.

...George

From: "Gallagher, Michael" <Michael.Gallagher@oakland.k12.mi.us>
To: "'k-12sd'" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>, K-12SD@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Questions on Standards
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002

The national and state education standards describe the content and skills
students should have in a given subject area. I am encouraged by the nature
of the standards with which I have some familiarity (National science and
mathematics, Washington state science, mathematics, social studies, writing
and reading). I believe they do describe qualities aligned with the system
dynamics movement. In science standards, the emphasis has shifted from fact
mastery to skills related to empiricism and problem solving. The Washington
state standards have a strand specifically on systems and a goal on the
relationship of science to social and economic elements of the world. They
are also thought of as dynamic, given the rapid pace of change in the
discipline.
All the modern standards emphasize ways of thinking within the content area
which leads to higher level analysis, synthesis and problem solving, they
include understandings of the context of the discipline to time and other
spheres. The newer standards should encourage more student centered
curriculum and instruction and new ways of learning.
In alignment with a national mood for accountability in education, the No
Child Left Behind re-authorization links federal dollars to school
improvement as "measured" by each state's test. The standardized tests are
attempts to measure how effective our educational systems are at achieving
the standards. An important conversation is occurring on how well they do
this. My concern is that what will be measured is what lends itself to
measurement (knowledge retention) and that what is not measured will not be
widely included in the experiences of students. It may be that the
accountability movement will dissuade our need to better teach to the
standards. However, I have seen that the prospects of a state test cause
teachers to refer to the standards.

Mike Gallagher

Xxxxxxxxxx

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002
From: "RICHARD TURNOCK" <Richard_Turnock@pgn.com>
To: <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Scott: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education
 
The question I have is, what's the best way for an outsider to start
making an impact in this direction?
 
Intervening in a system often causes the opposite consequence
from the results intended in the beginning. Starting with the goal
of making an impact won't result in you "making an impact in
this direction."
First, decide what do you want to learn. You might want to learn how
systems work and how to use that knowledge in a practical way. Then
move skills to a level where you think you know what you are doing.
Hopefully, you think you know how to use systems thinking and system
dynamics skills. Then start teaching what you know to others.
Accept failures, mistakes and accidents as part of really learning
how to do it. Then teach it again to another group.
Try teaching teachers system dynamics. Start thinking about how an
organization is a system. Learn about that, use your skills. Then
start teaching others about how organizations work as a system.
Teach teachers how organizations work as a system. Repeat this with
a community as the system for study. Keep moving up to larger and
larger organizations.

Richard

Xxxxxxxx

From: "Doug Cardell" <cardell@theriver.com>
To: "k-12sd" <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Forrester: The context for discussing SD in the future
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002

My answers Forrester's 4 questions:
1. I don't think we can predict what will happen in the standards movement.
I am in Arizona. I was the principle author of the 1995 version of the
Arizona Mathematics Standards. I actually included a computer modeling
strand and system dynamics strand in our document. It was approved by the
state board of education, a year later a new state superintendent was
elected and she immediately commissioned a new group to write a new set of
standards. This year a new superintendent is likely to be elected and we
may begin yet again. We are on our fourth set of standards since 1989. I
don't know if other states perform as poorly but if standards are subject to
political whims in this way then aligning to standards is likely to be very
difficult. The national subject area standards would be a better way to go,
the NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) Standards are at
least usually looked at by state math standards committees but even those
are less stable than we might like.
2. The current standards movement is a battleground where everyone wants
standards as long as it's their standards. Much of the battle is focused
around what I would describe as low level literacy vs. high level literacy.
The outcomes of these battles in individual states may be very different,
which brings back to #1. I don't think the outcome is predictable enough to
decide if it's in the best interests of our future citizens. Obviously, I
believe that if the standards I wrote had stayed in place the answer would
have been yes but if the current standards stay in place I would say no, I
haven't a clue about the ones we'll have next year.
3. To the extent that I have a good sense of what "we" hope to instill I
have seen very few versions of state standards that measure up. I think at
present the best we could hope for would be a neutral stance that doesn't
require so much time spent on lower level literacy that we are left with no
time to do "our" higher level literacy.
4a. If we were to develop at set of standards for higher level literacy
that included system dynamics we would at least be on record as having made
the statement. I believe that this would be a worthy effort.
4b. I think an attempt to make inroads into the home schooling area would
also be worthwhile. Home schooling and other alternative educational forms
are gaining popularity all the time and there is a need for good materials.
Many in the home schooling community would be drawn to a higher level
literacy approach but would need materials, maybe an online class.
I hope this helps stir the pot.
Doug
'Earthquakes are caused by the conflict between the resistance to change and
its inevitability.'

Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002
From: lonnigill <lonnigill@iquest.net>
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Anderson: Future of system dynamics in K-12 education

I, too have been a silent listener. I am a doctoral student at
Indiana University in Curriculum & Instruction with a minor in Ed Leadership. I am interested in doing my dissertation following a school with a new initiative. I would like some more references on SD/ST. I have read Schools that Learn and The Dance of Change by Senge, et al.
Any research data information would be appreciated.

Thank you.
 
Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sally,
Would suggest checking out the Waters' Foundation website @
www.watersfoundation.org for some very helpful information and resources.
Portland, Oregon in particular has quite a concentration of systems work
going on, and Mary Scheetz who is there would definitely be a person to
contact. Some of the key pieces - we have found - are a supportive
administration, mentors to coordinate a good professional development
program, financial support, a "supportive angel or advocate" who cheers you
on and keeps you focused, and enthusiasm and patience for the goal. There
are quotes from Martin Luther King and others, which don't necessarily
identify "systems," but stress how inter-related so many aspects of life
are. And those are facts that can be presented and discussed to diminish
opposition. As one of our students so aptly said, "there is systems by
nature, and systems by nurture."

Best of luck,

Eileen Riley
Carlisle Public Schools

Xxxxxxxx

Subject: Re: Riley: Waters Foundation Web Site
To: k-12sd <k-12sd@sysdyn.mit.edu>
From: "Sally Anderson" <sanderso@jkaf.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002

Thanks for the response - there are so many resources out there and it is
always encouraging to see so many trying to change mindsets.

Sally Anderson, Ph.D.
Creating High Performance Schools
Lead Design Consultant
Office 208-424-2620

Xxxxxxxx

End of August, 2002