Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Teaching Systems Thinking in the Context of the Water Cycle

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Complex systems affect every part of our lives from the ecosystems that we inhabit and share with other living organisms to the systems that supply our water (i.e., water cycle). Evaluating events, entities, problems, and systems from multiple perspectives is known as a systems thinking approach. New curriculum standards have made explicit the call for teaching with a systems thinking approach in our science classrooms. However, little is known about how elementary in-service or pre-service teachers understand complex systems especially in terms of systems thinking. This mixed methods study investigated 67 elementary in-service teachers’ and 69 pre-service teachers’ knowledge of a complex system (e.g., water cycle) and their knowledge of systems thinking. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of participants. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of content assessment data and questionnaires were conducted. Results from this study showed elementary in-service and pre-service teachers applied different levels of systems thinking from novice to intermediate. Common barriers to complete systems thinking were identified with both in-service and pre-service teachers and included identifying components and processes, recognizing multiple interactions and relationships between subsystems and hidden dimensions, and difficulty understanding the human impact on the water cycle system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achieve, Inc. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2004). Learning about Earth as a system: a new approach of designing environmental curricula. Website:stwww.weizmann.ac.il/g-earth.

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skill in the context of Earth System education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 518–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2010). System thinking skills at the elementary school level. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 540–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, J., & Sauser, B. (2008). Systems thinking coping with 21st century problems. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Booth Sweeney, L. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory. Web mail: http://web.mit.edu.jsterman/www/bathtub.pdf .

  • Booth Sweeney, L., & Sterman, J. D. (2007). Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems. System Dynamics Review, 23, 285–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brazelton, T. B. (1992). Touchpoints: your child’s emotional and behavioral development. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covitt, B., Gunckel, K., & Anderson, C. (2009). Students’ developing understanding of water in environmental systems. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40, 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson, D., & Dawkins, K. (2004). Eighth grade students’ understandings of groundwater. Journal of Geoscience Education, 52, 178–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson, D., Penick, J. E., Dawkins, K., Van Sickel, M., & Hay, G. (2005). Students’ conceptions of scale regarding groundwater. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53, 374–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson, D., Callahan, T. J., & Van Sickel, M. (2007). Groundwater in science education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1), 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English, L.D. (2006). Introducing young children to complex systems through modeling. In: P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen, & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities, cultures, and learning spaces (pp. 195–202). Adelaide: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.

  • Evagorou, M., Korfiatis, K., Nicolaou, C., & Constantinou, C. (2009). An investigation of the potential of interactive simulations for developing system thinking skills in elementary school: a case study with fifth-graders and sixth-graders. International Journal of Science Education, 31(5), 655–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. (2007). System dynamics—a personal view of the first fifty years. System Dynamics Review, 23, 245–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. (2000). Engineering systems thinking and systems thinking. Systems Engineering, 3, 63–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer complex systems principles. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 465–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A., & Bell-Basca, B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 16–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 247–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Azevedo, R. A. (2006). Understanding complex systems: some core challenges. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 53–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Pfeffer, M. G. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions. Cognitive Science, 28, 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Marathe, S., & Liu, L. (2007). Fish, swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Science, 16, 307–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K., & Fisherkeller, J. (1996). Representing students’ thinking about the nutrient cycling in ecosystems: bidimensional coding of a complex topic. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 941–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cognitive comparison of students’ systems modeling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 319–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. The Journal of the Learning Science, 15, 11–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., & Taylor, A. R. (2009). Developing a sense of scale: looking backward. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 460–475.

  • Jones, M. G., et al. (2008). Experienced and novice teachers’ concepts of spatial scale. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 409–429.

  • Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. (2003). Effect of knowledge integration activities on students’ perception of the earth’s crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 545–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research and Science Teaching, 35(3), 249–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D.H. (1999). Introduction to system thinking. In: System Thinking Tools and Applications. ASA: Pegasus Communications, Inc.

  • Klopfer, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (2003). Technologies to support the creation of complex systems model: using Starlogo software with students. Biosystems, 71, 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1996). Children’s ideas about ecology 2: ideas found in children aged 5–16 about cycling of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., Lewis, S., Adamson, K., Maerten-Rivera, J., & Secada, W. G. (2007). Urban elementary school teachers’ knowledge and practices in teaching science to English language learners. Science Education, 92, 733–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesh, R. (2006). Modeling students modeling abilities: the teaching and learning of complex systems in education. Journal of Learning Sciences, 15(1), 45–51.

  • Mandinach, E. B. (1989). Model-building and the use of computer simulation of dynamic systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 221–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orion, N. (2002). An Earth Systems curriculum development model. In V. J. Mayer (Ed.), Global Science Literacy (pp. 159–168). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Orion, N., & Ault, C. (2007). Learning earth sciences. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 653–688). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ossimitz, G. (2000). Teaching system dynamics and systems thinkng in Austria and Germany. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of System Dynamics Society, Bergen, Norway.

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penner, D. (2000). Explaining systems: investigating middle school students’ understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 784–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D.N., & Grotzer, T.A. (2000, April). Models and moves: focusing on dimensions of casual complexity to achieve deeper scientific understanding. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

  • Reiner, M., & Eilam, B. (2001). Conceptual classroom environment: a systems view of learning. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 551–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rempfler, A., & Uphues, R. (2011). System competence in geography education development of competence models, diagnosing pupils’ achievement. European Journal of Geography, 3(1), 6–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M. (1995). Affordances of computers in teacher-student interactions: the case of Interactive PhysicsTM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 329–347. doi:10.1002/tea.3660320404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer, D.L. (2013). The Development and Validation of a Three-tier Diagnostic Test Measuring Pre-service Elementary Education and Secondary Science Teachers’ Understanding of the Water Cycle (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri—Columbia).

  • Schwartz, K., Thomas-Hilburn, H., & Haverland, A. (2011). Grounding water: building conceptual understanding through multimodal assessment. Journal of Geoscience Education., 59, 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, N. P., Wylie, J. W., McGuinness, C., & Orchard, G. (2000). How children solve environmental problems: using computer simulations to investigate system thinking. Environmental Education Research, 6, 109–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steed, M. (1992). Stella, a simulation construction kit: cognitive processes and educational implications. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science, 11, 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemistry: incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 285–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ullmer, E. J. (1986). Work design in organizations: comparing the organizational elements models and the ideal system approach. Educational Technology, 26, 543–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeff, R. P., Waarlo, A. J., & Boersma, K. T. (2008). Systems modeling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 331–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 171–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA

    Tammy D. Lee

  2. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA

    M. Gail Jones & Katherine Chesnutt

Authors
  1. Tammy D. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Gail Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine Chesnutt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tammy D. Lee.

Appendices

Appendix 1 Water Cycle Diagnosis Test

Directions: Please put all of your answers on the answer sheet provided.

1. Plants absorb water through their root system. What process allows plants to release large quantities of water vapor into the atmosphere?

  • Respiration

  • Perspiration

  • Evaporation

  • Transpiration*

The reason for your selection is because:

  • Plants transpire water vapor through stomata.*

  • Water evaporates from leaves into water vapor.

  • Water perspires from the plant and turns into water vapor.

  • Plants respires water vapor during photosynthesis.

    2. Condensation happens when water vapor rises into the atmosphere and:

  • Cools*

  • Warms

The reason for your selection is because:

  • Condensation is a cooling process like low humidity on a warm summer day.

  • Condensation is a warming process like high humidity on a warm summer day.

  • Water cools to its saturation point and condensation occurs.*

  • Water warms to its vaporization point and condensation occurs.

    Most of the energy for the water cycle comes from the:

  • Ocean

  • Sun*

  • Atmosphere

  • Earth

The reason for your selection is because:

  • The atmosphere’s heating processes from greenhouse gases.

  • Earth’s internal heating from its core provides the energy.

  • The movement of earth’s ocean currents and tides.

  • Almost all the energy comes from the sun.*

5. Which process is the source for most of the water vapor going into the atmosphere?

  • Sublimation

  • Evaporation*

  • Advection

  • Convection

The reason for your selection is because:

  • The most common way for water vapor to enter the atmosphere.*

  • Movement of wind currents.

  • Transfer of energy in a fluid.

  • The ability of water to change from a liquid to a gas.

9. The total volume of water on earth is:

  1. a.

    Almost constant*

  2. b.

    Decreasing

  3. c.

    Increasing

  4. d.

    Varies over time

The reason for your selection is because:

  1. a.

    Water cycle is a closed system, so no water is lost or gained.*

  2. b.

    Water cycle is an open system so the total volume of water constantly changes either up or down.

  3. c.

    Water cycle is an open system that allows water to escape into the earth’s interior.

  4. d.

    Water cycle is an open system that allows water vapor from space to enter our atmosphere, and eventually fall to earth.

13. What directly forms due to the process of condensation?

  1. a.

    Water vapor

  2. b.

    Clouds*

  3. c.

    Rain

  4. d.

    Snow

The reason for your selection is because:

  • Decreases with temperature.*

  • Increases with temperature.

  • Increases with air pressure.

  • Reduces with air pressure.

14. On a hot summer day, you get a cold beverage from the refrigerator. You put the can down on a table, and a little while later you return and notice a puddle of water has formed around the outside of the can. Where did this water come from?

  • From the ice melting inside the can

  • From the beverage and ice melting from the can

  • From the beverage and ice condensing inside the can

  • From the air outside the beverage*

The reason for your selection is because:

  1. a.

    Warming of beverage caused the beverage to expansion and spill out of the can.

  2. b.

    Ice on the outside of the beverage melted and created the puddle.

  3. c.

    The beverage warmed and caused water to condensate inside the can, and the extra water caused too much volume in the can and seeped out.

  4. d.

    Water vapor from the atmosphere cooled and condensed when coming into contact with the cold beverage.*

16. What is needed for clouds to develop?

  1. a.

    Water vapor and atmospheric dust*

  2. b.

    Ozone, water vapor, and nitrogen

  3. c.

    Low pressure with low relative humidity

  4. d.

    Oxygen and hydrogen

The reason for your selection is because:

  1. a.

    Essential elements needed to form water.

  2. b.

    Dust allows water droplets to come together.*

  3. c.

    Influenced by a variety of atmospheric gases in order to form.

  4. d.

    Atmospheric conditions needed for cloud formation.

20. The melting of floating sea ice due to global warming will probably cause:

  1. a.

    Sea level to rise

  2. b.

    Sea level to fall

  3. c.

    No change in current sea levels*

The reason for your selection is because:

  1. a.

    The extra water produced due to the melting will cause sea level to rise and flood coastal areas.

  2. b.

    The loss of the sea ice will lower sea level because ice weighs more than water.

  3. c.

    No change in sea level will happen because sea ice and water have the same volume.*

27. Water in clouds may change from liquid to solid:

  1. a.

    Only at 32 °F/0 °C.

  2. b.

    At 32 °F/0 °C and temperatures below 32 °F/0 °C.*

  3. c.

    At temperatures above 32 °F/0 °C.

  4. d.

    Water in clouds never freezes.

The reason for your selection is because:

  1. a.

    Water vapor does not freeze in clouds.

  2. b.

    Water droplets cool while falling to earth, and change into ice.

  3. c.

    Clouds can have supercooled water in them.*

  4. d.

    Water vapor goes directly to a solid without forming a liquid.

Appendix 2: Systems Thinking Assessment

Item Statements on the Systems Thinking Written Assessment

  • Item 1: Clouds are the starting point of the water cycle and the tap at home is its end point

  • Item 2: Amount of water in the oceans growing day by day due to rivers continually flowing into the ocean

  • Item 3: Increase of evaporation as an effect of global warming may decrease amount of water on earth

  • Item 4: Population growth increase-water consumption increase-decreasing amount of water on earth

  • Item 5: Most underground water persists in small pores of rock—well watered sponge

  • Item 8: Part of the wells in the state of NC contain polluted water

  • Item 9: Rain that falls on the surface and penetrates within the soil can reach a depth of several meters

Appendix 3

Table 11 Systems Thinking Rubric expanded version
Full size table

Appendix 4: Interview Questions

Teachers were asked the following questions:

  1. 1.

    How would you define a system in science?

  2. 2.

    Can you give me an example?

  3. 3.

    What makes this a system?

  4. 4.

    How can elementary teachers teach students to understand systems?

  5. 5.

    Is the water cycle a system? If so, how? If not, explain.

  6. 6.

    What are all the components and processes of the water cycle that should be taught to fifth grade students?

  7. 7.

    How do these components and processes work together?

  8. 8.

    Here is an image. Describe how the image relates to the water cycle. How does it represent this idea of a system?

  9. 9.

    The NGSS states that systems thinking should be at the forefront of science instruction. What do you foresee as the challenges about teaching systems thinking as an elementary teacher?

Appendix 5: Pictorial Representation for Interviews

Street drain photograph

figure a

Deeproot Blog (January, 2011). Urban runoff negatively impacts stream biodiversity. [online image] Retrieved from http://www.deeproot.com/blog/blog-entries/urban-runoff-negatively-impacts-stream-biodiversity on February 23, 2015

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, T.D., Gail Jones, M. & Chesnutt, K. Teaching Systems Thinking in the Context of the Water Cycle. Res Sci Educ 49, 137–172 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9613-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9613-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation