Teaching Complex Dynamic Systems to Young Students with StarLogo
Article
Eric Klopfer, Susan Yoon, Tricia Um, MIT, United States
JCMST Volume 24, Number 2, ISSN 0731-9258 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA
Abstract
In the this paper, we report on a program of study called Adventures in Modeling that challenges the traditional scientific method approach in science classrooms using StarLogo modeling software. Drawing upon previous successful efforts with older students, and the related work of other projects working with younger students we explore: (a) What can younger students learn about complex systems and scientific methodology with this set of educational technology tools; (b) How do they respond to the open-ended nature of the Adventures in Modeling curriculum; and (c) How can the curriculum be adapted to better meet their needs. Using a naturalistic paradigm we investigate differences between fifth and seventh graders and how, as a group, they respond differently than other older students with whom we have worked. We also evaluate the degree to which their projects and practices embody the modeling and complex systems understanding that we have seen these activities promote in older students. We found that while students initially struggled with several aspects of the complex systems paradigm and required additional scaffolding, most of the students successfully built projects that demonstrated at least a rudimentary understanding of systems and how to analyze them. In comparison, the fifth graders were more readily engaged by the Adventures in Modeling curriculum, perhaps due to the playful design and exploration StarLogo modeling encourages. This finding echoes other researchers (Rieber, 1996) who have supported a similar notion that student learning at this level could benefit from greater play. This successful implementation of complex systems learning at a young age is important because, like many deep-rooted misconceptions in science, it may be easier to dispel the misconception of the centralized mindset (Resnick, 1994) at an earlier age before it has been reinforced by years of schooling.
Citation
Klopfer, E., Yoon, S. & Um, T. (2005). Teaching Complex Dynamic Systems to Young Students with StarLogo. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(2), 157-178. Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 28, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/5537/.
© 2005 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Chinn, C., & Malhotra, B. (2001). Epistemologically authentic scientifi c reasoning. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing For science (pp. 351-392). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175218.
- Colella, V. (2001a). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 471-500.
- Colella, V. (2001b). StarLogo Community of learners. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- Colella, V., Klopfer, E., & Resnick, M. (2001). Adventures in modeling: Exploring complex, dynamic systems withsStarLogo. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Cypher, A., & Smith, D. (1995). KidSim: End user programming of simulations. Proceedings of ACM Computer Human Interfaces, (CHI-1995), Denver, CO, 27-34.
- DiSessa, A., Abelson, H., & Ploger, D. (1991). An overview of Boxer. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10(1), 3-15.
- Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J. Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientifi c knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Jacobson, M. (2001). Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Complexity, 6(3), 41-49.
- Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Kafai, Y. B., Ching, C. C., & Marshall, S. (1998). Learning affordances of collaborative educational multimedia design by children. In T. Ottmann & I.
- Karaliotas, Y. (1999). The Element of play in learning –The role of synergetic playful environments in the implementation of open and distance learning. Unpublished master’s thesis, Open University, UK.
- Klopfer, E., & Colella, V. (1999, December). Structuring collaboration in workshops and classrooms: The StarLogo community of learners. Paper presented
- Klopfer, E., & Colella, V. (2000, February). Modeling for understanding. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE-2000) Conference, San Diego, CA.
- Kolodner, J., & Nagel, K. (1999). The design discussion area: A collaborative learning tool in support of learning from problem-solving and design activities. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL-99), Palo Alto, CA, 300-307.
- Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Inventing data structures for representational purposes: elementary grade students’ classifi cation models. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(1&2), 51-74.
- Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confl uences. In, N. K. Densin & Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. NY: Basic Books.
- Penner, D. E. (2001). Complexity, emergence and synthetic models in science education. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing For science (pp. 177-208). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Rea, D., Millican, K., & Watson, S. (2000). The serious benefi ts of fun in the classroom. Middle School Journal, 31(4), 3-28.
- Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffi c jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 1-22.
- Rieber, L. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research & Development, 44(2), 43-58.
- Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.
- Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
- Taylor, J., Noll, R., Colella, V., & Klopfer, E. (2001, March). Creating and analyzing models in starLogo: A secondary science approach. Paper presented
- Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Yoon, S., Klopfer, E., Richardson, R., & Taylor, J. (2004 June). Insights into the complexity of designing for professional development networks in educational technologies: Tensions between structure and agency. Paper presented
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References