Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries

Hayat Hokayem; Hui Jin; Etsuji Yamaguchi

doi:10.29333/ejmste/112582

Full Text (PDF)

Hayat Hokayem ¹ ^* , Hui Jin ², Etsuji Yamaguchi ³

More Detail

¹ Texas Christian University, USA² Educational Testing Service, USA³ Kobe University, JAPAN^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Feedback loop reasoning is an important stepping-stone toward systems thinking. To date, studies on feedback loop reasoning in ecology have focused on college students, while only a limited effort has been made to investigate a more general systems thinking of students at the lower elementary level. The goal of this study is to investigate how elementary students reason about feedback loop relationships among interdependent organisms (predator-prey), and address the knowledge sources of students as part of context of reasoning about this topic. This study was conducted in three countries, with 128 first through fourth grader participants from Japan, Lebanon, and the United States. These students participated in semi-structured clinical interviews focusing on the predator-and-prey relationships. We found that the majority of students used one-way causal reasoning, and only a few students reasoned using two-way causality with multiple feedback loops in the predator-prey relationship.

Keywords

learning progression
feedback loop reasoning
predator-prey relationships

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, Volume 16, Issue 2, February 2020, Article No: em1819

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

Publication date: 23 Nov 2019

Article Views: 3098

Article Downloads: 1320

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Alonzo, A. C., & Gotwals, A. W. (2012). LPs in science: Current challenges and future directions. Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
Alonzo, A. C., & Steedle, J. T. (2009). Developing and assessing a force and motion LP. Science Education, 93(3), 389-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20303.
Barman, C. R., & Mayer, D. A. (1994). An analysis of high school students’ concepts & textbook presentations of food chains & food webs. The American Biology Teacher, 56(3), 160-163. https://doi.org/10.2307/4449780.
Barman, C. R., Griffiths, A. K., & Okebukola, P. A. (1995). High school students’ concepts regarding food chains and food webs: A multinational study. International Journal of Science Education, 17(6), 775-782. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069950170608.
Blum, A. (1987). Students’ knowledge and beliefs concerning environmental issues in four countries. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(3), 7-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1987.9942734.
Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95, 639-669. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chapin III, F. S., Torn, M. S., & Tateno, M. (1996). Principles of ecosystem sustainability. The American Naturalist, 148(6), 1016-1037. https://doi.org/10.1086/285969.
Fulmer, G. W. (2014). Validating proposed LPs on force and motion using the force concept inventory: Findings from Singapore secondary schools. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9553-x.
Furtak, E. M., & Heredia, S. C. (2014). Exploring the influence of LPs in two teacher communities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 982-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21156.
Furtak, E. M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2012). LPs to support ambitious teaching practices. In LPs in science (pp. 405-433). Rotterdam: SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-824-7_17.
Gallegos, L., Jerezano, M.E., & Flores, F. (1994). Preconceptions and relations used by children in the constructions of food chains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310306.
Green, D. W. (1997). Explaining and envisaging an ecological phenomenon. British Journal of Psychology, 88(2), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1997.tb02630.x.
Grotzer, T. A., & Basca, B. B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(1), 16-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2003.9655891.
Hadenfeldt, J. C., Neumann, K., Bernholt, S., Liu, X., & Parchmann, I. (2016). Students’ progression in understanding the matter concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(5), 683-708. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21312.
Heritage, M. (2008). LPs: Supporting Instruction and Formative Assessment. Paper prepared for the formative assessment for teachers and students (FAST) state collaborative on assessment and student standards (SCASS) of the council of chief state school officers (CCSSO). Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2008/Learning_Progressions_Supporting_2008.pdf.
Hogan, K. (2000). Assessing students’ systems reasoning in ecology. Journal of Biological Education, 35(1), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2000.9655731.
Hokayem, H., & Gotwals, A. (2016). Early elementary students’ understanding of complex ecosystems: A learning progression approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 1524-1545.
Hokayem, H., & Jin, H. (2018). Elementary students’ knowledge sources for understanding ecosystems. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 13, 631-645.
Hokayem, H., Ma, J., & Jin, H. (2015). A learning progression for feedback loop reasoning at the lower elementary level. Journal of Biological Education, 49, 246-260.
Hovardas, T. (2016). A LP should address regression: Insights from developing non-linear reasoning in ecology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1447-1470. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21330.
Jin, H., & Anderson, C. (2012). A learning progression for energy in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 1149-1180.
Jin, H., Johnson, M. E., Shin, H.-J., & Anderson, C. W. (2017). Promoting student progressions in science classrooms: A video study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
Jin, H., Mikeska, J., Hokayem, H., & Mavronikolas, E. (2019). Toward coherence in curriculum, instruction, and assessment: A review of learning progression literature. Science Education, 103, 1206-1234.
Jin, H., Shin, H.-J., Hokayem, H., Qureshi, F., & Jenkins, T. (2019). Secondary students' understanding of ecosystems: A learning progression approach. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(2), 217-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9864-9.
Johnson, P., & Tymms, P. (2011). The emergence of a LP in middle school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 849-877. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20433.
Leach, J. R., Driver, P. Wood-Robinson, C. (1996). Children’s ideas about Ecology 2: Ideas found in children aged 5-16 about interdependency of organisms. International Journal of Science Education, 18(1), 129-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069960180201.
Maeng, S., Lee, K., Park, Y. S., Lee, J. A., & Oh, H. (2014). Development and validation of a LP for astronomical systems using ordered multiple-choice items. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(8), 703-718. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.8.0703.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2012). Supporting grade 5-8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Boston: Pearson.
Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi‐year LP for carbon cycling in socio‐ecological systems. Journal of research in science teaching, 46(6), 675-698. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20314.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and Teaching science in grades K-8. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Neumann, K., Viering, T., Boone, W., & Fischer, H. E. (2013). Towards a LP of energy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 162-188. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21061.
Nevanpää, T. & Law, N. (2006). Pupil’s ecological reasoning with help of modeling tool. In Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Interaction design and children (pp. 41-44). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1139073.1139088.
Palmer, J. A., Suggate, J., Bajd, B., Ho, R. K., Ofwono‐Orecho, J. K. W., Peries, M., ... & Staden, C. V. (1998). An overview of significant influences and formative experiences on the development of adults’ environmental awareness in nine countries. Environmental education research, 4(4), 445-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462980040408.
Roberts, N. (1978). Teaching dynamic feedback systems thinking: An elementary view. Management Science, 24(8), 836-843. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.24.8.836.
Salinas, I. (2009). LPs in science education: Two approaches for development. In LPs in Science (LeaPS) Conference, Iowa City, IA.
Shavelson R.J., Kurpius A. (2012) Reflections on LPs. In: A. C. Alonzo, & A. W. Gotwals (eds) LPs in Science (pp. 13-26). Rotterdam: SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-824-7_2.
Shea, N. A., & Duncan, R. G. (2013). From theory to data: The process of refining LPs. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(1), 7-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2012.691924.
Southerland, S., Smith, M., & Cummins, C. (2000). “What do you mean by that?” Using structured interviews to assess science understanding. In J. Mintzes, J. Wandersee, & J. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding (pp. 72-92). London: Academic Press.
Todd, A., & Kenyon, L. (2016). Empirical refinements of a molecular genetics LP: The molecular constructs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(9), 1385-1418. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21262.
Vyas, P. A. (2015). Exploring LPs of form-4 physics students in Hong Kong using assessment for learning strategies. HKU Theses Online (HKUTO).
Wickman, P. O. (2014). Teaching LPs: An international perspective. In N. Lederman, & S, Abell (Eds), Handbook of Research in Science Education (pp. 145-163). New York: Routledge.

How to cite this article

APA

Hokayem, H., Jin, H., & Yamaguchi, E. (2020). Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(2), em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

Vancouver

Hokayem H, Jin H, Yamaguchi E. Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2020;16(2):em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

AMA

Hokayem H, Jin H, Yamaguchi E. Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2020;16(2), em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

Chicago

Hokayem, Hayat, Hui Jin, and Etsuji Yamaguchi. "Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2020 16 no. 2 (2020): em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

Harvard

Hokayem, H., Jin, H., and Yamaguchi, E. (2020). Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(2), em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582

MLA

Hokayem, Hayat et al. "Feedback Loop Reasoning and Knowledge Sources for Elementary Students in Three Countries". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 16, no. 2, 2020, em1819. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/112582