Bringing systems thinking into the classroom.

Systems thinking is the ability to reason about biological systems in terms of their characteristics and can assist students in developing a coherent understanding of biology. Literature reports about several recommendations regarding teaching systems thinking, while it seems that systems thinking has not reached classroom practice. The main aim of this study was to identify design guidelines to implement systems thinking in upper-secondary biologyeducation. Based on the recommendations of literature and experience a teacher team developed, tested and evaluated two lessons in two upper-secondary biology classes (15–16 years old students, n = 26, n = 19) using Lesson Study. Lesson one focused on the application of seven system characteristics: boundary, components, interactions, input & output, feedback, dynamics, and hierarchy. Lesson two focused on the improvement of students’ understanding of the characteristics feedback and dynamics by using a qualitative modelling approach. Based on classroom observations, student products and interviews, the results suggest that a first step is made: most students are able to name and apply the seven characteristics. It seems important to pay attention to the: (1) introduction of the seven characteristics; (2) application of the characteristics in a wide variety of contexts; (3) individual characteristics; (4) explicit use of system language

Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education : The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy

This thesis describes a research project that was carried out at the Centre for Science and Mathematics Education at Utrecht University between 1998 and 2002. The study addresses problems in learning and teaching genetics in upper secondary biology education. The aim of the study is to develop a theoretically founded and empirically tested learning and teaching strategy (LT strategy) to cope with these problems. The study is designed according to the developmental research approach (Chapter 2). In developmental research educational researchers and teachers co-operate in defining and developing learning activities and testing these in classroom settings. The LT strategy will evolve in a process of cyclic empirical testing of scenarios (Chapter 4). Literature review and focus group interviews with Dutch biology teachers (n=19) revealed that the main difficulties in genetics education are associated with its abstract and complex nature (Chapter 3). A separation of inheritance from reproduction and meiosis (resulting in abstract subject matter) and the occurrence of heredity phenomena at different levels of biological organisation (its complexity) account in considerable degree for learning problems. More in-depth data about these key difficulties have been gathered, and design criteria defined, using theoretical and empirical sources (e.g. 12 students interviews, classroom observations, content analysis of textbooks, literature) (Chapter 3). The LT strategy has been developed, evaluated, revised and optimised in a cyclic process of testing scenarios in practice (case studies). Three case studies in different schools (n=3) and forms (n=5) were carried out and resulted in the yo-yo LT strategy for genetics . A formal description of the didactical structure of the final version of the yo-yo LT strategy for genetics is presented in chapter 5. In the yo-yo strategy students are invited to think backward-and-forward between the levels of biological organisation and to interrelate the genetics concepts on these levels. Analogue to the toy yo-yo. In handling the yo-yo it is impossible to skip part of the descending or ascending pathway. It is possible to yo-yo upwards and downwards, but the anchor and starting point is always the same: the hand that handles the yo-yo. In the yo-yo LT strategy for genetics the starting and anchor point is the organismic level, from where the levels can be descended and ascended (yo-yo downwards) but also ascended to the population and community level and descended (yo-yo upwards). The yo-yo strategy copes with the complexity by explicitly distinguishing the levels of biological organisation, and by descending and ascending these levels, starting from the concrete organismic level. Explicating the levels makes the transect nature of genetics transparent to students, and provides an insight into what hereditary phenomena, processes, and structures occur on the different levels of biological organisation. The genetics vocabulary is tuned to the specific level students are dealing with at that particular moment, which helps to prevent confusion. In this way, the educational difficulties with cytological concepts, chromosome structure, and the homologue chromosome concept that have been described in the literature are avoided to a great extent. The yo-yo LT strategy emphasises the genetics key concepts per level of biological organisation and their interrelationships. The relationships between reproduction, meiosis, and inheritance on the organismic and cellular level is stressed, and at the same time these key concepts are made concrete. This diminishes the abstract nature of genetics. The problem posing structure of content-related partial questions and reflection activities provide students a motive to engage in the next learning activity, in which another, related key concept on a subsequent level of biological organisation is explored. Because the levels of biological organisation play an important role in most biological topics, we have argued that the yo-yo LT strategy could be suitable for all biological topics transecting different levels of organisation, e.g. behaviour, evolution, and ecology

Development, uptake, and wider applicability of the Yo-yo strategy in biology education research: A reappraisal.

Heredity is a biological phenomenon that manifests itself on different levels of biological organization. The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy, which draws on the hierarchy of life, has been developed to tackle the macro-micro problem and to foster coherent understanding of genetic phenomena. Its wider applicability was suggested and since then yo-yo learning seems to be noticed in the biology education research community. The aim of this paper is to reappraise yo-yo thinking in biology education research based on its uptake and any well-considered adaptations by other researchers in the past fifteen years. Based on a literature search we identified research that explicitly and substantially build on the characteristics of yo-yo thinking. Seven questions guided the analysis of chosen cases focussing on how key concepts are matched to levels of biological organization, interrelated, and embedded in a pattern of explanatory reasoning. The analysis revealed that yo-yo thinking as a heuristic of systems thinking has been an inspiring idea to promote coherent conceptual understanding of various biological phenomena. Although, selective use has been made of the yo-yo strategy, the strategy was also further elaborated to include the molecular level. Its functioning as a meta-cognitive tool requires more specification, and teachers’ perceptions and experiences regarding yo-yo thinking should be addressed in future studies. View Full-Tex

Development, uptake, and wider applicability of the Yo-yo strategy in biology education research: A reappraisal.

Heredity is a biological phenomenon that manifests itself on different levels of biological organization. The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy, which draws on the hierarchy of life, has been developed to tackle the macro-micro problem and to foster coherent understanding of genetic phenomena. Its wider applicability was suggested and since then yo-yo learning seems to be noticed in the biology education research community. The aim of this paper is to reappraise yo-yo thinking in biology education research based on its uptake and any well-considered adaptations by other researchers in the past fifteen years. Based on a literature search we identified research that explicitly and substantially build on the characteristics of yo-yo thinking. Seven questions guided the analysis of chosen cases focussing on how key concepts are matched to levels of biological organization, interrelated, and embedded in a pattern of explanatory reasoning. The analysis revealed that yo-yo thinking as a heuristic of systems thinking has been an inspiring idea to promote coherent conceptual understanding of various biological phenomena. Although, selective use has been made of the yo-yo strategy, the strategy was also further elaborated to include the molecular level. Its functioning as a meta-cognitive tool requires more specification, and teachers’ perceptions and experiences regarding yo-yo thinking should be addressed in future studies. View Full-Tex

PARRISE, Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in Science Education, FP7 : Rethinking science, rethinking education

The PARRISE (Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research & Innovation in Science Education) project aims at introducing the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation in primary and secondary education. It does so by combining inquiry-based learning and citizenship education with socio-scientific issues in science education. This approach is called socio-scientific inquiry-based learning (SSIBL) which is implemented in teacher professional development courses across Europe. Based on practical experiences the approach is laid down in a new educational framework, and learning tools and materials for in/pre-service training courses are developed. The PARRISE educational methodology seeks to promote democratic citizenship through the integration of social issues and related scientific knowledge. Drawing from recently acquired IBSE insights and individual partner expertise, the PARRISE partners collectively develop a community of learners, who will bring together selected good practices examined from a Research and Responsible Innovation perspective

PARRISE, Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in Science Education, FP7 : Rethinking science, rethinking education

The PARRISE (Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research & Innovation in Science Education) project aims at introducing the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation in primary and secondary education. It does so by combining inquiry-based learning and citizenship education with socio-scientific issues in science education. This approach is called socio-scientific inquiry-based learning (SSIBL) which is implemented in teacher professional development courses across Europe. Based on practical experiences the approach is laid down in a new educational framework, and learning tools and materials for in/pre-service training courses are developed. The PARRISE educational methodology seeks to promote democratic citizenship through the integration of social issues and related scientific knowledge. Drawing from recently acquired IBSE insights and individual partner expertise, the PARRISE partners collectively develop a community of learners, who will bring together selected good practices examined from a Research and Responsible Innovation perspective

Socio-scientific inquiry in pre-service education: challenges and opportunities

Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) is a pedagogy which connects thestudy of socio-scientific issues (SSIs) with inquiry-based learning (IBL) and citizenship education (CE; Levinson, 2014). This paper features a training program in which pre-service biology teachers (PSTs) collaborate in designing and reflecting on SSIBL learning and teaching activities. It addresses how PSTs valued the SSIBL-pedagogy and what challenges and opportunities they foresee. Within the context of a 20-week pre-service teacher course, two cohorts of biology PSTs (n=27) were involved in training on SSIBL, consisting of two 1,5 hour face-to-face meetings and the development of a design for a SSIBL-lesson in groups of 3 or 4 PSTs. Qualitative methods were used to evaluate the SSIBL framework as experienced by the PSTs and consisted of classroom observations, collection of lesson designs and a questionnaire.The results indicate that the SSIBL-training enabled PSTs to bring socio-scientificcontroversies to their classroom practice and to engage students in personaldecision-making. Integrating social and scientific inquiry proved to be more difficult as it was mainly translated in an inquiry to generate more factual knowledge to be able to check the different claims by stakeholders. However, PSTs considered the SSIBL-approach to be of added value to biology lessons in general and to their own teaching repertoire in particular. The main obstacles mentioned by the PSTs for implementing SSIBL in biology education is the time consuming nature both in designing these activities as in the time needed for social an ethical inquiry in classroom practice. Moreover, they considered SSIBL difficult to manage due to its open and deliberative character, and they experienced inflexibility at their training school since it not matched the school planning. So, more effort is needed to support PSTs in guiding an open-ended inquiry in classroom practice. The training activities are being adapted at this moment and implemented in a next course for student biology teachers

Socio-scientific inquiry in pre-service education: Challenges and opportunities

Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) is a pedagogy which connects the study of socio-scientific issues (SSIs) with inquiry-based learning (IBL) and citizenship education (CE; Levinson, 2014). This paper features a training program in which pre-service biology teachers (PSTs) collaborate in designing and reflecting on SSIBL learning and teaching activities. It addresses how PSTs valued the SSIBL-pedagogy and what challenges and opportunities they foresee. Within the context of a 20-week pre-service teacher course, two cohorts of biology PSTs (n=27) were involved in training on SSIBL, consisting of two 1,5 hour face-to-face meetings and the development of a design for a SSIBL-lesson in groups of 3 or 4 PSTs. Qualitative methods were used to evaluate the SSIBL framework as experienced by the PSTs and consisted of classroom observations, collection of lesson designs and a questionnaire. The results indicate that the SSIBL-training enabled PSTs to bring socio-scientific controversies to their classroom practice and to engage students in personal decision-making. Integrating social and scientific inquiry proved to be more difficult as it was mainly translated in an inquiry to generate more factual knowledge to be able to check the different claims by stakeholders. However, PSTs considered the SSIBL-approach to be of added value to biology lessons in general and to their own teaching repertoire in particular. The main obstacles mentioned by the PSTs for implementing SSIBL in biology education is the time consuming nature both in designing these activities as in the time needed for social an ethical inquiry in classroom practice. Moreover, they considered SSIBL difficult to manage due to its open and deliberative character, and they experienced inflexibility at their training school since it not matched the school planning. So, more effort is needed to support PSTs in guiding an open-ended inquiry in classroom practice. The training activities are being adapted at this moment and implemented in a next course for student biology teachers

Socio-scientific inquiry in pre-service education: Challenges and opportunities

Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) is a pedagogy which connects the study of socio-scientific issues (SSIs) with inquiry-based learning (IBL) and citizenship education (CE; Levinson, 2014). This paper features a training program in which pre-service biology teachers (PSTs) collaborate in designing and reflecting on SSIBL learning and teaching activities. It addresses how PSTs valued the SSIBL-pedagogy and what challenges and opportunities they foresee. Within the context of a 20-week pre-service teacher course, two cohorts of biology PSTs (n=27) were involved in training on SSIBL, consisting of two 1,5 hour face-to-face meetings and the development of a design for a SSIBL-lesson in groups of 3 or 4 PSTs. Qualitative methods were used to evaluate the SSIBL framework as experienced by the PSTs and consisted of classroom observations, collection of lesson designs and a questionnaire. The results indicate that the SSIBL-training enabled PSTs to bring socio-scientific controversies to their classroom practice and to engage students in personal decision-making. Integrating social and scientific inquiry proved to be more difficult as it was mainly translated in an inquiry to generate more factual knowledge to be able to check the different claims by stakeholders. However, PSTs considered the SSIBL-approach to be of added value to biology lessons in general and to their own teaching repertoire in particular. The main obstacles mentioned by the PSTs for implementing SSIBL in biology education is the time consuming nature both in designing these activities as in the time needed for social an ethical inquiry in classroom practice. Moreover, they considered SSIBL difficult to manage due to its open and deliberative character, and they experienced inflexibility at their training school since it not matched the school planning. So, more effort is needed to support PSTs in guiding an open-ended inquiry in classroom practice. The training activities are being adapted at this moment and implemented in a next course for student biology teachers