Topics Amenable to a Systems Thinking Approach: Secondary and Tertiary Perspectives

Abstract

Interest within the chemistry education community in incorporating sustainability into chemistry education has converged on a systems thinking approach, and efforts to implement this are ongoing. One challenge to implementation is the different amenability to systems thinking approaches of topics that are important in chemistry at the secondary–tertiary interface. To identify low-hanging fruit, we developed a repertory grid consisting of five poles mapped to elements of systems thinking. Secondary and tertiary educators completed the grid during workshops, to measure the amenability of 12 chemistry topics that are important in both secondary and tertiary chemistry education to teaching through systems thinking approaches. Three of the 12 topics analyzed were considered highly amenable to systems thinking approaches by both secondary and tertiary participants. The level of teaching experience was found to be most significant in determining a participant’s perception of amenability of topics. The relationship of these topics to the curriculum structure at the secondary and tertiary level is discussed.

Investigating Educators’ Perspectives toward Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education from International Contexts

“…Participants (55%) indicated that their willingness would depend on availability of teaching resources, curriculum coverage, research-based evidence, and time constraints to learn and implement STICE (Figure ). Time and curriculum coverage limitations have also been recently emphasized as main limitations to implement STICE by other researchers, highlighting the substantial need for change in these areas. , …”

“…Time and curriculum coverage limitations have also been recently emphasized as main limitations to implement STICE by other researchers, highlighting the substantial need for change in these areas. 45,46 For successful adoption of STICE, there needs to be increased efforts for educational change at the departmental, institutional, and administrative levels (e.g., departmental STICE training, institutional policy changes, restructuring of curriculum, and assessments) as participants most frequently reported those four contextual factors as potential barriers to implement STICE. Reward and promotion practices have also been concrete ways in which institutions incentivize educators' choices in their educational efforts.…”

Systems Thinking in Chemistry and Chemical Education: A Framework for Meaningful Conceptual Learning and Competence in Chemistry

“…Despite its potential benefits, the adoption and implementation of ST in chemistry education is far from sufficient. More recent research on secondary and tertiary chemistry educators’ perspectives on ST has revealed that chemistry educators generally have little knowledge about ST and very few have implemented or plan to implement ST. − In these studies, it was revealed that although a majority of the educators had a neutral or positive approach to ST in chemistry education, they expressed a need for teaching and assessment materials and exemplary practices to implement ST. , Another noteworthy finding was that chemistry educators tended to perceive ST as an approach to teaching chemistry by relating it to societal and environmental contexts. , In line with this perception, they commonly thought that ST cannot be applied to all chemistry topics, and that topics such as green chemistry and food chemistry are more suitable for a ST approach, whereas topics such as atomic theory and periodic trends are less suitable. , Additionally, chemistry educators often suggested that there is not enough time and space in the curriculum for ST, and that the inclusion of ST would probably involve some reduction of chemistry content. , …”

“…17,18 In line with this perception, they commonly thought that ST cannot be applied to all chemistry topics, and that topics such as green chemistry and food chemistry are more suitable for a ST approach, whereas topics such as atomic theory and periodic trends are less suitable. 16,17 Additionally, chemistry educators often suggested that there is not enough time and space in the curriculum for ST, and that the inclusion of ST would probably involve some reduction of chemistry content. 17,18 The fact that chemistry educators commonly perceive ST not as an inherently necessary aspect of chemistry can be seen as a reflection of the way ST is addressed in the current chemistry education literature.…”

Experienced Tertiary Instructors’ Perceptions of the Benefits and Challenges of Systems Thinking in Chemistry Education

“…54,57 Recent studies examining secondary and tertiary chemistry instructors' perceptions of the implementation of systems thinking approaches in their classes echo this concern. [42][43][44]60 Further, instructors cite a lack of high-quality systems thinking resources as a challenge to implementation. 16,18,25,28,35−37,56−59 Instructors' beliefs and perceptions have an important and highly influential role in their classroom practice, 61−67 particularly when looking at whether faculty initially adopt or continue using evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs).…”