The ‘What is a system’ reflection interview as a knowledge integration activity for high school students’ understanding of complex systems in human biology

References

• Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32, 97–124. doi:10.1080/09500690902717283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. R., & Schönborn, K. J. (2008). Bridging the educational research-teaching practice gap: Conceptual understanding, part 1: The multifaceted nature of expert knowledge. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36, 309–315. doi:10.1002/bmb.20209
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelo, T. A., & Cross, P. K. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Ausubel, D., Novak, J., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344–370. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2003.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-David, A., & Orion, N. (2012). Teachers’ voices on integrating metacognition into science education. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 3161–3193. doi:09500693.2012.697208/10.1080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., Dodick, J., & Tripto, J. (2013). High school students’ understanding of the human body system. Research in Science Education, 43, 33–56. doi:10.1007/s11165-011-9245-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 518–560. doi:10.1002/tea.20061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, K., Waarlo, A. J., & Klaassen, K. (2011). The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education. Journal of Biological Education, 45, 190–197. doi:10.1080/00219266.2011.627139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bramwell-Lalor, S., & Rainford, M. (2014). The effects of using concept mapping for improving advanced level biology students’ lower- and higher-order cognitive skills. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 839–864. doi:10.1080/09500693.2013.829255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandstädter, K., Harms, U., & Großschedl, J. (2012). Assessing system thinking through different concept-mapping practices. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 2147–2170. doi:10.1080/09500693.716549
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. L. (1997). Transforming schools into communities of thinking and learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52, 399–413. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carver, C. S. (2003). Pleasure as a sign you can attend to something else: Placing positive feelings within a general model of affect. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 241–261. doi:10.1080/02699930244000291
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassata, A. E., Himangshu, S., & Iuli, R. J. (2004). “What do you know”? Assessing change in student conceptual understanding in science. In: A. J. Cañas, J. D. Novak, & F. M. González (Eds.), Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the first international conference on concept mapping, Pamplona, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glasser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152. Resource document http://matt.colorado.edu/teaching/highcog/fall11/readings/cfg81.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. J. Stemberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of hurnan intelligence (pp. 7–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 109–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clough, M. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science Education, 15, 463–494. doi:10.1007/s11191–005-4846-7
   Google Scholar
• Conner, L. N. (2007). Cueing metacognition to improve researching and essay writing in a final year high school biology class. Research in Science Education, 37, 1–16. doi:10.1007/s11165-004-3952-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, A. L. (1991). The school as a home for the mind: A collection of articles. Palatine, Ill: Skylight.
   Google Scholar
• Cuevas, H. M., Fiore, S. M., & Oser, R. L. (2002). Scaffolding cognitive and metacognitive processes in Low verbal ability learners: Use of diagrams in computer-based training environments. Instructional Science, 30, 433–464. doi:10.1023/A:1020516301541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, E. A. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819–837. doi:10.1080/095006900412293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, DC: Heath.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3, 101–129. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, J., & Fraser, K. (1983). Concept maps as reflections of conceptual understanding. Research in Science Education, 13, 19–26.
   Google Scholar
• Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognition experience tell us about the learning process? Educational Research Review, 1, 3–14. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001
   Google Scholar
• Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 54–98. doi:10.1080/10508400903452876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fogarty, R. J. (1994). How to teach for metacognitive reflection. Palatine, IL: IRI/Skylight Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Garofalo, J., & Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 163–176. Resource document http://olms1.cte.jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/2083/math_compmon_research.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Goel, A., Rugaber, S., & Vattam, S. (2009). Structure, behavior & function of complex systems: The SBF modeling language. International Journal of AI in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 23, 23–35. doi:10.1017/S0890060409000080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzalez, H. L., Palencia, A. P., Umana, L. A., & Galindo, A., Villafrade, L. A. M. (2008). Mediated learning experience and concept maps: A pedagogical tool for achieving meaningful learning in medical physiology students. Advances in Physiology Education, 32, 312–316. doi:10.1152/advan.00021.2007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartman, H. J. (2001). Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research, and practice. (Chap. 8). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Hay, D. B. (2008). Developing dialogical concept mapping as e-learning technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 1057–1060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, D. B., & Kinchin, I. M. (2008). Using concept mapping to measure learning quality.Education and Training, 50(2), 167–182.
   Google Scholar
• Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1, 33–49. doi:10.1016/0742–051X(94)00012-U
   Google Scholar
• Henige, K. (2012). Use of concept mapping in an undergraduate introductory exercise physiology course. Advances in Physiology Education, 36, 197–206. doi:10.1152/advan.00001.2012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Understanding complex systems: Some core challenges. Journal of Learning Sciences, 15, 53–61. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1501_7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing learning about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Science, 9, 247–298. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS0903_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Marathe, S., & Liu, L. (2007). Fish swim, rocks sit; and lungs breathe: Expert-novice understending of complex systems. Journal of the Learning Science, 16, 307–331. doi:10.1080/10508400701413401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Pfeffer, M. G. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions. Cognitive Science, 28, 127–138. doi:10.1016/S0364–0213(03)00065-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogan, K. (1999). Relating students’ personal frameworks for science learing to their cognition in collaborative contexts. Science Education, 83, 1–32. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199901)83:1<1::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-D
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingeç, S. K. (2009). Analysing concept maps as an assessment tool in teaching physics and comparison with the achievement tests. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 1897–1915.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson, M. J. (2001). Problem solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Journal of Complexity, 6(3), 41–49. doi:10.1002/cplx.1027
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson, M. J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 11–34. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1501_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jegede, O. J., Alaiyemla, F. F., & Okebukola, P. A. O. (1990). The effect of concept mapping on students’ anxiety and achievement in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 951–960. doi:10.1002/tea.3660271004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, R. C., Hmelo-Silver, C., Liu, L., & Gray, S. A. (2013). Fostering reasoning about complex systems: Using the aquarium to teach systems thinking. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 12, 55–64. doi:10.1080/1533015X.2013.797860
   Google Scholar
• Kinchin, I. M. (2003). Effective teacher–student dialogue: A model from biological education. Journal of Biological Education, 37, 110–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42(1), 43–57.doi:10.1080/001318800363908
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 1–10. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014–7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551–578. doi:10.1002/tea.10036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knipples, M. C. P. J. (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education: The yo-yo teaching and learning Strategy. (PhD dissertation). Proefschrift Universiteit Utrecht. Retrieved from http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/219.
   Google Scholar
• Kresh, J. Y. (2006). Integrative systems view of life: Perspectives from general systems thinking. In S. D. Thomas, & J. Y. Kresh (Eds.), Topics in biomedical engineering international book series (pp. 3–29). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 61–78. doi:10.1007/BF02319858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, C.-Y., & Hu, R. (2003). Students’ understanding of energy flow and matter cycling in the context of the food chain, photosynthesis, and respiration. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1529–1544. doi:10.1080/0950069032000052045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, X. (2001). Designing metacognitive activities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49, 23–40. doi:10.1007/BF02504926
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, X. D., & Lehman, J. D. (1999). Supporting learning of variable control in a computer based biology environment: effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 837–858. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098–2736(199909)36:7<837::AID-EA6>3.0.CO;2-U
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, L., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009). Promoting complex systems learning through the Use of conceptual representations in hypermedia. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 1023–1040. doi:10.1002/tea.20297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, P. L., Chen, C. J., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English Reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54, 436–445. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sofie, M. Loyens, M., & D. Gijbels. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: Introducing a multi-directional approach.Instructional Science, 36, 351–357. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9059-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 36–55). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• McClure, J. R., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. K. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliability, validity, and logistical practicality.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 475–492.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael, J., & McFarland, J. (2011). The core principles (“big ideas”) of physiology: Results of faculty surveys. Advances in Physiology Education, 35, 336–341. doi:10.1152/advan.00004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael, J., Modell, H., McFarland, J., & Cliff, W. (2009). The “core principles" of physiology: What should students understand? Advances in Physiology Education, 33, 10–16. doi:10.1152/advan.90139
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (2000). Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view. San Diego: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nakhleh, M. B. (1994). Chemical education research in the laboratory environment: How can research uncover what students are learning? Journal of Chemical Education, 7(3), 201–205.
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools for science and mathematics education.Instructional Science, 19, 29–52. doi:10.1007/BF00377984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D., & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning.American Educational Research Journal, 28, 117–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papaleontiou-Louca, E. (2003). The concept and instruction of metacognition. International Journal of Teachers’ Professional Development, 7, 9–30. doi:10.1080/13664530300200184
   Google Scholar
• Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010). Self-regulation of student epistemic thinking in science: The role of metacognitive prompts. Educational Psychology, 30, 27–52. doi:10.1080/01443410903353294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plate, R. (2010). Assessing individuals’ understanding of nonlinear causal structures in complex systems. System Dynamics Review, 26, 19–33. doi:10.1002/sdr.432
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40, 235–244. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4004_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reimann, S. (1996). Homeostasis and stability. Research Center for Interdisciplinary Studies on Structure Formation, 1–13. Universiy of Bielefeld. Retrieved from http://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/~bibos/preprints/bibos97-773.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rice, D. C., Ryan, J. M., & Samson, S. M. (1998). Using concept maps to assess student learning in the Science classroom: Must different methods compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1103–1127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2004). Examining concept maps as an assessment tool, concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the first international conference on concept mapping, Pamplona, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research, a guide for researchers in education and social science. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Shavelson, R. J., Ruiz-Primo, O. A., & Wiley, E. W. (2005). Windows into the mind.Higher Education, 49, 413–430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shkedi, A. (2005). Multiple case narrative: A qualitative approach to studying multiple populations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, C. R. (2000). Handbook of hope. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sommer, C., & Lücken, M. (2010). System competence—Are elementary students able to deal with a biological system? NorDiNa—Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6, 125–143. Resource document http://www.naturfagsenteret.no/c1515603/binfil/download2.php?tid=1568379
   Google Scholar
• Songer, C. J., & Mintzes, J. J. (1994). Understanding cellular respiration: an analysis of conceptual change in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 621–637. doi:10.1002/tea.3660310605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan, K. S. (2005, December). Getting to know your tools as science teachers and students: A reflective exercise on laboratory apparatus, equipment and instrument. Paper presented at the Conference on Research and Practice in Science Education, Hong Kong, SAR
   Google Scholar
• Tishman, S., Perkins, D., & Jay, E. (1996). The thinking classroom. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. P. (1999). Student restraints to reform: Conceptual change issues in enhancing students’ learning processes. Research in Science Education, 29, 89–109. doi:10.1007/BF02461182
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. P. (2002). The social mediation of metacognition. In D. McInerny, & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Sociocultural influences on motivation and learning. Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning (pp. 225–247). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Tripto, J., Ben-Zvi-Assaraf, O., & Amit, A. (2013). Mapping what they know: Concept maps as an effective tool for assessing students’ systems thinking. American Journal of Operations Research (AJOR), 3, 245–258. doi:10.4236/ajor.2013.31A022
   Google Scholar
• Westbrook, S. L., & Marek, E. A. (1992). A cross-age study of student understanding of the concept of homeostasis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 51–61. doi:10.1002/tea.3660310206
   Web of Science ®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 modelling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 171–209. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2402_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, C. D., Anderson, C. W., Heidemann, M., Merrill, J. E., Merritt, B. W., Richmond, G., Sibley, D. F., & Parker, J. M. (2006). Assessing students’ ability to trace matter in dynamic systems in cell biology. Life Science Education, 5, 323–331. doi:10.1187/cbe.06-02-0142
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49, 121–169. doi:10.10900305726767.2013.847261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Ben David, A. (2008). Explicit teaching of meta-strategic knowledge in authentic classroom situations. Metacognition Learning, 3, 59–82. doi:10.1007/s11409-007-9019-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Peled, B. (2008). The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low- and high achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 18, 337–353. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar