Systems Thinking
From WikEd
Descriptions, definitions, synonyms, origins of term
Definitions
"Systems thinking is the ability to understand (and sometimes to predict) interactions and relationships in complex, dynamatic systems: the kind of systems we are surrounded by and embedded in." (Senge, 2000)
"Systems thinking is...a mindset for understanding how things work. It is a perspective for going beyond events, to looking for patterns of behavior, to seeking underlying systemic interrelationships which are responsible for the patterns of behavior and the events." (Bellinger, 2004)
"Systems thinking involves the use of various techniques to study systems of many kinds. It includes studying things in a holistic way, rather than utilizing purely reductionist techniques." (Wikipedia, 2005)
"Systems thinking is a way of understanding reality that emphasizes the relationship among a system's parts, rather than the parts themselves. Based on a field of study known as system dynamics, systems thinking has a practical value that rests on a solid theoretical foundation." (Ward, 1999)
"Systems thinking is the art and science of linking structure to performance, and performance to structure - often for purposes of changing structure (relationships) so at to improve performance." (Richmond, 1993)
It is also important to define system, to clarify the particular perspective of the term that applies to systems thinking.
"A system is an entity that maintains its existence through the mutual interaction of its parts. The key part of this definition is that of interaction. A system is much more than a heap or a lump. It is the interactions which are responsible for the characteristics of the system, not the parts." (Bellinger, 2004)
"A system is a group of interacting, interrelated, and interdependent components that form a complex and unified whole. Systems have several defining characteristics including: a purpose within a larger system; the necessity of all parts to be present for the system to carry out its purpose optimally; a specific arrangement; adaptability to change in response to feedback; and a stability maintained by adjustments made based on feedback." (Ward, 1999)
Synonyms
In looking at library and database assigned subject headings and synonyms mentioned in the literature, the following are a list of possible alternative search terms: interconnectivity, systems research, systematic approach, holistic approach
Origins of term
Jay Forrester of MIT was key in understanding the overall system in order to determine the points at which change can have the greatest impact on performance. Forrester is considered a pioneer in the field of systems thinking, having drawn his ideas from the field of system dynamics in 1956. Aronson describes Forrester's impact, "Professor Forrester recognized the need for a better way of testing new ideas about social systems, in the same way we can test ideas in engineering. [He saw that] systems thinking allows people to make their understanding of social systems explicit and improve them in the same way that people can use engineering principles to make explicit and improve their understanding of mechanical systems." (Aronson, 2001)
As the single most influential educator and theorist to tackle systems thinking issues, Peter Senge is cited in every significant article on the topic. He defines systems thinking as "the fifth discipline" with the other four including shared vision (bringing together the goals of all representatives of an area), personal mastery (enabling an individual to evaluate what they want in life and encouraging a sense of a personal vision) , mental models (understanding and examining internal assumptions about the world and how they impact our participation in group environments), and team learning (collaborative decision making and understanding the balance of inquiry, advocacy, and implementation). In fact, of 45 articles retrieved on systems thinking from the past decade (and representing six disciplines of study), Senge is cited and discussed at length in 44 of them. Any discussion on systems thinking, therefore, would be incomplete without an acknowledgement of Senge’s Laws of Systems Thinking – the most frequently cited of which follow:
1. Today’s problems come from yesterday’s solutions
2. The harder you push, the harder the system pushes back
3. Behavior grows better before it grows worse
4. The easy way out usually leads back in
5. The cure can be worse than the disease
6. Faster is slower
7. Cause and effect are not closely related in time and space
8. Small changes produce big results;areas of highest leverage are often the least obvious
9. You can have your cake and eat it too, but not all at once
10. Dividing an elephant in half does not produce two small elephants
11. There is no room for blame
Application in classrooms and educational environments
Justification for and explanation of applications
“The idea of a school that can learn has become increasingly prominent during the last few years.�? (Senge, 2000)
One of the ways in which Senge defines a school that can learn is one that is able to move beyond, "looking at discrete snapshots at points in time." (Senge, 2000) Instead, he recommends looking at change as a continual process (also see following quote). Systems thinking encourages looking at the progress of a student over nine months and while he emphasizes that non-graded approaches may not work for all schools, he suggests that grades should be as flexible as the approaches to teaching used for different students.
"Systems thinking can provide some of its greatest benefit by giving companies a way to make sure that the benefits of their innovation efforts are not compromised by the lack of a big picture understanding. Without requiring any additional resources, innovation efforts targeted with the big picture in mind can produce greater, lasting benefits for the organization, and a company that gets more benefit from its innovation efforts will have a competitive advantage over its rivals." (Aronson, 2001)
Although the above quote is about companies and focused around a business model - it is still particularly relevant to education if one considers the issue of the big picture in schools and the education of children (i.e. learning progress over a year rather than on a single assignment or standardized test).
Thornton, Peltier, and Perrault encourage systems thinking as a way to improve student achievement. One the specific ways they see systems thinking approaches as a direct tie to education is in the promotion of constructivism (learning as an active process that builds on previous experiences, ideas, and the environment around the student). They state, "Constructivist environments facilitate learning through collaboration, context, and construction of knowledge. Through assimilation and accomodation, individuals use many elements of the learning context and relate those elements to their own experiences, thus creating new knowledge." (Thornton, 2004)
John Pulliam, in History of Education in America, discusses the idea that many school programs have been tried before in the past. “Much of what is regarded as new or innovative in education has a long historical record. For example individual instruction, team teaching, open classrooms, schools without walls, alternative schools for secondary students, work-study programs, nongraded schools, and competency based programs were all tried in one form or another by the progressive educators of the 1930s. (Pulliam, 1991) He suggests that the failure to recognize the recycling of old ideas and, more importantly, evaluate their potential in terms of prior failure, before implementation is due to a lack of systems thinking or holistic thinking.
A formal, or disciplined, approach to system thinking has been outlined by Gene Bellinger from a business model. However, his outline is relevant to other disciplines as well, and can be applied to education easily. Following his approach requires a theoretical dedication to systems thinking and a willingness to stretch formal or traditional models to include innovative techniques. "Systems thinking is not an easy approach for it requires a substantial investment of effort, and thought, though the results can be more than worth the investment." (Bellinger, 2004)
Bellinger's model follows:
1) Define the system
2) Determine whether or not systems thinking is appropriate
3) Develop patterns of behavior (collecting historical data on an issue and plotting patterns of behavior over time)
4) Evolve the underlying structure
5) Simulate the underlying structure
6) Identify the leverage points (influences within a system where small changes will lead to a substantial change in the system itself)
7) Develop an alternate structure (use the existing structure as a foundation and build in alternative directions)
8) Simulate the alternate structure
9) Develop an adoption approach
Possible outcomes of applications
•It promotes individual growth and mastery of tasks within an organization.
•It investigates problems globally: Each problem or change will effect the entire organization
•It supports a shared vision: All participants are looking ahead an working toward the same goal
•Evaluates mental models: How do we think about things? How should we think about things in the future? Are any of our ideas correct based on the situation? How do we change our ideas to benefit the system
•Team building: Everyone collaborating
•Reinforcing Process: without reinforcement the system will either grow or die
•Balance: Each part self-regulates to create an environment
•Underestimating: being aware of factors that can either slow down system or cause it move in the opposite direction
Benefits of applications
•Students become active participants in designing and evaluating their learning
•Teachers become active learners as well as active leaders
•Administrators lead and learn
•Schools become part of the community
•The community becomes part of the school
•All stakeholders are part of a shared vision (staff, students, community)
•Open communication throughout the school and with the community
•All stakeholders become better and more effective at problem solving
•All stakeholders, including students, can become more effective leaders
•All stakeholders can become more effective planners
•The educational system can become more effective and productive
Evidence of Effectiveness
Implementation - theoretical and practical
In order for a school system to effectively implement systems thinking the school should consider the following steps:
Planning through the organization.
Develop a system for implementing new plans.
Develop a system to audit and review the system.
Develop a system for benchmarking the performance of various processes.
Develop a system to measure performance and improvement.
Develop a system that trains and develops thought throughout the organization.
Once a system is implemented (as indicated above), the effectiveness must be measured and changes made to ensure maximal productivity. As we've seen above, part of systems thinking is about undertanding alternate possibilities/directions and responding to ineffective plans.
One example of the implementation of systems thinking approaches in education comes from an article in Academic Leader. In this article, Marianne Sullivan describes Medaille College and the financial crisis they faced. Faculty understood the budgetary issues but were unwilling to accept the proposed solution of the college board and administration (increasing class sizes dramatically). Rather than inflicting the change on their faculty, the board tried a new approach, "using a systems-thinking approach to this problem, the administration and the faculty came up with a way to increase revenue without affecting class size by creating an accelerated learning program and a graduate division." An idea that had never been considered, the graduate division, was created out of this collaboration and shows early signs of success. Sullivan suggests, "Every single entity of a higher education institution is part of the entire system, and it's very important for that system to continually work together. Everybody needs to be involved, but it's very difficult changing someone who's been accustomed to managing his or her position one way." (Sullivan, 2005)
Positive research results
Outside of the educational discipline, systems thinking has proven its value in addressing problems including: complex problems that involve helping many individuals see the big picture and not just their individual role, recurring problems or those that have been made worse by ill-conceived efforts to fix them, issues where an action will affect the environment around the issue; and problems whose solutions are not obvious. As these have been successfully resolved through systems thinking, it is reasonable to assume that similar problems in education could also be reconsidered and resolved.
Zarapa - 1995 - Interviewed and surveyed teachers who had been offered a free systems thinking online workshop course. Of the 180 who took the course, 70% of teachers in his study regularly used systems thinking and systems modeling in their course planning and almost all of them (94%) cited using systems thinking approaches at least once since the workshop.
Scheetz - 1998 - Describes the Waters Foundation, an organization that has supported the development and implementation of systems thinking and systems dynamics in schools for over a decade. Scheetz followed the progress of the schools in their implementation and outcomes of these changes. Though there were specific requisites cited for success including staff time, staff development, and supportive leadership, all schools reported at least some improved efficiency or effectiveness, even as they recognized the lack of an essential element to help their progress.
Waters, Marzaon, and McNulty - 2003 - Through a content and textual analysis of educational literature, they identified twenty-one characteristics of effective education leaders. Many of these characteristics include elements of "balanced leadership" and implement systems thinking approaches. Some of the most interesting/relevant include: fostering a sense of community and shared beliefs, protecting the teachers from issues that would detract from their teaching time; and establishing strong lines of communication."
Critics and their rationale
The main criticism of the systems thinking approach comes from those who benefit (or feel they benefit) from the current hierarchical model of the educational system. Although this seems like an understatement of the issue - it is in fact the teachers, administrators, and staff who have little interest in cooperative learning and reject other holistic or student-centered approaches to learning in the same way that they criticize systems thinking.
There have been no scholarly articles or research developed as critiques of systems thinking and its implementation in educational structures. However, one can find critics in blogs, listservs, and (one assumes) anecdotally through conversations with these groups. In researching this topic, I was curious about what current school librarians and teachers thought about the idea of systems thinking. I sent out a message describing my project and some of the key research in this field to three educational listservs. Most responses were positive, either respondents were intrigued about this idea that was new to them or could already think of ways that systems thinking models were in place in their current programs. What follows are a few of the negative responses I received (anonymity has been retained).
"Systems thinking sounds like another attempt for corporate double-speak approaches that principals will love and that will never work. I will have to spend the next few years trying to figure it out though, while she (the principal) gets sound bites on this latest big thing."
"I don't want my students to be more 'participatory' and I think the idea of holistic medicine is absurd so I certainly don't support 'holistic education.' Clearly you have never spent time in a classroom."
"Sure, it sounds good on paper, but how do we actually implement it? If there is one more big-scale change in education, I will have to take an early retirement."
"This sounds like another way to give students even more power. We already can't make them dissect even though studies show that it is still the most effective way for students to remember biology. We can't take away their comic books because we have to support 'free reading' and individual choice. We even have to let them make gay clubs if we want to keep our football team. I'm sorry, but I don't think that allowing students to be a 'stakeholder' in their own education serves them in the future. They can learn discipline, learn the facts, and learn to listen and then shape their own college years."
Margaret Wheatley expresses reservations as to whether or not contemporary K-12 schools can even be called "systems." "The startling conclusion is that most school systems aren't systems. They are only boundary lines drawn by somebody, somewhere. They are not systems because they do not arise from a core of shared beliefs about the purpose of public education. They coexist by defining clear boundaries, creating respectful and disrespectful distances, developing self-protective behaviors, and using power politics to get what they want" (2000). Therefore, her critique is more focused on the usage of a business/theoretical term in conjunction with an educational system that she feels has deep flaws at worst and is impossible to categorize in a single description at best.
Alternative explanations due to diversity
Diversity in education is usually found in the way we learn. Under the concept of systems thinking, administrators and educators would look differently at learning. A more global perspective would incorporate lessons that invloved more problem-solving from the teacher and the students. Students would be part of the process and become active particpants in their learning. "Students would be taught to think about these problems in a manner that is comprehensive, integrated and holistic, using the principles of systems thinking." By including systems thinking, learning could be diversified to meet the needs of all learners.
An influential article by H.S. Bhola explores diversity issues and education. Titled, "Potential of Adult and Lifelong Education for Poverty Reduction: Systems Thinking for Systemic Change," the article explores the global priority of reducing poverty. As the author indicates, there is an assumption that education plays an essential role in reducing poverty and while this is true, the author believes that effective lifelong education using a systems thinking approach is the only way to truly influence poverty reduction. The conclusion states, "A new band of activist adult educators is needed, rich in intellect and imbued with commitment, joined in a system of adult lifelong education that is both comprehensive and commensurate with the tasks of constructing projects of poverty reduction in the short run, and of deconstructing ideologies and structures of poverty induction in the long run."
It is clear that community involvement in schools helps support school funding, student learning, and a sense of interactive scholarship that benefits all. I see true potential for systems thinking to have a positive impact on any school system, including those that are badly funded, support high-risk children or are established in depressed areas. The interactivity of systems thinking can help motivate and improve self-efficacy in teachers and administrators, encourage students to work beyond their traditional or life boundaries, and involve the community in the education of "their" children.
A few examples of systems thinking on a large-scale include: Earth Summit, World Health Organization Initiative on AIDS, the International Women's Conference. Using technological advances creatively and toward a sense of greater good, increasing interest and concern for issues that are global and not just local, and a new understanding of how individuals can work together across language and cultural barriers are all applications that have been influenced by or are models of systems thinking.
Signed life experiences - testimonies and stories
From the perspective of a student Systems Thinking changed how I teach and how I learn. When I was introduced to the theory, I was not receptive. My first experience left me agitated and irritated.
I was enrolled in my first graduate class. It had been a few years since I had been in a class, but still felt I knew what I was doing. My teacher terrified me. Her linguistic skills were exquisite and I knew she would be my demise. After a few short assignments, my confidence grew and I discovered that my instructor was not out to get me. Towards the end of the semester we were assigned a medium size term paper. I proceeded to put it together with confidence. I turned it in and waited. On the day the paper was returned, I was a little nervous as I should be but never expected to be so broken. My grade was atrocious. I kept my composure and waited until everyone left to speak with my instructor. This is where my true journey began wih systems thinking.
After a very lengthy discussion, she explained that it was her responsibility to make sure my work was up to snuff. She gave me the opportunity to redo the assignment and offered as much guidance as I needed to complete the task. I took this same attitude back to my school and my students. I no longer looked at each individual assigment, but looked at the purpose for assignments. I no longer wanted to just give a grade and walk away. I wanted students to learn and grow. I also began using this technique with my collegues during intimante conversations. I asked questions and when things did not work as expected I went back and said "How can we look at this differently this time".
As a result of systems thinking, I now ask a lot of reflective questions, like: "why are we doing it this way" "is this the most effective way" "who else might be able to help us" "what can we change that will have the greatest impact" "what is it that we really want to accomplish" "when does it have to be done and have we weighed all of our options."
During my first class 2 years ago, I learned to look at situations differntly. I discovered a new system. I experienced a leader change her style of teaching in order to meet the needs of the learner and the system. My goal was to pass the class. Her goal was to help me pass the class while producing the highest quality work possible. Systems thinking works.... C. Yeoman
I admit that I was dubious about the application of systems thinking, a process that I had only heard of in terms of business usage, to education. After reading extensively on the topic, I am convinced as the practical application seems to reinforce holistic and student-centered learning and an integration of the larger community in education, both approaches I believe in strongly. In thinking about schools, a larger vision of how teachers, administrators, school librarians, and support staff can all work together cooperatively with students to support their education is not a new idea but it is one that seems like it can be more effectively implemented with systems thinking. April Spisak
The Senga book was wonderful in helping me think and approach school in a different way. At that time we had a superintendent/ principal that was a system thinker and I embarked on a whole new approach and path that revived my passion and hope for education. Bonnie
References and links of interest
References
Aronson, D. (2001). Targeted Innovation: Using Systems Thinking to Increase the Benefits of Innovation Efforts. Innovative Leader, 6, 2, 31-33.
Bellinger, G. (2004). Systems Thinking: A Disciplined Approach. Retrieved from http://www.systems-thinking.org/stada/stada.htm on October 5, 2005.
Bhola, H.S. (2005). Potential of Adult and Lifelong Education for Poverty Reduction: Systems Thinking for Systematic Change. International Journal of Lifelong Learning, 24, 5, 405-417.
O’Callaghan, W. (2004). Think like Peter Senge. School Administrator, 61, 10, 26-28.
Pulliam, J. (1991). History of Education in America. New York: Macmillan.
Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P., N. Cambron-McCabe, T. Lucas, et al. (2000). Schools that Learn: A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents, and Everyone who cares about Education. New York: Doubleday.
Sullivan, M. (2005). Systems Thinking: Not Just for Business Anymore. Academic Leader, 21, 10, 2-3.
Systems Thinking. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_thinking on September 12, 2005.
Thornton, B., G. Peltier, G. Perrault. (2004). Systems Thinking: A Skill to Improve Student Achievement. The Clearing House, 77, 5, 222-227.
Links
Site includes definitions, contextualization of the issue, issues to consider for future applications, and a bibliography of the research so far. http://www.ed.psu.edu/insys/ESD/systems/thinking/SysThink.htm
In this article translated from German, Gunther Ossimitz elegantly and effectively describes systems thinking from a variety of perspectives (including an educational approach). http://www.uni-klu.ac.at/users/gossimit/sdyn/gdm_eng.htm
A well-developed approach to understanding systems thinking from a business model, this is an excellent place to start one's research. http://www.systems-thinking.org
Although I hesitate to include a personal website of any given author, the following is the personal site of Margaret Wheatley, who is mentioned above as holding critical views of systems thinking. http://www.margaretwheatley.com/index.html
The collection of useful links for systems thinking. http://www.thinking.net/Systems_Thinking/systems_thinking.html
