This chapter focuses on how pupil’s scientific understanding can be studied. The principles of a complex dynamic systems approach are highlighted.
LINK
Energy Valley cluster and internationalisation.There is a need for more dynamic approaches to strategy development for clusters due to the complex internal and external environments that are part of clusters. The research introduced complex adaptive systems (CAS) approach to cluster theory where contextual analysis of clusters are an essential part of understanding cluster development. In-depth analyses of cluster dynamics and drivers of change in the context of the cluster would provide deeper understanding of cluster developments that will then feed into strategy development processes.
DOCUMENT
In the wake of neo-liberal informed global trends to set performance standards and intensify accountability, the Dutch government aimed for ‘raising standards for basic skills’. While the implementation of literacy standards was hardly noticed, the introduction of numeracy standards caused a major backlash in secondary schools, which ended in a failed introduction of a high stakes test. How can these major differences be explained? Inspired by Foucault’s governmentality concept a theoretical framework is developed to allow for detailed empirical research on steering processes in complex systems in which many actors are involved in educational decision-making. A mixed-methods multiple embedded case-study was conducted comprising nine school boards and fifteen secondary schools. Analyses unveil processes of responsibilisation, normalisation and emerging dividing practices. Literacy standards reinforced responsibilities of Dutch language teachers; for numeracy, school leadership created entirely new roles and responsibilities for teachers. Literacy standards were incorporated in an already used instrument which made implementation both subtle and inevitable. For numeracy, schools distinguished students by risk of not passing the new test affirming the disciplinary nature of schools in the process. While little changed to address teachers main concerns about students’ literacy skills, the failed introduction of the numeracy test usurped most resources.
DOCUMENT
Studying real-time teacher-student interaction provides insight into student's learning processes. In this study, upper grade elementary teachers were supported to optimize their instructional skills required for co-constructing scientific understanding. First, we examined the effect of the Video Feedback Coaching intervention by focusing on changes in teacher-student interaction patterns. Second, we examined the underlying dynamics of those changes by illustrating an in-depth micro-level analysis of teacher-student interactions. The intervention condition showed significant changes in the way scientific understanding was co-constructed. Results provided insight into how classroom interaction can elicit optimal co-construction and how this process changes during an intervention.
DOCUMENT
The inefficiency of maintaining static and long-lasting safety zones in environments where actual risks are limited is likely to increase in the coming decades, as autonomous systems become more common and human workers fewer in numbers. Nevertheless, an uncompromising approach to safety remains paramount, requiring the introduction of novel methods that are simultaneously more flexible and capable of delivering the same level of protection against potentially hazardous situations. We present such a method to create dynamic safety zones, the boundaries of which can be redrawn in real-time, taking into account explicit positioning data when available and using conservative extrapolation from last known location when information is missing or unreliable. Simulation and statistical methods were used to investigate performance gains compared to static safety zones. The use of a more advanced probabilistic framework to further improve flexibility is also discussed, although its implementation would not offer the same level of protection and is currently not recommended.
MULTIFILE
In order to study education and development, researchers can choose among a plethora of methods. The Merriam-Webster dictionary tells us that “method” means: a procedure or process for attaining an object …such as …a systematic procedure, technique, or mode of inquiry employed by or proper to a particular discipline or art “ or “a way, technique, or process of or for doing something”, or “a body of skills or techniques”. Methods proper to the scientific study of education and development cover a very broad range of procedures, ranging from how to formulate and ask questions, how to design studies for answering such questions, how to perform such studies in real-world contexts, how to extract data and how to process them, how to relate processed data to answers on questions, how to communicate such questions and answers, and how to apply them to real world activities aimed at promoting education and development. This body of methods is customarily termed “methodology”, which is a concept that includes the methods themselves but also our understanding of their relationships and their rational and scientific justification. Let us call this body of methods and the justifications “Integrative methodology”. Researchers often tend to see this integrative methodology as a more or less autonomous set of good practice prescriptions. This view is consistent with practices of academic training in which methodology courses are offered separate from courses on disciplinarian contents, e.g. courses on development or educational science. As a consequence of this autonomy oriented view of methodology, scientific questions regarding development and education tend to be framed in terms of the available or habitual methods. For instance, we readily transform or translate concrete questions about the influence of some particular educational intervention in terms of a statistically significant difference between 2 representative samples that systematically differ in only one variable or feature of interest, which, in this case, is the intervention. Almost every word in this translation carries the heavy burden of methodological principles, concepts and presuppositions: “statistically”, “significant”, “difference”, “representative”, “sample”, “systematically”, “variable”, and “intervention”. And all these principles, concepts and presuppositions are taken from this autonomous body of integrative methodology, which forms our indisputable cookbook of good practices, outside of which no good — scientific — practices exist. The answers to questions that are shaped by this independent body of methodology will then contribute to existing theories of development and education. In this sense, it is the (allegedly) independent methodology that informs theory.In this chapter, we will move against this current practice and make the — apparently deeply obvious — claim that it must be theory that informs the questions and the way we shall answer these questions. That is, it must be theory – that is, your body of justified knowledge about a particular phenomenon – that informs, influences and determines methodology, that is, the whole of methods, procedures and instruments that you use to study that phenomenon. . The sort of theory that should inform integrative methodology must be an integrative theory, that is to say a theory consisting of a consistent set of general principles and concepts shaping the domains of inquiry, which in this particular case are the related domains of development and education
DOCUMENT
Since the first release of modern electric vehicles, researchers and policy makers have shown interest in the deployment and utilization of charging infrastructure. Despite the sheer volume of literature, limited attention has been paid to the characteristics and variance of charging behavior of EV users. In this research, we answer the question: which scientific approaches can help us to understand the dynamics of charging behavior in charging infrastructures, in order to provide recommendations regarding a more effective deployment and utilization of these infrastructures. To do so, we propose a conceptual model for charging infrastructure as a social supply–demand system and apply complex system properties. Using this conceptual model, we estimate the rate complexity, using three developed ratios that relate to the (1) necessity of sharing resources, (2) probabilities of queuing, and (3) cascading impact of transactions on others. Based on a qualitative assessment of these ratios, we propose that public charging infrastructure can be characterized as a complex system. Based on our findings, we provide four recommendations to policy makers for taking efforts to reduce complexity during deployment and measure interactions between EV users using systemic metrics. We further point researchers and policy makers to agent-based simulation models that capture interactions between EV users and the use complex network analysis to reveal weak spots in charging networks or compare the charging infrastructure layouts of across cities worldwide.
DOCUMENT
Lectorale rede van Dave van Kann gehouden ter gelegenheid van zijn inauguratie als lector ‘Leren Bewegen in en rondom de School’ bij Lectoraat Move to Be van Fontys Sporthogeschool. Dave geeft in zijn rede aan op welke directe thematische focus hij zich in het bijzonder zal gaan richten in zijn lectorschap (de themalijnen Leren Bewegen en Beweegvriendelijke Omgeving). In lijn met de lectoraatsprojecten en -ambities geeft Dave zijn zienswijze op de thematiek ‘Leren Bewegen in en rondom de School’ weer en houd hij een pleidooi om in gezamenlijkheid met alle betrokkenen de komende jaren te werken aan een actieve generatie waarin bewegen meer vanzelfsprekend is en voor iedereen mogelijk.
DOCUMENT
Societal actors across scales and geographies increasingly demand visual applications of systems thinking – the process of understanding and changing the reality of a system by considering its whole set of interdependencies – to address complex problems affecting food and agriculture. Yet, despite the wide offer of systems mapping tools, there is still little guidance for managers, policy-makers, civil society and changemakers in food and agriculture on how to choose, combine and use these tools on the basis of a sufficiently deep understanding of socio-ecological systems. Unfortunately, actors seeking to address complex problems with inadequate understandings of systems often have limited influence on the socio-ecological systems they inhabit, and sometimes even generate unintended negative consequences. Hence, we first review, discuss and exemplify seven key features of systems that should be – but rarely have been – incorporated in strategic decisions in the agri-food sector: interdependency, level-multiplicity, dynamism, path dependency, self-organization, non-linearity and complex causality. Second, on the basis of these features, we propose a collective process to systems mapping that grounds on the notion that the configuration of problems (i.e., how multiple issues entangle with each other) and the configuration of actors (i.e., how multiple actors relate to each other and share resources) represent two sides of the same coin. Third, we provide implications for societal actors - including decision-makers, trainers and facilitators - using systems mapping to trigger or accelerate systems change in five purposive ways: targeting multiple goals; generating ripple effects; mitigating unintended consequences; tackling systemic constraints, and collaborating with unconventional partners.
MULTIFILE
Essay over een visie op leerecosystemen vanuit de complexe dynamische systeemtheorie.
MULTIFILE
