• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition >Methods for Measuring Systems Thinking: Differences Between Student Self-assessment, Concept Map Scores, and Cortical Activation During Tasks About Sustainability
【24h】

Methods for Measuring Systems Thinking: Differences Between Student Self-assessment, Concept Map Scores, and Cortical Activation During Tasks About Sustainability

机译：测量系统思维的方法：学生自我评估，概念地图评分与可持续性任务期间的皮质激活差异

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Systems thinking is a necessary skill towards solving complex civil engineering problems with interconnected environmental, social, and economic inputs and outputs. The dynamic relationship between systems components can act as a barrier for sustainability if decision makers work to reduce rather than understand complexities. To help advance methods for assessing and measuring students' ability to think in systems, multiple methods were used and compared, including: a previously developed 15-item self-report survey named Systems Thinking Scale Revised (STSR), three scoring approaches to concept mapping and advanced cognitive neuro-imaging methods to measure physical changes in cognition. Engineering students (n=28) completed the STSR survey to report their capacity of systems thinking. They were outfitted to wear a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) system and asked to draw a concept map related to sustainability topics about energy, food, climate, and water. Their concept maps were scored using three approaches: the traditional, holistic, and categorical scoring method. The result shows that students' self-evaluated systems thinking tendency is negatively (Spearman's r= -0.50, p = 0.016) correlated with their concept map performance graded with the traditional scoring method, while positively (r = 0.39, p = 0.038) correlated to the sub-scores on the environment concepts using the categorical scoring method. Efficiency in brain connectivity, which is calculated using fNIRS data, is positively correlated with the complexity index using the categorical scoring approach (r = 0.45, p = 0.016) and the sub-scores of comprehensiveness in holistic scores (r = 0.42, p = 0.025). The results suggest students with higher performance of systems thinking were also more cognitively efficient. This study contributes to engineering education by demonstrating a new measurement tool to understand systems thinking and students' cognitive abilities. The results also demonstrate possible discrepancies in previously developed surveys, concept map scoring techniques and cognition measured through changes in cortical activation. This trans-disciplinary approach bridges engineering education, sustainability, and neuroscience and begins to open new avenues of research helping measure the effectiveness of assessment techniques with physical responses of cognitive activation.
机译：系统思维是解决与互联的环境，社会和经济投入和产出的复杂土木工程问题的必要技能。如果决策者努力减少而不是了解复杂性，系统组件之间的动态关系可以充当可持续性的障碍。为了帮助提前评估和衡量学生在系统中思考的能力，使用和比较多种方法，包括：先前开发的15项自我报告调查名为Systems思维规模修订（STSR），三种评分方法概念映射和先进的认知神经成像方法，以测量认知的物理变化。工程学生（n = 28）完成了STSR调查以报告其系统思维能力。它们被装备佩戴功能近红外光谱（FNIRS）系统，并要求绘制与可持续性主题相关的概念图，了解能源，食品，气候和水。他们的概念地图采用了三种方法：传统，整体，分类评分方法。结果表明，学生的自我评估系统思维倾向是负面的（Spearman的r = -0.50，p = 0.016）与他们的概念地图性能与传统评分方法进行了分级，而正面（r = 0.39，p = 0.038）相关使用分类评分方法对环境概念的子分数。使用Fnirs数据计算的脑连接的效率与使用分类评分方法的复杂性指数正相关（r = 0.45，p = 0.016）和全面分数的全面性子分数（r = 0.42，p = 0.025）。结果表明，具有更高性能思维表现的学生也更加认知。本研究通过展示新的测量工具来了解系统思维和学生的认知能力，有助于工程教育。结果还展示了以前开发的调查，概念地图评分技术和通过皮质激活的变化测量的可能性差异。这种跨学科方法桥梁桥梁工程教育，可持续性和神经科学，并开始开辟新的研究途径，帮助衡量评估技术与认知激活的物理反应的有效性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号