The system that shapes a problem can be represented using a map, in which relevant constructs are listed as nodes, and salient interrelationships are provided as directed edges which track the direction of causation. Such representations are particularly useful to address complex problems which are multi-factorial and may involve structures such as loops, in contrast with simple problems which may have a clear root cause and a short chain of causes-and-effects. Although students are often evaluated based on either simple problems or simplified situations (e.g., true/false, multiple choice), they need systems thinking skills to eventually deal with complex, open-ended problems in their professional lives. A starting point is thus to construct a representation of the problem space, such as a causal map, and then to identify and contrast solutions by navigating this map. The initial step of abstracting a system into a map is challenging for students: unlike seasoned experts, they lack a detailed understanding of the application domain, and hence struggle in capturing its key concepts and interrelationships. Case libraries can remedy this disadvantage, as they can transfer the knowledge of experts to novices. However, the content of the cases can impact the perspectives of students. For example, their understanding of a system (as reflected in a map) may differ when they are exposed to case studies depicting successful or failed interventions in a system. Previous studies have abundantly documented that cases can support students, using a variety of metrics such as test scores. In the present study, we examine the ways in which the representation of a system (captured as a causal map) changes as a function of exposure to certain types of evidence. Our experiments across three cohorts at two institutions show that providing students with cases tends to broaden their coverage of the problem space, but the knowledge afforded by the cases is integrated in the students’ maps differently depending on the type of case, as well as the cohort of students.
The living fossil concept: reply to Turner