ساخت و اعتباریابی پرسشنامه تفکر سیستمی فردی دانشجویان

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران، اهواز، ایران.

2 دانشیار گروه روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشکده دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران، اهواز، ایران.

3 استاد گروه روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران، اهواز، ایران.

4 دانشیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

هدف: درک پیچیدگی و برخورداری از تفکر سیستمی بر پویاسازی یادگیری و کسب توانمندی جهت درک لحظه‌ای، درک روابط و تعاملات بین پدیده‌ها، توانمندی سازگاری با تفکرات و اندیشه‌های گوناگون و حتی مخالف تأکید دارد. برخورداری از تفکر سیستمی یک فلسفه شخصی به افراد می‌دهد تا خود را با دنیای پیچیده‌ای که در آن زندگی می‌کنند سازگار کنند؛ و به افراد کمک می‌کند تا با تیزی فکر و اندیشه با مسائل روبرو شوند. کسب مهارت‌های تفکر سیستمی در دانشگاه‌ها می‌تواند پایه‌های رشد تفکر سیستمی و توانمندی درک پیچیدگی‌های جامعه کنونی را در افراد فراهم سازد. لذا شکل‌سازی فرهنگ دانشگاهی در جهت درک پیچیدگی و اجرای برنامه‌های درسی که به‌واسطه آن یادگیرندگان توان درک روابط حوزه‌های گوناگون علمی را به‌دست آورند و به توانمندی درک روابط پیچیده بین پدیده‌های گوناگون دست یابند، امری اجتناب‌ناپذیر در دانشگاه‌های امروزی است. در این راستا یکی از فعالیت‌های مهم سنجش تفکر سیستمی است که هدف پژوهش حاضر ساخت و اعتباریابی پرسشنامه تفکر سیستمی فردی (IST) دانشجویان بود.
مواد و روش‌ها: این پژوهش توصیفی و از نوع آزمون‌سازی است. جامعه آماری تمامی دانشجویان کارشناسی دانشگاه شهید چمران مشغول به تحصیل در نیمسال دوم تحصیلی 95-1394 بود. روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی چندمرحله‌ای که 450 نفر از دانشجویان مشارکت داشتند. در فرایند طراحی پرسشنامه ابتدا با بررسی متون علمی و مصاحبه با خبرگان مؤلفه‌های اصلی تفکر سیستمی فردی گزینش شد و در گروه سه نفره از متخصصان 158 سوال طراحی گردید که طی مراحل متعدد بررسی و تحلیل، پرسشنامه اولیه با 54 سوال تدوین شد. در تحلیل داده‌ها از تحلیل عامل اکتشافی، تحلیل عامل تأییدی، روایی ملاکی همزمان و همسانی درونی استفاده شد.
بحث و نتیجه‌گیری: یافته‌ها نشان داد پرسشنامه تفکر سیستمی فردی از لحاظ روان‌سنجی برای سنجش ابعاد چندگانه تفکر سیستمی دانشجویان در موقعیت‌های دانشگاهی مناسب و قابل اطمینان است؛ و می‌تواند به‌عنوان ابزاری برای سنجش و شناخت وضعیت دانشجویان از حیث برخورداری از تفکر سیستمی فردی مورد استفاده قرار گیرد. همسو با پژوهش‌های متعدد انجام ‌شده در حوزه تفکر سیستمی، پنج بُعد شناسایی شده در این پژوهش از ابعاد اصلی و مهم تفکر سیستمی فردی است. تفکر سیستمی فردی دانشجویان به توانایی درک روابط غیرخطی و متقابل عوامل متعدد محیطی-اجتماعی، ارزیابی و تصمیم‌سازی‌های بهنگام و داشتن رفتارهای پویا در دانشجویان اشاره دارد. لذا با لحاظ به نتایج این پژوهش و پژوهش‌های دیگر و روند روبه رشد توجه به تفکر سیستمی فردی در نظام‌های آموزشی و ضرورت آن در جامعه کنونی، برنامه‌ریزان آموزشی و درسی نظام‌های آموزش دانشگاهی باید آموزش تفکر سیستمی به دانشجویان را در اولویت برنامه‌های خود قرار دهند. لذا توصیه می‌شود روش‌های آموزش و تقویت مهارت‌های تفکر سیستمی به مدرسان آموزش داده شود و فرصت‌های اجرای برنامه‌های درسی توسعه‌دهنده تفکر سیستمی فردی برای مدرسان فراهم گردد؛ مدرسان نیز برنامه‌های آموزشی کلاسی را در راستای توسعه توانمندی تفکر سیستمی فردی دانشجویان طراحی و اجرا کنند و دانشجویان را به این توانمندی مجهز سازند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Construction and Validation of the Questionnaire of Individual Systemic Thinking

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nahid Shafiee 1
  • Nasser Behrozi 2
  • Manijeh Shehni Yailagh 3
  • Mahmmod Abolgasemi 4
1 Ph.D. Student of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education & Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education & Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran.
3 Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education & Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran.
4 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Leadership & Development, Faculty of Education & Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Objective: Complexity understanding and systemic thinking deals with learning dynamism, the ability to understand the situation, the relations and interactions between phenomena and to adapt with different ideas even the opposing ones. Systemic thinking gives the people a special insght to adapt themselves with the complex world in which they live. It helps them to face the problems with sharpness. To acquire the skills of systemic thinking in universities can provide the foundations to grow systemic thinking and to understand the complexities of the community. In order to guide the academic orientation toward conplexsities' understanding and curriculum fulfilment is necessary in today's universities because by this, the leaners will be able to understand the relations between different field and will understand the complex relations between different phenomena. The study aims to construct and validation a queationaire for Individual Systemic Thinking (IST).
Materials and methods: This is a descriptive and test making research. The population was the whole undergraduate students in Shahid Chamran University who studies in the school year 2016. The sampling method was multistage cluster random and involved 450 students. To design the questionnaire, first the scientific texts were investigated and the experts were interviewed, then the main factors of individual systemic thinking were selected. Consulting with a team of three experts led to 158 items. These 158 Items were analyzed in different stages and finally the quesationaire with 54 item was designed. In analyzing data, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, concurrent criterion validity and internal consistency were used.
Results and discussion: Findings show that IST is psychometrically reliable to assess the different dimensions of individual systemic thinking among university students. It can be used as a tool to assess and recognize the students’ status in terms of IST. The five factors which were identified in the research are the main dimendions of systemic thinking and this is consistent whih the different researches done in this field.  Individual systemic thinking deals with the ability to understand non-linear relations, reciprocal relations of social-environmental, on time evaluations and decision making, and dynamic behavior in students. Regarding the findings of this reserach and other growing researches about Individual systemic thinking in educational systems and its necessities in the community, the curriculum developers of universities should prioritize the systemic thinking and teach it to students. So it is recommended that the methodology of systemic thinking skills be taught to students and be strengthend and the opportunities be provided to fulfill the curriculum which expand individual systemic thinking for professors. The professors should design the curriculum in a way that empowers the ndividual systemic thinking for Students and equip them with this ability.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • validity
  • reliability and students
  • Individual systemic thinking
  • factor analysis

مراجع

Ackoff, R. L. (2004). Transforming the system movement curiouscal. Philadelphia. Ackoff Center Weblog. https://ackoffcenter.blogs.com
Arefi, M., Hejazi, B., Gaheri, R. (2008). The effects of international academic relationships on curriculum in higher education. Quarterly Journal of Management and Planning in Educational Systems, 1(1), 8-20. (In Persian)
Arnold, R. D. & Wade, J. P. (2015). A Definition of Systems Thinking: A Systems Approach. Conference on Systems Engineering Research. Procedia Computer Science, 44, 669 – 678.
Assaraf, O. B., & Orion, N. (2009). A design based research of an earth systems based environmental curriculum. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5 (1), 47-62.
Assaraf, O. B., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. Journal of Research inScience Teaching, 42 (5), 518-560.
Assaraf, O. B., & Orion, N. (2010). System Thinking Skills at the Elementary School Level. Journal of Reserch in Science Teaching, 47 (5), 540–563.
Atrifard, M., Mokhberiannejad, R., Zarei, A., & Hoseini, M. (2015). Factor structure of the Persian form of "Social Phobia Inventory in an Iranian nonclinical sample. Journal of Research in Psychological Health, 9(2), 40-53. (In Persian)
Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149.
Cavaleri, S.; Raphael, M., & Filletti, V. (2002). Evaluating the performance efficacy of systems thinking tools. The 20th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society. Palermo, Italy.
Conti, p. (2006). Quality thinking and system thinking. TQM Magazine, 18 (3), 297-311.
Davidz, H. (2006). Enabling Systems Thinking to Accelerate the Development of Senior Systems Engineers. Doctoral Dissertation: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Dhawan, R., O’Connor, M., & Borman, M. (2006). Mental models and dynamic decision making: an experimental approach for testing system methodologies. The 24th International Conference of the SystemDynamics Society, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Duangploy, O., & Shelton, M. L. (2000). Using a systems approach to develop lifelong learning skills in accounting for business combinations. Journal of Education for Business, 76 (2), 81-86.
Evagorou, M., Korfiatis, K., Nicolaou, C., & Constantinou, C. (2009). An investigation of the potential of interactive simulations for developing system thinking skills in elementary school: A case study with fifth‐graders and sixth‐graders. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (5), 655-674.
Forrester, J. W. (1994). Learning through System Dynamics as Preparation for the 21st Century. Systems Thinking and Dynamic Modeling Conference for K-12 Education. June 27-29, at Concord Academy.
Frank M. (2010). Assessing the interest for systems engineering positions and other engineering positions' required capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST). Journal of Systems Engineering, 13, 161-174.
Ginsberg, A., & Morecroft, J. (1995). Systems thinking and the case method. The 13th International Conference of the SystemDynamics Society, Tokyo, Japan.
Habron, G., Goralnik, L., & Thorp, L. G. (2012). Embracing the learning paradigm to foster systems thinking. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 13 (4), 378-393.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2003). Heutagogy and developing capable people and capable workplaces: strategies for dealing with complexity. Proceedings of The Changing Face of Work and Learning conference, Alberta, Canada.
Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D., & Kolodner, J. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9 (3), 247-298.
Hooman, H. A. (2011). Multivariate data analysis in scientific research. Tehran: Payefarhang. (In Persian).
Hopper, M. A. (2007). Proposing measures for assessing systems thinking interventions. UNLV Theses/Dissertations/ Professional Papers/Capstones, Paper 282.
Jacobson, M. J. (2001). Problem-solving, cognition, and complex systems: Differences between experts and novices. Complexity, 6 (3), 41-49.
Kainz, D., & Ossimitz, G. (2002). Can students learn stock-flow-thinking? An empirical investigation. The 20th International Conference of theSystem Dynamics Society, Palermo, Italy.
Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. (2003). Effect of knowledge integration activities on Student’s perception of the Earth’s crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 545-565.
Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (9), 898-921.
Kopainsky, B., Alessi, S. M., & Davidsen, P. I. (2011). Measuring Knowledge Acquisition in Dynamic Decision Making Tasks. In The 29th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, 1–31. Washington, DC.
Levy, S. T., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Inventing a midlevel to make ends meet: Reasoning through the levels of complexity. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 1-47.
Lyons, C. (2014). Relationships between Conceptual Knowledge and Reasoning about Systems: Implications for Fostering Systems Thinking in Secondary Science. Under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.
Pala, O. & Vennix, J. A. M. (2005). Effect of system dynamics education on systems thinking inventory task performance. System Dynamics Review, 21 (2), 147-172.
Pandey, A., & Anuj, K. (2016). System Thinking Approach to Deal with Sustainability Challenges. Proceedings of International Conference on Science, Technology, Humanities and Business Management, 29-30 July 2016, Bangkok.
Penner, D. E. (2000). Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students’ understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 (8), 784-806.
Plate, R. (2010). Assessing individuals’ understanding of nonlinear causal structures in complex systems. System Dynamics Review, 26 (1), 19–33.
Plate, R., & Monroe, M. (2014). A Structure for Assessing Systems Thinking. Working in K-12 education to develop Systems Citizens,Creative Learning Exchange. www.clexchange.org.
Raia, F. (2005). Students' understanding of complex dynamic systems. Journal of Geoscience Education, 5 (53), 297-309.
Raia, F. (2008). Causality in Complex Dynamic Systems: A Challenge in Earth Systems Science Education . Journal of Geoscience Education, 56, 81-94.
Rezaiee, H. (2016). The relationship between individual systems thinking and learning approaches undergraduate students of Islamic Azad University of Shahr Rey. Islamic Azad University. (In Persian).
Richmond, B. (1994). Systems Dynamics/Systems Thinking: Let’s Just Get On with It. In International Systems Dynamics Conference. system Dynamic Review, 10 (2-3), 135–157.
Sederberg, D., Bryan, L. A., & Avenue, N. (2010). Magnetism as a size dependent property: A cognitive sequence for learning about magnetism as an introduction to nanoscale science for middle and high school students, International Society of the Learning Sciences, 1, 984-991.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Translated by Hafez Kamal Hedayat & Mohmmad Roshan (2010). Tehran, Industrial Management Institute. (In Persian).
Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students’ mental models of the environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (2), 327-348.
Shokri, O., Kadivar, P., Farzad, V., & Sangari, A. A. (2007). Role of Personality Traits and Learning Approaches on Academic Achievement of University Students. Psychological Research, Vol. 9, No. 3 & 4, 65-80. (In Persian).
Stave, K., Hopper, M. (2007). What constitutes systems thinking? A proposed taxonomy. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society
Sterman, J. D. (2003). System Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. In ESD International Symposium.
Sultani Thirani, F. (1999). Application of causal analysis in social and behavioral sciences. Tehran: Government Education Management Center. (In Persian).
Sweeney, L. B. & Sterman, J. D. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory. System Dynamics Review, 16 (4), 249-286.
Zaraza, R. J., & Guthrie, S. (2003). Using systems dynamics as a core tool for content teaching: a mature use of system dynamics in the pre-college environment. The 21st International System Dynamics Society Conference, New York City, New York.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار