Next Article in Journal
To Be or Not to Be: Social Justice in Networked Learning
Next Article in Special Issue
If a Tree Falls: Business Students Learning Active Citizenship from Environmentalists
Previous Article in Journal
Undergraduate Disabled Students as Knowledge Producers including Researchers: A Missed Topic in Academic Literature
Previous Article in Special Issue
Conceptualization and Evaluation of a School Project on Climate Science in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)
Open AccessArticle

The Mystery Method Reconsidered—A Tool for Assessing Systems Thinking in Education for Sustainable Development

1
Geography Education, Department of Social Sciences, Mathematics and Natural Sciences Education, Faculty of Education, Universität Hamburg, 20146 Hamburg, Germany
2
Computer Science Education, Faculty of Engineering, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, 24118 Kiel, Germany
3
IDN – Institute for Science Education, Leibniz Universität Hannover, 30167 Hannover, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2019, 9(4), 260; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040260
Received: 20 September 2019 / Revised: 20 September 2019 / Accepted: 18 October 2019 / Published: 23 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Geography Education Promoting Sustainability)
Influence diagrams, derived from the mystery method as its learning output, represent an externalization of systems thinking and are, therefore, valid to research; so far they have not been conceptualized in the research literature for teaching systems thinking in education for sustainable development. In this study, 31 of those diagrams are confronted with (1) three different expert references, in (2) two different ways, by (3) three different scoring systems to determine which evaluation option is both valid and easy to implement. As a benchmark, the diagrams’ diameters are used, which allows statements about the quality of the maps/diagrams in general. The results show that, depending on the combination of variables that play a role in the evaluation (1, 2, 3), the quality of the influence diagram becomes measurable. However, strong differences appear in the various evaluation schemes, which can be explained by each variable’s peculiarities. Overall, the tested methodology is effective, but will need to be sharpened in the future. The results also offer starting points for future research to further deepen the path taken here. View Full-Text
Keywords: education for sustainable development; systems thinking; data mining; mapping education for sustainable development; systems thinking; data mining; mapping
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Benninghaus, J.C.; Mühling, A.; Kremer, K.; Sprenger, S. The Mystery Method Reconsidered—A Tool for Assessing Systems Thinking in Education for Sustainable Development. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 260.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop