T205A Systems Thinking & Practice

T205A Systems Thinking & Practice

Week 2: Concept file 1: Readings 3,4 T551: readings 2, 3 &4 T552: Reading 2- Appendix A1.1 (Spray diagrams)+ Practice

Concept File 1 Reading 3: Models of the Learning Process
1. The acquisitive model of learning 2. The constructivist model of learning 3. The experiential model of learning Activities, Boxes and SAQ Activity 1, page 28 – Activity 2, page 30 Activity 3, page 32 – Activity 4, page 36 Read Appendix to Reading 3, page 44

Models of the Learning Process
Depending on the kind of learning that we need to achieve we can identify three models of learning Each one has it strengths and weaknesses, with no single one being totally right or wrong, rather a better fit for a particular purpose: The acquisitive model of learning The constructivist model of learning The experiential model of learning

3.1. The acquisitive model of learning (1)
This model which focuses on the behavior of the learner is based on the idea that learning could be changed based on feedback from the learning environment. Under this model learning is seen as a process for reproducing some desirable behavior or measurable outcome. Learners expect to acquire the skills required to achieve their goals. Teaching starts by analyzing what needs to be learned and then breaking that down into component parts which can be taught stage by stage. Effective and regular feedback is essential for learners to assess their achievement at each stage.

Figure 3.1, page 28: Model of acquisitive learning process

This approach is similar to an input output model with feedback loops; It focuses on the desired output of the process and ignores the process itself. One of its limitations is that it considers learning a passive process of absorption of unmodified inputs, where in fact learning is an active process where the same input does not reliably produce the desired output. The same input and feedback don’t produce good results with all learners or even with the same learners all the time. Successful learning could be demonstrated by understanding ideas and acquiring techniques for analyzing and evaluating information.

3.2. The constructivist model of learning (1)
The key notion in this "constructivist theory" is that people learn best by actively constructing their own understanding. The fundamental beliefs underlying this paradigm for learning have been generally summarized as follows: All knowledge is constructed through a process of reflective abstraction. Cognitive structures within the learner facilitate the process of learning. The cognitive structures in individuals are in a process of constant development. If the notion of constructivist learning is accepted, then the methods of learning and pedagogy must agree.

Figure 3.2, page 30: A system map of key elements in a constructivist model of learning

The constructivist model presents the learner with opportunities to build on prior knowledge and understanding to construct new knowledge and understanding from authentic experience. Students are allowed to confront problems full of meaning because of their real-life context. In solving these problems, students are encouraged to explore possibilities, invent alternative solutions, collaborate with other students (or external experts), try out ideas and hypotheses, revise their thinking, and finally present the best solution they can derive. Sometimes this might lead students to change their existing ideas in cases where new learning conflicts with existing assumptions and attitudes. Otherwise failure to realize the contradiction between old and new learning will undermine our ability to acquire new knowledge.

Figure 3.3, page 32: Ambiguous picture, first drawn by cartoonist W.E. Hill in 1915 and reprinted in the psychological literature by Boring (1930). It can be viewed as a head-and-shoulders portrait of either an old woman or a young woman. (If you have difficulty seeing both, it might help to know that the old woman is in profile and looking to the left; the young woman, also looking left, is turned away from the viewer. The old woman's left eye the young woman's left ear. The old woman's mouth is the young woman's necklace. The old woman's nose and nostril are respectively the young woman's cheek and jaw.)

3.3. The experiential model of learning (1)
Experiential learning which connects learning to real life situations is a theory that defines the cognitive processes of learning. In particular it asserts (claim) the importance of critical reflection in learning. Learning is looked at as a cycle that begins with experience, continues with reflection and after leads to action, which itself becomes a concrete experience for reflection through active experimentation (Rogers, 1996).

Reflective observation: Perceiving, Processing, (Ask questions) Abstract conceptualization/ analysis: (Find answers) Active experimentation: (Action phase) Figure 4, page 34: The Kolb model of learning

Kolb divides the concept of reflection into two separate learning activities, perceiving and processing. Thus he identified a stage called “Abstract Conceptualization”, whereas in the Critical Reflection stage we ask questions about the experience in terms of previous experiences, in the Abstract Conceptualization stage, we try to find the answers. We make generalizations, draw conclusions and form hypotheses about the experience. The Action phase, in light of his interpretation, then becomes a phase of Active Experimentation, where we try the hypotheses out.

Abstract Conceptualization: In this stage learning involves using logic ideas, rather than feelings to understand problems or situations. Typically, you would rely on systematic planning and develop theories and ideas to solve problems. Active Experimentation: Learning in this stage takes an active form by experimenting with, influencing or changing situations. You would take a practical approach and be concerned with what really works.

Active Experimentation: Experiential Learning has been used in different ways, and it has played a major role in the movement towards bringing work experience and ways of learning in the workplace into higher education studies. Kolb’s four-stage model of experiential learning is the basis for the Learning Style Inventory which he developed to help learners understand their strengths and weaknesses. The inventory measures the learner’s preferences in the four stages of learning. Preference of one or more stages over others indicates a preferred learning style.

The learning styles are: 1. Activist
Flexible, open minded, optimistic. Rush to action without thinking Takes too much risks, rush into action with little preparation get bored easily. 2. Reflector Careful, thorough and methodical. Thoughtful, rarely jump to conclusions. Slow to make a decision, low participation, too cautious, not assertive. 3. Theorist Logical “vertical thinkers”, rational and objective. Good at asking probing questions. Exhibit a low tolerance for uncertainty, disorder, and ambiguity. 4. Pragmatist Keen to test things out in practice, Practical, realistic and businesslike. Not interested in theory, rejects things without obvious application.

Understanding your preferred learning style is beneficial in two ways: It helps you understand and determine your areas of weakness, It gives you an opportunity to work on becoming more proficient in the other modes or it helps you realize your strengths, which might be useful in certain social situations, such as deciding on a career.

Do Activity 1,2,3 & 4 Reading 3 Concept File 01 Refer to “Appendix to Reading 3” On Page 44

Reading 4 Learning to act: managing and systems practice
How to be good at managing? To have a good working knowledge of one's own activity, the people one works with, and how they all fit into the wider organization. But this doesn't work either, because a person doesn't just cope well with their particular job. They can also handle changes in their work, or move to a different organization, getting the hang of changed circumstances fairly quickly, working out how to make the best of them, how to get things done and knowing when and how to stand up for themselves Meaning one has to be competent – which is an elusive quality! Competent people know far more than they can express.

New ways of thinking and acting: systems practice
Relate your learning with your experiences!! Explore and take seriously the points of view of the other people involved, trying out their perspectives and incorporating their insights. Think about the solutions by thinking around the problem, explore different angles and boundaries. Anticipate problems!! Reflect!!

T551: Systems thinking and practice: a Primer 2. Ways of thinking (2)
Failure to realize that there are different ways of thinking limits our ability to solve problems. Systems’ thinking offers us “tools for thought” in order to explore a given situation from “new angles”, to try out different boundaries, and to generate a rounded appreciation of the problem. Trying out other perspectives and exploring other points of view are two of the main characteristics of systems thinking. Even though at some levels we each have a unique way of thinking, generally speaking, on other levels we can identify two main kinds of thinking: Logical thinking, and Causal thinking.

2.1. Logical thinking (1) Is the ability to understand and to incorporate the rules of basic logical inferences in every day activities. It is built on a generalization (premise assumed to be true), then deduces a conclusion about a particular case. Example: “if all cows are animals and this is a cow then it is an animal”.

2.1. Logical thinking (2) Logical thinking has three characteristics:
It is objective (conclusions are not affected by personal opinions or points of view). It is necessary (the conclusion always follows from the premise) It is sequential (a chain of reasoning) Logical thinking is a very useful way of thinking. It provides clarity in making sensible decisions. It does not work in every situation (emotional problems).

2.2. Causal thinking (1) It is a way of linking activities or events together. It has the same characteristics as logical thinking : It is objective Reasoning is necessary (however there is more scope to the reasoning here) It is sequential (if a, then b, then c etc) Example: The driver lost control of the car (A), which caused the car to crash (B). Driver lost control ---car crash--- insurance claim We can go forward and backward in identifying more causes and effects.

2.2. Causal thinking (2) Multiple causes (chains of causes & consequences) A causes B B is the consequence of A Changing A will alter B When we identify and recognize the network of direct and indirect causes that lead to B, then we have a large number of potential intervention points for changing B.

2.2. Causal thinking (3) In addition if we know all the direct and indirect consequences of our chosen course of action (changing A in order to change B), we can judge whether it will actually have our desired effect (changing B), and whether it will have other undesired effects. Multiple causes (chain of causes and consequences) are an important feature of systems thinking. Tyre burst--caused driver to loose control--caused car crash- caused insurance claim Why did the tyre burst? Manufacturing defect Earlier damage. Sharp turn

2.2. Causal thinking (4) In this case there are multiple causes for the tyre to burst In addition there might also be a set of multiple consequences: Car crash  insurance claim late for appointment anxious about driving again While failure to take the interconnections of multiple causes and effects into consideration are some of the main limitations of causal and logical thinking, they are the key features of systems’ thinking.

Limitations of Logical and Causal Thinking
They look for general principles and patterns from particular instances. They tend to be rational and objective and ignore subjective and emotional factors (which does not always work). It is hard to predict the behavior of complex systems, where changes can lead to unintended consequences. Systems are interconnected and use feed back loops, while causal and logical thinking focus on simple separate cause and effect.

2.3. Reductionist Thinking
Is the idea that everything that exists can be explained as the interactions of a small number of simple things. All of nature can eventually be described scientifically. There are no inherently unknowable facts. The reductionist approach: Breaks things up into separate bits and tackles each bit separately. Draws inferences or takes actions based on the understanding of the parts. Reductionist thinking artificially restricts the components of a system in order to observe repeatable experiments, which limits its applicability.

2.4. Holistic Thinking (1) Systems’ Thinking tries to complement the Reductionist Thinking by adopting a Holistic approach. Holistic Thinking is the idea that the properties of a system cannot be determined or explained by the sum of its components alone. It is often regarded as opposite to reductionism. It deals with wholes rather than parts. It looks at the interrelationships between all the members or parts within a system. It simplifies wholes in order to understand a situation or solve a problem

2.4. Holistic Thinking (2) Since full knowledge and understanding of reality is impossible people tend to simplify the mass of ideas and information they receive into familiar pattern. When we receive new information our brain selects some as important and retains them into pre-existing categories, and ignores other. Thus under the Holistic approach: The first step starts by looking at the nature and behavior of the whole, and The next step is to look at the bigger whole of which it forms a part

2.4. Holistic Thinking (3) This sometimes raises the problem of identifying the whole. For instance, a person is a whole human being, yet he is a part of a group such as a family or workgroup, and that group, which is a whole, is a part of a larger group, such as a community or organization. One way holistic thinking attempts at simplifying holes is by taking multiple partial views.

2.5. Multiple partial views
It takes the whole then starts to simplify this whole into smaller parts or partial views, with no single slice or part being wrong or untrue rather a different view. The more slices we have the more we will know about the whole.

2.6. Perspectives (1) Considering different perspectives or points of view offers a more feasible way of taking multiple partial views. To apply systems thinking successfully people need to broaden their awareness by adopting other different perspectives. This could be accomplished in one of three ways:

2.6. Perspectives (2) Be clear and explicit about your own point of view (your personal beliefs, assumptions, values, and interests or Worldview), we can sometimes gain new perspectives by carefully considering our own values and beliefs. Make a serious effort to see things through the eyes of others. Consider the unintended consequences (by-products) of operating a given system: Look at what the system does Assume that is its purpose Describe the system in terms of its consequences

2.7. Worldview versus perspective
Perspective refers to how things look from your current position. When swapping roles, places, or responsibilities leads to a change of opinion, then we could say that the difference is one of perspective rather than Worldview. Worldview refers to how you see the world, regardless of your current position. It is about deep values which have their origins in upbringing or cultural experience, it represents fundamental beliefs about the nature of things

2.8. Summary (1) There are different ways of thinking:
Logical thinking deals with simple, timeless cause and effect links between statements and as such is inadequate to deal with complex situations. Causal thinking which underlies scientific thinking looks at simple cause and effects by isolating components or parts of a whole.

2.8. Summary (2) Systems thinking looks at the complicated pattern of multiple causes that make up the whole, and simplifies by looking at the multiple partial views or perspectives Systems thinking introduces to you the tools, it shows you how to use them, and illustrates the context in which they can be useful. This will give you new insights and understanding which will result in improvements and new learning.

Activities, Boxes and SAQ
T551. Systems thinking and practice: a Primer Read Box 1, page 18 SAQ 1 – 5, pages 20-22

T551: 03 Systems Thinking T551. Systems thinking and practice: a Primer 3. Systems Thinking 4. Types of situations 5. Types of complexity Activities, Boxes and SAQ SAQ 6, 7, 8, 9, pages 25-26, 32, 37 Activity 1, page 27 – Activity 2, page 30

3. Systems Thinking (1) Before we describe the main ideas and techniques of systems thinking we need to clarify few points: Some of the examples and exercises used in systems thinking might not be specifically about systems the reason for that is that holistic thinking isn’t always about systems. Even though most people have an innate ability to think systemically this could be hard to do at first

3. Systems Thinking (2) We need to make a distinction between systemic thinking and systematic thinking. Systematic means having a plan or method. In this context it deals with orderly methodical thinking, it is more reductionist, since it reduces the overall activity to a set of discrete parts that only recognize the importance of the previous and next steps. Systemic on the other hand, means affecting entire body or organism, and in this context systemic thinking deals with the behavior of the wholes.

3. Systems Thinking (3) At times when we get stuck, when our ways of thinking about the issue totally let us down, when everything we try seems to make the situation worse, when every attempt to reduce conflict seems to increase misunderstandings. That is when we need a “fresh approach”, or a new way of looking at the whole thing, a new set of ideas to bring to the situation, and it is at such times that the systems approach can provide rewarding results.

3. Systems Thinking (4) Thinking in systems is a way of thinking about the world that is based in General Systems Theory. A system is some “entity” that is made up of a set of interlinked internal processes, surrounded by some type of boundary. It is defined by circular cause and effect chains which means that the internal process have mutual influence on each other.

3. Systems Thinking (5) Each system is generally open to the outside world, in some way or another, and is influenced by other systems to which it is connected in various ways. In most cases systems are made up of sub-systems and are, themselves, part of larger systems. In other words systems thinking understand the world as being a series of nested systems. A person’s body is a system. The heart is a system. A forest is a system. A company is a system, the weather is a system, and planet earth is a system.

3. Systems Thinking (6) Systems thinking involves the use of various techniques to study systems of many kinds. It includes studying things in a holistic way, rather than purely reductionist techniques. It aims to gain insights into the whole by understanding the linkages, interactions and processes between the elements that comprise the whole “system”.

3. Systems Thinking (7) Systems thinkers consider that:
A “system” is a dynamic and complex whole, interacting as a structured functional unit in equilibrium Information flows between the different elements that compose the system A system is a community situated within an environment Information flows from and to the surrounding environment via semi-permeable membranes or boundaries

Traditional decision making tends to involve linear cause and effect relationships. One of the main limitations of reductionist thinking is that it fails to cope with the problems that arise as a result of the complexity and interconnectedness between components in a system. By taking a systems approach, we can see the whole complex of bidirectional interrelationships. Instead of analyzing a problem in terms of an input and an output, for example, we look at the whole system of inputs, processes, outputs, feedback, and controls. It seeks to understand interconnectedness, complexity and wholeness of components of systems in specific relationship to each other.

A holistic approach emphasizes that the simplification should be accomplished in a way that does not overlook the significant connectedness, one way of representing complex issues more simply is by the use of diagrams since connectedness can be simply understood and represented. In addition to its holistic, constructivist approach, systems thinking embraces the value of reductionist science by understanding the parts, and understanding the complex relationships that enable parts to become wholes.

This larger picture will typically provide more useful results than traditional methods. One strong characteristic of systems thinking is that in tackling an issue the first step is to go up several levels of abstraction, and the later stages involve coming back down to earth (relating the conclusions reached to the specific issue in hand).

The elements of a system (1)
There are a number of fundamental concepts that constitute the elements of systems: 1. Subjective Definition: Systems are clearly a human conceptualization. They do not exist independently of the observer in the sense that it is the human observer that views something as a system. There may be some agreement amongst a group of people about the shape or properties of a system. In which case there is an inter-subjective consensus about the definition of the systems. Ex. Even though most people would agree on the general properties of the basic number system and most doctors would agree on the general properties of the digestive system. However, different groups may have different perspectives on the purpose of the economic and social systems.)

2. Organization: Systems are organized. They are different from aggregates. A collection of bicycle parts constitutes an aggregate. Only when such parts are arranged in a particular way we speak of the system of a bicycle

3. Purpose: To say a system displays organization (alignment) implies that a system is organized to do something. A system can only be conceived when there is a clear articulation of an organizational purpose. This purpose usually expresses the dimensions of the relationship between the system and its environment. (Defining the purpose allows us to measure the performance of the system). ex. the purpose of a system of drains underlying a major city might be defined as the dispersal of water from the city’s streets. In terms of this defined purpose we could measure the performance of the drainage system in terms of how long it takes to disperse a particular volume of water).

4. Boundaries: Once the purpose has been determined, the boundaries of the system can be identified. (In this process the aspects of the environment that are encompassed in the system are articulated). The process of boundary identification also shows what parts of the environment are marginal to the system, (just included or just excluded). Boundary judgments are an important characteristic of systems thinking. It is important to establish the boundary of the system to include enough parts so their relationship to one another makes sense. However, systems are not mutually exclusive they might be so closely related that there is no way to draw boundaries that separate all parts of one from all parts of the other.

5. Coherence: All the dynamics that exist within a system need to have a coherence (a sense of wholeness) if they are to be a legitimate part of that system. 6. Connectivity: Logical dependence between components or elements (including sub-systems) within a system. 7. Emergent properties: characteristics of systems which are revealed at a particular level of organization and which are not possessed by constituent sub-systems. It implies that the whole has characteristics that can not be identified from a study of the systems parts. ex. In a traffic network a bottleneck experienced at some intersection is the result of the interactions of a large body of components ‘cars’ interacting in particular ways. A bottleneck is not a property of any one component ‘car’ it is only a property of the system as a whole.

8. Sub-Systems: These are the parts of the system that have to interact in an interdependent way for the system to achieve a balance and express its purpose on the supra-system. The parts are also the only way a system can learn about its environment, they are the power-house which give life to the system. Ex. An automobile can be viewed as being composed of sub-systems such as the electrical sub-system, transmission sub-system etc. alternatively, the human body can be seen to be made up of sub-systems such as the nervous system, the circulatory system, the digestive system etc.

9. Environment: This is a term often given to the supra system and encompasses all things not included in the system by its purpose (that which is outside the system boundary and which affects the behavior of the system). Obviously there will be some aspects of the environment, which have a close relationship with the system while other dimensions will seem to be totally unrelated. However, in systems thinking all aspects have some relationship to the system although it may be very tenuous and the pathway of the relationship almost impossible to discover. Ex. If we consider an organization as a system then we define its boundary in terms of activities performed by its members. We might prohibit the consideration of activities of its customers and suppliers as forming part of the system).

Primer T551 04. Types of Situation
4.1 Two Sorts of Situations Difficulties: simpler, more limited sorts of situations. It is fairly clear-cut Messes: More taxing and complex situations. They are Larger than difficulties. More serious consequences , larger time-scale and more area. Difficult to say what the situation is about. It is fuzzy. If the basics of a situation are not known that is a serious matter The more people involved more questions about the goals

DIFFICULTIES BOUNDED LIMITED TIME-SCALE
KNOWS WHAT WOULD BE THE SOLUTION PRIORITIES CLEAR LIMITED IMPLICATIONS KNOWS WHAT THE PROBLEM IS BOUNDED CAN BE TREATED AS SEPARATE MATTER KNOWS WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE LIMITED NUMBER OF PEOPLE INVOLVED

MESSES UNBOUNDED LONGER, UNCERTAIN TIME-SCALE NO ‘SOLUTION’ PRIORITIES
CALLED IN QUESTION LONGER, UNCERTAIN IMPLICATIONS NOT SURE WHAT THE PROBLEM IS UNBOUNDED CAN’T BE DISENTANGLED FROM THE CONTEXT DON’T KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE KNOWN MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED

4.2 Rational and Emotional Situations
Generally the focus is on the rational aspect and the emotional aspect is ignored. Problem exist how it is interpreted by a person. The individual’s concerns are also part of the situation. Hence it is advice that when you are solving messy problems consider rational and emotional aspects.

DO ACTIVITY 1 & 2 OF READING 4

T552: Diagramming 2. Why do people use diagrams?
2.1. Thinking through diagrams 2.2. Representing text as diagrams 2.3. Reading diagrams

Why do people use diagrams?
To convey & illustrate ideas To provide ways of sharing info To illustrate new & unexpected relationships in a situation, and suggest ways for moving ahead To sharpen our understanding of those ideas & to open our eyes to alternative Views

2.1. Thinking through diagrams (1)
Classification of diagram users: Visualizers: are people who possess a natural preference or ability for using diagrams Verbalizers: are people who seem more comfortable with textual material

Note: In systems thinking, text and diagrams support each other, It is important to be comfortable with both

So why do people use diagrams?
To illustrate what something looks like To demonstrate how objects, ideas & quantities are organized or related For decorative purposes to make a text more pleasant & appealing They are powerful tools in helping people further their own thinking

One feature that characterizes complex situations is The interconnectedness of the components within them Diagrams are a characteristic feature of systems approaches to understanding complex situations Words alone either confuse or misrepresent the situation They allow the relationships between components of the situation to be seen at the Same time as the components themselves

Contrary to diagrams Written accounts are linear (Words follow one another in a given order); when describing non-sequential events, normal linguistic description fails to capture the complexity and diversity between the elements

2.2. Representing text as diagrams (1)
ALLOW The relationships between the components of a situation to be seen simultaneously with the components themselves

2.2. Representing text as diagrams (2)
So diagrams are helpful in clarifying our thinking because: They can summarize complex situations allowing us to appreciate the complexity while seeing the individual components & the connections between the components They offer new insights into a situation by making us think carefully about the components & their connections, and by helping us to learn more effectively

It helps in: 2.3. Reading diagrams (1) Ability to read Ability to draw
Understanding what people are trying to say Becoming critical of our own diagrams EQUALLY IMPORTANT Ability to read diagrams Ability to draw Diagrams

2.3. Reading diagrams (2) In reading diagrams, We try to answer some basic questions: What’s the purpose of the diagram?, what is it trying to tell us? (usually it is summed up in the title) How is the information imparted or presented? What assumptions does it make about our ability to understand it? What are we expected to learn from it? How successful is it in doing all of the above?

2.3. Reading diagrams (3) NOTE That our ability to answer those questions accurately depends on the level of experience that we have in drawing different types of diagrams.

Agenda: Diagramming Appendix A: diagram types
A.1. Diagrams for exploring complex unbounded situations A.2. Diagrams for exploring bounded complex situations (or systems diagrams) A.3. Diagrams for helping to understand particular structures or processes in a bounded situation (Purpose, Elements, Conventions, Guidelines)

Introduction (1) IT DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION
There are no hard or fast rules that determine when to use most diagrams IT DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION

At specific points in particular systems methods
Introduction (2) Some diagrams are used: At specific points in particular systems methods Others are more suited to a certain task than others

Introduction (3) In the context of our study we are going to distinguish between 4 stages of diagramming: Times when you have not yet identified a system of interest Representing a system of interest Analyzing particular aspects of systems of interest Trying to understand someone else’s thinking

Introduction (4) NOTE: With more experience at diagramming, you can use your own different approaches However, in doing so, you must be clear in your own mind what you want to achieve, why you are using a particular type of diagram and what the benefits & limitations of that type of diagram are

Agenda: Diagramming Appendix A: Diagram types
A.1. Diagrams for exploring complex unbounded situations A1.1. Spray diagrams and mind maps A1.2. RICH pictures (Purpose, Elements, Conventions, Guidelines)

A.1. Diagrams for exploring complex unbounded situations (1)
Generally used at the pre-analysis phase: System of interest still unidentified we wish to make some sense of the situation diagrammatically Source of information about situation probably varied; includes written documents & conversations with key members Copyright Material © Arab Open University – Lebanon Branch_T205A_Diagramming

A.1. Diagrams for exploring complex unbounded situations (2)
At this stage it’s important to consider all the aspects of situation without focusing on any particular one too quickly. Do not rush to conclusions and judgments (not favorable) Spray diagrams; mind maps; relationships diagrams; concept maps; & rich pictures

A1.1. Spray diagrams & Mind maps (1)
MAIN TOPIC Subtopic 2 1 3 aaa bbb ccc eee fff ggg hhh xxx yyy zzz (a)

MAIN TOPIC ddd eee fff aaa ccc bbb (b)

1. Purpose: They are similar to look at, but have different functions !! Their form & structure are almost identical

Are mainly used: For representing the structure of an argument Thinking about a topic, OR For note taking.

Mind maps: IN CONTRAST, Are a little bit like brainstorming on your own, where You are trying to get your own ideas out on a paper in a relatively unstructured way. They are a simple, fast technique for getting ideas down without being concerned by details of structure They can show connections in trains of thought and can indicate groupings between ideas or thoughts Less useful when there are lots of loops or cross connections to consider

2. Elements: Central circle or blob for main topic; Blobs for sub-topics (optional); Words on the lines or at the end of lines; Branching sets of lines; Title.

3. Conventions: 1/ Put keyword or phrase in a circle 2/ Related ideas expressed in one or few words are attached to lines radiating from this circle (a single- layer spray) or from secondary circles creating fans (multiple-layer sprays) 3/ Words may be written along the lines or at the ends of lines 4/ The lines do not show directional links (no arrows!!) 5/ Similar ideas on the radiating fans can be linked by loops 6/ Different colors can be used to group or highlight particular fans or clusters of ideas

4. Guidelines: 1/ Write down the central idea leaving space all around it 2/ Identify branches from that idea you want to explore further. Write them down around the central idea and link each to it with a straight line. Keep going to see if further branches (ideas) link to it 3/ Start by working fairly freely then check to see if any of the strands are effectively the same idea 4/ If you get stuck, start a new diagram (with a new central keyword) instead of cluttering up the original

Practice on Spray Diagrams

T205A Systems Thinking & Practice

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "T205A Systems Thinking & Practice"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

T205A Systems Thinking & Practice

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "T205A Systems Thinking & Practice"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback