Restructuring Change, Interpreting Changes: The DeltaTick Modeling and Analysis Toolkit

Understanding how and why systems change over time is a powerful way to make sense of and navigate our world. By modeling those systems, learners have the opportunity to consider how their own actions influence the world, and to make predictions and recommendations for the future. But often, the very notion of change is as complex as it is powerful - population levels, global temperatures, or economic trends are all driven by multiple events and actors, but measured in terms of only a few quantities. In this paper, we discuss the motivation, design, and pilot user studies of DeltaTick, an extension to the NetLogo (Wilensky, 1999) agent-based modeling environment that allows students to easily build and analyze sophisticated models of quantitative change within specific real-world domains. To do so, they construct models in terms of agent behavior-based units, rather than the rate-based units typical of calculus-based or system dynamics models. They can then explore those models with specific attention to plots of quantitative trends that result, providing multiple opportunities for them to connect and compare their behavioral models to typical equation-based representations.

[1]  Dor Abrahamson,et al.  Learning axes and bridging tools in a technology-based design for statistics , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[2]  M. Resnick,et al.  Thinking in Levels: A Dynamic Systems Approach to Making Sense of the World , 1999 .

[3]  Alexander Repenning,et al.  The agentsheets behavior exchange: supporting social behavior processing , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[4]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  SIMCALC : Accelerating Students’ Engagement With the Mathematics of Change , 2000 .

[5]  Uri Wilensky,et al.  Statistical Mechanics for Secondary School: The GasLab Multi-agent Modeling Toolkit , 2003, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[6]  Ken Kahn Building computer models from small pieces , 2007, SCSC.

[7]  Celia Hoyles,et al.  Developing new notations for a learnable mathematics in the computational era , 2002 .

[8]  Christopher G. Langton,et al.  Artificial Life , 2019, Philosophical Posthumanism.

[9]  Werner Blum,et al.  Modelling and Applications in Mathematics Education : the 14th ICMI Study , 2007 .

[10]  Michal Yerushalmy Mathematizing Verbal Descriptions of Situations: A Language to Support Modeling , 1997 .

[11]  C. Hoyles,et al.  Tools in practice, mathematics in use , 1998 .

[12]  C. Hoyles,et al.  The Construction of Mathematical Meanings: Connecting the Visual with the Symbolic , 1997 .

[13]  Uri Wilensky,et al.  Students’ Learning with the Connected Chemistry (CC1) Curriculum: Navigating the Complexities of the Particulate World , 2009 .

[14]  Walter M. Stroup,et al.  Understanding Qualitative Calculus: A Structural Synthesis of Learning Research , 2002, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[15]  Ricardo Nemirovsky Children, Additive Change, and Calculus. , 1993 .

[16]  Paulo Blikstein,et al.  An Atom is Known by the Company it Keeps: A Constructionist Learning Environment for Materials Science Using Agent-Based Modeling , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[17]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas , 1981 .

[18]  Joel Waldfogel,et al.  Introduction , 2010, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[19]  Andrea A. diSessa,et al.  Changing Minds: Computers, Learning, and Literacy , 2000 .

[20]  Marlo Steed,et al.  Stella, a simulation construction kit: cognitive process and educational implications , 1992 .

[21]  渋江 靖弘,et al.  Science for All Americans , 1990 .