Author: teodora.boarta.20

Chaos theory is a branch of mathematics that seeks to understand the inner workings of dynamic systems, which modify their behaviour under a seemingly chaotic, non-linear way. Whether chaos theory can apply to how learning occurs, due to the myriad of internal and external factors involved, is still subject to academic debate. Examples of such internal factors are self-motivation, confidence, ability, prior knowledge, metacognitive skills and learning strategies, etc and of external factors, teacher competence, physical learning environment, government policies, etc.

Some see the interactions between such factors as similar to those in a dynamic system (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014) and draw interdisciplinary parallels as a result, whereas others say that this association is ‘misguided’ (Hunter and Benson, 2010). Either way, chaos theory can help us see education provision in a completely different light which might inspire innovative thinking in solving complex problems within the field and should be explored.

Dynamic systems

The force or influence applied by each of a system’s internal components on one another, compounded with the influence by forces external to the system, affect the dynamics of its components in unpredictable ways (Reference for Business). A good example of this is weather forecasting (Alkan), where the surface of planet Earth is a dynamic system composed of humidity, oxygen, dust and other elements. Within this system physical forces such as temperature, pressure and gravity determine movement of its composite elements in ways that can be forecasted, but not predicted exactly (e.g. where it rains, when hurricanes are formed, how often sandstorms appear, etc.). Other examples of dynamics systems are inter-human dynamics, exchange markets, and even the movement of water molecules within a glass of water that was stirred.

The reason why we can never predict how a dynamic system will react with any precision is not because its inner workings are physically chaotic and unpredictable. It is because there are too many factors influencing the system, both internally and externally, escaping our ability to identify and keep track of all of them, even with sophisticated computer modelling. Hypothetically, if we could identify ALL the factors involved, no matter how small, study their behaviour and track their influence on ALL other system components, at the same time, we would be able to predict the future. This is because dynamic systems are deterministic despite them seeming random (i.e. an event is the result of, or caused by, a series of other events that led to it and is never the result of randomness). This is why chaos does not equate randomness or erratic behaviour, but only appears to do so (Reference for Business).

Determinism is also often equated, especially in the field of philosophy, with the absence of agency and freewill. However, Chaos Theory does not remove the agentic traits of each element of the system, but maintains instead that “each component of a complex system has the ability to fluctuate, randomly and unpredictably, within the context of the system itself” (Reference for Business), while also exerting influence on its environment and other system components.

The Butterfly Effect

Determinism in the smallest influences within the system, as described above, gave rise to the concept of the Butterfly Effect, introduced by MIT, Edward Lorenzv, in the early 1960s (Reference for Business). Colloquially, we know it as when a butterfly flaps its wings in Texas, causes a hurricane in China (Boeing, 2015). Within a dynamic system the concept describes how the influence of each force or factor, no matter how small or insignificant, will result in unforeseeable, and potentially significant, impact elsewhere within the system (Reference for Business). To illustrate this, researchers John Briggs and F. David Peat have been quoted as having said that “the whole shape of things depends upon the minutest part. The part is the whole in this respect, for through the action of any part, the whole in the form of chaos or transformative change may manifest” (Wheatley, 2001).

“By analyzing problems in terms of multiple variables, one may discover a rich array of potential causes” (Çobanoğlu, 2008 in Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.511)

Because of the dynamism of internal and external forces it is often difficult to say whether a big change on the system will result in a state significantly different than the one it started from due to potential internal self-cancelling forces. Likewise, a small change could have a significant impact due to a domino effect on its components. In Change Theory, arising from the field of management, this effect is recognised through the importance placed on the human-element of a change project (or reform) and through the recognition that rarely do change projects result in the exact same planned outcomes set out at the very beginning. In the field of education, this worldview is important when thinking about reform so it can be designed and implemented with these potential effects in mind.

Application of Chaos Theory on organisations and educational establishments

In the 80s the concepts above started being applied to fields outside exact sciences, such as biology, engineering, economics, etc, but most notably to how organisations and companies work. As such, there is extensive literature that talks about how companies are falsely seen as machines with known inputs and predictable outputs (Reference for Business and Alkan). However, how well companies will do at any point in the future, and even if they will survive, cannot be predicted. Based on knowledge of the company (e.g. its financial health, internal policies, expansion strategies, etc) one can only forecast how well it will do in the future, but the myriad of external (such as market conditions, politics, and even weather, etc) and internal factors (such as team dynamics, management policies and styles, and even the mood of one single individual within the company, etc.) makes it impossible to predict with absolute certainty how well it will do at any point in the future.

Within organisations order is often equated with control and extensive efforts are made to tightly control ‘inputs’ (e.g. people’s behaviours and performances) for desired outcomes (Reference for Business). However, “chaos theory implies that this is unnecessary, even harmful” (Reference for Business). Schools and other educational establishments are also institutions subject to organisational forces. Therefore the literature on chaos theory applied to organisations is also applicable to educational institutions, as seen is a 2014 study by Akmansoy, V. and Kartal, S. Fundamentally, this idea that one should allow self-organisation within the institution, guided by a shared mission and purpose, is one that can be applied in relation to teacher autonomy over the educational content.

Characteristics of dynamic systems relevant to the field of education

The above means that the state of a dynamic system at any one point is sensitive to initial conditionsand changes over time (‘initial’ here refers to a snapshot of the system dynamics at a previous point in time as each state is preceded by a previous one, as no state appeared from scratch but resulted from a previous one).

In education this means that every single experience a child has during their educational journey will impact their performance in some way, sometimes positively or negatively (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.511), from obvious ones such as the quality of didactic materials, to less obvious ones such as that one time when they were told off by the teacher. This does not suggest that we should control for every single factor as part of a child’s educational experience, but we need to acknowledge that these influences exist and be mindful of them when designing educational experiences and school reform. In chaos theory applied to education, this aspect has been used to highlight how one missed lesson can have unforeseen consequences on a child’s education further down the line (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.511).

It also means that a child’s educational performance fluctuates over time and a snapshot of a child’s performance and ability at any one time is not a predictor of success later on (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.511). This is important in reviewing policies that cut out children with poor performance or bad behaviour from the system, as, because of the Butterfly Effect, we can see that “a student can make a difference, and that schools should make use of all of the abilities that their students have (Çobanoğlu, 2008, in Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.515).

Another key term in the chaos theory vocabulary is that of non-linearity. This is used to describe the seemingly chaotic behaviour of elements within a dynamic system due to the myriad of difficult-to-trace dynamics within. The concept of non-linearity has also been applied to the learning process to suggest that a tightly controlled, static and timed, educational path for any student (e.g. that involves careful planning and scaffolding of knowledge, etc.), will not determine a certain outcome, although it may affect it in unpredictable ways (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.511). For instance, a child’s understanding of the learning material and their ability to learn and apply it at any one point changes, even if very slightly, with every experience they go through. Sometimes this allows them to perform better, absorb more, or demotivates them and sets them back temporarily. This dynamic and fluctuation is not compatible with a static and pre-set learning path.

While the above does not reveal a solution to better adapt the provided learning path to match this dynamism and optimise a child’s learning experience, it does explain why rigidity in the sequencing of how learning content is structured and expected completion within a given window of time, is not an educational model aligned with the aim of giving each child the learning opportunities needed to succeed.

“The disorder caused by chaos in education should not frighten educators; on the contrary, it should be used as an opportunity to seek order from chaos and then reorganize the system to adapt to this new situation” (Akmansoy & Kartal, 2014, p.517)

Bibliography

• Akmansoy, V. & Kartal, S., 2014, ‘Chaos Theory and its Application to Education: Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Case’. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. Available at:  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1038743.pdf
• Alkan, B.E., (undated) ‘Organizations in ‘Chaos’: What can chaos theory teach us about organizations? Medium.com, available at: https://medium.com/rethinking-organizations/organizations-in-chaos-what-can-chaos-theory-teach-us-about-organizations-71a4276578ef
• Boeing, G., 2015, ‘Chaos Theory and the Logistic Map’. Geoff Boeing Blog, available online at https://geoffboeing.com/2015/03/chaos-theory-logistic-map/
• Hunter, W. & Benson, G.,  2010, ‘Arrows in Time: The Misapplication of Chaos Theory to Education’. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 29. 87-100. Available online at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261688528_Arrows_in_Time_The_Misapplication_of_Chaos_Theory_to_Education
• Reference for Business, (undated), ‘Chaos Theory’, available at: https://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Bun-Comp/Chaos-Theory.html
• Wheatley, M.J. (2001) ‘Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World Revised’. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2001.

Blog under construction 🙂

Will be available ahead of our 2nd workshop on Thursday, 24 June.

Please note that the blog on ‘Change Theory’ will be covering different material than the one on ‘Theory of Change’ which will be made available ahead of the 3rd Workshop (date TBC).

Co-authors: Rebekah Simon and Teodora Boarta

(NB: This blog is an opinion piece and was created to serve as a conversation starter for the Designing Education workshops. Therefore it should not be used as reference in any academic writing.)

Since the introduction of compulsory educational systems in the UK, and its adoption in the form of universal education around the world, educational systems changed in response to multiple factors, often political in nature. Some of these factors reflected changes in society which put pressure on the governments of the time to reform the system to serve the changing needs of society (for instance, it is believed that compulsory education in the UK was the result of the rising need in a skilled labour force following the Industrial Revolution).

However, these changes often had a time lag and reform in education, when responding to a societal change, often takes some time to adapt to new environmental conditions. Can it be argued that the changes in today’s society are increasingly being outpaced by the system’s ability to adapt to these changes? If so, are there ways in which we can make it more responsive? For instance, can discussions on possible future scenarios of society and education be helpful in this matter?

Whether changes and pressures within society should be a sufficient catalyst to reform education or not is in itself value laden, and largely controversial. Should education change to respond to psycho-emotional pressures children face nowadays? Some would argue that education is reserved only to the development of rational thought (Hand, 2008, p.219), and addressing aspects outside of it, such as resilience, is not within the school’s remit.

Should education seek to equip children for the challenges a society faces at any given time? If yes, in what ways? See table below with a short list of examples (by no means exhaustive) of changes in the past 50 years, their impact on society and their potential significance for education.

Change	Current Impact	Significance for education
Internet	Instant access toinformation Increased onlinepresence Connecting individuals and communities across the globe Cyber threats Inequality in access to broadband	Increased need for media literacy Internet safety education Equality in remote learning Impact on mental health of students Globalization – more access to new cultures and people
Advancements in science and medicine	Higher demand for STEM skills and specialisations and less funding for arts More technological literacy necessary for low skill/low wage jobs Research and prototyping new technologies requires interdisciplinary collaboration and project management skills. We live longer lives which has an indirect impact on how services are funded (including education)	Need for emphasis on civic education and community engagement Education is less holistic and more specialized Pressure on students to choose a field that is profitable (greater number of graduates in STEM fields and fewer students studying humanities) Floods of new graduates in STEM field without evidence of higher employability Advances in tech require constant continuing education (e.g. lifetime education)
AI and automation	Data tracking and monitoring Productivity-driven mindset Algorithm-curated content Changes in the labour market and work environments	More self-paced, individualized learning Shift to ‘human skills’, such as adaptability, flexibility, creativity, etc. Less socialization in classrooms Backlash from parents and increased socio-economic divides in access to tech-driven and tech-free learning
Climate Change	Shift in methods of energy production Major changes in where people live Emphasis on sustainability Shift in focus from ‘individualism and ‘consumerism’ to the ‘collective’ and the ‘global’.	Social action mindset Sustainability in the classroom Need for cultural literacy Individual responsibility vs. responsibility of government and corporations Skills to solve complex social problems

Over the past two decades, there have been a myriad of rapid changes in the education sector, as well as changes in the labour market and new technological developments. Many of the changes have been caused or exacerbated by the implementation of new technology in classrooms, as well as a decline in humanities education and an increased interest in STEM subjects. These changes create many new challenges in the field of education, and we should seriously consider whether these challenges need to be addressed in order to fulfil the goal of creating an equitable education system which imparts knowledge and skills while also producing a self-reliant populus.

While the table above tackles reflections on the educational system now, there are also more medium- and long-term trends that we could be considering and factor in long before they occur. This is because the educational cycle of a child is between 12-17 years of education. In order to create an educational system that prepares pupils for entering a society 20 years from now, education needs to think in advance of what such a society might look like and adapt our education systems to pre-empt meeting its demands. For instance we should be considering trends such as: multi-profession, passion-driven career, focus on work-life balance (including for pupils) or a demand for individualised services (including in education).

Deep dive into: Internet, AI, and automation

While there is much that can be said about automation and changes in the labour market, perhaps one of the most important changes of the last few decades has been the shift in focus from reading and writing as the fundamentals of literacy to a much wider definition. This is seen in education through the need to “mak[e] sense of abundant, often conflicting pieces of information, [and] assess the reliability of sources and the validity of given claims within concrete cultural contexts.” (OECD)

Technological and digital literacy is perhaps the most important component of this shift. However, theevidence is not strong enough to support claims about the relationship between tech and student outcomes (OECD). Also the introduction of technology as a component of schooling has served to widen the gap in access to education between different social groups. While the impact of new technologies should not be ignored in education, more thinking needs to be done around how this is integrated in the classroom. This may require a user-focused (i.e. pupils) approach, careful instructional design considerations and changes in curriculum and pedagogy.

Recent studies revealed that higher rates of screen time among adolescents have a negative impact on psychological well-being. This changes the way we should think about the future of technology and AI learning systems in the classroom, and what the best way of both encouraging students to gain skills in the area of digital literacy while also fostering good mental health and psychological well-being.

How do we plan for the future?

OECD has developed four possible scenarios for the future of education in order to start a conversation around how prepared we are as a society for each and what the gaps are. The scenarios are:

1. Schooling extended – education is the primary way of gaining social and economic capital, so more people stay in school for longer, and degrees begin to lose their value
2. Learning outsourced – Traditional schooling systems break down as society becomes more directly involved in educating its citizens. Learning takes place through more diverse, privatised and flexible arrangements, with digital technology a key driver.
3. Schools remain, but diversity and experimentation are the norm. Opening the “school walls” connects schools to their communities, favouring ever-changing forms of learning, civic engagement and social innovation.
4. Education takes place everywhere, anytime. Distinctions between formal and informal learning are no longer valid as society turns itself entirely to the power of the machine.

(Via OECD four scenarios schooling)

While we may not all agree on whether education should mirror major changes in society, they should at the very least inform how we think about the future of education. There are many facets that must be considered, from the mental health and well-being of students to the changing landscape of career opportunities, and the window of opportunity to rethink education through those lenses is narrowing rapidly.

Bibliography

• Hand, M., 2008, ‘WHAT SHOULD WE TEACH AS CONTROVERSIAL? A DEFENSE OF THE EPISTEMIC CRITERION’. Educational theory, 58(2), pp.213–228. Available online at https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/docview/214135706?pq-origsite=primo
• OECD, 2020, ‘Back to the Future of Education: Four OECD Scenarios for Schooling, Educational Research and Innovation’, OECD Publishing, Paris, Available online at https://doi.org/10.1787/178ef527-en.
• Schmidt, B., 2018, ‘The Humanities Are in Crisis’. The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 4 Sept. 2018. Available online at www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/08/the-humanities-face-a-crisisof-confidence/567565/.
• Twenge, J.M, and Campbell, W.K, 2018, ‘Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study’. Preventive medicine reports vol. 12 271-283. 18 Oct. 2018. Available online at doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.10.003.
• Waters, R., 2018, ‘The Backlash Against Screen Time at School’. The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 15 Nov. 2018. Available online at www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/11/screen-time-backlash/567934/.
• Wexler, N., 2021, ‘How Classroom Technology Is Holding Students Back’. MIT Technology Review, 29 Apr. 2021. Available online at www.technologyreview.com/2019/12/19/131155/classroom-technology-holding-students-back-edtech-kids-education/.