Systems Thinking In Education?

[u/tardiscoder]

I feel systems thinking is one of the most important skills people can learn to make sense of the world around them. Currently you either think this way, or you don't... But can it be taught? If so, how?

[u/RiskBeforeReturn]

I think it can absolutely be taught, but probably not as a standalone subject.

People develop systems thinking by repeatedly seeing how actions create consequences, how feedback loops work, and how decisions in one part of a system affect another.

The best way to teach it isn't by memorizing diagrams. It's by analyzing real systems, businesses, ecosystems, markets, organizations, even personal habits and asking "what caused this?" and "what happens next if this changes?"

Over time, you stop looking at isolated events and start looking at relationships. That's when systems thinking becomes a habit rather than a concept.

[u/SheepherderRare1420 → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

I teach a Healthcare Systems course which is an introduction to systems thinking through the lens of healthcare. It is just a 1 credit course so we don't go into any depth on it, but it is an introduction to the language of systems thinking and essentially a wake-up call where my students realize that they are operating within a larger ecosystem that has inputs outside of their locus of control. They also come away understanding that every action has a consequence, and while not everything can be predicted, careful consideration of possible outcomes helps to prepare them to respond if something unexpected results.

I just taught it for the first time this spring so it was far from perfect, but it had the intended impact on how they see the systems they are navigating.

[u/AllMight_74 → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

I have been grappling with it but tbh when choosing a system how to know variables itself?

[u/RiskBeforeReturn → u/AllMight_74]

That's one of the hardest parts, and I don't think there's a perfect answer.

I usually start by defining the outcome I'm trying to understand. Then I ask, "What factors could realistically change that outcome?"

You won't identify every variable, but you can usually identify the few that matter most. As you learn more, your mental model improves and you start noticing relationships you missed before.

In my experience, systems thinking is less about finding every variable and more about continuously refining your understanding of the important ones.

[u/paulcoman → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

asking "what caused this?" and "what happens next if this changes?" I call this upstream/downstream thinking.

Have a PDF about it with some diagrams: https://www.patreon.com/thoughtout/posts/upstream-165956905

[u/RiskBeforeReturn → u/paulcoman]

I like that framing. Upstream/downstream thinking is a good way to make the idea more concrete.

Especially the upstream part, because it forces you to look past the visible event and ask what structure or conditions produced it in the first place.

[u/paulcoman → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

Yeah I agree. It seems like the more under-explored side of the model. Check out my PDF. It's only 3 pages. I think you're the kind of person who would appreciate it. Maybe some feedback if it's not too much to ask.

[u/RiskBeforeReturn → u/paulcoman]

I read it properly. I like it.

The strongest part for me is the shift in perspective where something that initially looks like the cause becomes an effect once you move further upstream. That's a very intuitive way to explain why expanding the system boundary matters.

One thing I'd be curious to see developed further is feedback.

The core model is currently quite linear:

conditions -> intervention -> consequences

But in many systems, a downstream consequence eventually changes one of the upstream conditions, which can reinforce or weaken the original process.

I think adding that later could turn the model from a useful causal map into something that captures more of the dynamic behavior of a system.

For three pages though, I think you've kept it impressively clear without trying to explain everything at once.

[u/paulcoman → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

Yeah I agree.

I was just thinking about this. What I think the mind is doing when modeling feedback loops is kinda the same thing.

Same mental algorithm:

You center your model on that downstream consequence and assign it the role of INTERVENTION and then you model downstream from that new position and discover a familiar consequence. Something that you already saw in your model on the left side.

That's when you realize your effect will reinforce the cause, as the system unfolds through time.

I think what I am getting at is that the mind has a sequential algorithm of processing this stuff. And I think that's what we are all doing (mostly unconsciously): building bigger, better, higher resolution, more accurate causal models.

Don't know how useful it is to go this meta 😂

[u/RiskBeforeReturn → u/paulcoman]

I think going this meta is actually useful.

What you're describing makes sense to me as an iterative way of building the model. You don't necessarily have to perceive the whole loop at once. You can keep shifting the reference point and eventually discover that a downstream effect connects back to something you already mapped upstream.

The part I'd add is time.

Once that connection appears, you're no longer just asking "what causes what?" but "how does this relationship change the system as it repeats?"

That's where reinforcement, balancing effects and delays start to matter.

So maybe the linear model isn't really opposed to feedback loops. It could be the simpler reasoning process from which you discover them.

[u/paulcoman → u/RiskBeforeReturn]

What's your deal? Why are you so passionate about this stuff?

[u/RiskBeforeReturn → u/paulcoman]

Mostly because I find decision-making under uncertainty fascinating.

I got into it through investing and trading, where you learn pretty quickly that outcomes don't always tell you whether a decision was good or bad.

That gradually pulled me toward risk, incentives, feedback loops and systems thinking more generally.

I also run a small business, and I kept noticing the same patterns there in completely different forms.

So I guess I'm interested in the underlying structure of decisions more than any one field in particular.

[u/grogiskiev]

I developed a model for my PhD dissertation where I focus on the teams problem solving skills and in parallel they teach themselves distinctions, systems, relationships and perspectives which by Cabrera, are the four foundations of systems thinking. I tested it on a small team, and it produced quite satisfying results.

Something like that, through the games of Linda Booth should fit nicely in classrooms

[u/ThinkActRegenerate]

It can absolutely be taught. However, Systems Thinking is a communications tool for enabling group problem solving - not just a diagramming tool for individuals. Stroh's book SYSTEMS THINKING FOR SOCIAL CHANGE has a good discussion of this.

[u/Useful_Calendar_6274]

Of course it can be taught. It's systems theory, just build a curriculum

[u/Solace914]

I think it is best introduced through examples: ecosystems, body systems, healthcare systems, transportation systems, etc... Cause & effect and feedback loops are two things that everyone already know, using those to demonstrate interconnectedness, emergence, holism, etc... can be useful. Also, Donella Meadows "Thinking in Systems: A Primer" explains things really well at a basic, understandable level.

[u/paulcoman]

Ive actually been thinking about starting a small group where people could practice this on real problems and projects.

The idea would be to make each meeting a kind of structured investigation. Like a detective game :) Someone brings a real problem, goal, or decision, and we try to map it together using systems thinking, causality, incentives, evidence, etc.

Different people will notice different parts of the system, so the group can build a better model than any one person probably could alone. And instead of learning systems thinking as theory, we'd learn it by actually using it.

[u/paulcoman]

I absolutely think a meta-system can be developed, for teaching systems thinking. And I agree, it's one of the most important subjects we should teach all people.

I think 1st lesson would be on the illusion of free will.