A SYSTEM DYNAMICS APPROACH TO TEACHING OF SETTLEMENT GEOGRAPHY
Orasa Suksawang
Faculty of Social Sciences
Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand
ABSTRACT
This paper explains an effort to approach system dynamics
as a tool for designing a curriculum and integrating experimental
learning in a course titled Geography of Settlements. The course
is offered for undergraduate students in the field of. Social
Sciences at Kasetsart University. Its contents deal with change
over time and space and integration of physical and social
contexts of change. The lectures incorporate experimentation in
computer-based learning for understanding. theories and
information relationships existing in the spatial organization,
settlement problems and developments. After students have
learned system dynamics concepts and feedback system, they. are
asked to formulate the causal. loops. and simple models of
settlement growth and urbanization with policies for
environmental control, before coming up with physical planning
and designing a town or a city. The responses of students in
class and group discussion as well as exercise outputs are
examined and compared to the control group of students who have
no experience with this approach.
Introduction
Settlement provides a focus for interdisciplinary study. The
economist, sociologist, historian, psychologist and geographer
are all able to examine a settlement from a clearly defined
disciplinary base. Geography acts as an integrator, borrowing
from the other disciplines but, at the same time, making its own
distinctive contribution, particularly with respect to spatial
organisation (Daniel and Hopkinson 1989, p.7).
In the past , geographers have argued that the physical
condition in the area actively determined the pattern and
organisation of settlement. Today the concept of 'physical
determinism' has been superseded by the realisation that social
factors are also important in the location and developing
character of any settlement (Daniel and Hopkinson 1989,p.13).
Development and change in human settlements can not be separated,
either conceptually or analytically, from the processes of
economic and social development (Habitat 1987,p.7).
The course on Settlement Geography offerred for
undergraduate students in the field of social sciences at
Kasetsart University has been traditionally taught static images
of the settlement problems while they are dynamic. Most of the
students in this course are hardly familiar with science and
mathematics especially system concept. They learned by
Page 572
System Dynamics '91 Page’573
remembering ,ignoring the interaction between the course contents
as well as the relationship with the other subjects. They rapidly
forgot what they have learned. This reminds Forrester (1990)'s
statement that" the human mind grasps pictures,’ maps and static
relationships in a wonderfully effective way. but in systems of
interacting components that change through time, the human mind
is a poor simulator of behavior."
The author has just joined Kasetsart University in the
Department of Geography and has been teaching 3 subjects in
applied geography namely Rural, Agricultural and Settlement
Geography. It has been found that there is a repetition of
some theories taught in these subjects. The student once learned
a theory in one subject could not relate to another subject
because of the fragmented teaching process. This results .in
disconnected adoption of the knowledge. This paper reports the
feedback of the student after changing the teaching pattern by
using system approach and system dynamics concept as a framework
for curriculum design of Settlement Geography and cohesion to the
related subjects based on the same major theories.
Existing Study Environment
Faculty of Social Sciences at Kasetsart University provides
6 major studies as follows : Psychology, Sociology, Political
Science and Public Administration, Law , Historym:and Geography.
Total - undergraduate and graduate students account presently for
797 people. Although the Faculty has been promoted for 15 years,
facilities as experimental laboratories for nourishment of social
sciences study are insufficient compared to the number of
students. There are psychological lab, cartographical lab and
computer lab in which 3 microcomputers (PC compatible) are
available for faculty staff and graduate students using
statistical analysis and word processing.
Evaluation by the fourth year.social sciences students
done in 1990 shows the significant feature that much of what are
taught in social sciences classes is repetitive and lacks
intellectual stimulus and challenge to the students.It seemed to
them that one teacher would lecture the same things even in
different subjects. As Forrester (1990) states " education is
fragmented. Social studies, physical science, biology, and other
subjects are taught as if they were inherently different from one
another even though dynamic behavior in each rests on the same
underlying concepts...Humanities are taught without relating the
dynamic sweep of history to similar behaviors on a shorter time
scale that the student can experience in a week or a year. .....A
student is expected to create a unity from the fragments of the
educational experience. But the teachers themselves have seldom
achieved that unity."
This supports Saeed (1990) 's paper discussing that "The
teaching of social sciences, including that for the
methodological courses forming part of a curriculum, is
Page 574 System Dynamics '91
nevertheless conducted predomenantly on the conventional lines of
the lecture, emphasizing the learning of.the theoretical premises
or the mechanics of a method without necessarily going through an
involved reflective process. Supervised laboratory or studio
sessions are rares. An opportunity to reflect might occur while
the student is working on the exercises often assigned in the
course of the teaching, but it may not be taken full advantage of
since there is often inadequate help in designing and
interpreting experimentation relevant to exercise."
Curriculum Design in Settlement Geography
Traditionally, The Geographer examined cause and effect to
describe the relationship between settlement and physical
environment in a rather subjective and unscientific manner
(Pattison, 1973). The search for common characteristics was
gradually extended to include a search for order in both the
spacing of settlements and their internal organization. The
‘quantitative revolution', as it became known, meant that
scientific method was adopted by the geographer in the search for
a greater understanding of spatial organization. Underlying the
quantitative revolution was the belief that problem-solving was a
rational process, relying upon logical thought and accurate
information for its success. While reliance upon economic theory,
mathematically analysed data and a logical approach is attractive
and appears eminently reasonable, many geographers have grown
dissatisfied with the effectiveness and relevant of such methods
when applied to real world problems (Daniel and Hopkinson, 1989).
Settlement theories generally available in the text book of
settlement geography provide studies of internal and external
structure of settlement or town. Internal structure theories
named Concentric Zone developed by Earnest W. Burgess in 1925,
Sector Theory by Homer Hoyt in 1939 and Multiple Nuclei Theory by
Harris and Ullman in 1945, explain land use pattern, growth of a
town as well as economic activities in terms of spatial
organization within a town. While external structure focuses
spatial organization between towns, the role and functions of
each town. A well known study is Central Place Theory, developed
by Walter Christaller in 1932, which explains a hierarchy and
location of settlements based on a number, size, function and
space between the central places.
Settlements change in size and form in constant, though
usually delayed, response to the changing economic and _ social
development of the surrounding areas (Everson & FitzGerald,1969
p.112). However, these theories cannot explain successfully the
interaction between elements of a settlement system based on
concept of change while the Urban Interaction Theory, a system
dynamics model developed by Jay W. Forrester in 1969 can
experiment through time the interaction between elements of an
urban system with the advantage of forecasting long term trend.
System Dynamics can provide that dynamic framework to give
meaning to. detail, facts sources of information, and human
System Dynamics '91 Page 575
responses (Forréstér,' 199U).
PocssseesessesoeSsses {System Dynamics Approach
I (Causal diagram and
! feedback loop concept)
!
1 H
1 {
| v
| Development and Changes of
i
1
!
F seas
H | Political 'k--->[ Socio-Economic {<--->| Physical |
1
1
I
i
i
1
1
1
i
!
1
1
i
1
1
Poof LEER eee eee anaes
|
1 in terms of spatial differences !
t in Location, Function, Size, Form and Pattern
! I t 1
1
' r------ eee S ° Perse Ramana pesedosecraes 7
1 i Rural 1 | Settlement ! ! Agriculyural |
! i Geography 1 tGeography ; | Geography |
i beswcnos oem 4 brome Ey J Dearie cals eens 4
a
1 be
H Settlement Theories
H (Static Concept) (Dynamic Concept)
apeey ?
explaining spatial organization explaining interaction
Within Between between elements of
Settlement Settlement an urban system
* Concentric Zone * Central * Urban Interaction
* Sector Place Theory
* Multiple Nuclei Theory
Theories
Fig.1 Structure of Curriculum Design for Settlement Geography
Page 576 System Dynamics '91
Fig.1 shows the structure of curriculum design in
settlement geography course by incorporate the system dynamics
concept as a framework of teaching process and a linkage to the
other related courses. The interactions between the development
and changes of political, socio-economic and physical factors as
well as the effects of these factors on the changes of settlement
in terms of location, function and size, will be explained in
causal diagram and feedback loop concept. Simple system dynamics
model in urban system is experimented to get the better
understanding of traditionally static theories in spatial
organization.
An Outline of Course Contents
4 hours per week
Week 1 : Lecture. 3
Concept of Settlement Geography as a system approach, definition
of system, simulation and models.
Week 2 : Debate & lecture.
Debate on a life in a city is better than an upcountry? Lecture
on causation, feedback, and system boundary using contents
arrived from the debate and some exercises from Nancy Roberts
and et al :Introduction to computer simulation: The system
dynamics approach (1983).
Week 3 : Lecture and group discussion.
Graphing and analysing the behavior of feedback system linking
casual loop and graph. group discussion on topics from daily
newspapers.
Week 4 : Lecture and group work survey.
Settlement origin and growth. To survey a slum near the
university and construct the casual loops of a system in order to
capture variables for interviewing next time.
Week . 5,6,7,8 : Lecture and model experiment.
Settlement theories, growth of town, urban center and rural and
urban system. Experiment to the class on urban dynamics model
developed by Alfeld and Graham (1976).
Week 9 : Mid- term exam.
Week 10,11,12,13 : Lecture and group discussion.
Industrialization & urbanization (case studies on Asian
coutries), action for human settlement problems.
Week 14,15,16,17 : Field trip and group work report.
Field trip to slum in Bangkok: comparison between the old and new
ones. Data collection and analysis on a case study : The problems
of a slum near Kasetsart University and policies proposed for
environmental control.
Week 18 : Report presentation and final exam.
Evaluation of the Course
This class consisted of 16 second year students with no
background of a system thinking. A traditional learning pattern
was taking notes all words from a lecturer or projection
transparencies without understanding since the students were
afraid of having nothing to overcome the examination. The first
week of introducing a change to learning by thinking with system
System Dynamics '91 Page 577
concept, there was a question from the class why they had to
recognise this since it was not relevant to the settlement course
based on the settlement geography text books. Before mid-term
exam some students were worried whether the exam might be loaded,
because the lectures covered all the topics of the text book, and
what to do for the two months left and the final exam.
However, it was observed that there was a vital
participation in the group discussion and working group
presentation and report. The students found that they could
capture the problems in the real world on a survey exercise quite
rapidly and have wider perspectives in terms of the relationship
among variables as well as save time to design the questionaire
for data collection and analysis after they had some experience
in system thinking and construction of causal diagram and
feedback loop. concept. The big change is that most of them
could assimilate knowledge of the subjects by understanding not
only remembering which can be shown in the final exam evaluation
and group work presentation compared to the group learned this
course in the traditional process.
Conclusion
Since this was the first change of learning process with
inadequate computer laboratory session, though the _ students
lacked an opportunity to cultivate 'reflective practice' which
should allow the practitioner to engage with self experiment, the
outcomes of -a change could be a promise for the future
development of learning facilities and more participation to
this approach from the faculties.
References
Pattison,W. (1973), The Four Traditions in Geography, in Bale,J.,
et al. Perspectives in Geographical Education, Oliver & Boyd.
(quote from Daniel, P. and Hopkinson,M. 1989, The Geography of
Settlements, Oliver & Boyd.)
Daniel,P. and Hopkinson, M. (1989), The Geography of Settlements,
Oliver & Boyd.
Habitat, (1987), Global Report on Human Settlements, Oxford
University Press.
Forrester, Jay W. (1990), System Dynamics as a Foundation for
Pre-College Education Proceedings of 1990 International
System Dynamics Conference , Vol. 1, p. 369
Forrester, Jay W. (1969), Urban Dynamics, MIT Press.
Alfeld,L. and Graham,K.(1976),Introduction to Urban Dynamics, MIT
Press.
Saeed, K.(1990), Bringing Practicum to Learning: A System Dynamics
Modelling Approach. Higher Education Policy, Vol.3, No.2,p. 44
Everson, J.A. & FitzGerald, B.P.(1972), Settlement Patterns,
Longman Group Ltd, London.
Roberts,N. and et al (1983), Introduction to Computer
Simulation: The System Dynamics Approach, Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company.
