Waters Center Blog

Articles about systems thinking from our staff and guest writers

School attendance, and the problem of chronic absenteeism is a community-based problem that requires coherent solutions and action across stakeholder groups. Assigning the blame to schools would be misplaced; asking schools to solve the problem unilaterally fails to understand the scope of the problem, so we need local solutions that match the particular set of needs. Systems Thinking Habits and tools can serve as a method to help school communities develop solutions.

Introduction

School non-attendance is a community-based problem. When children do not attend school regularly, there is a cascade of problems caused in the near- and long-term. It goes without saying that there are many school-based factors, well within a school leader’s control, that impact school attendance. However, to make the type of change necessary to impact our current situation, we must look beyond the school-yard gates and into the communities that students live in. A community-based approach shoulders an important assumption - that no one entity within the system shoulders the full burden. For this reason, a Systems Thinking-informed approach is necessary to make lasting change.

The Problem of Chronic Absenteeism

No educator can escape the blaring alarm about student attendance and the increasing rate of students who are chronically absent (defined as missing 10% or more of the school year). We have seen a 11% rise in an already problematic rate of chronic absenteeism since COVID-19 began, from 15% to 26% of students in the 22-23 school year (NY Times). The term crisis has been applied to an issue in education many times in the recent past, usually in relation to student achievement, however, we are now contending with a crisis that could impact foundational principles of our society and communities. If children are not attending school, they certainly cannot learn reading, writing and mathematics. Moreover, they miss out on the socialization that school provides, and the safety net provided by educational institutions which mitigate hunger, abuse, and other detrimental risk factors that injure families and communities.

A simple google search reveals numerous articles that describe the phenomena of chronic absenteeism and the attempts to legislate policy solutions (NYTimes, ProPublica, NCSL). Ranging from mandates placed on school systems, contracts with private companies to intervene with students and families, incentive programs for students, and restorative practices meant to reintegrate students with schools, possible solutions feel in endless supply. With everyone looking for a quick fix, it is possible that school leaders feel inundated with ideas, overwhelmed by the problem, and that they are grasping at straws.

School is “optional”

So what does the current situation around schooling reflect? I believe that a recent headline from The New York Times may say it best - “Our relationship with school became optional.” It is reasonable to attribute a negative connotation with the word “optional”, implying that perhaps students and families are disregarding their civic commitment to education. Instead, let’s take the emotionality out and think of this as a new relationship where other, multitudinous, factors come into the decision-making of students and families so that school is an option for where to spend time among many other possible spaces. Taking this at face value, we can suppose that students and families are making “rational” choices based on the information and beliefs that they have and the situations that they find themselves in. As good systems thinkers do, let’s not assign blame and rather let’s define the problem as carefully as we can.

Leaning into the notion that the relationship between communities and schools has shifted compels us to examine causes and effects not from a linear perspective, but rather from a circular or recursive one. Human relationships, and the connections between cause and effect in a human system, are rarely simplistic enough to manage and change unless we are prepared to recognize their complexity and that context matters. We are compelled to think about how the boundaries that we draw in our analysis enables and constrains our ability to make change in the system.

Even though one-size-fits-all approaches feel more suitable, and because we have a natural compulsion to manage problems on a broad scale, since student absenteeism is a community-based problem we should consider more community-based approaches. In fact, The Learning Policy Institute has conducted research that suggests that Community Schools, ones that link students with in- and out-side resources are more likely to mitigate the symptom of chronic absenteeism (LPI). In essence, the boundaries around the phenomena of chronic absenteeism expand beyond the schoolhouse gates and outside of the direct control of school leaders.

Where do we draw boundaries?

The crisis of school attendance and student absenteeism is a symptom of structural changes in communities. Let’s see this as a manifestation of one of the 14 Habits in Systems Thinking - A system’s structure generates its behavior. Policymakers and educational leaders agree that COVID-19 and the ramifications of school closures and work/home changes that occurred dramatically impacted and even exacerbated an already increasing problem with school attendance. Blaming the school closures alone is not sufficient to understand the full scope of the problem. Looking at some recent articles we can see that the structure is not just changing, but also shifting in different ways in different places. Reasons for absences may range from:

Family vacations
Care for siblings and/or adults in the home
Student illness
Sense of safety at school
Lack of transportation
Mental health
Sickness (COVID & other more routine illnesses)
Parental work schedules
Academic avoidance

Even with this knowledge in hand, the legislation is woefully lacking in comprehensiveness and innovation, compelling school systems to manage the crisis in a silo. In essence, for many school leaders, the boundaries of the system for school attendance have been artificially drawn closely around the school system. To improve the conditions for attendance for students and families, perhaps we need to consider a broader inclusion of the structures within the social system that contribute to school (non)attendance and work to widen our influence. By expanding the boundaries of our system, we increase the complexity but also the likelihood of finding solutions - extending a clarion call for using Systems Thinking Habits and Tools.

A Systems Thinking Informed Approach

The categorical reasons why students are absent are likely similar across contexts. The list above captures the vast majority of why, however, the prevalence of one reason compared to others likely differs between communities. In communities with higher income levels and greater social capital, there may well be more family vacations, more diagnosed mental health concerns, and perhaps increased academic avoidance. In settings with lower income levels, sickness, caring for siblings, and safety concerns may be more consistent barriers for students. The question is whether policymakers and leaders in local communities know what the composition of causes in their community actually is. Unfortunately, the factors are obscured by the simple fact that the observable trend is that students are absent from school.

From a Systems Thinking perspective, if we only measure the pattern based on school absence and fail to account for the causes, this may obscure the need to address the problem on a community-based level, and we fail to shift our perspective to attend to the causes. Said in another way, because the observable problem and scale of absenteeism appears to be similar across communities, leaders and policymakers assume that a congruent set of solutions will drive change. This stands in contrast to a Systems Thinking approach grounded in the Habits of a Systems Thinker and systems thinking tools that help us to prioritize the context and needs within the community, to (re)design a structure in order to generate different outcomes.

Using a Systems Thinking Approach

Re-conceptualize the boundaries of the system - Instead of viewing the school at the center of the system, let’s consider the student at the center. This change of perspective offers us an opportunity to see the system through a new lens and shifts responsibility for school attendance to many entities. Since chronic absenteeism affects students in the primary grades through the upper grades of high schools, if we wish to impact the system in an efficient and meaningful way, we should consider the role of the family and care structures that surround the children. Some of the organizations that have an impact on our system include employers, healthcare providers, transportations services, and other culturally important institutions. Each has both an interest in students attending school regularly and can also influence school attendance.
Visualize connections - If we assume that there are many influences on student attendance, we should consider that there are high-leverage actions that are outside of the control of the school, alone. A Systems Thinking model for change would ask us to make meaningful connections within and between systems. For example, including community health agencies, local transportation agencies, housing agencies, childcare providers, and others in the discussion about chronic absenteeism illuminates the interactions that families and students may have beyond the school. While we might not establish standing partnerships in this effort, by visualizing the system broadly we increase chances of finding viable solutions.
Understand that mental models are the foundation of action - It is all too easy to take a deficit-minded approach - “Parents are not engaged” “Students don’t care” “They’re just lazy”. When making policy or determining how to change the behaviors of others, all too often leaders substitute their own norms and beliefs for those who they seek to influence. However, if we take a Systems Thinking approach we ground ourselves in the belief that mental models, the underlying and often sub/unconscious heuristics that lead to choices and action, are developed from experiences and imparted from trusted sources. To effect change on the system that surrounds students who are chronically absent, we must begin by learning the mental models and then determine methods to alter behavior in spite of existing mental models or by influencing the complexion of mental models in place.
Tools to visualize thinking and assist us in developing context-sensitive solutions could include the following:

Behavior Over Time Graphs: We can map a trend over time and visualize our story. This tool could help stakeholders tell their own stories and share their own perspectives to generate deeper insights into the problem.
Ladder of Inference: When analyzing data, the Ladder can serve as a tool to understand how our own biases impact our conclusions. Additionally, using the Ladder might help identify stakeholders and elements in our system that we might overlook.
Stock-Flow Diagram: By mapping our system using a stock-flow diagram, we can better understand the in- and out-flows and conditions that are modifying student attendance.
Iceberg Model: By mapping out our understanding of the events, patterns, structures, and mental models, we can identify points of leverage.

Conclusion

It has become more and more clear that fundamental shifts are occurring in the fabric of our society, and the choice to attend school regularly is perhaps one of the paradigms that are deeply affected. Changing the relationship that communities, families, and students have with school to more closely resemble our ideal will take time and dedicated leaders at all levels who serve as problem solvers who acknowledge the inherent complexity. That the problem is complex should not detract from our fervent desire to find and implement solutions, but instead should inform how we develop solutions. Addressing the constellation of variables that contribute to the outcome of chronic absenteeism requires that our educational leaders maintain an open mind and can hold various perspectives to understand the needs and then determine solutions. Donella Meadows wrote that “Change comes first from stepping outside of the limited information that can be seen from any single place in the system and getting an overview”(108, 2008). No two contexts will be the same, and no one person can solve this problem alone. If this resonates with you, then you are already thinking in systems.

References

Learning Policy Institute. (2023). Chronic absenteeism and community schools (Fact Sheet). Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/chronic-absenteeism-community-schools-factsheet

MacGillis, A. (2023, April 20). A startling surge in student absenteeism. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/school-absenteeism-truancy-education-students

Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Mervosh, S., & Paris, F. (2024, March 29). Chronic absences in schools rise nationwide. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/29/us/chronic-absences.html

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2024). Student absenteeism. National Conference of State Legislatures. https://www.ncsl.org/education/student-absenteeism

Systems-Inspired Curiosity

What does it mean to be truly curious?

by Sheri Marlin, Waters Center Executive Director

Babies are remarkable. While it might seem like all they do is eat, sleep, cry, and poop—especially to a sleep-deprived parent living this cycle 24/7—there's much more going on beneath the surface. If you watch an infant closely, you’ll notice how they actively take in the world around them. Over time, their eyes come into sharper focus, evolving from a gaze fixed on their caregiver to noticing smaller details, like the movement of a pet's tail. Sounds capture their attention, and objects are thoroughly explored by touching and, of course, tasting. Infants learn by engaging with everything around them. In fact, they’re so eager to explore that caregivers often need to step in to protect them from danger. This sensory exploration is a pure, unfiltered expression of curiosity—perhaps even the essence of it.

From birth, children seem wired to be curious. As they grow, they begin to connect, integrate, and synthesize new information to better understand their world, which can be thought of as a system made up of people, relationships, objects, patterns, and natural laws. Even before they develop enough language to ask questions, children are constantly constructing meaning. They instinctively understand the importance of staying curious as they navigate and make sense of their environment.

In their book Systems Inspired Leadership, Frank Uit de Weerd and Marita Fridjhon identify curiosity as one of eight essential meta-skills. They define curiosity as a willingness to explore and learn, leading to new awareness. This definition aligns closely with what we observe in young children—through their natural inquiries, they are continuously learning how their system works.

What happens to our curiosity?

As we age, what becomes of this natural curiosity? Ideally, it would grow and evolve alongside our intellectual, social, and emotional capacities. However, many factors work to diminish it.

One such factor is busyness. In a world filled with responsibilities and endless to-do lists, we can become so focused on productivity that moments of wonder—like noticing the dew on a leaf, listening to children’s laughter, or savoring a smell wafting from the kitchen—feel childish or impractical. Curiosity is relegated to an indulgent luxury rather than embraced as a meta-skill.

Another factor that stifles curiosity is the emphasis on "right-answer thinking." Traditional education often rewards correct answers, especially in the form of multiple-choice tests that leave little room for exploring what might be right about an incorrect answer. This approach encourages memorization over inquiry. As Daniel Kim puts it, “Having to know the answers puts one in a terrible position from which to learn.” While acquiring knowledge is valuable, genuine learning happens when we connect new information with what we already know. Curiosity bridges this gap, helping us make meaningful connections between past experiences and new insights.

In a mechanical system, a skilled technician can quickly diagnose a broken part or a misaligned connection. However, this technical expertise is born from genuine curiosity. Temple Grandin suggests in her book Visual Thinking that if we continue to prioritize right answer thinking and force people to accept predetermined answers, we will extinct the next generation of technicians and innovators because we are stifling much-needed curiosity. Since human systems are even more complex, it stands to reason that learning to be curious about relationships will improve our ability to solve all kinds of problems.

Exercising Curiosity Using the Habits of a Systems Thinker

If curiosity is a skill, what if we intentionally worked to strengthen it, like a muscle that grows with exercise? Can practice help us to build curiosity? The Habits of Systems Thinker are practices that can help build the meta-skill of curiosity and counteract the cultural trends that weaken our curiosity muscle.

At the Waters Center, we are often asked, "Why focus on habits?" Habits reinforce the idea that systems thinking is something you do, not just a theory to understand. People have agency over the habits they develop. If we want to build our "curiosity muscle," we can consciously apply these thinking habits as a way to practice curiosity.

The Habits of a Systems Thinker help us see the importance of relationships within complex systems. Surfacing and testing our assumptions and mental models promotes curiosity by encouraging people to question their own beliefs and consider the ideas of other people. A curious mind naturally probes how different beliefs shape an understanding of the world. Testing assumptions pushes us to ask what information we might be missing that is important to fully understanding the system. It requires courage to test our mental models because sometimes when we do so we learn that we are wrong. A CEO in Systems Inspired Leadership says, “No one gets to be wrong, but everyone gets to be curious.” Curiosity is a great anecdote for right-or-wrong thinking.

When we approach a situation with genuine curiosity, we naturally seek multiple perspectives. This not only enhances our ability to see the big picture but also fosters a deeper understanding of complex systems. Even when we think we’ve grasped the big picture or arrived at the “right” conclusion, curiosity invites us to explore further, to take a more nuanced approach. Systems thinking encourages us to slow down, examine issues thoroughly, and reflect on our own mental models, allowing us to see not just the obvious parts of a system but the intricate relationships holding it together—to genuinely see the big picture. The big picture requires a person to look beyond immediate details and ask broader questions about how various components fit together. Curiosity drives the exploration of connections and patterns within a system.

Change is a constant in systems and that change can fuel an innate tendency towards curiosity. People naturally want to investigate why and how things change, leading them to observe trends and dynamics over time. Curiosity drives the desire to see beyond isolated incidents and understand recurring themes.

Thinking in Loops, Not in Lines

A curious thinker enjoys exploring circular cause-and-effect relationships rather than linear ones. These circular relationships can be quite apparent in natural systems. For example, the more flowers the more pollinators, the more pollinators the more flowers, or even a houseplant’s response to a needed drink of water. And yet, circular relationships occur with just as much frequency in more unseen systems. When a person is frequently late to meetings, it can fuel a belief in others that the person is disinterested or irresponsible. However, further exploration might reveal a circumstance that explains their tardiness and creates an opportunity to offer support.

Seeing the circular nature of cause-and-effect and making meaningful connections promote curiosity about how interconnected parts influence one another. Identifying leverage points in a system involves a curiosity about cause-and-effect, understanding which small changes can lead to significant impact and connecting that to what is changing over time.

Systems thinking encourages curiosity about feedback—how actions lead to reactions within a system. The Habits promote inquisitiveness about the ripple effects of decisions and behaviors. They cause us to ask questions like: What is happening? What are the patterns? What are the consequences or actions? What beliefs are impacting the systems in a context of change over time?

Curiosity in Life and in Work

We’ve established that a natural propensity for curiosity is fairly obvious in children, but what does it look like in adults? At work, it might manifest in a team of colleagues where ideas and challenges flow freely, with members who genuinely believe they are better together. Applying the Habits of a Systems Thinker, the team develops a common language that allows them to surface assumptions, consider consequences, and ask questions about how others view the situation from their unique vantage points. At home, it could sound like a parent of a teenager digging deeper to better understand their child's perspective, using language that avoids accusation and instead fosters deeper, more meaningful conversations. On a personal level, curiosity might feel like contentment—recognizing that one is not responsible for having all the answers, but for being curious, taking time to truly listen, and observing with all the senses what’s happening in one’s environment.

Curiosity isn’t a luxury—it’s a critical skill for understanding and improving the world around us. Applying the Habits of a Systems Thinker is a practical way to build our curiosity muscle at the same time we are improving our ability to see complex systems more clearly. Practicing the Habits of a Systems Thinker fosters a culture of curiosity. It enhances our ability to navigate complex systems, opening the door to continuous learning and discovery.

What if our practice of curiosity included recognizing genuine curiosity in others, acknowledging their efforts, and encouraging them by joining in their pursuit of deeper understanding? This could mean taking time to think, fully considering an issue, and being open to changing our minds. What if, every day, we set aside the notion that curiosity is a luxury and instead engaged in it with urgency? What if we embraced curiosity with the same fervor and diligence that we devote to daily exercise and good nutrition? We would be learners, who just might feel remarkable.

References

Grandin, T. (2022). Visual thinking: The hidden gifts of people who think in pictures, patterns, and abstractions. Riverhead Books.

Kim, D. H. (1999). Introduction to systems thinking. Pegasus Communications.

Uit de Weerd, F., & Fridjhon, M. (2021). Systems inspired leadership: How to tap into the wisdom of the collective. CRR Global.