Learning to research environmental problems from a functional socio‐cultural constructivism perspective
Author:
Stauffacher M.,Walter A.I.,Lang D.J.,Wiek A.,Scholz R.W.
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the transdisciplinary case study (TCS) as a learning framework based on what we call functional socio‐cultural constructivism and project‐based learning (PBL). In doing so, the paper attempts to illustrate the applicability of TCS to learn competencies and skills necessary to research problems of sustainable development.Design/methodology/approachTCS is considered a learning framework based on the principle of self‐regulated learning; i.e. students must actively deal with the requirements as well as plan and execute their project work within their own worldviews and goals. TCS methods are essential as we tackle complex real‐world problems.FindingsThe paper discusses challenges and obstacles of such an approach and present lessons learned since 1994, on both the viewpoints of students and of teachers. It conclude that case study learning is a demanding task, especially in a transdisciplinary context where more challenges emerge than in PBL, since goals of teachers, case agents, and students have to be balanced.Practical implicationsTCS or courses like it are important for universities at the present time. Under present budget restrictions and a wide‐ranging mistrust of society toward universities, there is a necessity for a new contract between society and research: students should learn to take over responsibility in societal contexts and be able to communicate beyond the “ivory tower”.Originality/valueThe learning goals of TCS differ from the goals of most university courses. They are more comprehensive and include complex problem solving, societal context, and group processes. The ambitious goal is that students become enabled to tackle complex, real‐world problems.
Subject
Education,Human Factors and Ergonomics
Reference87 articles.
1. Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N.G., Mamlok‐Naaman, R. and Hofstein, A. et al., (2004), “Inquiry in science education: international perspectives”, Science Education, Vol. 88, pp. 397‐419. 2. Adger, W.N., Beown, K., Fairbrass, J., Jordan, A., Paavola, J., Rosendo, S. and Seyfang, G. (2003), “Governance for sustainability: towards a ‘thick’ analysis of environmental decisionmaking”, Environment & Planning A, Vol. 35, pp. 1095‐110. 3. Ashford, N.A. (2004), “Major challenges to engineering education for sustainable development: what has to change to make it creative, effective, and acceptable to the established disciplines?”, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 239‐50. 4. Barab, S.A. and Duffy, T.M. (2000), “From practice fields to communities of practice”, in Jonassen, D.H. and Land, S.M. (Eds), Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 25‐55. 5. Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash, S. (1995), Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Cited by
132 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|