Design Criteria for Visual Cues Used in Disruptive Learning Interventions Within Sustainability Education

Abstract

This paper presents the design criteria for Visual Cues ñ visual stimuli that are used in combination with other pedagogical processes and tools in Disruptive Learning interventions in sustainability education ñ to disrupt learnersí existing frames of mind and help re-orient learnersí mind-sets towards sustainability. The theory of Disruptive Learning rests on the premise that if learnersí frames of mind or frames of reference can be disrupted (in other words, challenged), then learnersí mind-sets can be re-oriented towards sustainability, and indeed learners can be motivated to engage in change agency for sustainability. The use of Visual Cues thus unsettle or challenge learnersí mind-sets, and in doing so, set them on the pathway towards re-orientation in becoming more sustainability oriented, and/or in motivating engagement in sustainability change agency. The findings form part of a broader research study on ESD conducted in a higher education institution in Ireland within an undergraduate degree of teacher education. Kathy Charmazí Constructivist Grounded Theory approach guided the entire study, resulting in the articulation of the theory of, and processes within, Disruptive Learning. This paper presents design criteria for Visual Cues that were articulated through a thematic analysis approach from data emerging from reflective diaries, follow-up interviews, audio recordings and observational notes. The findings from this study in respect of design criteria state that Visual Cues must disrupt rather than disturb; must represent (have impressions of) real life contexts, scenarios, practices or events; must provoke controversy; must contain a visual stimulation; and can have a critical question.

Education for Sustainable Development: The Choice of Pedagogical Approaches and Methods for the Implementation of Pedagogical Tasks in the Anthropocene Age

“…The journals have already accumulated research demonstrating the goals of sustainable development, the nature of sustainable education and the phenomenon of sustainability (Bell, 2016;Carbach & Fischer, 2017;Huckle, 2012;Hurtman, Johnson, & Hill, 2017;Kalaitzidis, 2012;Makrakis & Kostoulas-Makrakis, 2012;Miedema & Bertram-Troost, 2015;Pace, 2010;Tillmans, Holland, & Filho, 2017). Apart from traditional research, JTES has accumulated experience in using participatory and / or educational action research in more holistic research (Ged˛˚ne & Ged˛˚ne, 2010;Gri‚ne, 2008;Pipere & Salite, 2006;SalÓte, 1998;SalÓte, 2008;Soobik, 2014), and there are also studies and experiences that seek to underpin the use of approaches and methods in the current context (Aldahmash et al, 2017;Flores et al, 2014;Hurtman et al, 2017;Kabadayi, 2016;Mohammadi & Moradi, 2017;Okeke & Mtyuda, 2017;Zunker, 2012).…”

Reflecting on Partnerships of Sustainability Learning Enacting a Lewin–Deleuze–Guattari Rhizome

“…Indeed, many environmental and sustainability educational initiatives focus on socio-emotional dimensions to assess values and actions, along with ethical drivers for perceiving and behaving differently [50]. I integrate the emotional domain into my practice by designing visual cues that initially trigger emotional reactions and challenge social norms within discussions [51]. Where there is no dissent from the groupperspective, I act as the devil's advocate and pose counterarguments or counter-questions that require individuals to think -outside‖ the group assemblage.…”

Reflecting on Partnerships of Sustainability Learning: Enacting a Lewin–Deleuze–Guattari Rhizome

“…Indeed, many environmental and sustainability educational initiatives focus on socio-emotional dimensions to assess values and actions, along with ethical drivers for perceiving and behaving differently [50]. I integrate the emotional domain into my practice by designing visual cues that initially trigger emotional reactions and challenge social norms within discussions [51]. Where there is no dissent from the group-perspective, I act as the devil's advocate and pose counter-arguments or counter-questions that require individuals to think "outside" the group assemblage.…”