Activities
- Suggested duration: 2 hours x 2
- Technique used: Collaborative research methods (micro-research, conversations, discussions, co-production)
- Aim of activity: Learning to know how to identify and explain theories for the interpretation of a phenomenon/“real world” problem
- Underpinning components: UC4.1a; UC4.3a; UC4.3b
- Connection with other competences: Attentiveness; Action; Transdisciplinarity
Short description
Starting with a “real-world” problem of unsustainability (also in continuity with the two previous activities), make a micro background research (explorative) divided by small groups which apply different disciplinary point of views and produce a brief report and PowerPoint to illustrate the main features of the problem. Presentation of PowerPoint. Discuss the specific point of view used by each group and the partial and specific analysis of the problem. Identify elements of contradiction, overlapping, and complementarity. Establish collectively a report structure that takes into account all disciplinary contributions and acknowledge the value of the interpretative inputs that have arisen from the discussion.
- Suggested duration: 30 mins
- Technique used: Observation, outdoor education, cooperative learning
- Aim of activity: Understand the need to change the perspective to get a complete view of a phenomenon/“real world” problem
- Underpinning components: UC4.3a ; UC4.3b
- Connection with other competences: Transdisicplinarity
Short description
The activity takes place outdoors. Locate a path or a space with trees or other lateral supports of varying height, possibly even with cover (e.g. a pergola). Distribute different kinds of small objects (small toys, coloured papers, small non-organic waste items) into partially hidden but visible areas at different heights. Divide students into small groups, invite them to walk through space once and finding objects as they go. Make a ranking of the groups based on the items they have collected. Ask the groups to discuss how objects have been found and which one were most easily found (looking up, down, side, coloured, strange ones, etc.). Ask them to plan a new observation by assigning roles within the group and repeating it. Identify the difference in results achieved.
Group discussion and substantiate the need for more people collaborating and taking different points of view.
- Suggested duration: 15 mins
- Technique used: Small group discussion
- Materials required: Examples of different models of sustainable development e.g. pillars, Venn diagram, nested systems
- Aim of activity: To encourage critical thought
- Underpinning components: UC4.1b; UC4.3a; UC4.3b
- Connection with other competences: Systems
Short description
Small groups study different models of sustainable development and consider which they prefer, any limitations/criticisms and try to create an alternative model. Plenary – short presentation on knowledge and how it is provisional, contingent and contestable.
- Suggested duration: 20 mins
- Technique used (e.g. simulation, debate): Small group analysis of material presented
- Materials required: Material on sustainability issues that contain facts, assumptions and opinion
- Aim of activity: To encourage learners to look carefully at language used to identify facts, assumptions and opinions. To encourage learners to reflect on their own bias and receptiveness to new ideas.
- Underpinning components: UC4.2a; UC4.2b; UC4.3a
- Connection with other competences: Attentiveness
Short description
Pairs/small groups analyse texts underlining examples of facts, opinions and assumptions. Whole group share and discuss. Reflect on own responses to texts e.g. do we look for things that confirm our opinions?
- Suggested duration: 45 mins
- Technique used: Small group analysis of material presented
- Materials required: Materials showing different issues that we need to be aware of, e.g.
Potential research bias/agenda due to funding source/ organisational links
Different focus depending on media source e.g. tabloid newspaper, serious newspaper, report
Information changes over time as a result of emerging research/developing ideas
Influence that framing can have, i.e. that the way things are presented can potentially guide thinking - Aim of activity: To encourage learners to be more analytical and critical of materials and to consider bias, focus, motive language, date and framing
- Underpinning components: UC4.2a; UC4.2b
- Connection with other competences: Action
Short description
Prepare materials that illustrate the types of issues as mentioned above. Give each small group a set of materials that focuses on one of the above issues. Ask each group to study their materials to see what they notice. Whole group – report back what they have noticed. Plenary discuss the need to be alert and to evaluate sources.
- Suggested duration: 15-20 mins
- Technique used: Group research
- Materials required: Internet access or reference material
- Aim of activity: To encourage students to think about things from different perspectives to do with age
- Underpinning components: UC 3.1
- Connection with other competences: Attentiveness
Short description
Using any devices you have with you, do a quick search to see what you can find out about the demographic of a local town – what is the size of the population and how is it broken down in terms of age?
Using this information, make some predictions about the future needs of the town. Consider aspects such as traffic/parking; health; housing; education; appropriate leisure facilities.
- Suggested duration: 15 mins
- Technique used: Group discussion
- Materials required: Photographs or pictures
- Aim of activity: To encourage students to explore their responses and different perspectives to a situation.
- Underpinning components: UC 3.3
- Connection with other competences:
Short description
In groups.
Choose a facilitator
Facilitator: guide your group to
- Consider the picture you are about to see
- Develop a set of enquiring questions that it might evoke
- Discuss responses to the questions
- Suggested duration: 25 mins
- Technique used: Simulation
- Materials required: Handout (see below)
- Aim of activity: To encourage students to think about their values
- Underpinning components: UC 3.3
- Connection with other competences: Values; Decisiveness
Short description
Individuals read the handout and decide on a charity. They are paired with someone who chose a different charity and have to agree on ONE charity between them. They then join another pair who chose a different charity to them and try to agree on ONE charity to support.
In plenary discuss whether this was easy or not. What made it difficult?
We are driven by our values – sometimes even positive values conflict with each other.
Handout used in UK setting: Considering Your Values
Your school has a reputation for making small donations to a variety of good causes so when an elderly neighbour of the school passed away, she left a donation of £4,000 to the school with the condition that half should go to the school and half should go to a charity in order to make an impact.
The headteacher is aware that to make an impact, this sum should be paid to one charity.
All staff and pupils were invited to suggest their favourite ‘good cause’ and a number of suggestions were made.
The Head finds it impossible to choose from the top four preferred charities so you have been asked to make a decision because you have no personal connection with any of the listed charities.
The Head’s only guidance is that the school should be “seen in a good light among parents and the public” for making this donation.
Your task is to choose one charity from the list below and then rank the others in order of priority. Explain why the other charities were not selected.
- The local animal rescue centre – their urgent need for more animal housing has been highlighted in the paper recently.
- Oxfam – towards their recent, high profile appeal following a massive earthquake in Malawi.
- The local hospice – caring for terminally ill patients with a reputation for its special care of cancer patients.
- The NSPCC – for a specific campaign to help with the assessment, support and monitoring of children returning home from a period in care.
- Suggested duration: 25 mins
- Technique used: Role play
- Materials required: Instructions to group
- Aim of activity: To encourage students to consdier things from different perspectives
- Underpinning components: UC 3.1, UC 3.2
- Connection with other competences: Decisiveness
Short description
In your assessment groups, please allocate as many of these roles as possible, (starting from the top):
- Facilitator
- Sociologist
- Environmental scientist
- Economist
- Local religious leader
- Computer scientist
- Scientist/mathematician
You make up the governing body of a local educational institution.
Government policy is to take the institution out of local authority control and make it a ‘free’ school, meaning you are able to decide for yourselves its future direction.
Task A
- Group: Discuss what should be the focus/vision from your perspective. Try to win the others around to your idea
- Facilitator: Listen and take notes. Decide who makes the most compelling argument/who ‘wins’
Task B
- Facilitator: stage another discussion.
- This time try to find a focus/vision that can satisfy all members of the group.
- A win-win?
Plenary reflect on the different experiences
- Suggested duration: 45 mins
- Technique used: Developing metacognitive skills of students to help them notice, how they argue, discuss and reason about complex problems, systems and processes.
- Materials required: None
- Aim of activity: This helps us to notice that we are not consistent in being systemic thinkers, which is a common problem of systemic thinking.
- Underpinning components: UC 2.1