Abstract
The Research Institute for Sustainability Science and Technology under the Master degree in Sustainability Science and Technology organises the course action research workshop on Science and Technology for Sustainability (5 ECTS). The authors have been coordinating the course during the academic years 13/14, 14/15 and 15/16. The purpose of the workshop is to put together civil society organisations, local administrations, students and educators to collaboratively undertake responsible research, performing transdisciplinary learning environments and by an action research framework, to answer questions such as: Who are we researching for? Who profits from our research? What are the impacts of our research? Which methodologies and tools should be used when dealing with sociotechnical sustainability challenges? Students work on real projects, related to local sustainability problems, represented by a community entity (Service learning and Campus Lab). Action research methodology is used with a two-cycle approach. In each real-life project, students, faculty and stakeholders are asked to follow the action–reflexion process of action research projects: Action 1—Jointly defining: Project purpose; Customer and interest; Involved actors; Reflexion 1—Students define: research question, initial situation, needed additional information, action Strategy, Tasks planning and distribution: Action 2—Items returning and discussing with stakeholders, Reflexion 2—Revising and reformulating. Having now run the workshop three times, we can conclude that: first, students realised the significance of framing an investigation under a research methodological framework that allows bringing research to the community, enhancing transdisciplinarity in any initiative or action in sustainability science. They set out the importance of some topics and the difficulty to hold them. Second, the formulation of the problem became one of the most arduous tasks in the process; difficulties were mainly related to the perception of the problem from distinct community group motivations. Third, interaction and communication with stakeholders and the recognition of their role was problematic as engineering students are not usually trained to work in wicked problems nor accompany stakeholders during the whole process. Finally, it is relevant to highlight that during the process students faced conflict and frustrating situations both within their team and with stakeholders. To help tackle this problem, an Emotional Intelligence module was introduced in the workshop which proved useful in helping students to solve some paralysing situations, which could otherwise have stopped the progress of the project. We suggest that engineering students need specific training in transdisciplinary research and in conflict resolution, to avoid collapsing in frustration when dealing with real transdisciplinary sustainability transitions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
11 January 2019
In the original publication of the article, the co-author Dr. Gisela Cebri?n Bernat has not been included in the article.
11 January 2019
In the original publication of the article, the co-author Dr. Gisela Cebri��n Bernat has not been included in the article.
11 January 2019
In the original publication of the article, the co-author Dr. Gisela Cebri��n Bernat has not been included in the article.
11 January 2019
In the original publication of the article, the co-author Dr. Gisela Cebri��n Bernat has not been included in the article.
11 January 2019
In the original publication of the article, the co-author Dr. Gisela Cebri��n Bernat has not been included in the article.
Notes
GROP: Psychopedagogical Counseling Research Group. MIDE, Faculty of Education. University of Barcelona. http://www.ub.edu/grop/.
References
Aramburuzabala P (2013) Aprendizaje-Servicio: una herramienta para educar desde y para la justicia social. Revista Internacional de Educación para la Justicia Social 2(2):5–11
Barth M, Adomßent M, Fischer D, Richter S, Rieckmann M (2014) Learning to change universities from within: a service-learning perspective on promoting sustainable consumption in higher education. J Clean Prod 62:72–81
Baum F, MacDougall C, Smith D (2006) Participatory action research. J Epidemiol Commun Health 60(10):854–857
Bisquerra R, Pérez N (2007) Las competencias emocionales. Educación XXI 10:61–82
Carr W, Kemmis S (2009) Educational action research: a critical approach. The sage handbook of educational action research. Sage, London, pp 74–84
Coghlan D, Brannick T (2014) Doing action research in your own organization. Sage, London
Coughlan P, Coghlan D (2011) Collaborative strategic improvement through network action learning: the path to sustainability. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Craig DV (2009) Action research essentials, vol 11. Wiley, New York
Declaration B (2004) Engineering education in sustainable development conference Barcelona
Dlouhá J, Burandt S (2015) Design and evaluation of learning processes in an international sustainability oriented study programme. In search of a new educational quality and assessment method. J Clean Prod 106:247–258
Edwards A, Talbot R (2014) The hard-pressed researcher: a research handbook for the caring professions. Routledge, Abingdon
Evans J, Jones R, Karvonen A, Millard L, Wendler J (2015) Living labs and co-production: university campuses as platforms for sustainability science. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16:1–6
Gardner H (2001) La inteligencia reformulada. Paidós, Barcelona
Goleman D (1996) Inteligencia emocional. Kairós, Barcelona
Haynes C (2002) Introduction: laying a foundation for interdisciplinary teaching. In: Haynes C (ed) Innovations in interdisciplinary teaching. American Council on Education/Oryx Press, Washington, pp 11–22
Kember D (2000) Action learning and action research: improving the quality of teaching and learning. Psychology Press, Routledge
Kemmis S (1985) Action research and the politics of reflection. Reflection: turning experience into learning, New York, pp 139–163
Klein JT (2004) Interdisciplinarity and complexity: an evolving relationship. E:CO Espec Double Issue 6(1–2):2–10
Klein JT (2008) Evaluation of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research a literature review. Am J Prev Med 35(2S):116–123
Knorr-Cetina K (2007) Culture in global knowledge societies: knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisc Sci Rev 32:361–375
Kunnanatt JT (2004) Emotional intelligence: the new science of interpersonal effectiveness. Hum Res Dev Q 15(4):489–495
Lambrechts W, Mulà I, Ceulemans K, Molderez I, Gaeremynck V (2013) The integration of competences for sustainable development in higher education: an analysis of bachelor programs in management. J Clean Prod 48(6):65–73
Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(S1):25–43
Martens P (2006) Sustainability: science or fiction? Sci Pract Policy 2(1):36–41
Mayer JD, Salovey P (1997) What is emotional intelligence? In: Salovey P, Sluyter D (eds) Emotional development and emotional intelligence: implications for educators. Basic Books, New York, pp 3–31
Noffke SE (1997) Professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. Rev Res Educ 22(1):305–343
Noffke SE (2009) Revisiting the professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. In: Noffke SE, Somekh B (eds) The sage handbook of educational action research. Sage, London, pp 6–30
Revans RW (2011) ABC of action learning. Gower Publishing Ltd, Farnham
Scholz RW (2011) Environmental literacy in science and society. From knowledge to decisions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Seager T, Selinger E, Wiek A (2012) Sustainable engineering science for resolving wicked problems. J Agric Environ Eth 25:1–18. doi:10.1007/s10806-011-9342-2123
Segalas J, Mulder KF, Ferrer-Balas D (2006) Embedding sustainability in engineering education. Experiences from Dutch and Spanish technological universities. In: Conference: higher education for sustainable development: new challenges from a global perspective. Luneburg
Segalas J, Mulder KF, Ferrer-Balas D (2010) What do engineering students learn in sustainability courses? The effect of the pedagogical approach. J Clean Prod 18(3):275–284
Sipos Y, Battisti B, Grimm K (2008) Achieving transformative sustainability learning: engaging head, hands and heart. Int J Sustain High Educ 9(1):68–86
Sobh R, Perry C (2005) Research design and data analysis in realism research. Eur J Mark 40(11/12):1194–1209
Sterling S (2005) Higher education, sustainability, and the role of systemic learning. In: Corcoran PB, Wals AEJ (eds) Higher education and the challenge of sustainability: problematics, promise and practice. Kluwer, Boston, pp 49–70
Topping K (1998) Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Rev Edu Res 68(3):249–276
Tripp DH (1990) Socially critical action research. Theory pract 29(3):158–166
Vilsmaier U, Lang D (2015) Making a difference by marking the difference: constituting in-between spaces for sustainability learning. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16:51–55
Wallace M (1987) A historical review of action research: some implications for the education of teachers in their managerial role. J Edu Teach 13(2):97–115
Welch J (2011) The emergence of interdisciplinarity from epistemological thought. Issues Integr Stud 29:1–39
Whitehead J, McNiff J (2002) Action research. Principles and practice. Routledge Falmer, London
Wiek A, Withycombe L, Redman CL (2011) Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustain Sci 6(2):203–218
Yearworth M (2016) Sustainability as a ‘super-wicked’ problem; opportunities and limits for engineering methodology. Intell Build Int 8(1):37–47
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Handled by Masaru Yarime, School of Energy and Environment, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tejedor, G., Segalas, J. Action research workshop for transdisciplinary sustainability science. Sustain Sci 13, 493–502 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0452-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0452-2