48
most skills and competencies were fostered. Additional critical comments also were
often centered on unclear instructions for the exercise, or the applicability, or difficulty, of applying a particular approach to the individual case that was assigned to
the group where —depending on the questions posed by students—certain
approaches just have a more natural fit with particular topics. Finally, another ongoing challenge voiced by students has concentrated on the reading materials used as
a backdrop to each approach block, especially comments of the articles containing
an insufficient amount of case examples.
3.5.2 Changes to Enhance Approach Understanding
A common challenge—which is not unique to the pedagogical challenges here—is
fostering student depth and mastery of each approach in a (very) limited amount of
time. The challenge is augmented when the student comprehension and mastery of
the approaches is for 35–45 students with diverse cultural and academic backgrounds. The difficulty is also compounded by conscious efforts to create tangible
connections to the earth system science and social theory courses.
Based on the feedback from students, an important characteristic of Swedish
education, several changes to the course have been made to foster increased student
comprehension of the framing approaches, and to create a more coherent structure
throughout the entire course. With the changes, or small tweaks, the learning activities for the individual framing approaches have become progressively better, especially in recent years. A few of the main changes are presented here.
3.5.3 Single Case
A common critique in the past was the disparate nature of the course, especially
related to the approaches. To add coherency, single group topics (with mentors)
were introduced. Although originally intended to better link student learning activities to actual research taking place at LUCSUS, an ongoing recommendation of
students in past years, the introduction of the topics has helped to nurture a connection to the respective mentors—albeit for only a brief period. Furthermore, they
have provided an effective medium to test each framing approach in real-world
sustainability problem research contexts. It has also been an important approach to
create opportunities for students to see the possibilities and related pitfalls for each
approach introduced. Related, the single case has also fostered increased depth in
understanding with each of the approaches (or combinations of them) through an
implicit object of focus of the particular case (e.g., understanding processes of
change over time, governance dynamics of a system, complex causal interactions).
Because of these reasons, the students have been positive about the concentration of
the individual topic throughout most of the approach learning activities.
B. Ness
most skills and competencies were fostered. Additional critical comments also were
often centered on unclear instructions for the exercise, or the applicability, or difficulty, of applying a particular approach to the individual case that was assigned to
the group where —depending on the questions posed by students—certain
approaches just have a more natural fit with particular topics. Finally, another ongoing challenge voiced by students has concentrated on the reading materials used as
a backdrop to each approach block, especially comments of the articles containing
an insufficient amount of case examples.
3.5.2 Changes to Enhance Approach Understanding
A common challenge—which is not unique to the pedagogical challenges here—is
fostering student depth and mastery of each approach in a (very) limited amount of
time. The challenge is augmented when the student comprehension and mastery of
the approaches is for 35–45 students with diverse cultural and academic backgrounds. The difficulty is also compounded by conscious efforts to create tangible
connections to the earth system science and social theory courses.
Based on the feedback from students, an important characteristic of Swedish
education, several changes to the course have been made to foster increased student
comprehension of the framing approaches, and to create a more coherent structure
throughout the entire course. With the changes, or small tweaks, the learning activities for the individual framing approaches have become progressively better, especially in recent years. A few of the main changes are presented here.
3.5.3 Single Case
A common critique in the past was the disparate nature of the course, especially
related to the approaches. To add coherency, single group topics (with mentors)
were introduced. Although originally intended to better link student learning activities to actual research taking place at LUCSUS, an ongoing recommendation of
students in past years, the introduction of the topics has helped to nurture a connection to the respective mentors—albeit for only a brief period. Furthermore, they
have provided an effective medium to test each framing approach in real-world
sustainability problem research contexts. It has also been an important approach to
create opportunities for students to see the possibilities and related pitfalls for each
approach introduced. Related, the single case has also fostered increased depth in
understanding with each of the approaches (or combinations of them) through an
implicit object of focus of the particular case (e.g., understanding processes of
change over time, governance dynamics of a system, complex causal interactions).
Because of these reasons, the students have been positive about the concentration of
the individual topic throughout most of the approach learning activities.
B. Ness