Probleemide nurjatuse küsimus siinse voo lugejale ilmselt selgitamist ei vaja, küll aga võib olla asjakohane küsida, et kuidas nende nurjatute probleemidega tegelemist õpetada? Just selle küsimusega siinviidatud artiklis tegeletakse.
Traditional teaching methods offer students a cognitive understanding of sustainability issues but tend to lack the holistic point of view several scholars advocate (e.g., Bansal and DesJardine, 2014; Shapira et al., 2017; Starik et al., 2010), whereas techniques designed for deep engagement with system-level problem solving, have seen limited diffusion in business schools (Dunne and Martin, 2006; Kolko, 2015). In other words, the diffusion of sustainability as a topic has outpaced the diffusion of tools to train future managers to move beyond the largely settled matter of “awareness” of these challenges to creating effective solutions.
Kuidas siis õpetada nurjatu probleemiga tegelemist?
how to adapt our teaching and learning approaches to meet this market opportunity while not trivializing these inherently complex, system-level challenges?
we move beyond advocating for increased use of design thinking in business schools or assessing this approach’s general effectiveness in helping solve complex problems since other scholars have ably addressed these questions (e.g., Glen et al., 2014; Lancione and Clegg, 2015). […] The outcome of our investigation is an integrative conceptual model that provides guidance for educators engaging with the complex, transdisciplinary, spatially-dispersed, and otherwise wicked problems inherent in sustainability-related challenges.
Olukord ei ole lootusetu:
The puzzle we focus on in this study is that we face the urgent need to fundamentally redesign our approach to sustainability education, and past research has shown that design thinking is a useful approach for addressing such wicked problems.
Earle, A. G., & Leyva-de la Hiz, D. I. (2021). The wicked problem of teaching about wicked problems: Design thinking and emerging technologies in sustainability education. Management Learning, 52(5), 581–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507620974857