New Pedagogical Approaches to Induce Sustainable Development Goals
https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2019-28-3-50-56
Abstract
High quality professional training in accordance with the principles of outcome-based approach depends on the learning outcomes students are expected to achieve upon graduation from the educational program. However, the definition of a set of core competencies is just one of the steps that have to be fulfilled, but not enough for successful achievement of intended learning outcomes by the students. The paper considers the role of teaching and learning methods in designing and implementing of educational programs.
Flipped Learning is becoming a well-known pedagogical approach in which direct instruction moves consistently from the group learning space to the individual learning space, and the resulting group space is transformed into a dynamic, interactive learning environment where the educator guides students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.
Education of the next generation of practitioners that will creatively implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) by 2030 requires the complete rethinking by the educator how to do the job being done on a certain way for years. The flipped classroom model addresses how students learn best and become more engaged. Discussions and hands-on activities tend to keep students’ interest. While educators work with students directly as they explore the concepts they’re learning in class, they can provide immediate feedback that helps students improve their learning as they go.
The students pursuing the SDG’s creative engagement in classrooms become better at taking the lead on finding valuable resources and pursuing learning their own way using the flipped learning. This approach explores a specific challenge in the development of education and practice.About the Authors
Jose Carlos QuadradoPortugal
PhD, DSc, Prof., Vice-president
Kseniya K. Zaitseva
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Education), Assoc. Prof.
References
1. Thomasian, J. (2012). Building a science, technology, engineering and math education agenda: an update of state actions. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices.
2. Khan, S. (2012). The one world schoolhouse: Education reimagined. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
3. Davies, R.S., Dean, D.L., Ball, N. (2013). “Flipping the classroom” and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development. No. 61(4), pp. 563–580.
4. Davies, R.S., West, R.E. (2014). Technology Integration in Schools. In: J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J.Elen, M.J. Bishop (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. New York, NY: Springer New York, pp. 841–853.
5. Talbert, R. (2012). Inverted classroom. Colleagues. No. 9 (1, Article 7), pp. 1–2.
6. Wang, S.K., Hsu, H.Y., Reeves, T.C., Coster, D.C. (2014). Professional development to enhance teachers’ practices in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools: Lessons learned from a design-based research study. Computers and Education. No. 79, pp. 101–115.
7. Lajoie, S.P., Azevedo, R. (2000). Cognitive tools for medical informatics. In: Computers as Cognitive Tools II: No More Walls: Theory Change, Paradigm Shifts and Their Influence on the Use of Computers for Instructional Purposes. Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ, pp. 247–271.
8. Azevedo, R. (2005). Computer Environments as Metacognitive Tools for Enhancing Learning. Educational Psychologist. No. 40(4), pp. 193–197.
9. Hsu, H.-Y., Wang, S.-K., Runco, L. (2013). Middle School Science Teachers’ Confidence and Pedagogical Practice of New Literacies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, No. 22(3), pp. 314–324.
10. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference on Envisioning Future Media Environments – MindTrek ’11, pp. 9–11.
11. Huotari, K., Hamari, J. (2012). Defining gamification. In: Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference on – MindTrek ’12, p. 17.
12. Nelson, M.J. (2012). Soviet and American precursors to the gamification of work. In: Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference on – MindTrek’12, p. 23.
13. Fitz-Walter, Z., Tjondronegoro, D., Wyeth, P. (2011). Orientation Passport: using gamification to engage university students. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference on – OzCHI ’11, pp. 122–125.
14. Brewer, R., Anthony, L., Brown, Q., Irwin, G., Nias, J., Tate, B. (2013). Using Gamification to Motivate Children to Complete Empirical Studies in Lab Environments. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 388–391.
15. Flatla, D.R., Gutwin, C., Nacke, L.E., Bateman, S., Mandryk, R.L. (2011). Calibration games: making calibration tasks enjoyable by adding motivating game elements. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology – UIST ’11, pp. 403–412.
16. Iosup, A., Epema, D. (2014). An experience report on using gamification in technical higher education. In: Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education – SIGCSE ’14, (2008), pp. 27–32.
17. Pokholkov Y., Zaitseva K. (2017). Specific learning environments for fostering students’ sustainability mindset. In: 45th SEFI Annual Conference 2017: Education Excellence for Sustainability: Proceedings, p. 223–228
18. Quadrado, J.C., Zaitseva, K. Engineering education interdisciplinarity in global teams. In: 45th SEFI Annual Conference 2017: Education Excellence for Sustainability: Proceedings, pp. 954–961.