Games by which to learn and teach about sustainable ... - SAVIE

Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847 www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Games by which to learn and teach about sustainable development: exploring the relevance of games and experiential learning for sustainability Hans Dieleman a,*, Don Huisingh b,1 b

a Center for Sustainability and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Room M7-19, 3000 Dr Rotterdam, The Netherlands The Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 311 Conference Center Building, Knoxville, TN, USA

Received 1 August 2005; accepted 1 November 2005 Available online 27 March 2006

Abstract This paper discusses the roles of games in experiential learning for sustainability. It includes applied emphases upon four topics: (1) The challenges of sustainable development education with the need for interdisciplinarity, knowledge, skills and attitudinal training and with a special focus upon the urgent needs for paradigm, context and practice changes to help ensure that we make progress toward sustainable societies. We emphasize that these characteristics challenge existing teaching and educational philosophies and methods. (2) The theory of experiential learning, as developed by David Kolb in the nineteen eighties. We underscore that experiential learning is a good model for education for sustainability. (3) The usefulness of games as tools in learning processes. Various aspects of games are discussed such as the ‘functions of games’ and ‘the different categories of games,’ and ‘the role of games in learning and particular in experiential learning.’ These three aspects form the theoretical part of the paper. (4) Brief reviews of some illustrative games. The authors provide practical advice on how to play games in the context of learning for SD. They underscore facets such as the contextualization of games, technical aspects of playing games and the debriefing after the games have been played. The authors conclude the paper with conclusions that games are potentially relevant in all of the four learning phases of experiential learning. Games are especially relevant in phase four. In this phase games can contribute to helping learners to effect shifts in their personal paradigms, context and practice that are needed for sustainable development. The final conclusion is that many games exist and have been proven to be helpful. Educators are invited to change their curricula to facilitate usage of games as integral components of their educational philosophy tools and practice. Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Games and simulations in education; Learning through simulations; Simulations for teaching sustainability

1. Introduction: how do we learn? ‘How do we learn?’ As a child we learn by exploring, by touching things, moving things and taking things apart. Along this process we break things, twist and bend them and discover that we sometimes can and sometimes cannot repair them. This is really an ‘experiential’ way of learning: ‘learning by * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ31 10 408 2050. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Dieleman), [email protected] (D. Huisingh). 1 Tel.: þ1 865 974 3379. 0959-6526/$ - see front matter Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.031

doing.’ By contrast at school, in the classroom, most of us had to sit down quietly, without moving, talking or playing. When the teacher was speaking we had to have our arms crossed in front of us and be constantly alert to the words of wisdom coming from her/him!! Learning (and teaching) was seen as a purely cognitive process. We had to think, to analyze, to COMPREHEND, to learn by heart and to store the content of books in our memories. However, already about a hundred years ago, this traditional view on learning began to be challenged by many educators. Various scholars in education and pedagogy such as Peter Petersen, Rudolf Steiner or Maria Montessori started to question the purely cognitive and

H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847

838

analytical approaches to learning. They developed alternative approaches and founded new schools such as the Jenaplan School (Petersen), the Free School (Steiner) and the Montessori School (Montessori). The school reformers looked at the characteristics, learning capacities and needs of young children and developed fundamentally new approaches to facilitating their learning. Currently, most of our children (fortunately also those outside Jenaplan, Steiner or Montessori schools) have more freedom at school to discover and learn by doing. For a long time, such ‘alternative’ approaches were only used in the context of primary education and were focused upon the learning characteristics of children. Only much later, some educators started to see that the traditional learning approach is also limited and restrictive for adult learners. One of the approaches that is highly critical towards traditional learning and teaching methods, especially for adults, is the experiential learning theory developed by David Kolb. His theory provides a comprehensive view on different forms of learning and places them in an integrative framework. It is this theory on experiential learning that we utilize as our starting point for the discussion of the usage of games in learning for sustainability [1].

2. Kolb’s experiential learning theory According to Kolb, learning is a process of a combination of grasping experience and transforming it. The essence of experiential learning is that it involves not only understanding phenomena, and not only observing the phenomena being studied (grasping or prehension), but it also focuses upon doing something with them, such as testing them or applying them with the intention of achieving a desired result (transformation). Along the line of ‘grasping’ and ‘transforming,’ Kolb makes a number of distinctions (Fig. 1). In terms of grasping, he distinguishes between apprehension and comprehension. Experience grasped through comprehension relies on conceptual interpretation and symbolic representation. That is the kind of teaching that we usually receive in schools and almost always in universities. It is rational, usually analytical and uses the right side of the brain. In contrast experience grasped through apprehension relies on the tangible and felt qualities of the immediate experiences. That refers to the kind of learning processes one goes through while exploring things, looking at them and touching, feeling,

(understanding) comprehension

(experiencing) apprehension prehension

2.1. The four-stage cycle of learning The process of experiential learning can be described as a four-stage cycle, involving four different learning modes. Table 1 Relationships among learning processes, types of knowledge and change processes

LEARNING transformation intention (internalization)

smelling, tasting and hearing them. It relies upon intuition, feeling, emotion and insight that are lateral processes of thought, typically processed through the left side of the brain. For Kolb, there is more to learning than the distinction between comprehension and apprehension. Learning is the result of grasping or prehension (comprehension and apprehension) as well as transforming. In terms of transforming, he distinguishes between intention and extension. The learning process of transforming through intention relies on internal reflection. It touches upon our emotions and recreates and transforms the image we have of ourselves, vis-a`-vis the phenomena being studied. Transformation that relies on extension is based on active manipulation of the external world. It recreates and transforms phenomena or an object and therefore, the external world around us. According to Kolb, different forms of learning result in different types of knowledge. He makes a distinction between assimilative, accommodative, divergent and convergent knowledge. Assimilative knowledge helps the learner to understand and adapt to existing contexts and situations. Accommodative knowledge helps the learner to understand and adapt to new contexts and situations Divergent knowledge helps the learner to accomplish changes within given situations and contexts. Finally, convergent knowledge helps the learner to change situations and contexts. The distinction has a similarity with the two types of learning that have been identified by Argyris: single loop learning and double loop learning. Single loop learning aims at learning to perform known activities better, within a given context. Double loop learning aims at changing the context in which activities take place; a type of learning how to learn how to make increasingly effective changes. Different learning processes lead to different types of knowledge and contribute to different change processes (Table 1). According to Kolb, experience grasped through apprehension and transformed through intention results in assimilative knowledge. Experience grasped through comprehension and transformed through intention results in accommodative knowledge. When experience is grasped through comprehension and transformed through extension, the result is convergent knowledge. When experience is grasped by apprehension and transformed by extension, divergent knowledge is the result.

extension (externalization)

Fig. 1. Different forms of learning, according to Kolb [1].

Learning process

Type of knowledge

Change process

Apprehension/intention Comprehension/intention Comprehension/extension Apprehension/extension

Assimilative Accommodative Convergent Divergent

Adapt to existing contexts Adapt to different contexts Change within contexts Changes contexts


Kolb describes learning as a system, or as a complete package with exercises and theory, allowing students to go through all phases of the experiential learning process. In this process or system, he distinguishes among four phases. Firstly, the phase of concrete experiences, secondly, the phase of reflective observation, thirdly, the phase of abstract conceptualization and fourthly, the phase of active experimentation. 2.1.1. Concrete experiences The learning phase of concrete experiences focuses on the grasping of experience through apprehension. According to Kolb, this is the most common starting point in learning in human development. Children first start to apprehend experiences and learn to know reality ‘‘as it is.’’ In higher education this phase refers to the importance of understanding; ‘‘experiencing’’ the richness and complexity of reality, a complexity that is beyond our capacity to grasp it in terms of models and theories. (Fig. 2) 2.1.2. Reflective observation The next phase focuses on accommodative knowledge. The key to reflective observation is that it stimulates the learning process of how we have to act with respect to specific questions, what the working of specific solutions is, what operational knowledge is needed to perform tasks in different roles. This phase can be compared with single loop learning, learning knowledge and skills that enables one to become better in performing known tasks within more or less given contexts. It deals with practices, tools and techniques currently used. 2.1.3. Abstract conceptualization The third learning phase focuses on comprehension through conceptual interpretation, analyses and symbolic representations. In many training programs, this type of education has been the primary focus over the past several centuries. It emphasizes the importance of gaining understanding from information, it disregards specific contexts, because it seeks to unravel and understand universal principles and universally applicable knowledge, such as theories and philosophies. This phase enables development of skills for converting information into knowledge, since it focuses upon going beyond the Concrete experiences

Divergent Changes contexts Grasping via apprehension Active experimentation

Assimilative Adapt to existing contexts

Transformation

Transformation

Via extension

Via extension

Convergent / Change within a context

Grasping via comprehension

Reflective observation

Accommodative Adapt to new contexts

Abstract conceptualization

Fig. 2. The experiential learning cycle of Kolb [1].

839

present and beyond applied solutions and problem definitions; however, it is still within given contexts. 2.1.4. Active experimentation The active experimentation phase aims at putting the knowledge that has been acquired, into practice. This phase is the ultimate phase of transformation, as it aims at manipulating the outside world through the implementation of change. In a learning cycle, this phase typically merges into the next cycle, when active experimentation has the characteristics of new experiences. A student changes, in this period, from being ‘‘a student,’’ a relative outsider that still has to be fully socialized, into being ‘‘a participant,’’ a member of a specific actor group. The different stages of the experimental learning cycle as well as the relationships that Kolb sees between ways of learning and types of knowledge are very relevant for education in sustainable development. In Section 3, we explore that relevance. 3. Experiential learning and sustainable development education Kolb’s theory is very relevant for sustainable development (SD) and for SD education in several ways. First of all his focus upon ‘apprehension and comprehension’ is very relevant. One of the fundamental challenges of SD education is its goal to integrate science, social sciences and managerial science into one, overarchingdsystems thinkingdframework. This is basically a cognitive challenge that is fundamental. We all are children of the ‘Enlightenment,’ with an intellectual heritage of analysis. That means we have learned to take things apart, to deconstruct them and to analyze them. As a result of a few hundred years of the scientific heritage, we are poorly equipped to reconstruct the whole after the analysis and deconstruction. We focus more on the parts than on the whole. What SD requires of us is to understand the effects of one dimension on the other dimensions and on the whole (and back and forth). However, since we are so poorly equipped to think in systems terms and to comprehend systems behavior, we are tempted to deconstruct systems and to analyze the parts. We lack the cognitive tools to comprehend systems and therefore, we keep ‘flipping-back to an analytical mode,’ even though we know we should not do so. One of the key challenges of SD education is to develop a ‘systems thinking language.’ But as long as we are not there, we can make use of other -non-cognitive- approaches to ‘‘record’’ reality and to begin to ‘understand’ sustainability. On an emotional and intuitive level, we are capable of apprehending and ‘experiencing’ complex systems. We can experience the interaction of a warm wind, a raising sun, the sound of the sea and the waves, the arm of a beloved one and the taste of a cool beer and experience them as great experiences. We can describe them as ‘heaven on earth’ or as ‘one of the best moments of my life.’

840


We immediately know that the surplus or added value of such moments is not in one of the different elements (the wind, the sun, the sea, the arm, the beer) but in the combination and especially the ‘interactions’ among all of these facets. In the same way, SD cannot and should not be reduced to three dimensions but is to be realized in the interaction of all of those dimensions as well as the crucial integration of the fourth dimension, TIME!! The time dimension is crucial in any kind of SD context, but it is so often overlooked! Therefore, we need other tools to ‘understand and to work with’ reality. In the next section, we present the point that games, and especially games that deal with ‘systems behavior,’ are tools that we can use to apprehend and experience systems behavior that will provide us experiential insights into the dynamic factors of what we need to do to transform unsustainable into sustainable societies. Additionally, there must be the element of emotional attachment to the subject of study. The challenge of SD (and education for SD) goes much further than merely a quest for multidisciplinarity. It IS multidisciplinary but, at the same time it is oriented towards effecting change, based on certain values and visions of a desired future state based upon those values. The word ‘empathy’ is a word that comes to mind when envisioning the consequences of this challenge. When we not only seek to analyze but also wish to change, and when this change is based on certain values, the consequences are that certain levels of emotion and emotional attachment are essential. This means that we need to develop a certain emotional relationship with the subject we learn and teach; in this we are seeking to integrate apprehension with comprehension. SD education requires multidisciplinary collaboration. It requires teachers and students to become co-learners who are able to make the connections between the diverse domains of knowledge generation and knowledge application, in real life situations. This means they have to be able to bridge different professional cultures, traditions, gender differences and ages. The experiences within environmental sciences during the past 20 to 30 years show that such connections and bridges can be made, but it is a very difficult challenge for persons involved in transdisciplinary projects to mutually understand each other. In such efforts, we discover that we all have implicit images of reality and ‘taken-for-granted,’ working methods in our minds. Since these images and methods are not the same for people coming from various backgrounds and ages, they must not be ‘implicit’ but must be made explicit and must be openly discussed and acted upon. Finally, there is the action element that is essential for effecting changes. Kolb points at the relationship between ways of learning, knowledge and change. Certain types of education result in certain types of knowledge and contribute to certain types of change and action. We should be very much aware of the fact that education for SD must focus upon and contribute to dramatic changes in paradigms, context and behavior. As a consequence education for SD should focus on education that relies on apprehension and extension since

the combination of those two processes leads towards diverting knowledge that facilitates understanding and motivates people to contribute to changing the systems from unsustainable to sustainable. But since education for SD requires, at the same time that the student develops a certain emotional relationship with the subject of study, education should also rely on apprehension and intention. Finally, the two remaining stages of the cycle are equally important. The usage of the appropriate tools and a sound multidisciplinary understanding of the subject of study are equally indispensable to help the student develop an emotional attachment and the capacity to transcend existing contexts and paradigms. This means that education for SD should be based on a well balanced mix of the four types of learning. Therefore, we need to develop education that is based on apprehension as well as comprehension, and that is based on intention as well as on extension. When one looks at the standard format of education for SD, one sees that several of the required parts are present but that teaching in apprehension and especially in apprehension and extension are rare or are totally absent. That is understandable because these kinds of teaching rely less on formal education and rely much more on emotional processes and on ‘learning by doing.’ Even though it may be understandable, it does not mean that it is desirable and in fact it is not as effective as it would be if all four approaches were always utilized. A standard format of education for SD, very often starts with a presentation of a case study. We find that the usage of case studies is the most common approach to observing reality. This makes sense since case studies help us to grasp the richness of reality and to go beyond the merely analytical approach. It is also an attempt to understand processes within certain contexts. Case studies ‘‘par excellence’’ provide the context to understand the particular behavior of people within these contexts and to understand (comprehend) the linkages between certain problems, the behavior and technologies within these contexts and the problems that result. It leads to contextual thinking’ and provides solutions that are contextspecific. It helps us to ‘apprehend’ reality and prepares for the development of changes within certain contexts. Case studies can be helpful but we must be aware of the fact that they do not necessarily lead to changing paradigms, contexts or behavior. They may even be counterproductive in this respect since students may become tempted to look for solutions within the boundaries of the prescribed case studies. That is why additional teaching techniques and learning modes are needed. Such additional modes do exist. In many curricula, fieldwork or internships are included. Potentially, these should cover the aspects of apprehension and extension. Very often however, they do not facilitate the development of contextual changes. Students leave the school or university and become internalized into a company or organization where they do their fieldwork or internship. This means that students automatically accept the contexts of the organization where they perform their fieldwork. There are several psychological explanations for this. Students feel that they lack the knowledge and experience of the personnel that work in the organization and that they should learn from them instead of giving


critique. Since internships often are an avenue for obtaining a job in that organization, students are reluctant to criticize and tend to accept the organization as it is. The psychological processes are perfectly understandable and in a way this is be favored, after all, it is better to understand and apprehend first, before one starts to criticize. The real danger is that this leads to accepting existing contexts. The key is the fine line between an attempt to change existing contexts and the practice of critique. Often an attempt to change contexts is perceived as critique. Students should be educated in this and should be provided with more tools to master these kinds of challenges. Playing games can help and can provide students with an understanding of the subtle differences between critique and attempts to change contexts. For more details on these facets, see Table 2. Since the fieldwork or internship is very crucial in learning to change contexts and not many pedagogical tools exist to facilitate this phase, we feel that the games we present in this paper are potentially very useful, especially in this teaching/ learning phase. We feel, in fact, that this phase of the learning cycle misses explicit educational program elements and we believe that games can be perfect program elements for enriching and enhancing this phase. Games can serve very important roles in all the program elements however (See Fig. 3). In the phase of learning through concrete experiences and within the context of presenting case studies, games like role-plays can serve a very significant role. In the phase of reflective observation and the exploration of tools and techniques, games, especially games for self analysis, collabortion and communication, should be an essential part of all curricula. Also, in the phase of abstract conceptualization, games should be a part of education for SD. In this phase, students must learn to collaborate with colleagues from various disciplines and once again, games can play a powerful role in helping them to learn these kinds of skills. 4. Games in the context of experiential learning and sustainable development Playing games is an appropriate activity in the context of learning for SD and especially in the context of experiential learning. When one plays games, one simulates and creates

841

realities, with certain mutually accepted rules, roles, conditions and assumptions. When one plays games, one can easily ‘take the role of others’ and develop an emotional understanding (apprehension) of why others act as they do. The beauty of playing games is that one ‘learns by doing’ and ‘learns by failing’ without negative consequences for the real world. One can simulate certain realities, play, manipulate and experiment and experience what the consequences are or what they might be. In case the consequences are negative, one learns what NOT to do and one can design alternative approaches or alternative goals. The added value of games compared to experiments is the fact that within games, one can combine aspects of comprehension and apprehension, as well as processes of intention and extension. Playing games has the following functions: They provide learning experiences. One can ‘learn by doing’ without creating real consequences for the outside world. They provide the possibility to create shared experiences. This is extremely important since this can provide the foundation of shared problem definitions and shared views of solutions that can help the learners make further progress toward SD, which is a key element for success. Because, first of all SD is a complex phenomenon that, by its very nature, involves diverse stakeholders. Secondly it involves actors of different cultural, academic and experiential backgrounds societal positions; as such they have very different attitudes, values and needs. In this context, one of the key challenges is develop a shared view for people with such heterogeneous contexts. Playing games can help. Playing games with people with dramatically different backgrounds, help to create, at least, one shared experience. This shared experience can be used as the point of reference to facilitate mutual understanding and will help the workshop facilitator(s) to engage and empower her/his/their audience during the use of other games. Playing games contributes to team-building. Since playing games creates shared experiences, it can help in the process of team-building. Since not every shared experience leads to better team-building; by careful selection, the

Table 2 Games in the context of learning processes and types of knowledge that is likely to be developed with their usage Phase Apprehension: Concrete experiences Active experimentation Comprehension: Reflective observation Abstract conceptualization

Teaching program element

Learning process

Type of knowledge

Case study approach games: role plays Games: system games, games for self analysis and collabortion and communication

Apprehension intention Apprehension extension

Assimilative Divergent

Games for self analysis and collabortion and communication to practice skills Analysis experiments Games for self analysis and collabortion and communication to practice multidisciplinary collaboration

Comprehension extension

Accommodative

Comprehension extension

Convergent

842


Menu of games Games for self-analysis Everything but sleep or Nine dot game or Rest in my arms

Games for communication and collaboration Paper tear or Thumb wrestling or Harvest game

System games Triangles or Avalange or Living loops

Fig. 3. Brief menu of some games useful for teaching sustainability-related concepts.

games that are used can help to contribute to team-building. Playing games that facilitate communication and collaboration usually do result in better team performance and provide a sense of belonging to a team. The advantage of games is that they are ‘safe’ and ‘experimental’ as well as the fact that they are ‘not for real.’ This can help to engage people who normally prefer to not become teamplayers. Playing games contributes to knowledge of oneself. By playing games, participants gain insight into their attitudes, values and thought processes. They can help the gaming participants discover the implicit assumptions that they have in life, but that may not necessarily be shared by others. Playing systems games helps participants understand and feel the limitations and possibilities to change the system. This is essential for helping people envision the changes that need to be made and to empower them to make the changes in ‘real life’ that are essential for SD. Playing games helps to test alternative solutions. As stated earlier, one of the fine attributes of playing games is that one ‘learns by doing’ without negative consequences for the real world. One can simulate diverse realities, play the games, manipulate reality and experience the resulting consequences, within the safety of the simulation. At the same time while one is testing alternative solutions one also learns much about one’s self while creating shared experiences for all participants. Especially for SD, it is

essential to have these kinds of shared experiences and to benefit from the consequent insights because the system characteristics of SD make it difficult to predict the outcome of interventions, in the real world, but the simulations may help the participants to be more open to explore ways of moving forward. Playing games is fun and entertainment. Such ways of ‘learning,’ are very important because they generate positive mental energies and enthusiasm for participants to engage in the complex challenge of SD. Games, properly selected and used, may also contribute to changes in the visions of what is essential for effecting SD. Many people associate the issue with words such as ‘heavy,’ ‘serious,’ negative’ or ‘depressing.’ But in fact, even though there is some truth that some of those qualifications, SD also provides the opportunity for creativity, innovation and adventure. Playing games may help to make people see this part of SD. Of course not all games have the same function. Some games help one to discover parts of one’s self; others help one to understand processes of and mechanisms in communication with others. Yet other games help one to experience the working of complex systems and help to position oneself within such systems. In the next section we distinguish among the three types of types of games. Roughly speaking, three categories of games can be distinguished: games for ‘self-analysis,’ games for communication and collaboration, and ‘system games.’ 4.1. Games for ‘self analysis’ Games for ‘self-analysis’ help participants become more conscious of their thought processes, sensorial perceptions and values. Games of this type help one to clarify one’s implicit assumptions and the ways one approaches other people, their organizations or their problems. An example of this type of game is, ‘everything but sleep’ (see Section 5 of this article) that helps the participants experience how they watch and listen to a teacher providing instructions for the steps of the game. Most people that play the game are surprised by the outcome and discover something about everyday life that is absolutely new to them. Other games such as the ‘‘rest in my arms,’’ focus on the experiential level of ‘trust’ and ‘confidence’ that one has one in oneself and in others. When playing this game, especially in a group, one discovers, experiences and ‘sees’ that the level of trust someone has in others is directly related to the level of confidence one has in themselves. In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, games for ‘self analysis’ help, first of all, in the process of intention that relies on internal reflection. It touches upon the image we have of ourselves vis-a`-vis the outside world. Additionally, this type of games help the participants learn in the extension stages to help them make transformative changes in the world. The ‘nine dot’ game (see Section 5 of this article) for instance tells us much about ourselves in how we seek solutions for problems. In our attempts to change the world it is equally


important to be aware of our implicit functioning as well as the image we have of ourselves vis-a`-vis the outside world. 4.2. Games for ‘communication and collaboration’ Games for ‘communication and collaboration’ help one to understand and experience invisible mechanisms that take place when one communicates and collaborates. The game ‘paper tear’ shows, for instance that the way we look at reality literally depends on our view of reality. When hearing this, social scientists may be tempted to think of Karl Marx and his theory of materialism. According to Marx, we interpret the world according to the societal position we have which determines our ‘consciousness’ and our vision of the world. ‘Paper tear’ (see Section 5 of this article) shows that this process is true in an even more literal sense. What we see as our left or our right depends on where we are, for instance in a classroom. This has quite a few consequences for communication. By playing this game these consequences are immediately seen and ‘felt’ or experienced. Other games, such as ‘harvest’ or thumb wrestling’ manifest some of the implicit culturally rooted mechanisms that almost all of us bring into processes of collaboration. The game ‘harvest’ (also known as ‘fishbanks ltd’) is the best game to show and make participants feel the reality of the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, games for ‘communication and collaboration’ are very useful in various stages. In stage 1 they can be useful in understanding the concrete experiences and the realities we observe and experience. In Kolb’s stage 2, when dealing with tools and techniques, they play a role in the selection and usage of management tools and techniques. In part three, they can be extremely useful when one works in multi-disciplinary teams, One of the key challenges of working in multi-disciplinary teams is to understand and respect each other, despite the fact that you don’t always understand each other’s analyses. 4.3. System games System games aim to show the players the functioning of complex systems. These games are extremely interesting in the context of SD since it is a system-based concept. System games enable participants to see, feel and ‘experience’ various aspects of system behavior. These experiences are useful in the context of transformation of the world. While playing system games one feels that they are part of a larger whole. One is able to influence the system, but is usually not able to steer the system in exactly the direction one would like. This means that one has to try to understand how the system functions and to find ways to make the necessary changes. System games can help one to understand the functioning of leverage points. Leverage points are crucial points in the system because by working at these points one can change the entire system more effectively and efficiently. The game ‘triangles’ (see Section 5 of this article) helps participants experience what it is like to be part of a system, to be able to change it, but not steer it and to better understand what and where the import leverage

843

points are. The game ‘avalanche’ (see Section 5 of this article) shows us the complex interactions between individual intentions of participants of a system and the system behavior. Avalanche is one of the ultimate games to show the complexity of stabilizing and decreasing parameters such as economic growth and consumption. In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, systems can be useful in various stages, but are especially valuable in stage four. The games help us to really feel and experience the behavior of large and complex systems and help us to experience the effects of certain interventions in such systems. As such they are potentially enormously useful in the transformation stage, especially when we are dealing with systemic issues such as SD. Games can play a role in all of the four stages of Kolb’s learning cycle. In order to clarify that we look at the four stages again and review what educational program elements belong within each of the four stages (Fig. 3): (a) In phase one, we often work with case studies. The essential objective of this phase is to begin to understand the role of actors, their problem definitions and their ways to find and implement solutions. (b) In phase two, we use tools and techniques in the process of seeking to understand them in a comprehensive and apprehensive way Games are especially helpful to apprehend social and management aspects, tools and techniques. (c) In phase three, we seek to better understand the processes of scientific analysis and understanding theoretical insights. System games certainly can play a role in the clarification of the theoretical aspects of systems behavior. When scientists work in multi-disciplinary groups, as is almost always required in research in SD, games for communication and collaboration can help to enhance the communication processes among researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds. (d) In phase four, we engage in games that provide opportunities for active experimentation. This provides the participants the opportunity to apply their knowledge and understanding to specific and concrete situations and circumstances. (For further clarification, see the contents of Table 3.) 5. Games that were played during the Workshop in Monterrey, Mexico in June 2004 During the workshop at the conference in Monterrey we played a selection of games derived from the different categories of games. This enabled the participants to experience games from each category discussed above. Most of these games are described in the ‘Systems Thinking Playbook’ that was written by Linda Booth-Sweeney and Dennis Meadows [3]. This book has been the input of a project performed in the Netherlands in 2004 and early 2005 for the governmental program, ‘‘Learning for Sustainability.’’ The object of that program was to empower trainers and teachers in sustainability and to provide them with the tools needed. Within


844

Table 3 Educational program elements and types of games that may be useful in the different learning phases Phases

Educational program elements

Games

Concrete experiences

Actors are involved. Actor’s perspectives are clarified. Problems are involved and the definitions of problems are clarified.

Games for communication, collaboration and system games are useful for this phase.

Reflective observation

Current practices in terms of solutions are clarified. The use and understanding of tools is highlighted. The use and understanding of techniques is experienced.

Games for communication, collaboration and for self-analysis are useful for this phase.

Abstract conceptualization

Understanding theoretical insights is an essential part of this phase. Understanding limitations of the practices and techniques is essential. Learning new approaches and new contexts is essential. Working in (multi-disciplinary) teams is valuable.

Games for communication, collaboration and system games are useful for this phase.

Active experimentation

Applying knowledge and understanding in concrete and specific circumstances is especially important in this phase.

Games for self analysis, communication collaboration and system games are valuable for this phase.

the framework of that project, Hans Dieleman, together with 12 trainers and teachers from various Dutch organizations (cities, schools, and consultants) organized a number of workshops with Dennis Meadows in the format of Master-classes. The experiences gained during these workshops with Meadows are encapsulated within the Dutch manual: ‘‘Playing towards sustainability’’ [2]. The lessons and insights obtained were with the participants at the Monterrey workshop. The workshop’s second source of information and experience was the experience that Donald Huisingh gained in many workshops and formal courses on Simulation and Gaming he has conducted during the last 20 years in more than 40 countries. Games not included in the book by Sweeney and Meadows were drawn from the facilitator’s own games or from those developed by participants in previous workshops they have facilitated. The following list of ‘briefly described,’ games was used as a menu from which games were selected for the workshop.

5.1. Games for ‘self analysis’ Within the category ‘‘games for ‘self-analysis’’’ we placed three games on the menu: ‘everything but sleep,’ the ‘nine dot

game’ and ‘rest in my arms.’ The three games illustrate various aspects of the human brain. They provide sufficient input to discuss the role of self-analysis in SD. ‘‘Everything but sleep’’ is a nice game to show participants how they and others in the workshop read a text that was provided to them. The game is based on the participant’s capacity and intuitive usage of the mental process of ‘association.’ The game shows how rapidly we assume that certain words are said or written while this is absolutely not true. The game shows how easy it is to manipulate people and to place words in their minds without saying or writing them. The game makes participants aware of their own mental processes and shows them the risks/dangers of being manipulated with words. The ‘‘nine dot game’’ is an excellent game to start a brainstorm session. The game confronts the participants with an assignment that cannot be solved using ‘traditional’ thought processes and self-evident solutions. The problem solver needs to be creative. The problem is very easily solved once the problem solver steps out of the traditional boxes and dares to experiment with unorthodox solutions. The game is very simple and very illustrative for what one needs to realize SD; with traditional solution approaches the problems cannot be solved. Using unorthodox solutions however, changes the framework and solutions are easy to find and to implement. ‘‘Rest in my arms’’ shows the participant the relationship between self-confidence and trust in others. The game is easy to play andvery illustrative. This game is one of a whole range of games that can be played to ease and ‘let things go.’ This game is also helpful for self-analysis; consequently it is useful in helping to catalyse communication and collaboration.

5.2. Games for communication and collaboration Within the category ‘‘games for communication and collaboration’’ we listed three games on the menu: ‘paper tear,’ ‘thumb wrestling’ and ‘the harvest game.’ ‘‘Paper tear’’ is a good game to illustrate multiple aspects of communication. Paper tear illustrates the importance of telling people not only, WHAT to do but to tell them as well WHY they perform that task. This game can be very useful for managers. At the same time Paper tear illustrates, in a very good way, the importance of accurate and clear explanations in communication. Finally, it shows that we really look at reality in different ways when we are in a different position vis-a`-vis each other. ‘‘Thumb wrestling’’ is a traditional game. Two people ‘wrestle’ with their thumbs. The objective is for each participant to score as many points as possible. The game illustrates, in a fabulous way, how almost all of us start to fight against each other and try to make each others life hard. As a result neither player makes many


points. When, by contrast, the game is played in a collaborative way, both players score heavily. The game shows much about one’s implicit rules and values by which one approaches the reality of ‘‘scoring as many points as possible.’’ ‘‘Harvest game’’ is a game developed by Dennis Meadows and is very well known as ‘‘Fishbanks Ltd’’ Fishbanks is a computer game and ‘harvest’ is a simplified, non-computer version of it. Both illustrate, in an excellent way, the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ In ‘harvest’ the participants form small groups of fishermen who go out on the ocean to fish. The objective for each team is to maximize their profit, in the long term. The game shows, in a marvelous way, how and why the ‘tragedy of the commons’ occurs and what mechanisms account for it. The game provides much valuable input for extensive debriefing on what needs to be changed in our way of collaboration in order to achieve SD.

5.3. System games Within the category, ‘system games,’ the menu also offers three games: ‘triangles,’ ‘avalanche’ and ‘living loops.’ These games take more time to play than the games of the first category. ‘‘Triangles’’ is a game that can be played with a large group of people. In fact, a minimal of ten to fifteen participants is required. The participants form a system and are interdependent elements of that system. Each participant has two others as his or her reference (which make the triangles) and the essence of the game is that when one person moves, the reference persons have to move as well. But as these reference persons have their own reference persons, those persons will start to move as well. This setup allows the participants the opportunity to clarify various aspects of system behavior such as ‘leverage points’ and ‘systems change and stability.’ ‘‘Avalanche’’ is a perfect metaphor for SD, or to be more accurate: for unSD. The game is played with a hoop or a stick and requires 6 to 10 participants. The participants have the shared task of bringing down the hoop or the stick to the floor. Individually they have to be careful to not lose contact with the stick or the hoop. What usually happens is illustrative for unSD. The individuals are so focused on their private tasks that the collective task of ‘bringing down’ is not achieved. In fact, what usually happens is that the hoop or the stick goes up instead of down. This is a perfect metaphor for SD. The game offers many opportunities to discuss why it is so difficult to bring down economic parameters like consumption, and illustrates that systems have their own ‘behavior.’ ‘‘Living loops’’ is a game to illustrate cause and effect, as well as the functioning of open and closed systems. Participants are elements in a chain, with either a negative or a positive sign. Impulses are given to one person in the chain and

845

the impulses go from one person to the other. Dependent on the sign of the person (negative or positive) the impulse is amplified or starts to go into the opposite direction. With this basic format, various aspects of systems can be illustrated. Five to ten persons are required to play this game. 6. The technique of playing games Playing games are serious ways to learn. Games can help to deepen the participant’s understanding and help them to apprehend diverse facets of reality in new and more comprehensive ways. There is however, one condition to this and that concerns the way games are performed. Only when games are well prepared, well executed and well evaluated, will the intended effects and impacts of the games be realized. Each game has its own rules and requirements that must to be respected. In addition to game-specific rules, the following are a few generic rules that need to be applied when playing any kind of game: (1) the contextualization and preparation for the game, (2) the execution including explanation to the participants of how to play the game and (3) the debriefing at the end of the game. We briefly discuss these generic rules in the following paragraphs: 6.1. The contextualization and preparation for playing the game The purpose of playing games in teaching is to be able to play, to manipulate and experience and ultimately to apprehend certain aspects of reality. This means that games should, in some way or other, represent the reality (realities) of the participants. That is why the types of game and the types of participants are key variables that must be carefully addressed in selecting and playing the games. 6.1.1. Type of game In principle there are three ways in which games can represent the real world around us. A first group of games represent realities that we can find anywhere and are not specific; the universal game. Games like ‘thumb wrestling’ or ‘everything but sleep’ belong to this type. They can be played with any group because they refer to universal aspects of reality. A second type of games are the situation-specific or isomorphic types of games. They represent concrete settings such as a classroom, a hospital, a prison, a fight, a couple in love, etc. The third type, the fantastic type, does not represent any specific or any universal reality. The world in this type of game is purely fictional. The game ‘triangles’ is a game that belongs to this group. 6.1.2. Type of (target) group The next question concerns the group of people that are engaged in playing the games. Is this a group of students, neighborhood citizens, politicians, elderly, mixed group in terms of gender, age and race, etc. When playing games, it is important to ask the question what do we want to accomplish with the games and with what types of groups we will play the games?

846


Dependent on the answers to these questions (purpose and target group) one can select appropriate games. Games derived from the universal or fantastic type can, in principle, be played in any setting. Isomorphic games can be very powerful but must be tailored to the specific target groups. 6.1.3. Group dynamics The group dynamics is largely dependent on the culture of the participants of the group and to questions such as whether the group members know each other well or not at all. In case one plays with groups that know each other well (for instance employees of a company that collaborate on a daily basis) one must realize that some fixed group dynamics exist. One will always find some informal leaders, some jokers, some members of the group that are prone to question and criticize, some stereotypes will also become evident and some tensions among members may come to the surface. It is important for the game facilitators to be fully aware of this so they properly anticipate and even use these aspects in the games to make the learning opportunities richer and more complete. Depending upon the cultural setting, some games may require modifications or adjustments. When one plays games in cultures where it is not appropriate for men and women to hold each others hands, for example, the facilitators can provide the participants with a piece of rope or any other device to overcome such practical barriers for playing games where that is an element. Alternately, in such cases, one could have separate circles for males and females. In other words, the game coordinator should adapt and adjust the games to fit the context and to realize that all are flexible and dynamic ways of helping the participants learn in new/old ways. 6.2. The actual play, including the introduction and instructions to the participants The Actual Play part involves the aspects of Introduction and Instructions. It also involves the details of the activities of the game. 6.2.1. Introduction and instructions An important part of the success and impact of games can be explained by the proper introduction to and instructions for each game. It is very important to use exactly the right words and to leave out some of the key words in the explanation. In games such as ‘everything but sleep’ the effect of the game largely depends on the word ‘sleep’ and the way this is used in the introduction. It is equally important to explain, in a ‘step-by-step’ manner, precisely what the participants are to do, what is expected of them and what they should not do. It is also essential to ask, several times, if all participants have understood the purpose and actions of the game. It is highly recommended that the facilitator(s) act out some of the movements that the participants have to make, in case this is part of the game, to ensure that all understand what is to be done.

6.2.2. In education: the sequence of games and explanations In educational settings one should make a conscious choice between the sequence of playing the game and explaining certain elements of reality. Games can be used to make students explore certain aspects of reality. In this case games should be played without too much introduction and should be followed by an extensive debrief. Games can also be used to make students experience or apprehend certain aspects of reality that are explained to them before they play the game(s), in a more theoretical manner. 6.2.3. Technical aspects of playing the games Playing games involves three different technical aspects. First of all, some games must be played with certain tools and toys. It is important to prepare these aspects thoroughly. Some games, like avalanche, depend entirely on the right equipment used. When a too heavy hoop is used, the game will probably not work at all and is a waste of time and energy. A second aspect is related to the space within which the games are played. If the room is not adequate in terms of size or equipment it is advised not to play certain games at all. It is better not to play games instead of playing them in a poorly executed way. The last aspect concerns effectiveness as well as safety of the participants. Be aware of hard objects such as balls and protect and warn participants that are vulnerable because of clothing (fragile or light colored that may become soiled in the process of playing the game(s) or of certain medical devices or conditions that potential participants my have that may put them at risk if they participate in some games. 6.3. The debriefing at the end of the gaming session The debriefing session at the end of the gaming session is an extremely important aspect of playing games. One trainer and game developer once underlined the importance of debriefing in the following way; ‘playing a game without debriefing is like playing a soccer game without scoring goals.’ The participants will always have an array of experiences but they will need a context and some help to facilitate their clarification and expression of the emotive ‘learnings’ they experienced. Also, of course, as they express their ‘learnings’ and listen to the ‘learnings’ of others, they will realize that people learn very different things from performing the same activities. Reflections on the differences in perceptions and emotions that are elicited via the games are extremely valuable. Such debriefing sessions are essential to also help the participants to reflect on how they may use the lessons they learned in their personal and professional lives as well as how they may use these and numerous other games and simulations in their teaching and training activities. Some questions that can be relevant in the debriefing after a game or games include but are not limited to: What did I learn about myself, my behavior, my values, my thoughts, my fears, and my eagerness to win, while participating in this game or games?


What did I learn about the others, their behavior and attitudes? What did I learn about different forms of communication? What was new to me? What did I know but do not do? What did I learn concerning the topic of my study or work (SD) and how can I use this in the future? 7. Conclusions In this paper, the authors explored the relevance of the theory of experiential learning and the roles of games for education for SD. They emphasized that the theory of experiential learning provides numerous opportunities for teachers and learners to obtain valuable insights in learning processes. The theory is helpful in identifying the relationships between education and learning for paradigm and context change. The authors conclude that this phase is very important in education for SD but that currently many curricula do not include the explicit program elements necessary to facilitate learning via the usage of games. Games are excellent tools, precisely to practice with contextual and paradigm changes. As such, games could and should be added to curricula in SD education. In terms of the four phases of the experiential learning cycle, games play important roles in all four phases but especially in phase

847

four. They can help students understand and apprehend the differences between criticism and making suggestions for context changes in concrete organizational settings. This is a very important skill that students should learn before they start to work, as interns or as paid professionals. Many games are already available and new ones are being developed all the time. This paper makes a reference to nine different games in three game categories: games for self-analysis, games for communication and collaboration and system games. The nine games are samples of the thousands of others that are available. We feel that it is up to educators and teachers to implement the many games that exist and to change their curricula to facilitate usage of games within them. Thereby, we anticipate that all of us will become increasingly effective in helping ourselves and our students to become effective ‘Change Agents’ toward Sustainable Societies. References [1] Kolb D. Experiential learning, experiences as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1984. [2] Dieleman H. Playing for sustainability. Rotterdam: Erasmus University; 2004 (Leren voor duurzaamheid, Dutch publication). [3] Booth Sweeney L, Meadows D. Systems thinking playbook; exercises to stretch and build learning and systems thinking capabilities. 1995. ISBN 0-9666127-7-9.