Human Agency and Learning
A Computer-based Exploration of Sustainable Water Management
David MacLennan
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Thompson Rivers University, 900 McGill Road, Kamloops, Canada
Keywords: Game-based and Simulation-based Learning, Higher Order Thinking Skills, Immersive Learning and Multi-
media Applications, Educating the Educators.
Abstract: Hydrological systems provide instructive examples of systems that have both human and natural
components. The computer-based learning experience we are designing makes use of maps, models and a
game-like experience to introduce learners to sustainability issues in a local watershed. We start with
established principles of learning theory, like the idea that human beings learn best when they can act on the
world (in this case a digital world), and that role-playing can enhance student engagement in the learning
process. However, the paper argues that designers of computer-based learning experiences can benefit from
richer models of human agency. Role theory, in particular, provides valuable resources for designers who
wish to incorporate different aspects of human agency into the gaming experience.
1 INTRODUCTION
Research has demonstrated that learners often have
difficulty dealing with complex systems: they tend
to focus on visible at the expense of invisible aspects
of systems; and they engage in atomistic thinking
rarely appreciating the importance of part/whole
relationships (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2015: 9-10). The
challenges of complexity are especially acute when
systems involve a combination of natural and human
components. Yet it is precisely such human/nature
interactions that learners will need to understand if
they are to meet the challenges of environmental
sustainability that loom so large in the contemporary
world (Selman, 2012).
The purpose of this position paper is to outline a
computer-based strategy for introducing learners to
complex human/nature interactions. At the core of
the strategy is a game-like experience that allows
learners to experience for themselves the challenges
associated with managing a basic natural resource:
in this case, water. It is argued that when dealing
with complexity it makes sense to draw on the
insights of major theorists like Piaget and Vygotsky
who insisted that to learn effectively human beings
must have opportunities to act on and in the world
(Cavicchi, 2006; Freeman et al., 2014: 4810,
Kozulin, 2001; Lourenco, 2012).
In this paper, this fundamental insight is taken
one step further. Drawing on role theory (Biddle
1979, 1986) and recent explorations of the nature of
human agency (Archer, 2000, 2012; Frankfurt, 1988;
Martin, 2010), some of the processes that unfold as
human beings act on and in the world are identified.
It makes sense to view human agents in relation to
social roles, and this is the basic idea that informs
the role playing experiences one encounters in
computer games designed for educational purposes
(Katsaliaki and Mustafee, 2012: 9-10).
However, it is important to recognize that the
traditional model of the human being as a role
playing agent is not without flaws. Occupants of
roles seek out new knowledge, realizing that reliable
knowledge is crucial to enacting roles effectively.
Moreover, role-playing may involve role-making,
critical thinking about roles. This critical thinking
may take the form of internal deliberative processes
as persons struggle to remake roles in response to
emerging concerns and commitments. But it may
also involve processes of dialogue and
collaboration.among the occupants of different roles.
The challenge is to find ways to incorporate some of
these real complexities of human agents into the role
playing activities that learners encounter as they
participate in computer-based learning. The
objectives of this paper are twofold: to outline a
richer model of human agency; and to show how this
model can be used to design a computer-based
learning experience.
452
MacLennan D..
Human Agency and Learning - A Computer-based Exploration of Sustainable Water Management.
DOI: 10.5220/0005487204520456
In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2015), pages 452-456
ISBN: 978-989-758-107-6
Copyright
c
2015 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
2 A COMPLEX SYSTEM:
THE LOCAL WATERSHED
Hydrological systems provide instructive examples
of systems that have both human and natural
components. The computer-based learning
experience we are designing makes use of maps,
models and a game-like experience to introduce
learners to sustainability issues in a local watershed.
The watershed includes many different ecosystems
and habitat patches. It bears the marks of previous
human uses and continues to support a variety of
human uses, both recreational and agricultural. The
impact of those human uses on the sensitive
ecosystems that compromise the watershed is
significant and the watershed must be managed
carefully if those ecosystems are to survive.
The critical human component of the watershed
consists of a series of dams. Similar dams can be
found throughout the region. The climate is semi-
arid. While streams and small rivers provide water
for agriculture in valley bottoms, they are subject to
dewatering in the dry season. Small dams provide a
human-made technological solution to this problem
allowing those with water permits to regulate the
flow of water to their properties.
The dams serve as the most tangible point of
contact between the natural processes of the
watershed and the human processes associated with
agricultural activities. As indicated above, to
simulate this point of contact we are creating digital
models of the most important dams in the watershed.
By turning a digital crank wheels players will be
able to influence flow rate and regulate the volume
of water diverted to the farmer’s fields. This is a
critical component of the player’s learning
experience and is firmly grounded in the basic tenet
that human beings learn best when they act on and in
the world (in this case a digital world).
The dams are a part of a complex system that
incorporates natural and human components. To
enable learners to better appreciate the relation
between this part of the system and the whole we are
linking the water management game to a web site.
The web site will include google map
representations of the watershed. It will also identify
the complex web of overlapping ecosystems that are
found in the watershed. Those who visit the web site
will be able to see how variables like elevation and
precipitation influence the distribution of various
plant and animal communities.
Water is, of course, crucial to all of these
ecosystems. Salmon use the lower reaches of the
river as a spawning ground and there are trout living
in the upper reaches of the river and the various
smaller lakes located at higher elevations. Water and
human decisions about water storage and water flow
rates have the potential to impact all of these
features of the natural system. The location of the
dams in the google map representation will be
clearly indicated and this will serve to scaffold the
learner’s awareness of part/whole relationships.
What about the hidden parts of the system, the
parts that, because they are not clearly visible, pose
challenges to novice learners? Problems of visibility
linked to spatial scale are addressed through the
zoom in zoom out function of google maps. By
zooming out players can see the whole watershed
and see how events that occur in one part of the
system (upstream) might affect events elsewhere
(downstream). Moreover, we anticipate provide
players options that would enable them to ‘see’ what
is happening at smaller spatial scales (the chemical
composition of the water that runs off farmer’s field,
for example).
The fore-mentioned strategies make some
progress towards addressing predictable challenges
confronting learners who are struggling to
understand complex natural systems. However, more
is needed to address challenges that arise when a
system has natural and human components. What is
needed is a richer model of human agency. In the
next pages this model is outlined and linked to a
computer-based learning experience.
3 HUMAN AGENCY:
BUILDING A RICHER MODEL
Central to many forms of computer based learning,
especially those where games figure significantly,
are role playing activities. In the learning technology
we are designing also incorporates role-playing as a
key part of the experience. The watershed which
provides setting for the learning experience can be
viewed from many different perspectives. How an
individual understands the challenges of sustainable
water management in the area is a function of the
different social roles they occupy. A number of roles
stand out as especially important from an
educational standpoint: elected municipal politician;
city planner; farm manager; watershed ecologist;
hydrologist, dam safety expert; owners of a fishing
resort located upstream; member of the local
naturalist club, representative of the federal
government’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
etc.
HumanAgencyandLearning-AComputer-basedExplorationofSustainableWaterManagement
453
Each of these roles will be associated with a
cluster of role- related scripts, and basic issues of
what is an acceptable flow rate (either through the
dams, or through the outlet located at the point of
diversion to the farmer’s fields) will be defined by
those scripts. This notion of “roles as scripts” makes
sense in relation to traditional role theory which
portrayed human agents responding in relatively
passive ways to the scripts associated with their
roles. However, theory of social roles has evolved:
many researchers who work in this area now
recognize that human actions are best viewed as a
combination of role-taking (following scripts) and
role-making (Biddle, 1986; Brandle, 2011). The
activity of role-making involves a (partially internal)
deliberative process where agents seek to reconcile
role scripts with their basic values, what they care
about (Archer, 2012).
As ideas about sustainability become more
widespread, one can imagine the occupants of roles
rethinking the scripts associated with their roles to
make those scripts more compatible with emerging
cultural values like sustainability. So, for example, a
learner who is assigned the farmer role might
imagine a farmer who is striving to balance the
narrowly defined requirement of the farmer script
(achieving maximum yield) with environmental
concerns (maintaining fish habitat). To be sure, this
approach to a role-playing exercise is more
complicated than an approach that requires players
to simply act out assigned scripts. But it is more
congruent with the complexity of real human agents
seeking to come to terms with the emerging cultural
norms we associate with sustainability.
One way to deal with this complexity is to create
a relatively simple version of the game where
individuals are assigned the role of a traditional
farmer. The responsibility of a traditional famer is to
attain maximum yield using a crop selection that
generates the greatest profit margins. The traditional
farmer will manage water resources to achieve these
goals, and the game will be scored to reward crop
yields and profit margins.
While this single role version of the game has
some merit, there are other options that reflect
significant cultural changes in the way water
management is understood. No longer is fresh water
viewed as an inexhaustible resource. Like many
other natural resources, it is finite. Sustainable water
management requires collaboration among multiple
stakeholders and what some have called a “radical
new approach: Integrated Water Resource
Management (IWRM)” (Black and King, 2009: 92).
We are working on a version of the game that
incorporates key principles of IWRM. This version
of the game involves teams of players who seek to
enact a range of different roles (such as those
identified above). Outstanding performance in this
version of the game would involve water
management strategies that combine collaborative
decision-making with the sharing of specialized
knowledge among players.
This collaborative version of game illustrates the
way interaction among stakeholders may contribute
to role conflict and eventually to role change. It also
simulates the real-world mechanisms associated with
role change. Research on water management
suggests that a key mechanism of role change is the
interaction between different stakeholders in a water
management system. A recent paper identifies the
key principle involved: interaction “requires each
member to externalize his/her knowledge,
internalize the knowledge of other and then
negotiate” (Murgue, Therond and Leenhardt, 2015:
61). The authors of the paper suggest that this
collaborative process of externalization/
internalization may help “groups move towards a
shared understanding of the problem and a shared
representation of potential solutions” (Murgue,
Therond and Leenhardt, 2015: 61). The opportunity
for dialogue among learners enacting the roles of
different stakeholders will be a central part of the
learning experience in the collaborative game. We
believe it will lead to the kind of critical thinking
about roles that contributes to role change and more
flexible versions of role enactment.
It is worth pausing at this point to comment on
the kinds of knowledge that are relevant to role
enactment in the water management game. The
watershed that forms the basis of this game is a
complex system that includes both natural and
human (social) components. Some members of the
team will bring knowledge of the natural
environment to the knowledge sharing process. For
example we anticipate assigning roles like
“university ecologist” or “hydrologist” to team
members. This will enable team members to
appreciate the complex web of ecosystems that
intersect in the watershed, and the hydrological
cycles that determine the sustainability of those
ecosystems.
But effective decision-making about water
management involves knowledge of both natural and
social environments. The social, legal/regulatory
environment, is comprised of water permits,
property rights, zoning laws and a range of
overlapping government jurisdictions. Traditionally
this social complexity led to a fragmented and
CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
454
incoherent approach to decision making in the area
of water management. To achieve a more integrated
approach, players will need to appreciate both the
obstacles and affordances (Gibson, 1979) associated
with the social environment in which decisions are
made. Agents who are aware of these affordances
and obstacles are more likely to pursue their goals
effectively.
One way to introduce players to the regulatory
environment is to provide simple visual
representations that can be accessed as pop ups or
through a media library. In addition to these visual
representations the player would be read sample
documents outlining the various kinds of rules that
influence what can and cannot be done in the local
watershed. This would include general zoning laws:
part of the land in the watershed is provincial park
and part is private land; part of the private land is
zoned agricultural and must be maintained in this
state. Water rights play a critical role in this
watershed as in many others. In British Columbia,
water rights derive from a legal tradition that
construes water as property (Matsui, 2009). Holders
of water permits have access to a legally specified
volume of water per spatial unit of agricultural land.
However the rights of property owners are not
absolute: what is permitted in riparian and other
protected areas is determined by public authorities.
Clearly these key features of the regulatory
environment are complicated and we continue to
work on strategies for introducing them to learners.
What must be stressed is that in this collaborative
version of the game enacting a role involves more
than adhering to a script or pursing a narrowly
defined objective. In the collaborative version,
players must appreciate the perspectives of others,
share specialized knowledge, and arrive at water
management solutions that balance environmental
protection with a broad range of water uses.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Complex systems have hidden components that
many learners overlook. Some of what is hidden can
be made visible when learners can modify the spatial
scale of a map or model as is possible with the zoom
in/zoom out function of google earth. However
when learners are seeking to understand systems that
include natural and social components, conventional
ways of representing spatial scale are not enough.
What is needed is a richer model of human agency.
Such a model should make use of established
principles of learning theory like the idea that human
beings learn best when they can act on the world (in
this case a digital world), or that role-playing can
make a crucial contribution to learning.
However, to take full advantage of the role
playing component of game design, it is necessary to
take into account the challenges associated with role
enactment, role conflict, and role change. A role
playing scenario that involves collaboration among
the occupants of different roles showcases the forms
of agency that are valued in modern societies.
Outstanding team performance in this context
involves understanding the perspectives of others,
sharing specialized knowledge, and finding ways to
balance competing values. In situations like this,
agency becomes a deliberative process, as traditional
role expectations are reconciled with emergent
cultural norms, and role enactment draws
increasingly on diverse forms of specialized
knowledge. Role theory, enriched by recent work on
the nature of human agency, offers game designers
the conceptual resources they will need to represent
the social dimensions of complex systems and create
more authentic educational experiences for learners.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my research student Hector
Alzade who helped me appreciate the educational
value of computer games.
REFERENCES
Archer, M. (2000) Being human: The problem of agency,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archer, M. (2012) The reflexive imperative in late
modernity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biddle, B. (1979) Role theory: Expectations, identities and
behaviours, New York Academic Press.
Biddle, B. (1986) ‘Recent development in role theory’.
Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 12, pp. 67-92.
Black, M., King, J. (2009) The atlas of water: Mapping
the world’s most critical resource. Second Edition.
Foreword by M. Catley-Carlson. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Brandle, G. (2011) ‘Role’, in Ritzer, G. and Ryan, J. (eds.)
The Concise Encyclopedia of Sociology, Oxford, UK:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Cavicchi, E. (2006). ‘Faraday and Piaget: Experimenting
in relation with the world.’ Perspectives on Science,
vol. 14, pp. 66-96.
Frankfurt, H. (1988) The importance of what we care
about. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S., McDonough, M., Smith, M.,
Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. and Wenderoth, M. (2014)
HumanAgencyandLearning-AComputer-basedExplorationofSustainableWaterManagement
455
‘Active learning increases student performance in
science, engineering and mathematics’. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Science of the U.S.A., vol.
111, pp. 8410-8415.
Gibson, J. (1979) The ecological approach to visual
perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Hmelo-Silver, C., Liu, L., Gray, S., Jordon, R. (2015).
‘Using representational tools to learn about complex
systems: A tale of two classrooms’. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, vol. 52, pp. 6-35.
Katsaliaki, K. and Mustafee, N. (2012) A survey of
serious games on sustainable development,
Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation
Conference.
Kozulin, A., (2001) Psychological tools: A sociocultural
approach to education. Harvard University Press.
Lourenco, O. (2012) Piaget and Vygotsky: Many
resemblances and a key difference.’ New Ideas in
Psychology, vol. 30, pp. 281-295.
Martin, J. (2010) ‘The psychology of personhood:
Conditions of a viable neo-Meadian pluralism’. New
Ideas in Psychology, vol. 28, pp. 219-226.
Matsui, K. (2009) Native peoples and water rights:
Irrigation, dams and the law in western Canada.
Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press.
Murgue, C., Therond, O. and Leenhardt, D. (2015)
‘Toward integrated water and agricultural land
management: Participatory design of agricultural
landscapes.’ Land Use Policy, vol. 45, pp. 52-63.
Selman, P. (2012) Sustainable landscape planning: The
reconnection agenda. New York: Routledge.
CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
456
