In the context of an evolving polycrisis, universities play a crucial role in preparing individuals to navigate significant social and environmental transitions. Despite sustained efforts to incorporate transferrable skills such as problem-solving, critical thinking, communication, and teamwork into education programs in recent decades, it has become apparent that these generic skills alone are insufficient for facilitating the transition to a more sustainable and equitable global society. New types of capabilities, such as transdisciplinarity, systems and futures thinking, change-making and reflexivity, have been proposed as necessary for addressing contemporary challenges (see OECD, 2020; UNESCO, 2017; Jordan et al., 2021; Kligyte et al., in progress). However, significant shifts enabled by these capabilities are yet to be realised.
Through this workshop, we advocate for a more holistic conception of futures-making capabilities, in contrast to prevailing educational paradigms that emphasise individual capacity development. From a transdisciplinary perspective, it is particularly evident that sustainable and equitable societal futures cannot be achieved by lone individuals working in siloed sectors. Thus, we conceptualise futures-making capabilities as dynamic, contextually contingent, and action-oriented rather than static attributes possessed by individuals. To support our thinking, we draw upon the capabilities approach conceptualised by Sen (1999) and Nussbaum (2011). Emerging from the human development field, the concept of capability to function encompasses not only what individuals are ‘able to do and be’ (Robeyns, 2017, p. 24) but also considers the environmental conditions necessary for individuals to exercise their capabilities (Walker & McLean, 2015). As an area relatively underexplored in mainstream higher education literature, our workshop aims to advance the conversation and develop a collective understanding of essential aspects of situated and contextualised relational futures-making capabilities and how they might be articulated and evidenced.
We will begin by sharing our work developing futures-making capabilities, drawing on a decade of transdisciplinary education practice at an Australian University and an extensive literature review and surveys with 73 alumni of our transdisciplinary education programs. Using this work as a springboard, we invite transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary educators and practitioners to co-create a glossary and atlas exploring how these futures-making capabilities might be conceptualised across different contexts. Particularly, we seek to examine the contextual and relational aspects of individuals’ capacity to apply capabilities in real-world situations. Our aim is to develop a language that differentiates, positions and legitimises these futures-making capabilities in diverse academic and professional settings, rather than relegating them to mere ‘soft skills’ like ‘teamwork’ or ‘collaboration.’ Drawing from our experience in transdisciplinary education, we recognise these capabilities as ‘hard’ skills that demand dedicated attention, practice, and development.
Workshop description
1. Introduction
The workshop will begin with an introduction to the authors’ journey in developing a transdisciplinary future-making capability framework as an approach to sensemaking and grappling with their own transdisciplinary education practice. We will also explore the participant’s experience in transdisciplinary and future-focused education.
2. Co-creation
Drawing on The CreaTures Glossary approach and toolkit (https://glossary.languagin.gs/), participants will be invited to contribute their own terms and interpretations used in their practice to co-create a glossary, lexicon and atlas of future-making capabilities. Through conversation, free association, and real-time creation of situated word collections, participants will actively shape the lexicon of capabilities required for societal transitions by contributing to, editing, and refining the definitions of these capabilities. By focusing on the fluid evolution of meanings and definitions, we will explore how contextualised language reflects our worldviews and seek helpful ways to articulate a shared terminology that might help differentiate and legitimise future-making capabilities across further academic and professional contexts to support social and environmental transitions.
3. Reflection
The workshop will conclude with a reflection on the experience of collaboratively defining future-making capabilities and consideration of its implications for community-building and change-making. Together, we will explore how this approach can be applied in various contexts beyond the workshop, fostering inclusivity and empowering diverse voices in defining the meaning and practices of transdisciplinary futures-making capabilities. Workshop participants will be invited to continue their contribution to the co-created glossary, lexicon, and atlas after the workshop as the project progresses as part of an ongoing research project.
References
* Jordan, T., Reams, J., Stålne, K., Greca, S., Henriksson, J. A., Björkman, T., & Dawson, T. (2021). Inner Development Goals: Background, method and the IDG framework. Growth that matters. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/600d80b3387b98582a60354a.
* Kligyte, G., Melvold, J., Pratt, S. Bowdler, B. (in progress). Transdisciplinary capabilities framework: developing students’ capacity to thrive in an uncertain future. Futures.
* Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating Capabilities. The Human Development Approach. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.
* OECD (2020). Education at a Glance 2020. Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development. Paris.
* Robeyns, I. (2017). Wellbeing, freedom and social justice: The capability approach re-examined. Open Book Publishers.
* Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* UNESCO (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals - Learning Objectives. Paris.
* Walker, M., & McLean, M. (2015). Professionals and public good capabilities. Critical studies in Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 60–82.
