The Goggles Project: Using Street Theatre to Engage University Stakeholders in Discussions about Sustainability

doi:10.4236/ce.2013.47A2012

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education

2013. Vol.4, No.7A2, 105-109

Published Online July 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ce) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.47A2012

The Goggles Project: Using Street Theatre to Engage University

Stakeholders in Discussions about Sustainability

Tarah Wright1*, Gary Markle2, P et er Wuench3

1Environmental S c i en c e , Faculty of Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

2Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, Ha l if a x , Canada

3Breakhouse Inc. , Halifax, Canada

Email: *[email protected]

Received May 15th, 2013; revised June 15th, 2013; accepted June 22nd, 2013

Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the

original work is properly cited.

Sustainable development has become a global priority. While a sustainable future cannot be achieved

through changes and actions in one sector alone, education is a key component in working toward this

goal. Universities in particular have a moral task as leaders in the ESD movement, and are important

catalysts for moving towards a sustainable future. However, research shows that there is a general lack of

engagement in, and knowledge of sustainability within the university community at large. This manu-

script describes the Goggles Project which used street theatre as a creative way to engage the whole uni-

versity community in discussions regarding sustainability and the role universities can and/or should play

in achieving a sustainable future.

Keywords: Sustainability in Higher Education; Sustainable Development; Street Theatre; Education for

Sustainable Development

Background-Sustainability in

Higher Education

Over the past few decades, humanity has become more aware

of the growing number of environmental problems that threaten

human and ecosystem health. The ramifications of environ-

mental degradation have led many governments and interna-

tional agencies to highlight the need for human development to

be based on principles of sustainable development (SD). The

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)

defines SD as “meeting the needs of the present without com-

promising the ability of future generations to meet their own

needs” (WCED, 1987: p. 43). The main tenets of sustainable

development are focuses on integrating ecological, economic

and social considerations into decision making; inter-genera-

tional equity; increasing equity within nations and amongst

developed and developing countries (intra-generational equity);

reducing population growth; and, conserving and enhancing the

resource base.

While a sustainable future ca nnot be achieved through changes

and actions in one sector alone, education is a key component

in working toward this goal ((Bachiorri & Puglisi, 2007; Cor-

tese, 2003; Orr, 1992; UNESCO, 2005). The concept of educa-

tion for sustainable development (ESD) asserts a vision of edu-

cation that empowers people to assume responsibility for creat-

ing sustainable societies. ESD has become so important to the

global sustainability movement that the United Nations de-

clared 2005-2014 the United Nations Decade of Education for

Sustainable Development (United Nations, 2002).

Universities in particular have a moral task as leaders in the

ESD movement, and are important catalysts for moving to-

wards a sustainable future (Orr, 1992; UNESCO-UNEP, 1978).

Clugston (1999) explains that universities are vested by society

with the task of discerning truth, imparting values, and social-

izing students to contribute to social progress and the advance-

ment of knowledge. Higher education has a responsibility to

impart the moral vision and technical knowledge needed to

ensure a high quality of life for future generations. According

to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or-

ganization, “the goal of (higher) education is to make people

wiser, more knowledgeable, better informed, ethical, responsi-

ble, critical and capable of continuing to learn. Education, in

short, is humanity’s best hope and most effective means in the

quest to achieve sustainable development” (UNESCO, 1997).

The desire to consider sustainability within the university has

been translated into a number of initiatives. Several emerging

themes demonstrate how universities frame the central task of

becoming leaders in sustainable development, and include: en-

gagement in environmental literacy initiatives; curriculum de-

velopment; research related to sustainability; partnerships with

government, non-governmental organizations and industry in

developing sustainability initiatives; and, “greening” physical

operations (Wright, 2004).

Although several advances have been made in SHE research,

major university stakeholders have remained largely absent in

discussions regarding the role universities can play in creating

sustainable societies (Wright, 2010). This is a major issue, as

research shows that all university stakeholders (administrators,

students, staff, and faculty) must be engaged in discussions in

*Corresponding author.

T. WRIGHT ET AL.

order to ensure the long-term success of sustainability initia-

tives (Filho, 2005; Newman & Abrams, 2005).

Scholarly research shows that outreach can be a major vector

in creating change (Filho, 2000; Oepen, 2000) and an often

neglected factor in social learning and change processes (Or-

netzeder & Rohracher, 2005). Much of the literature contends

that engaging with key stakeholder groups in developing a vi-

sion for change is paramount to ensuring that change efforts

within the institution bear fruit (de la Harpe & Thomas, 2009;

Kezar & Eckle, 2002; Kezar, 2009; Wals & Jickling, 2002).

McMillin & Dyball (2009) posit that all university stakeholders

must be engaged in discussions of sustainability for it to be

realized at an institution. Filho (2005) states that to be success-

ful, the sustainability in higher education movement must en-

gage in stakeholder discussions and the integration of the whole

university community into decision-making and communica-

tion (Filho, 2005). Finally, Wright (2010) argues that there is a

general lack of engagement in, and knowledge of sustainability

within the university community at large—which in turn can hin-

der progress to developing sustainability initiatives on campus.

But how can we best engage university stakeholders in dia-

logue about sustainability in higher education? How can we

reach those who are not already involved with sustainability

initiatives on campus (i.e. reach beyond “the choir”)? The Gog-

gles Project that we describe below was designed to engage the

whole university community in discussions regarding the role

universities can and/or should play in achieving a sustainable

future in a creativ e wa y.

The Genesis of the Goggles Project

The story of the Goggles Project begins at a party, where a

couple of friends from different academic backgrounds and

employment experiences (i.e. science, architecture, and fashion

design), but with a shared vision for a sustainable future, were

discussing how to provoke sustainability discussions and en-

gage the entire university community in thinking about the role

that higher education could play in the sustainability movement.

Many ideas were thrown around, including holding focus

groups on campuses and sustainability lecture tours, but none

felt like they could reach out far enough amongst the various

stakeholders within the institution. It was further determined

that these ideas were relatively boring, and would not serve to

inspire any excitement amongst stakeholders who are not cur-

rently involved in sustainability on campus.

Sustainability problems are complex, and while traditional

delivery methods (lectures, public talks, etc.) serve to inform

individuals, they have been criticized in the past for failing to

promote a full understanding or appreciation of sustainability

issues as a whole:

No amount of preaching to the citizenry about the perils

of a polluted environment, the dangers of irresponsible

disposal of wastes or deforestation and the benefit to

mankind [sic] of greening the environment will make

people act to seek to forestall environmental degradation

unless they are imbued with a deep concern for the com-

mon good, a sense of responsibility for maintaining a

balanced and healthy ecosystem and a strong drive to

achieve harmony with nature (Clover, Follen, & Hall,

1998).

The friends realized that a conceptual platform to engage

higher education stakeholders in conversations about sustain-

ability in a creative, fun, and resonating way (like a good con-

versation at a great party), was exactly what was needed. Thus

the Goggles Project was born-predicated on the assertion that

engaging people in discussions of sustainable development

requires a different approach.

Sponsored by a generous grant from the Social Sciences and

Humanities Research Council of Canada, the friends gathered a

team of creative thinkers to develop the idea further. The team

met and discussed many ideas to “interrupt” people’s lives on

campus and find creative ways to get them talking about sus-

tainability. The use of street theatre was seen as an excellent

way to reach those who might not necessarily be reached by

traditional academic offerings such as a focus group or lecture

on sustainability.

The choice of street theatre as a medium was informed by a

growing body of literature that demonstrates the benefits of

using the arts in engaging people in thinking about and action

for a sustainable future. Cohen-Cruz (2001) demonstrates the

efficacy of street theatre in the past to discuss major social is-

sues, and argues that street theatre has the ability to help push

new questions onto the political agenda. Packalen (2009)

claims that the arts can inspire empathy, evoke emotion and

spark dialogue. For Packalen, the arts can examine the world

critically and provide insights to better understand the problems

we face and to build sustainable solutions. Further, Nadarajah

and Yamamoto (2007) discuss the power of theatre in terms of

building a culture around sustainability. In addition, Österlind

(2008), and Sullivan et al. (2008), demonstrate through case

studies, the benefits of using interactive theatre as a method to

bring about social change. In particular, Sullivan and Lloyd

(2006) found that interactive theatre was particularly beneficial

in addressing community environmental issues in contrast to

using traditional approaches.

The vision of the Goggles Project Inaugural Tour was to in-

spire all university stakeholders to think about how universities

can contribute to a sustainable future. The goals included:

 Explaining in plai n l a n g u a ge what sustainability means

 Conveying the urgency of sustainability in a way that does

not depress people

 Creating dialogue amongst all stakeholders in the university

about higher education and sustainability

 To reach out to individuals on campus who may have never

thought of sustainability and/or ESD in the past.

Street theatre was purposefully chosen for this project in or-

der to achieve these goals. By performing on high foot traffic

areas on campus, it was anticipated that the troupe would be

able to bring their message and provoke discussions with stu-

dents, faculty, staff and administrators from all facets of the

campus

Goggles Project—The Inaugural Tour

The first Goggles Project Tour took place over a three-week

period at the beginning of the academic school year (Septem-

ber-October). A troupe of four professional actors and a han-

dler/communication expert travelled from Halifax to Vancouver

by train, visiting nineteen university campuses and performing

at least 4 street theatre events a day to a total audience of over

1000 people. After receiving location advice from sustainability

campus contacts across the country, the troupe performed on

university greens, the steps of administrative buildings, in pe-

106

T. WRIGHT ET AL.

destrian walkways, cafeterias, and residences halls (we even

performed in a loading zone once and nearly got run over).

The troupe engaged the audience in a thought-provoking way,

asking them to rethink their understandings of sustainability

and suggest solutions for the campus that go beyond reduce,

reuse and recycle. The 15 - 20 minute street show introduced

the playful and funny troupe of eccentric thinkers from the

fictional Rethink University, as they delivered a lecture for a

first-year undergraduate class called Rethink 101 (Figure 1).

The show included an interactive quiz with the audience, stories

of how Re-Think University came to be, descriptions of new

ways seeing higher education’s role in sustainability (with the

use of goggles that help us see more clearly), and a sustainabil-

ity pledge and rap! The troupe engaged their audiences, asking

them to consider how universities may have contributed to

unsustainable behaviour in the past, examine new ways of

thinking about higher education for the future, and develop new

perspectives on the foundations and purpose of the university

given our desire for a healthy, prosperous and sustainable

plane.

The messages and facts that the Goggles troupe shared with

their audiences were a reminder of the challenges humanity and

the planet face. However, the goal was not to focus on grim

predictions for the future or on difficulties that may lie ahead.

Rather, it was to encourage university stakeholders to refocus.

The show therefore focused on being entertaining as well as

information. The use of homemade goggles was particularly

effective for injecting humour into the show. Whenever in the

performance the troupe had a moment of clarity about sustain-

ability, they put on goggles (made from recycled water bottles)

to symbolize a transformation in their thinking (Figure 2). Au-

dience members were also encouraged to wear the goggles, and

were given cards that promoted the project and gave instruc-

tions for people make their own goggles.

At the end of the show, audience members were encouraged

to talk to the troupe and record videos to document their own

goggles moments (instances where they realized that something

related to sustainability on campus must change), and/or to

offer their thoughts on what universities could and/or should be

doing to become leaders in creating a sustainable future (Fig-

ure 3). The videos were uploaded on the gogglesproject.org

website so that viewers could see what university stakeholders

across the country think about the university and sustainability.

Lessons Learned—The Hits and Misses!

The Goggles Project, although informed by scholarly re-

search and experience, was a grand experiment. While there

were many things that we did right, there are also things that we

would do differently next time. The following section reflects

on some of the “hits” and “misses” of the Goggles Project Tour,

and discusses possible avenues to follow for subsequent itera-

tions of the project.

First, and foremost, our experiences add to the literature that

discusses the efficacy of using theatre as a medium to engage

people in thinking about important societal issues (Cohen-Cruz,

2001; Nadarajah & Yamamoto, 2007; Österlind, 2008; Sullivan

et al., 2006; Sullivan & Lloyd, 2006). Not only did people stop

to be part of the audience, many individuals stayed around after

the performance to talk with the troupe about their ideas on

sustainability and the university. Many of the audience mem-

bers said how much they appreciated the opportunity to reflect

Figure 1.

The goggles project troupe.

Figure 2.

The nutty professor has a “goggles” moment

during Re-Think 101 le ct ure.

Figure 3.

Students at Ryerson University have their say on the goggles’ website.

T. WRIGHT ET AL.

on an issue that they were not often exposed to. As one student

said:

“I am writing to say thank you for coming to our univer-

sity and catching people as they bustled by. It is so easy

for us to live in a bubble of oblivion-especially in a uni-

versity setting. It seems almost contradictory, that in an

institution teaching critical thinking, we become so ab-

sorbed in the day-to-day that we lose our perspective on

the wider world. Thank you for making us question the

way universities operate and for encouraging us to think

about ways to change our institutions and the way we are

educated.” (Rosalind Crump, Mount Allison University)

In addition, we learned that the delivery of heavy material

(i.e. climate change, poverty, an war) can benefit from a light

treatment in order to engage and not scare people away. The

troupe found that being silly (i.e. physical comedy, rapping

using humorous lyrics, etc.) during the show relaxed people and

encouraged them into creative thinking.

We also found that the use of goggles made from recycled

pop bottles throughout the performance and after the show was

useful in engaging the audience. Not only were the goggles

used as a metaphor for seeing differently, the physical presence

of the goggles, and encouraging the audience to wear the gog-

gles was brilliant way to put people at ease in order to generate

innovative ideas. Anecdotally, the troupe found that when they

asked an audience member to give their ideas on how the uni-

versity could be more sustainable, their ideas were much more

creative (i.e. have a herd of goats cut the lawns on campus) if

they were asked to wear the goggles in responding, then if they

did not (i.e. offer more courses related to the environment).

The same was true after the show when audience members

were invited to give their own thoughts and ideas to be posted

on the website. The troupe found that many of the audience

members wanted to talk, and the website became full of inno-

vative ideas and creative solutions that are currently not present

in the literature (see www.googlesproject.org to view a selec-

tion of the videos from our first tour).

The team also admits to some “misses” along the way. First,

we observed that people are afraid of being the first person to

stop to watch a street performance. While we did our best to

pre-advertise performances with sustainability groups on each

university campus via social media (primarily via Twitter and

Facebook), there were occasions where there was no pre-audi-

ence waiting for the show to happen and it was very difficult to

get people to stop and watch even in heavily travelled areas. On

the other hand, when we had a small crowd of people gathered

before a show, people were more likely to stop and watch.

Therefore, any future iteration of Goggles street theatre will

attempt to maximize pre-audience size even if it means putting

“ringers” in the audience.

Second, while the Goggles Project Tour was an attempt to

reach stakeholders throughout the university, we found that the

majority of our audiences were made up of students. While

Students are an essential component of sustainability in higher

education (Kagawa, 2007).), research shows that all stake-

holders need to be involved in discussions and actions toward

becoming models of sustainability (Filho, 2000; Keniry, 1995).

Therefore future iterations of the Goggles Project will likely

include guerrilla and disruptive theatre (i.e. the troupe breaking

in on faculty meetings, administrative offices, etc.) to ensure

that all stakeholders are reached.

Conclusion

Universities have the potential to become leaders in devel-

oping a sustainable future. The literature shows that becoming

leaders in the sustainability movement requires both an aware-

ness of sustainability amongst all stakeholders on campus, and

openness to positive cultural change for sustainability in higher

education.

The Goggles Project adds to the emerging body of literature

that demonstrates the benefit of using creative acts in aiding in

a cultural transformation within higher education toward sus-

tainability. Further, the Goggles Project contributes to the sus-

tainability in higher education literature by identifying concep-

tualizations of various campus stakeholders on the role that the

university can play in creating a sustainable future.

It is our sincere hope that our manuscript offers guidance and

inspiration to others wishing to engage in creative acts on

campus in their own attempts to create positive cultural change

for sustainability on their campus. Stay tuned for Goggles Pro-

ject Take Two!

Acknowledgements

The Goggles Project was supported by a Research Dis-

semination grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities

Research Council.

REFERENCES

Bachiorri, A., & Puglisi, A. (2007). Promoting education for sustain-

ability: A challenge for the university system. In W. Leal Filho, E.

Manoloas, M. Sotirakou, & G. Boutakis (Eds.), Higher education and

the challenge of sustainability: Problems, promises and good prac-

tice (pp. 7-15). O r e s t i a d a : Environmental Education Cente r of Soufli.

Clover, D., Follen, S., & Hall, B. (1998). The nature of transformation:

environmental, adult and popular education. Toronto: Ontario Insti-

tute for Studies In Ed u c ation.

Clugston, R. (1999). Introduction. In W. L. Filho (Ed.), Sustainability

and university life . Frankfurt/M: Pete r Lang.

Cohen-Cruz, J. (2001). Motion of the ocean: The shifting face of US

theater for social c hange since the 1960s. Theatre, 31, 95-107.

doi:10.1215/01610775-31-3-95

Cortese, A. D. (2003). The critical role of higher education in creating a

sustainable future. Planning for Higher Educat io n, 3, 15-22.

De la Harpe, B., & Thomas, I. (2009). Curriculum change in universi-

ties: Conditions that facilitate education for sustainable development.

Journal of Education for Sustainable Deve lopme nt, 3, 75-85.

doi:10.1177/097340820900300115

Filho, W. L. (2000). Communicating sustainability: Some international

considerations and challenges. In W. L. Filho (Ed.), Communicating

sustainability ( pp . 11-23). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Filho, W. L. (2005). Handbook of sustainability research. Frankfurt:

Peter Lang.

Kagawa, F. (2007). Dissonance in students’ perceptions of sustainable

development and sustainability: Implications for curriculum change.

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8, 317-

338. doi:10.1108/14676370710817174

Keniry, J. (1995). Ecodemia. Washington DC: National Wildlife Fed-

eration.

Kez ar, A. (2009). Change in higher education: Not enough, o r too much?

Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning.

http://www.tandfonline.com

Kezar, A. J., & Eckel, P. D. (2002). The effect of institutional culture

on change strategies in higher education: Universal principles or cul-

turally responsive concepts. The Journal of Higher Educa tion, 73 , 435-

460. doi:10.1353/jhe.2002.0038

108

T. WRIGHT ET AL.

Mcmillin, J., & Dyball, R. (2009). Developing a whole-of-university

approach to educating for sustainability. Journal of Education for

Sustainable Development, 3, 55-64.

doi:10.1177/097340820900300113

Nadarajah, M., & Yamamoto, A. T. (2007). Urban crisis: Culture and

sustainability of cities.

Oepen, M. (2000). Environmental communication for sustainable de-

velopment. In M. Oepen, & W. Hamacher (Eds.), Communicating

the environment: Environmental communication for sustainable de-

velopment (pp. 32-37). Frankfurt: Peter La ng.

Ornetzeder, M., & Rohracher, H. (2005). Social learning, innovation

and sustainable technology. In W. L. Filho (Ed.), Handbook of sus-

tainability research (PP. 147-176), Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang.

Orr, D. (1992). Ecological literacy: Education and transition to a post-

modern world. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Österlind, E. (2008). Acting out of habits: Can theatre of the oppressed

promote change? Boal’s theatre methods in relation to Bourdieu’s

concept of habitus. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of

Applied Theatre and Perf o r ma n c e , 13, 71-82.

Packalen, S. (2009). Culture and sustainability. Sweden: Malardalen

University.

Sullivan, et al. (2008). Theatre of the oppressed and environmental

justice communities: A transformational therapy for the body politic.

Journal of Health Psyc h o l o gy , 13, 166-179.

doi:10.1177/1359105307086710

Sullivan, J., & Lloyd, R. S. (2006). The forum theatre of Augusto Boal:

A dramatic model for dialogue and community-based environmental

science. Local Environment, 11, 627-646.

doi:10.1080/13549830600853684

United Nations Education Science and Cultural Organization (UNE

SCO) (2005). Draft international implementation scheme decade of

sustainable environment. Paris: UNESCO.

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=36025&URL

_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

United Nations (2002). United nations general assembly resolution

59/237.

UNESCO, UNEP (1977) The Tbilisi declaration. Moscow: UNESCO-

UNEP press.

UNESCO (1997). Thessalonik i Declaration. Gland: UNESCO.

Wals, A. E. J., & Jickling, B. (2002). Sustainability in higher education:

From doublethink and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful

learning. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,

3, 221-232. doi:10.1108/14676370210434688

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987).

Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wright, T. (2004). The evolution of sustainability declarations in higher

education. In P. B. Corcoran, & A. E. Wals (Eds.), Higher education

and the challenge of sustainability (pp. 7-19), Dordrecht: Kluwer

Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/0-306-48515-X_2

Wright, T. (2010). University presidents’ conceptualizations of sus-

tainability in higher education. International Journal of Sustainabil-

ity in Higher Education, 11, 61-73.

doi:10.1108/14676371011010057