The Future of Education
Bridging Theory and Practice: Cognitive Dissonance as a Pedagogical Tool for Cultivating Inclusive Educators
Roberta Diamanti, Universidad Católica de Valencia ‘San Vicente Mártir’ (Spain)
María Laura Angelini, Universidad Católica de Valencia ‘San Vicente Mártir (Spain)
Isabel Torrijos, Universidad Católica de Valencia ‘San Vicente Mártir’ (Spain)
Abstract
Simulation-based learning is increasingly recognized as a transformative approach in teacher education, particularly for preparing educators to address the complexities and systemic inequities present in multicultural classrooms. This study investigates how the intentional incorporation of cognitive dissonance, psychological discomfort arising from confronting conflicting beliefs or values, within virtual simulations can serve as a powerful pedagogical tool. Using the "School of Valtance" simulation platform, pre-service teachers engaged in immersive, practice-oriented scenarios that mirrored real-world educational dilemmas, such as ethical decision-making, bias identification, and collaborative problem-solving in diverse classroom contexts. Traditional teacher education often struggles to bridge the gap between theoretical understanding and the realities of diverse educational environments. By exposing participants to challenging and sometimes conflicting perspectives within the simulation, the study aimed to cultivate critical consciousness, adaptive expertise, and a strong commitment to equity and inclusion. The research employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, combining quantitative data from validated Likert-scale questionnaires with qualitative insights from reflective reports, direct observations, and debriefing sessions. The sample included 79 pre-service teachers from nine faculties of education across Europe, North America, Africa, and South America, ensuring a diverse and multicultural participant pool. Key findings highlight that structured cognitive dissonance in simulations significantly increased participants’ awareness of implicit biases and structural barriers affecting marginalized students. Confronting dissonant perspectives prompted critical self-reflection and a willingness to challenge prior beliefs. Iterative engagement with complex scenarios strengthened participants’ adaptive expertise, including skills in dynamic differentiation, trauma-informed instruction, and culturally responsive pedagogy. The study also introduced the "Reflection-Action Cycle" model, mapping how simulated dissonance translates into real-world equity praxis. Overall, the research demonstrates that simulation-based learning, when grounded in cognitive dissonance theory and transformative learning, can bridge theory and practice in teacher education. It equips future educators with the critical skills, dispositions, and advocacy capacity necessary for leading inclusive and socially just classrooms, offering a scalable and impactful strategy for equity-centered teacher preparation.
|
Keywords |
cognitive dissonance pedagogy; immersive learning; culturally sustaining practices; simulation-based teacher training; transformative learning; virtual exchange. |
|
REFERENCES |
[1] Abdal-Haqq, I. (1998). Constructivism in Teacher Education: Considerations for Those Who Would Link Practice to Theory. ERIC Digest. [2] Álvarez, M. N. (2023). Aprendizaje visible y consciente a través de "lesson study" y "debriefing" en la formación inicial docente (Doctoral dissertation). https://riucv.ucv.es/handle/20.500.12466/2833 [3] Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games (Vol. 5). MIT Press. [4] Carrera, A. M., Naweed, A., Leigh, E., Crea, T., Krynski, B., Heveldt, K., & Khetia, S. (2016). Constructing safe containers for effective learning: Vignettes of breakdown in psychological safety during simulated scenarios. In Intersections in Simulation and Gaming (pp. 15–29): Springer. [5] Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229-266). Academic Press. [6] Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. L. (1990). Simulation, Gaming, and Language Learning. Newbury House Publishers. [7] Crookall, D. (2010). Serious games, debriefing, and simulation/gaming as a discipline. Simulation & gaming, 41(6), 898-920. [8] de Wijse-van Heeswijk, M. (2021). Ethics and the simulation facilitator: Taking your professional role seriously. Simulation & Gaming, 52(3), 312-332. [9] Dieker, L. A., Rodriguez, J. A., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Hynes, M. C., & Hughes, C. E. (2014). The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: Current and future possibilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(1), 21-33. [10] Dieckmann, P. (2020). The unexpected and the non-fitting - considering the edges of simulation as social practice. Advances in simulation (London, England), 5, 2. doi:10.1186/s41077- 020-0120. [11] Duke, R., & Greenblat, C. (1981). Principles and practices of gaming simulation. Sage. [12] Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press. [13] Granziera, H., & Perera, H. N. (2019). Relations among teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs, engagement, and work satisfaction: A social cognitive view. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 75-84. [14] Greenblat, C. (1988). Designing Games and Simulations. An Illustrated Handbook. Sage Publications [15] Feldman, M. (1995). Import/export email business simulation. In M. Warschauer (ed.): pp. 363-364. [16] Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. doi, 10, 9781503620766. [17] Goetz, J. P., & Le Compte, M. D. (1988). Ethnography and qualitative design of educational research. Morata [18] Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (2019). An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. In E. Harmon-Jones (Ed.), Cognitive dissonance: Reexamining a pivotal theory in psychology (2nd ed., pp. 3–24). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000135-001 [19] Harris, K. S. (2005). Teachers' Perceptions of Modular Technology Education Laboratories. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 42(4), 52-71. [20] Harteveld, C., Thij, E. T., & Copier, M. (2011). Design for engaging experience and social interaction. Simulation & Gaming, 42(5), 590-595. [21] Jones, K. (1998). What are We Talking about? Simulation & Gaming, 29(3), 314–320. doi:10.1177/104687819829300 [22] Jones, K. (2013). Simulations: A Handbook for Teachers and Trainers. Routledge. [23] Kasperski, R., Levin, O., & Hemi, M. E. (2025). Systematic Literature Review of Simulation-Based Learning for Developing Teacher SEL. Education Sciences, 15(2), 129. [24] Kato, F. (2010). How We Think and Talk About Facilitation. Simulation & Gaming, 41(5), 694–704 [25] Krahenbuhl, K. S. (2016). Student-centered education and constructivism: Challenges, concerns, and clarity for teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 89(3), 97-105. [26] Kriz, W. C. (2010). A Systemic-Constructivist Approach to the Facilitation and Debriefing of Simulations and Games. Simulation & Gaming, 41(5), 663–680. doi:10.1177/104687810831986. [27] Kriz, W. C. (2017). Types of gaming simulation applications. Simulation & Gaming, 48(1), 3-7. [28] Kriz, W. C. (2020). Gaming in the Time of COVID-19. Simulation & Gaming, 51(4), 403-410. [29] Levin, O., Frei-Landau, R., Flavian, H., & Miller, E. C. (2023). Creating authenticity in simulation-based learning scenarios in teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1-22. [30] Ledger, S., Burgess, M., Rappa, N., Power, B., Wong, K. W., Teo, T., & Hilliard, B. (2022). Simulation platforms in initial teacher education: Past practice informing future potentiality. Computers & Education, 178, 104385. |
