Higher Education for Sustainable Development

Kerry Shephard

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781137548412
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Higher Education

This book asks how higher education should approach the task of educating for sustainability and then sets to answering it. It provides a guide for those who advocate for sustainability and for those who do not and makes a point of emphasising that all in higher education have the capacity and willingness to contribute in some way. The challenge is to find an approach that unifies the efforts of higher education teachers towards sustainability objectives, rather than dividing them. People at universities across the world were consulted and a grounded theory was devised. This encourages all university teachers to teach what they want to teach openly and honestly, about sustainability or not; but on the way to ensure that their students develop the critical skills that will enable them to fully understand what is being taught and what they are learning.

Part I

Developing a Grounded Theory of Higher Education for Sustainability

Consider the task.

In 2012, after many years of researching higher education for sustainability, I worried that this academic field of enquiry had reached an impasse. It appeared to me as if higher education was quite capable of carrying on as it had for many years, buried in contestation and poor communication, and generally oblivious to the sustainability concerns of many on our planet. It seemed to me that many of my academic colleagues at my own institution and more widely in the world were divided in their aspirations for higher education, in their concerns about the planet’s problems and for their own roles in addressing these problems. Perhaps most worrying to me was my impression that higher education was capable of asserting that it was addressing the issues but not actually doing so and not monitoring the impact of what it was doing.

I had some sympathy with my colleagues in higher education because I couldn’t myself in all honesty suggest a reasonable way forwards. I could, of course, suggest possible ways forwards, as indeed many others had done before, but I doubted that any of these would actually work within the higher education system that I knew. And let’s be clear, I am myself part of this system, and I blame myself as much as I blame others for the situation we find ourselves in. Overall I found myself in a position where I no longer trusted the enterprise of higher education.

An opportunity came to take a year out from my conventional academic work and have a sabbatical year. I chose to focus my sabbatical year on doing my best to address the problem of higher education for sustainability and to seek, in some senses, a solution to this problem. An alternative interpretation is, of course, that I was seeking solace for my disaffection with higher education.

What emerged, to my surprise, was a combination of: much greater understanding of the situation university colleagues around the world find themselves in; confirmation that although higher education cannot simply solve the world’s sustainability problems, it does nonetheless have a role to play; and that one way forwards might be to enlist the goodwill of everyone in higher education to do what they want to do rather than engender bad-will by trying to get them to do what they don’t want to do.

How might that work?

1

Sustainability and ES/ESD Missions: Where Are We Now, How Did We Get Here and Whereto from Here?

Abstract: Introducing the expectations that society has of higher education with respect to sustainability education with comments on higher education’s responses. The chapter addresses: the Talloires Declaration; different approaches to sustainability education that arise under the headings ‘environmental education’, ‘environmental studies’, ‘education for sustainable development’, and ‘education for sustainability’; the objectives of each of these described in terms of student learning; the barriers that limit higher education’s activities and successes in these areas; the nature of the transformations that some anticipate; and criticisms of university teachers who are said to be disengaged. Chapter 1 concludes by providing a rationale for the research described in subsequent chapters.

Shephard, Kerry. Higher Education for Sustainable Development. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137548412.0005.

Some expectations and responses

Institutions of higher education around the world are responding to societal expectations that they will address environmental, social, cultural and economic issues that threaten the sustainability of human populations and of other inhabitants on our planet. Sustainability-related research in these areas is an important component of institutional research portfolios, and campus sustainability has become an integral aspect of institutional management in many parts of the world. This research may, one day, solve the sustainability problems that we face, and this research commitment, together with institutional commitment to sustainable operation, may contribute an appropriate educational role model both within the institution and more widely in local communities.

In addition, curriculum-based teaching and learning responses are underway that individually stem from different long-standing or recently developed research and education paradigms. These include environmental education (EE), ‘education for sustainable development’ (ESD) and ‘education for sustainability’ (ES). For the purposes of this book, these are collectively referred to here as ‘sustainability education’ (SE)’ notwithstanding the great differences that exist between them, in relation to their aspirations and modes of operation (expanded in the subsequent sections). In line with different modes of SE, institutions also use different educational structures to reach students. Some have embarked on systematic ‘greening of the curriculum’ to enable students in every discipline to experience sustainability concepts (see, e.g., UK discussions on the Toyne Review, British Government Panel on Sustainable Development Third Report, 1997). Others rely on or extend traditional liberal studies approaches to ensure that many, most, or all students can benefit from a sustainability-inclusive curriculum. The aims and objectives extant in this broad area of SE also vary widely but in general terms include the hope that higher education will contribute to social change towards sustainability, via changes in choices that graduates will make before and after graduation. Each educational paradigm describes change in different terms, uses different educational frameworks and reaches out to different groupings of students, making comparisons difficult. And the changes anticipated of higher education may be substantial. ESD, for example, seeks ‘commitment to rethink the purpose of education and to reorient curricular frameworks and pedagogical practice’ (Ryan & Tilbury, 2013, p.1). Table 1.1 describes some key expectations of higher education and higher education’s responses to them.

The hope that education would lead, in general rather than for a sub-set of sustainability-focused students, to ‘environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective public participation in decision-making’ (Agenda 21; United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 1992, chapter 36, p.2) is proving difficult to realise, despite the worthy promises of those who have signed the Talloires Declaration. Ryan and Tilbury (2013, p.1), for example, claim, ‘early pioneers in this area [ESD] have met with substantial obstacles’. Numerous articles, based on research in several countries, have identified the barriers that limit higher education’s activities and successes in these areas or emphasise approaches necessary to overcome these barriers. For example, research by Cotton et al. (2009) noted several constraints on the inclusion of sustainable development in higher education teaching, including perceptions of limited relevance, lack of leadership, competing agendas and dominant pedagogies inappropriate for ‘education for sustainable development’ outcomes. Others ‘take offence at prescriptive constructions such as ‘education for sustainable development’ that reduce the conceptual space for self-determination, autonomy, and alternative ways of thinking’ (Jickling & Wals, 2008, p.4). Some authors describe the complex (or ‘wicked’) nature of sustainability problems that make many students unwilling to actively engage or suggest that particular approaches, other than curricular change, may be necessary to achieve SE outcomes, such as co-curricular activities for students, specific teaching approaches (‘interdisciplinary, experiential, holistic pedagogy’ is promoted by Lugg [2007, p.108]) and integration of formal, informal and campus-based curricula (Hopkinson et al., 2008).

TABLE 1.1 Society’s expectations of higher education and higher education’s responses

Other work emphasises the need for distinctive leadership to achieve the objectives of SE. Scott et al. (2012), for example, suggest that ‘Higher education needs to transform itself if it is to assist societal transformation for a more sustainable future’ and ‘The key to progressing sustainability in HE is to identify and systematically build viable leadership capabilities, competencies, support systems and pathways’ (Scott et al., 2012, p.3). These authors make several recommendations including ‘Put in place the right incentives’ And ‘Engage the disengaged and the institution’s senior leadership’ (Scott et al., 2012, p.2), suggesting lack of progress in SE is at least in part due to the lack of suitable incentives to engage ‘disengaged’ academics. Similarly, Ralph and Stubbs state that ‘Education and building the awareness of university staff of the importance of environmental sustainability to future generations was key to a successful strategy [for integrating environmental sustainability into universities]’ suggesting perhaps that university teachers are currently unaware of the importance of environmental sustainability to future generations (Ralph & Stubbs, 2013).

My own work, with colleagues and with students at the University of Otago, in South Island, New Zealand, has added considerably to my own understanding of these complex issues. For several years now we have been developing research instruments designed to help us explore the worldviews of our students and how they change during their stay with us in higher education. We have integrated these instruments within a statistical longitudinal model of change that allows us to incorporate repeat measures from individual students over several years. We are deeply interested in change, but so far have not managed to demonstrate that it exists in the context of ‘higher education for sustainability’. We do see substantial differences in worldview between different groups of students, but these differences do appear to be in place before students arrive at university (Shephard et al., 2014, 2015; Harraway et al., 2012). I have also researched the subjective viewpoints held by university teachers within my own institution about ‘education for sustainability’ and about their role within this enterprise. A colleague and I used Q methodology to research and to categorise the viewpoints that these university teachers held on these issues. We identified four groups of university teachers each with qualitatively different viewpoints. One group thought it their role to advocate for sustainability, while three groups thought otherwise (Shephard & Furnari, 2013). We suggested that those who do not accept advocacy for sustainability as a reasonable approach to university teaching might struggle to fully participate in ES/ESD. Their ‘lacking suitable incentives’, or being ‘unaware of the importance of environmental sustainability to future generations’ do not appear, to me, to be adequate rationales or descriptors for their limited involvement in SE. I emerged from this research with an enhanced appreciation of the essential quality of aspiration of higher education teachers. Whether or not individual university teachers embrace the sustainability mission, there is no reason to doubt their motives or passion for teaching, particularly within their disciplines. I find it difficult not to question whether the enterprises of SE, as applied to the higher education mission defined by, for example, Agenda 21, have so far adequately consulted higher education teachers, rather than simply expecting them, or requiring them, to change.

Perhaps, it is time to summarise the situation as I see it. From my perspective our planet, our species and our societies have questionable sustainability. The predicament of many other species on the planet is probably worse. Higher education is part of the problem and probably has the capacity to be part of the solution, at least in part through its teaching and learning activities. Many in higher education have promised much but higher education as a whole has probably delivered little. Some higher education practitioners think we should do much more and these colleagues tend to advocate for sustainability in their teaching and call for essential transformation of the higher education mission. Others, for whatever reason, tend not to advocate for sustainability in their teaching and tend not to call for this form of transformation. Meanwhile, the problems of the planet, of our species and of our societies appear to be getting worse.

The research described in the next two chapters of this book is based on some underpinning assumptions about change and the change processes most appropriate for higher education engagement with sustainability education. I acknowledge the need for change and respect the motives of those calling for change but I anticipate a different trajectory for change from that of some of my sustainability-focused colleagues. In particular, I accept and wish to work with the long-term resilience of higher education and its resistance to change and its commitment to its historical purpose and its own deep-seated values. Wholescale transformation of higher education seems to be unlikely in the short to medium term. My research in 2013 was not, therefore, totally open-minded. I was seeking a way forward that respected those who advocate for sustainability and those who do not.

References

British Government Panel on Sustainable Development Third Report (1997) London. Department of Environment.

Cotton, D., Bailey, I., Warren, M., & Bissell. S. (2009) Revolutions and second-best solutions: education for sustainable development in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 34(7), 719–733.

Harraway, J., Broughton-Ansin, F., Deaker, L., Jowett, T., & Shephard, K. (2012) Exploring the use of the Revised New Ecological Paradigm Scale (NEP) to monitor the development of students’ ecological worldviews. Journal of Environmental Education 43(3), 177–191.

Hopkinson, P., Hughes, P., & Layer, G. (2008) Sustainable graduates: linking formal, informal and campus curricula to embed education for sustainable development in the student learning experience. Environmental Education Research 14(4), 435–454.

Jickling, B., & Wals, A.E.J. (2008) Globalization and environmental education: looking beyond sustainable development. Journal of Curriculum Studies 40, 1–21.

Lugg, A. (2007) Developing sustainability literate citizens through outdoor learning: possibilities for outdoor education in higher education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 7(2), 97–112.

Ralph, M., & Stubbs, W. (2013) Integrating environmental sustainability into universities. Higher Education.

Ryan, A., & Tilbury, D. (2013) Uncharted waters: voyages for education for sustainable development in the higher education curriculum. Curriculum Journal 24(2), 272–294.

Scott, G., Tilbury, D., Sharp, L., & Deane, E. (2012) Turnaround Leadership for Sustainability in Higher Education. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.

Shephard, K., & Furnari, M. (2013) Exploring what university teachers think about education for sustainability. Studies in Higher Education 38(10), 1577–1590.

Shephard, K., Harraway, J., Lovelock, B., Mirosa, M., Skeaff, S., Slooten, L., Strack, M., Furnari, M., Jowett, T., & Deaker, L. (2015) Seeking learning outcomes appropriate for ‘education for sustainable development’ and for higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. (In press).

Shephard, K., Harraway, J., Jowett, T., Lovelock, B., Skeaff, S., Slooten, E., Strack, M., & Furnari, M. (2014) Longitudinal analysis of the environmental attitudes of university students. Environmental Education Research. (In press). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504622.2014.913126.

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (1992) Agenda 21. Retrieved 10 August 2013 from http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html.

University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (2014) Talloires Declaration Institutional Signatory List. Retrieved 12 January 2015 from http://www.ulsf.org/programs_talloires_signatories.html.

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

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Introduction
• Part I   Developing a Grounded Theory of Higher Education for Sustainability
• Part II   Educational Rationales to Unify the Efforts of Higher Education towards Sustainability Objectives
• Index