DRAFT: EfS Framework Appendix – V1 30th November 2009. Comments welcome: aryan@glos.ac.uk
APPENDIX: EFS IN HUMANITIES
This Appendix contains guidance on the ways that EfS (Education for Sustainability) can relate to
the Humanities disciplines, which at UoG includes UG and PG provision in Creative and Critical
Writing; English Language; English Literature; History; Philosophy; Religion, Philosophy and
Ethics; Theology; and Applied Theology.
This Appendix includes:
1. orientation statement about the ways that EfS can be conceived in relation to the
priorities and concerns of Humanities subject areas;
2. connections with subject benchmarks for Humanities disciplines and the skills and
competencies advocated for EfS;
3. indicative learning aims and outcomes that can be adapted and applied in designing
existing and future programmes and modules in the Humanities.
You can also refer to Section 5 of this EfS Framework for further discussion about the pedagogic
approaches prioritised in EfS and the generic skills EfS seeks to cultivate. Section 5 also contains
guidance on thematic points of focus (‘content’ or ‘topics’) across subject areas that are well
suited to analysis in terms of sustainability.
For tips about good practice for sustainability in the practical aspects of delivering teaching and
learning activities, e.g. in organising tutorials and field trips, see the following collection of
factsheets on ‘How to Make Your Teaching More Sustainable’:
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/esd/howto.aspx.
1. ORIENTATION STATEMENT:
EfS is geared to the critical exploration of cultural practices and discourses, using the contested
concept of ‘sustainability’, to consider the present trajectory of communities and to support
social change. The potential for Humanities disciplines to contribute to EfS therefore lies in the
process of nurturing critical graduates with the capability to think systemically and reflectively
about human civilisations and to challenge their assumptions, priorities and likely futures.
The analysis of past and present social and ideological dynamics for insight into ‘unsustainable’
ways of managing human life is a fundamental point of connection for EfS. EfS uses pedagogic
methods that build student confidence in identifying and critiquing examples of unsustainability,
in envisioning more sustainable alternatives and developing compatibilities needed for engaging
in social change. The subtleties of cultural analysis developed in Humanities subjects, by taking
diverse, global and comparative perspectives on questions of human existence, meaning-making
and long term existence of communities, are of particular value in terms of EfS.
The contributions of the Humanities to EfS have often remained implicit, rather than being
explicitly articulated. For example, historical and archaeological studies have considered
questions of heritage and survival of the cultural record; environmental history and philosophy
have problematised concepts such as ‘nature’ and ‘progress’ when questioning the relationships
DRAFT: EfS Framework Appendix – V1 30th November 2009. Comments welcome: aryan@glos.ac.uk
between humans and their environments; linguistic and religious studies have explored the
challenges of intercultural understanding; and many aspects of study in the humanities have
utilised questions of sustainability when addressing issues of ethics, ontology and epistemology.
Central concerns and priorities in Humanities disciplines that connect with EfS include:
 analysis of the different cultural practices and ethical priorities that guide humanenvironment relationships, across diverse societies and historical periods;
 critical reflection upon philosophical, religious and literary representations of utopia and
apocalypse, and the symbolic devices used to promote such ideas;
 developing expertise in argumentation, rhetoric and analysis, as a means of addressing
questions of civic and global importance and promoting social innovation;
 historical analysis of inter-generational legacies and responsibilities, and of the
complexities of cause and effect in relation to human-environment interactions;
 exploration of the role of religious and philosophical systems, and the uses of ethics, in
perpetuating or challenging ideologies, discourses and values around ‘sustainability’;
 evaluation of the ways in which linguistic strategies can help to channel, communicate
and embed ideological forces within and across societies;
 comparative and historical understanding of the contexts in which conflicting values and
interests have played out and the implications for future human development;
 recognition of the influence of values in education and in public life, and the ability to
make complex decisions in the face of conflicting values in diverse professional roles.
The ability to analyse, expose and subvert ideological influences, in relation to explicit and
implicit discourses, underpins the Humanities contribution to civic development and to EfS. The
wide range of occupations and professions among Humanities graduates enables the capabilities
prioritised in EfS to be brought into many spheres across the public and private sectors. In
particular, the capacity developed through Humanities training to reflect upon ethics and values,
and to assess truth claims and forms of argumentation, enables students to sensitise and to
sharpen their personal and professional perspectives on sustainability issues and contexts.
2. SUBJECT BENCHMARK CONNECTIONS:
The expectations and characteristics of the Humanities are expressed in the QAA subject
benchmarks1, which include introductory statements that connect with EfS priorities as follows:
English 2007: (hereafter ENG 2007)



1
cultivation of an open mind and the conceptual sophistication to engage in dialogue
with past and present cultures and values (ENG 2007 1.1);
awareness of the shaping influence upon meaning of historical, social, political, stylistic,
ethnic, gender, geographical and other contexts (ENG 2007 1.2);
the role of the discipline in enabling inter-disciplinary, responsive and focused study of
specific topics, periods and eras (ENG 2007 2.4).
Downloaded from:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/honours/
DRAFT: EfS Framework Appendix – V1 30th November 2009. Comments welcome: aryan@glos.ac.uk
History 2007: (hereafter HIST 2007)



the varied and open nature of understanding required about the human past and the
incalculable value this brings to individuals and to society (HIST 2007 2.1);
awareness of differing values, systems and societies, and critical yet tolerant personal
attitudes to past attempts of humans to organise life (HIST 2007 2.4);
critical and reflective abilities, including enhanced awareness of present historical
processes unfolding and deeper understanding of traditions (HIST 2007 2.9).
Linguistics 2007: (hereafter LING 2007)



the inter-disciplinary breadth of the subject area and its role in understanding human
activity, particularly cognition, behaviour and ideology (LING 2007 2.1);
the role of language in the governance of multicultural societies and development of
cohesive communities across diverse social groups (LING 2007 2.3);
analysis of the applications of language and discourse, and considerations of cultural
and linguistic preservation under globalising conditions (LING 2007 2.3).
Philosophy 2007: (hereafter PHIL 2007)



critically questioning ideas about reality, value and experience that pervade our
understanding of the world and our place in it (PHIL 2007 2.3);
the role of philosophy in probing understanding and ethics in other fields of global
scientific, technological and intellectual development (PHIL 2007 2.8);
comparative and open-ended inquiry into ideas of ethics, truth, knowledge and
causality, and practices of science, politics and education (PHIL 2007 3.1).
Theology and Religious Studies 2007: (hereafter TRS 2007)



significance and role of the subject area in understanding contemporary cultural and
religious diversity and the nature of beliefs and values (TRS 2007 1.1);
fostering empathetic engagement with unfamiliar viewpoints and analysing the
potential for societal conflict arising from plural values (TRS 2007 1.2);
creating opportunities for involvement in social change, including the harnessing of
pastoral and professional roles in related spheres (TRS 2007 1.4).
These overlapping aims and the means of achieving them are further demonstrated in the list of
possible learning aims and outcomes contained in Section 3 below.
Many generic skills and attributes highlighted in Section 5 of the UoG EfS Framework document
are also found in sections of the benchmark statements dedicated to skills, teaching and
learning principles, and programme design:
Futures thinking
Critical and creative thinking
ENG 2007
3.1; 3.2
1.3; 3.1; 3.2
HIST 2007
2.1; 2.9
3.1; 4.5
LING 2007
4.1; 4.3; 6.14
DRAFT: EfS Framework Appendix – V1 30th November 2009. Comments welcome: aryan@glos.ac.uk
Participatory learning
Partnerships
Systemic thinking
Futures thinking
Critical and creative thinking
Participatory learning
Partnerships
Systemic thinking
3.2; 3.3
3.3; 6.5
4.4
1.2; 2.4; 3.2
2.4; 2.5; 3.1; 4.6
3.2; 4.1; 4.3
PHIL 2007
2.11; 4.2; 6.11
4.8; 4.10; 6.12
5.4
TRS 2007
1.2; 1.13
3.1; 3.2; 5.5
2.8; 4.5; 4.8
2.8; 4.8; 6.14
1.15; 2.4; 2.6; 3.2
3. INDICATIVE LEARNING AIMS AND OUTCOMES:
The lists below suggest potential learning aims and outcomes that connect Humanities subject
areas with EfS priorities. Differentiation for programme/module level, and for skills progression,
can be framed in line with the architecture of existing programmes. Alignment with different
categories of learning outcomes, such as ‘knowledge’, ‘skills’ and ‘attitudes’, can also be related
to the approaches taken in existing provision.
Some examples of Programme or Module Aims for the Humanities could include:
1) To promote critical exploration of the influence of different ideological and analytical
propositions guiding public perceptions and actions on sustainability issues.
2) To develop understanding and expertise about the ways that sustainability questions
can arise in pastoral, educational, scientific or professional contexts.
3) To encourage competence in the methods of rhetoric and persuasion needed to bridge
conflicting values and support dialogue among competing interests.
4) To develop student sensitivity to the ways that different discourses have shaped their
own and others’ consumption habits and values.
5) To evaluate societal and historical differences in the availability and deployment of
resources, and the implications for global development, equity and justice.
Some indicative Learning Outcomes for the Humanities might include:
1) Analyse the role of language in the channelling and reception of sustainability discourses
in different societal contexts and in relation to controversial issues.
2) Recognise and critically reflect upon the ways that competing values and truth claims
can influence the assessment of environmental and cultural impacts.
3) Harness effective methods of communication and analysis to assess complex debates on
public issues, challenge existing practices and encourage social change for sustainability.
4) Evaluate the ethical and factual claims of unfamiliar systems of thought and practice,
and their effectiveness in promoting responsible citizenship and community resilience.
5) Demonstrate appreciation of the cultural sustainability issues for specific local, national
and global communities regarding the preservation of cultural and linguistic heritage.