Bibliography: Learning Outcomes In Sustainability
Ashwani Vasishth <vasishth@ramapo.edu> February 5, 2010
Pepper, Coral & Helen Wildy. 2008. “Leading for Sustainability: Is Surface
Understanding Enough?” Journal of Educational Administration, v46n5 (2008):
613-629 [This paper aims to report an investigation of how education for sustainability is
conceptualised, incorporated across the curriculum and led in three Western Australian
Government secondary schools. It also reports on processes to enable education for
sustainability to become embedded into these schools. Data for the research were gathered
through semi-structured interviews with teachers who were reputedly leading education for
sustainability. With the exception of one participant, the concept of education for sustainability is
not widely embraced in the schools of this study. Instead participants focus only on the
environmental aspect of sustainability. Again, with the exception of one participant, education for
sustainability remains fragmented and vulnerable to changing school conditions. Leadership of
education for sustainability occurs whimsically and with little vision for the future across this study
with little evidence of alliance building or collaboration among colleagues. The paper concludes
that leading for sustainability requires a combination of a deep knowledge of sustainability;
forward thinking and the ability to imagine a different future; the interpersonal and networking
skills to build strong relationships; and the energy and capability of taking action to achieve the
imagined different future.]
Rubin, Kyna. 2009. “Globalizing General Education,” International Educator,
v18n5 (Sep/Oct 2009): 20-24,26-29. [In the twenty-first century, few updated mission
statements omit the goal of giving young people the skills and knowledge they need to
understand other cultures and compete in the global workforce. Providing Global Education at
Home Equipping U.S. college students to become effective world citizens and workers begins
with a general internationalization of U.S. campuses. The presence of international students on
campuses as well as international scholars teaching and conducting research at institutions
outside of their home countries has traditionally been one method of campus internationalization encouraging a more global perspective.]
Shephard, Kerry. 2008. “Higher Education for Sustainability: Seeking Affective
Learning Outcomes,” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,
v9n1 (2008): 87-98. [Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to interpret aspects of education
for sustainability in relation to educational theories of the affective domain (values, attitudes and
behaviours) and suggest how the use of these theories, and relevant experience, in other
educational areas could benefit education for sustainability. Design/methodology/approach - An
analysis based on a literature review of relevant educational endeavours in affective learning.
Findings - This paper suggests that most teaching and assessment in higher education focus on
cogitative skills of knowledge and understanding rather than on affective outcomes of values,
attitudes and behaviours. Some areas of higher education, however, have effectively pursued
affective outcomes and these use particular learning and teaching activities to do so. Key issues
for consideration include assessing outcomes and evaluating courses, providing academic credit
for affective outcomes, key roles for role models and designing realistic and acceptable learning
outcomes in the affective domain. Practical implications - Educators for sustainability could use
this relevant theoretical underpinning and experience gained in other areas of education to
address the impact of their own learner-support activities. Originality/value - Educators have
traditionally been reluctant to pursue affective learning outcomes but often programmes of study
simply fail to identify and describe their legitimate aims in these terms. This paper emphasises
the application of a relevant theoretical underpinning to support educators' legitimate aspirations
for affective learning outcomes. It will also help these educators to reflect on how the use of these
approaches accords with the liberal traditions of higher education.]
Sibbel, Anne. 2009. “Pathways Towards Sustainability Through Higher
Education,” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, v10n1
(2009): 68-82. [Purpose - The aim of this paper is to contribute to aligning higher education
towards meeting the challenge of global sustainability. Design/methodology/approach - The
barriers to sustainability are juxtaposed against the resources, responsibilities and potential of
higher education. Ideas from several models and from within several disciplines are integrated to
construct a framework through the challenges can be examined and then translated into learning
outcomes, expressed as graduate attributes. Findings - The focus of education for global
sustainability has been on encouraging consumers to modify patterns of resource consumption
and waste management. However, there are some significant limitations to relying on consumer
action. Future professionals, involved in managing resources or designing options from which
consumers make choices, are in a much better position for influencing how social, cultural and
environmental resources are used. To actualise this potential requires that higher education
curricula offer experiences which develop graduate attributes of self-efficacy, capacity for
effective advocacy and interdisciplinary collaboration, as well as raise awareness of social and
moral responsibilities associated with professional practice. Research limitations/implications For higher education to contribute towards achieving sustainability requires support of the whole
institution, and considerable professional development of staff to help them appreciate how they
can lead the next generation to global sustainability. The next stage of the research into the role
of higher education in building a sustainable society should focus on how these objectives can be
achieved. Originality/value - Considerable research has been dedicated to describing the urgent
and intractable nature of the problems facing the global community and, to some extent, the need
for higher education to engage with these problems. This paper takes the next step by presenting
some guidelines for designing curricula to develop graduate attributes required for this work.]
Sipos, Yona & Bryce Battisti & Kurt Grimm. 2008. “Achieving Transformative
Sustainability Learning: Engaging Head, Hands and Heart,” Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, v9n1 (2008): 68-86. [Purpose - The current UN
Decade of Education for Sustainable Development echoes many scholars' calls to re-envision
education for sustainability. Short of a complete overhaul of education, the paper seeks to
propose learning objectives that can be integrated across existing curricula. These learning
objectives are organized by head, hands and heart - balancing cognitive, psychomotor and
affective domains. University programs and courses meeting these learning objectives exhibit an
emergent property here termed transformative sustainability learning (TSL).
Design/methodology/approach - Theoretically, TSL grew from traditions of sustainability
education and transformative education. Practically, TSL emerged from experimental learning
collaborations sponsored by the University of British Columbia in 2003 and 2004 in an effort to
enable explicit transitions to sustainability-oriented higher education. Primarily through action
research, these community-based, applied learning experiences constituted cyclical processes of
innovation, implementation and reflection. Findings - The paper finds: advancement of head,
hands and heart as an organizing principle by which to integrate transdisciplinary study (head);
practical skill sharing and development (hands); and translation of passion and values into
behaviour (heart); development of a cognitive landscape for understanding TSL as a unifying
framework amongst related sustainability and transformative pedagogies that are
inter/transdisciplinary, practical and/or place-based; creation of learning objectives, organized to
evaluate a course or program's embodiment of TSL. Originality/value - By enabling change within
existing structures of higher education, the paper complements and contributes to more radical
departures from the institution. The work to date demonstrates potential in applying this learning
framework to courses and programs in higher education.]
Stephens, Jennie C. & Maria E. Hernandez & Mikael Román & Amanda C.
Graham & Roland W. Scholz. 2008. “Higher Education As A Change Agent for
Sustainability In Different Cultures and Contexts,” International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, v9n3 (2008): 317-338. [Purpose - The goal of this
paper is to enhance consideration for the potential for institutions of higher education throughout
the world, in different cultures and contexts, to be change agents for sustainability. As society
faces unprecedented and increasingly urgent challenges associated with accelerating
environmental change, resource scarcity, increasing inequality and injustice, as well as rapid
technological change, new opportunities for higher education are emerging.
Design/methodology/approach - The paper builds on the emerging literature on transition
management and identifies five critical issues to be considered in assessing the potential for
higher education as a change agent in any particular region or place. To demonstrate the value of
these critical issues, exemplary challenges and opportunities in different contexts are provided.
Findings - The five critical issues include regional-specific dominant sustainability challenges,
financing structure and independence, institutional organization, the extent of democratic
processes, and communication and interaction with society. Originality/value - Given that the
challenges and opportunities for higher education as a change agent are context-specific,
identifying, synthesizing, and integrating common themes is a valuable and unique contribution.]
Svanström, Magdalena & Francisco J. Lozano-García & Debra Rowe. 2008.
“Learning Outcomes for Sustainable Development In Higher Education,”
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, v9n3 (2008): 339351. [Purpose - This paper sets out to discuss the commonalities that can be found in learning
outcomes (LOs) for education for sustainable development in the context of the Tbilisi and
Barcelona declarations. The commonalities include systemic or holistic thinking, the integration of
different perspectives, skills such as critical thinking, change agent abilities and communication,
and finally different attitudes and values. Design/methodology/approach - An analysis of LOs that
are proposed in the Tbilisi and Barcelona declarations is conducted, showing specific issues for
the commonalities presented. Examples of LOs from Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios
Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM) in Mexico, as well as various associations from the USA is
shown. A brief discussion is done on the means to achieve these LOs and learning evaluation.
Findings - In the example sets of LOs shown, the commonalities presented in the paper's first
section appear in the LOs proposed by the institutions. Based on current knowledge and
perception, sustainability is properly addressed in the examples. Practical implications - The
paper can be used to foster a wider discussion and analysis of LOs for sustainability education,
also further work on teachers' capacity building for sustainability, as well as the assessment
needed for future professionals in higher education institutions. Originality/value - The paper
presents the onset of discussing and comparing commonalities among higher education
institutions regarding sustainability LOs.]