EXPLAIN, SUSTAIN, REMAIN: Exploring student responses to a crossfaculty, interdisciplinary project in environmental sustainability
co
Strategic Teaching and Learning Grant Scheme 2009
Authors: Sonia Nuttman, Rebecca Patrick, Teresa Capetola, Laura Freeman and Sue Noy School of Health and Social Development Deakin University 2009
CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 PROJECT OUTLINE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9 i.
Aim………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
ii.
Objectives……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
iii.
Research Questions…………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………………………………………………...10 i.
Setting the Context for Education for Environmental Sustainability…………………… 10
ii.
Education for Environmental Sustainability……………………………………………………… 11
iii.
Cross-faculty, interdisciplinary teaching for a sustainable future………………………. 17
iv.
Greening Deakin’s Curriculum…………………………………………………………………………. 18
METHODS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 i.
Study Design…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21
ii.
Recruitment of Participants…………………………………………………………………………….. 23
iii.
Program Intervention……………………………………………………………………………………… 24
LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH DESIGN……………………………………………………………………………. 26 RESULTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 29 STUDENT PRE AND POST SURVEYS……………………………………………………………………………… 29 i.
Who participated in Explain, Sustain, Remain?....................................................................... 29
ii.
Participant views on Education for Environmental Sustainability……………………… 29
iii.
Participant Knowledge of Environmental issues………………………………………………. 32
iv.
Participant attitudes towards environmental sustainability……………………………… 39
v.
Student skills, knowledge and ability……………………………………………………………….. 43
vi.
Environmental sustainability in the future……………………………………………………….. 45
vii.
Designing the ideal Education for Environmental Sustainability program………….. 49 2
STUDENT AND STAFF FOCUS GROUPS…………………………………………………………………………. 57 i.
Pre-implementation Focus Groups…………………………………………………………………… 57
ii.
Post-implementation Focus Groups………………………………………………………………….64
DISCUSSION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 77 CONCLUSIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 84 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 85 DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS…………………………………………………………………………………….. 87 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 89 APPENDIX 1 BUDGET…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 93 APPENDIX 2 MEMBERS OF PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE AND REFERENCE GROUP 96 APPENDIX 3 PRE-TEST SURVEY…………………………………………………………………………………… 97 APPENDIX 4 POST-TEST SURVEY……………………………………………………………………………......101 APPENDIX 5 PROPOSED ESR UNIT OUTLINE 2010………………………………………………………111 APPENDIX 6 MODEL FOR CROSS-FACULTY, INTERDISCIPLINARY DELIVERY………………113
3
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Explain, Sustain, Remain Program Themes and Topics Table 2: Matrix of student focus groups Table 3: Student Demographics Table 4: Themes and Focus Group comments: Interdisciplinary Work Table 5: Reflections on the proposed unit, its delivery mode and anticipated student responses Table 6: Development and Delivery of the Unit Table 7: The Future Design Table 8: Student responses to the Unit
4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXPLAIN, SUSTAIN, REMAIN Exploring student responses to a cross-faculty, interdisciplinary project in environmental sustainability Explain, Sustain, Remain (ESR): securing the future for a climate change world was a pilot interdisciplinary education for sustainability research project designed in collaboration with staff from across all four of Deakin’s faculties and delivered to over 100 undergraduate thirdyear students during trimester two, 2009. Universities have a unique and pivotal role to play in promoting sustainability in the 21st century and this is reflected in a suite of international declarations such as: The United Nations Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2015); International Implementation Scheme (UNESCO 2008); Tailoires Declaration (1990) (to which Australia is a signatory) highlighting the specific role for universities in promoting sustainability through education, research, policy formation and information exchange. Moreover, UNESCO (2009) International Seminar on Climate Change Education emphasised the need for interdisciplinary and intersectoral cooperation in the field of Education for Sustainable Development. The Australian government has responded to these documents in its Australian Government Strategy for the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014. Strategically the principles of education for environmental sustainability align with a number of Deakin University’s Strategic Plans and Policies including: Strategic Teaching and Learning Plan (2008-2012); Deakin’s Teaching and Learning Goal; the University’s Environmental Policy (2009) and Environmental Management Plan (2009-2010) and; Rural and Regional Engagement and Graduate Employability. Explain, Sustain, Remain was an innovative and creative response to environmental concerns in the Higher Education context at Deakin University. Taking up the challenge of working within an interdisciplinary framework, the idea of “modules” proposed in the original STALGS objectives gave way to a “journey to the future - 2030” format where the salient feature became the formation of six “ports” (water, food, built environment, natural environment, waste, energy) visited by small cross faculty student groups who progressively “built boats” (accumulating environmental concepts) in their 6 week journey. Revised research questions were also developed and centred on the viability of a transdisciplinary unit on sustainability using a cross faculty interdisciplinary model and exploring both staff acceptability and the efficacy of an interdisciplinary paradigm in addressing the complexities presented by environmental challenges. A mixed methods approach using a qualitative and quantitative research design was utilised to ascertain feedback on the ESR program from staff and students. Pre and post surveys from students were analysed using SPSS program. Focus groups were conducted with staff pre and post program and a sample of students participated in a focus group post program adding depth to the quantitative data.
5
Findings were overwhelmingly positive and there was congruence between staff and students favouring most aspects of ESR, such as the use of the journey metaphor and praise for the program launch and finale, inclusive of the Green Job Expo. Of particular note was the almost unanimous positive feedback to the interdisciplinary component of the program from both staff and students. Survey results indicated students’ knowledge of environmental content increased as did their confidence to take action on environmental issues. While there was some dissonance between students who were undertaking the program as part of an existing unit and those who had volunteered, all student group presentations were of a high standard and applauded by staff, regardless of whether students were being formally assessed. The success of the ESR program overwhelmingly illustrated that it is not only possible but highly productive for Deakin University staff from different disciplines and cross faculties to work together to develop an interdisciplinary unit on sustainability. While it was administratively and politically possible to deliver a unit of study across faculties engaging both staff and students from all faculties in a pilot program, further resources and planning would be required to establish a unit within the constraints of undergraduate course requirements. The overall positive response to ESR has its genesis in the interdisciplinary approach to the program. Taken as a whole, the ESR program delivered more than innovative curriculum for sustainability. Hope, enthusiasm, purpose and trust were the much prized products of the interdisciplinary endeavour, reflecting the adage that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”.
6
INTRODUCTION Explain, Sustain Remain: securing the future for a climate change world was an innovative research project on environmental sustainability with students across all faculties at Deakin University. This interdisciplinary curriculum was delivered as a pilot program to approximately 100 undergraduate third-year students during trimester two, 2009. The project gave students the vision, tools and inspiration to meet challenges such as climate change and peak oil and in securing the future for a climate changed world. This project responded to growing concerns about the environment and aimed to equip graduates with skills and knowledge to tackle environmental issues, enhancing their employability and their ability to make a positive contribution to sustainability Literature in this field emphasizes that universities have the potential and capacity to equip students with the skills and knowledge required to address urgent environmental issues such as climate change and peak oil. For example, Chase (1998) identifies the need to rethink curricula and help students to attain skills, knowledge and values that lead to creating a more sustainable society. To achieve these important and ambitious goals, faculty members in all disciplines across all campuses need to take into account principles of sustainability in their research and teaching. This collaborative project, involving all four faculties (Business and Law, Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Sciences, Science and Technology, Arts and Education) across Deakin University aimed to produce an innovative teaching and learning module that emphasised environmental literacy (such as understanding sustainability, social equity and justice, issues of peak oil, consumerism and resilience in the face of change) as well as civic engagement and responsibility. Students representing all faculties participated in an interdisciplinary ‘learning community’, drawing on strengths of their respective disciplines. Students voyaged to 2030 in order to identify the necessary steps that needed to be taken in 2009 to secure a sustainable future. The findings of this project support a future proposal for a university-wide common unit on sustainability for all undergraduate students. Eighty-four students responded to the Explain, Sustain, Remain (ESR) program pre-test survey in July 2009. The response rate for the follow-up ESR program post-test survey was lower at 39 students (41%), administered at the end of trimester two. This low response rate may have been due to student commitment to studies during Deakin University examination period. Keeping this in mind results from both pre and post surveys indicate that students consider it important to undertake studies that address environmental challenges and that they are likely to undertake further studies dealing with environmental sustainability. These results also suggest the ESR program initiated understanding, developed knowledge and promoted awareness amongst participating students of a diverse range of environmental sustainability concepts and issues. The results also highlight the increase in students’ level of optimism, motivation, confidence and contribution to environmental sustainability. Many students indicated that environmental 7
sustainability education should be delivered as a first year, mandatory, dedicated unit for future students.
8
PROJECT OUTLINE
AIM:
The aim of this project was to undertake preliminary research into the development of four cross-faculty, interdisciplinary learning modules that could be integrated into undergraduate units at Deakin University. It was proposed that the dedicated modules would be designed for cross-faculty implementation and assist students to understand the complexity of environmental issues from a diverse range of disciplines. This project responded to growing concerns about the state of the environment and aimed to equip graduates with skills and knowledge to tackle environmental issues, enhancing employability as well as the ability to make a positive contribution to environmental sustainability. OBJECTIVES:
1. To develop in consultation with the Reference Group, four cross-faculty modules around environmental sustainability which can be integrated into undergraduate units within the university. 2. To identify four undergraduate units to integrate the modules for trimester two implementation. 3. To integrate the modules across the four undergraduate units and trial them throughout trimester two. 4. To evaluate the cross-faculty modules using pre and post-survey questions and focus groups. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: In the process of working interdisciplinarily, the idea of “modules” gave way to a “journey” structure with backcasting element. It was then necessary to develop research questions to guide and eventually evaluate the ESR program.
Can Deakin University staff from different disciplines/faculties work together to develop a transdisciplinary unit on sustainability? What professionally might they gain from the collaboration?
Is it administratively and politically possible to deliver a unit across faculties, mixing students and teaching staff from the different faculties?
There is a body of literature suggesting that the complexity of issues around sustainability requires interdisciplinary approaches. Did this project demonstrate any advantages/benefits to support this? 9
LITERATURE REVIEW
SETTING THE CONTEXT FOR EDUCATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
The need for actions to achieve environmental sustainability has never been more urgent nor more obvious. Never has there been such unprecedented consumption of the Earth’s natural resources and there is a striking correlation between the start of the Industrial Revolution and increasing environmental degradation. Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable period of time in human history, largely due to meeting rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fibre and fuel (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Once seen as vast and resilient, the earth’s natural resources are diminishing at a rapid rate and although it has provided humanity with its services over the past million years, human use has begun to exceed the carrying capacity of the environment, damaging ecosystems worldwide (Goodland 1995, p. 13). According to Wheatley (1993) there are three main groups which are contributing to environmental degradation: government, business and (collectively) individuals. It is clear that universities (as organisations) have a role to play in promoting sustainability in the 21st century. Literature in this field emphasise that universities have the potential and capacity to shape society as a whole. Due to their educational component, they affect and influence the thinking of future generations. According to Uhl and Anderson (2001) universities are in a unique position to address this issue and play a fundamental role in how society moves forward in meeting the environmental sustainability challenge. A number of international organisations have also recognised the importance of sustainability initiatives at a university level. The British National Committee of Enquiry into Higher Education (NCHIE) (1997 cited in Foster 2002, p. 35) states that “higher education institutions need to be dispassionate, committed to the pursuit of truth and able to reflect on the hardest and most complex issues facing the world in the 21st century”. The Talloires Declaration, a report endorsed in October 1990 by 280 universities in 40 nations, including Australia, takes this sustainability challenge one step further. It states that if an equitable and sustainable future is to be created for all humankind, universities will have a major role to play in the education, research, policy formation and information exchange (University Leaders for a Sustainable Future 1990 cited in Haigh 2005). Often titled ‘Greening the Curriculum’, universities will need to incorporate environmental sustainability into every course in order to meet these challenges. Presently, environmental issues are treated in isolation and seen as the property of a select few disciplines (Haigh 2005). Cortese (2001), for instance, states that interdisciplinary systems thinking needs to replace the traditional disciplinary focus if any real changes are to occur.
10
The Piedmont Project and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as two examples of a ‘Green Curriculum’ As indicated by the signing of the Talloires Declaration by 280 universities, a number of institutions are already integrating environmental sustainability into the curriculum. Emory University in Atlanta developed the ‘Piedmont Project’ in May 2001. The project involved 20 academic staff from different faculties who were involved in a two day workshop focussing on integrating sustainability issues in their respective units (Eisen & Barlett 2006). Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) in New York is another example of a university that has adopted strategic sustainability initiatives. In 1995, the Greening of Rensselaer Initiative enabled students to apply for grants to create a sustainable university (RPI 2007a). By 1998 the university had made significant progress and was developing long term strategic goals towards environmental sustainability in the university and its curriculum (Breyman 1998).Today undergraduates at Rensselaer are able to undertake multidisciplinary environmental courses as well as a number of interdisciplinary Masters’ degrees (RPI 2007b). Edelstein (2004) elaborates the point that universities are the logical loci for experiments in sustainability. As they are inherently learning centres, new ideas can be heard and advocat for change. They are able to guide other sectors and have the potential to serve as societal models. Edelstein (2004) further states that universities have the potential to address sustainability through what is termed the 4 C’s: curriculum, culture, campus and community. Chase (1998) also makes the point that universities need to rethink curricula and help students to attain skills, knowledge and values that will move closer to creating a more sustainable society. Breyman (1998) also highlights this need for universities to integrate environmental sustainability into their curricular where the author states that ‘no single discipline has hegemonic purchase on analysis and resolution of environmental problems… multi and interdisciplinary curricula are indispensable if the ecological literacy necessary for construction of sustainable societies is to be achieved’ (1998, p 119).
EDUCATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY The Decade for Education for Sustainable Development In December 2002 at the Johannesburg Summit the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development for the period 2005-2014. The UN General Assembly declared that the vision of sustainable development should expand on the educational objectives of the Millennium Development Goals and Education for All Movement to incorporate the principles of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in the recognition that education is an indispensable element for achieving a sustainable future. The Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD) is a process that aims to incorporate the principles, values and practices of Education for Sustainable Development into existing educational programs around the world. Ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to learn about the environmental, social, political, economic and cultural dimensions around 11
environmental sustainability, DESD goes beyond educating students about conservation and protection of the environment (UNESCO 2005). It touches upon all the social and institutional fabric which have contributed to the complexity of problems in the 21st century such as degradation of the natural environment, poverty, human rights abuses, gender inequality, and lack of democracy and active citizenship. The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) broadly define Education for Sustainable Development as: “A concept that goes far beyond environmental education. ESD is the educational process of achieving human development (economic growth, social development, and environmental protection) in an inclusive, equitable and secure manner. It thus includes education for poverty alleviation, human rights, gender equality, cultural diversity, international understanding, peace and many more.... the vision of education for sustainable development is a world where everyone has the opportunity to benefit from quality education and learn the values, behaviour and lifestyles required for a sustainable future and for positive societal transformation. (UNESCO 2008) DESD not only builds the skills, knowledge and competencies required to integrate environmental sustainability into everyday life, it challenges students with the frameworks on which current society is built on. Richmond (2009, p. 1) elaborates this concept further stating Education for Sustainable Development is a key means through which education can build a global lobby for effective action, showing people that, as conscious consumers and responsible citizens, their concrete actions can contribute to lasting solutions to such challenges as climate change. ESD also recognises that youth are the vanguard to a sustainable future due to their enthusiasm and energy and are a key stakeholder in the International Implementation Scheme. UNESCO classifies youth as people between the ages of 15 and 24 and state that “Young people have the energy and enthusiasm as well as the capacity to capture sustainable development values, ideals and goals and act on them to shape our collective future… [And] because they are the leaders of tomorrow… to help them to take into their own hands the future they will be leading” (UNESCO 2009b). It stands to reason then that young people who are studying at university should be engaged with the principles of ESD throughout their course and external programs so that they are provided with the opportunities to develop the skills required to address some of the most challenging issues today and safeguard their future. The DESD calls governments and institutions alike to recognise the importance of ESD to further the cause for a sustainable future for all and invites participants to embrace the goals and objectives outlined in the International Implementation Scheme. Some of these goals include:
Provide an opportunity for refining and promoting the vision of and transition to sustainable development – through all forms of education, public awareness and training.
12
Give an enhanced profile to the important role of education and learning in sustainable development. (UNESCO 2005)
In 2005 the Australian Government responded to the call to implement the principles, values and goals of the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development by developing the Australian Government Strategy for the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014 whose vision states that: “At the end of the decade, the Australian community will have the understanding, knowledge, skills and capacity to contribute to sustainable development and will embrace the intrinsic value of sustainability as a national aspiration. Our ultimate vision is a sustainable Australia” (Commonwealth of Australia 2007). Subsequently the National Action Plan– Living Sustainably: the Australian Governments National Action Plan for Education for Sustainability was released. The plan outlines four strategies that address the issues identified in various community consultation: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Demonstrating Australian Government leadership Reorienting education systems to sustainability Fostering sustainability in business and industry Harnessing community spirit to act (Commonwealth of Australia 2009)
For the purposes of this literature review the following section will focus on strategy two and the higher education sector’s role in creating a sustainable future. Education for Environmental Sustainability and the higher education sector Reorienting education systems to sustainability is the second major objective outlined in the Action Plan. Using transformative approaches to the education sector, whole-of-institution engagement, innovative teaching and learning and changes to curricula are key processes in achieving the vision of a sustainable Australia. Universities are outlined under Objective 2.2 of this strategy where it states that: “Education for sustainability is integrated into all university courses/subject areas and campuses are managed in a sustainable way” (Commonwealth of Australia 2009, p. 21). It has been recognised that the higher education sector has a key role to play in achieving this vision of a sustainable Australia. But what does this mean in reality? Cortese (2008, p. 8) states that, ‘higher education is doing a fair to poor job on the health, social and economic dimensions of sustainability. The majority of graduates know little about the importance of sustainability or how to lead their personal and professional lives aligned with sustainability principles’. Saugier (2009) echoes this sentiment and states that sustainable development should be at the centre of education, similar to how students learn reading, writing and numeracy skills. 13
“At present, in practically all the world’s education systems, sustainable development is still on the sidelines. We must place it in the centre and, then, the very term education for sustainable development will vanish, as it will be obvious that the purpose of education, taken as a whole, in the same way as reading, writing and numeracy skills, will be to restore and preserve the balance in people’s relations among themselves and with their environment” (Saugier 2009) More specifically to Australia, Education for Sustainable Development is what Tilbury (2008) calls “in progress”. Despite some major developments and programs across the sector much capacity building work is yet to be done in the area of Education for Sustainable Development. Most campus activities around sustainable development involve greening the campus and to a lesser extent the curriculum. Proponents of the literature, however, emphasise that the higher education sector need to align both curriculum and campus greening operations to address sustainability more profoundly. Tilbury et al. (2005, p. 8) states that ‘for education institutions to more deeply address sustainability there is a need to link campus management to research, curriculum and administrative practice, such that sustainability is embedded across every aspect of institutional operations in a synergistic way’. Literature in the field also suggests that sustainability should permeate courses in all faculties and at all levels (Fien 2004), however, a study undertaken by Sherron and Robin (2006) in 2004-2005 found that in Australia, sustainability is still largely ‘owned’ by one faculty, mainly Science and Technology. Tilbert et al. (2005) adds to this notion and states that curriculum design around sustainable development needs to be done in two ways, through the revision of existing courses and development of new ones across all faculties at a university. The following section will discuss the frameworks around Education for Sustainability – a framework that incorporates the vision, values and principles of Education for Sustainable Development. Education for Sustainability in the Curriculum Education for Sustainability is considered one of the more effective ways to educate the community around sustainability and move people beyond knowledge to action. It differs from education about sustainability which is based around raising awareness about the environment or engaging participants in on-the ground activities. Education about sustainability assumes that increasing the awareness of a problem will lead to a change in behaviour, however, research has shown that there is little evidence of a causal link between simply raising awareness or information giving and changing the action of learners (Wortman et al. 2006; Tilbury et al. 2005). Education for sustainability on the other hand goes beyond providing information about the environment. It is seen as a process which motivates and engages people in creating sustainable futures. It motivates, equips and involves individuals and groups in reflecting how they currently live and work, in making informed decisions and in creating ways to work collaboratively to develop solutions and take actions for a more sustainable world (ARIES 2009; Wortman et al. 2006) Education for Sustainability provides a framework to educate and empower students around highly complex issues such as poverty and climate change. Challenging students to think about how society can change its widely held views about the social, economic and environmental 14
constructs. ‘it seeks to implement systemic change within the community, institutions, government and industry (Tilbury et al. 2005). So the question therein is what teaching methods does education for sustainability provide to ensure a secure, sustainable future? Key components of Education for Sustainability
Envisioning a better future Critical thinking and reflection Participation in decision-making Systemic thinking
Envisioning a better future: “Futures thinking… tries to help people in becoming more active in envisioning a preferred future. And we do it by giving them a greater range of images, by helping them to choose the way they want the future to be so they can move in the right direction” (Dator, 1993) Envisioning also known as futures thinking is ‘a process that engages people in conceiving and capturing a vision of their idea future… it helps people to discover their possible and preferred futures and to uncover the beliefs and assumptions that underlie these visions and choices’ (Tilbury et al. 2005, p. 4). An important element of futures thinking is giving participants time to reflect and vent their frustrations of the current ways things are going (Dator 1993). Studies undertaken by Hutchinson in 1993 found that many young people in Australia expressed a strong sense of negativity, helplessness, despondency and anguish about anticipated problems facing society and the world at large, including environmental degradation (Hicks 2006). Futures thinking creates a supportive environment where participants can express these concerns but also allows people’s vision of what an alternative future could look like. Critical Thinking and Reflection: “Every day we are exposed to a barrage of information, advertisements, and stories in newspapers, on billboards and on television…information that tells us what is important in the world… but stop and think about what is really being said? What are we really being sold?” (Tilbury and Wortman 2004) ‘Critical thinking and reflection challenges participants to examine the way that we interpret the world and how our knowledge and opinions are shaped by those around us’ (Tilbury and Cooke 2005), it asks students to challenge the social, economic and cultural constructs that have lead to the unsustainable way of living today. It moves beyond criticising something and examines the power, vested interests, consumption and root causes of sustainability (Tilbury and Wortman 2004).
Participation in decision making: According to Rensburn and Sisitka (2000) active participation in education for sustainability is centred around 4 themes which increase the learners’ confidence and ability to build a shared vision for a sustainable future, these include: 15
Encouraging learners to share understandings; Draw out meaning on which learners can build; Encouraging greater confidence in one’s own abilities; and Contributing to collective understanding of issues and solutions and encourages ownership of solutions
Participation in this setting means that learners are active contributors and in most cases guided by a facilitator rather than instructed by an ‘expert’. According to Tilbury and Wortman (2004) this process makes all participants, including non-specialists, feel comfortable to actively contribute in creating a positive vision. Gayford (2003, p. 132) supports this process and sates that ‘the underlying principles of this approach are to place value on the experience of participants and practitioners, to help them to work collaboratively with colleagues and to make them feel empowered in the process’. Systemic Thinking: Education for sustainability goes beyond simple cause-effect approaches to problem solving to recognise the importance of the complex and interrelated contexts in which decisions are made and problems are addressed. Systems thinking can help learners to understand the importance of the transformation change necessary across all organisations, individuals, institutions, schools and government departments (Wortman et al. 2006) Proponents of the literature have indeed discussed the need for systemic thinking to overcome such complex issues such as climate change. The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) released a policy dialogue paper at UNESCO’s International Seminar on Climate Change Education Conference in Paris supporting this proposition. They state that: “Simply introducing new content about climate change science, causes, consequences and solutions will not be an adequate response to climate change. Central to processes of mitigation, adaptation and transformation are new values, creative thinking and problem solving skills. These skills require learners to engage in critical analysis of causes and consequences, creative proposals for possible solutions to problems, testing of new solutions and evaluation of the outcomes. This requires Education for Sustainable Development teaching and learning methodologies that are participatory, experiential, critical and open-ended” (UNESCO 2009c, p.3)
Moving higher education in a sustainable direction. Within the higher education sector this requires a shift in the way education around environmental sustainability is viewed. Major shifts will be required to set the nexus for education for sustainability, including cross-faculty, interdisciplinary partnership development. Cortese (1999, p. 2) supports this proposition and states that ‘the context of learning must change to make the human/environment interdependence and values and ethics a central part of teaching in all disciplines, rather than isolated as a special course or module in programs for environmental specialists’. As such it stands to reason that educators will also require a new set of skills and shift in mind-sets towards restoration of the environment, as Tilbury and Wortman 16
(2004) state ‘educators will require a new set of skills, such as envisioning, critical thinking and reflection, dialogue and negotiation, collaboration and building partnerships’. Coreste (1999, p. 2) also supports this notion and further adds that ‘environmental specialists are necessary but not sufficient to achieve sustainability because all people occupy ecosystems, consume resources and produce pollution and waste’.
CROSS FACULTY, INTERDISCIPLINARY TEACHING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE There is a growing field of research exploring the efficacy of teaching, learning and research which are not based on mono-disciplinarity. At present there is little consensus in the literature on the various definitions given to embrace a suite of descriptors for the proposition that multiple levels of knowing are a superior form of problem solving. Several terms variously used to describe varying multiple levels of epistimologies are: multidisciplinary, cross disciplinary, transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary. For purposes of this report the term which will be employed to describe an approach at academic fusion is interdisciplinarity (Turner 1990 p. 3). According to Turner (1990) interdisciplinarity challenges the organisation of the conventional curriculum and adopts an epistemologically creative and critical stance towards existing disciplinarity. Issues and problems in the environment and sustainability are complex and require interdisciplinarity to develop useful solutions and approaches (Eisen and Bartlett 2006). As far back as 1977 the UNESCO Intergovernmental conference on research in environmental education developed 6 guiding principles for action on education for sustainability, of note are principles 2 and 3: 2. Bring together a broad range of interdisciplinary expertise and; 3. Develop a spirit of interdisciplinary cooperation on the basis of openness to working across traditional disciplines and welcome dialogue around a problem orientation (as cited in Eisen and Barlett 2008 p.26). Eisen and Barlett (2008) adopted these multifarious principles in their development of a campus and curriculum sustainability program referred to as the Piedmont Project. The project identified eight pedagogical methods for faculty development and curriculum innovation. Again of interest to this report was the pedagogy of “interdisciplinary cohort” which refers to a rich diversity of disciplines represented in each group that enriches perspectives on the issues. These and other principles and pedagogies were successful as evidenced by over 100 courses having been introduced or reshaped (over 5 years) in direct response to the education for sustainability project. Further, participants in the project lauded the value of the interdisciplinary experience: The interdisciplinary make-up of our group greatly enhanced our experience and the payoff from these brainstorming sessions. Because we all approach environmental issues from different angles, the presence of our peers from across the university helped highlight areas of inquiry and raise question about which we would otherwise never think. Eisen and Barlett (2008 p.29). 17
Mark Richmond, Director for the Coordination of United Nations Priorities in Education spoke at the 2009 UNESCO International Seminar on Climate Change Education, said there was a clear need for interdisciplinary and intersectoral cooperation in the field of Education for Sustainable Development and that the economic dimensions must not be forgotten (UNESCO 2009a). This is a salient point made by a variety of authors spanning diverse fields such as research, grass root action, international declarations and various levels of government and is testimony to the power and efficacy of interdisciplinary and intersectoral approaches needed to address the complex and pervasive challenges of environmental sustainability. Hewlett Packard Labs and Forum for the Future (2008) collaborate to project possible future scenarios resulting from climate change so that businesses and organisations can plan for possible future conditions. They emphasis a need to “. . . think across disciplines, in all sectors and globally. . . ” Hewlett Packard Labs and Forum for the Future (2008 p.6) again reinforcing the case for interdisciplinary approaches to climate problems even beyond the Higher Education Institutions. Nicole (2008) the keynote speaker in Creating sustainable communities through education forum in Japan put forward 14 principles to guide the process of educating for sustainability. Of note worthy is principle 8 where Nicole (2004 p18) argues “Environmental science on its own is no longer an adequate basis for constructing educational strategies.” Reinforcing the need to go beyond traditional problem solving methods that treat disciplines in isolation from one another. Haigh (2005) promotes the adoption of interdisciplinary strategies, not just as pedagogical mainstays but to avoid environmental issues becoming the property of a select few disciplines. Instead Haigh (2005 makes the case for interdisciplinary systems thinking rather than a disciplinary focus in order to avoid the ghettoization or tokenism of environmental learning.
GREENING DEAKIN’S CURRICULUM Strategically the principles of education for environmental sustainability align with a number of Deakin University’s Strategic Plans and Policies. The university should be commended for developing the first Environmental Management Plan which aims to reduce the ecological footprint of the university’s operations including energy, waste, water and transport. However, as highlighted in the previous chapters, if significant change is to occur beyond the boundaries of Deakin University where graduates have the skills, knowledge and competencies to incorporate environmental sustainability into their future professions, the university will have a critical role in ensuring that the principles of education for environmental sustainability is embedded in its teaching and learning programs. The following section will highlight where the principles of education for environmental sustainability align with the university’s Strategic Teaching and Learning Plan (2008-2012), Deakin’s Teaching and Learning Goal, the University’s Environmental Policy (2009) and Environmental Management Plan (2009-2010), Rural and Regional Engagement and Graduate Employability. Deakin University Teaching and Learning Plan 2008-2012 18
The Teaching and Learning Plan states that Deakin’s courses must be relevant and futureoriented. “Our courses are designed first and foremost to be relevant to the career and life aspirations of students, equip students to adapt to an ever-changing global environment and be informed by high quality, contemporary research and consultation with industry, employers and government” (Deakin Teaching & Learning Plan 2008-2012). These will be achieved by the following strategy: Strategy 1: Providing a broad range of contemporary and relevant teaching programs…… which will ensure that Deakin is known for its proactive approach and its agile response to workforce demands (Deakin University Teaching and Learning Plan 2008 p. 10). Embedding the principles of Education for Sustainability into the teaching and learning programs at Deakin will assist the university to provide a broad range of contemporary and relevant teaching programs, including generalist degrees, which prepare multi-skilled graduates who are able to enter the workforce or go on to further study; focused professional undergraduate programs; and flexibly delivered postgraduate programs, all of which will contribute to ensuring that Deakin is known for its proactive approach and its agile response to workforce demands (Delivering Effective Partnerships 2008, p.16). Teaching and Learning Goal The principles of education for environmental sustainability is also in keeping with Deakin University’s goal to work in partnership with students, staff, industry, employers and governments to ensure that Deakin’s academic programs are of high quality, relevant, informed by contemporary research and create a unique Deakin experience; and to be recognised as a national leader in flexible education (Delivering Effective Partnerships 2008, p. 16). Environmental Sustainability Enabling Policy 2009 The Environmental Sustainability Enabling Policy states that “So far as possible the University will integrate environmental sustainability principles into all of its operations, strategies, plans, policies, activities and the curriculum” (Policy Objective 2). Policy Objective 5 also states that “The University will further promote responsible environmental management and sustainability through: communities of interest partners, contracts and the supply chain. Curriculum development and teaching leadership (Environmental Sustainability Enabling Policy, 2009) Any curriculum developed using the principles of Education for sustainability will be developed by staff at Deakin who are firstly leaders in their field. This project will also demonstrate to the wider community that Deakin is serious about environmental sustainability and is making a commitment to environmental stewardship - not only through its operations but though the curriculum where students will develop critical skills to tackle this most pressing issue. The unit also creates a platform which enables environmental sustainability principles to be embedded at Deakin University through the curriculum. Environmental Management Plan 2008-2010 At Deakin University, environmental initiatives have emerged in relation to teaching and research. The Deakin University Environmental Policy Advisory Committee (EPAC) has initiated action in the area of strategic and operational policy for Environmental Sustainability. EPAC has 19
also commenced a review of environmental sustainability in teaching and research and recommended the following in the area of teaching and learning: One or more cross-faculty majors in key undergraduate courses; Strategic grant applications to generate innovative curriculum design, learning approaches and study materials related to Environmental Sustainability (EPAC 2008). The plan discussed the future of a cross-faculty major in environmental sustainability. Timing of a cross-faculty, interdisciplinary curriculum is pertinent for the development of a future crossfaculty major in environmental sustainability. Rural and Regional Engagement Deakin University has identified six core commitments that shape its distinctive position in higher education in Australia - rural and regional engagement has been identified as one of these important commitments. The principles of Education for Sustainability will meet Deakin’s goal to meeting the needs of rural and regional Australia by producing skilled, highly educated graduates who are able to meet workforce needs, undertaking relevant and responsive research and enhancing the economic, social, cultural and intellectual capital of south central and south western Victoria (Delivering Effective Partnerships 2008) through the involvement of staff and students from the Geelong and Warrnambool campuses in the development of curriculum. Graduate Employability A study undertaken by Precision Consultancy (2007) also reiterates the importance for graduates to be responsive and flexible to changes in the global environment. “More than ever we need professionals who are responsive to economic, social, cultural, technical and environmental change and can work flexibly and intelligently across business contexts. Australian industry requires new graduates who understand the part they play in building their organisations, and have the practical skills to work effectively in their roles” (Cleary et al. p. 1). A study by the Dusseldop Skills Forum found that there will be significant skills shortages in the market as we move from a high-carbon to low-carbon economy. The study calls for substantial action to ensure that the skills, education, and training required are available and ready to contribute. This will involve concerted action by government, businesses, labour, educational and training institutions to develop and implement new approaches to green education, training and jobs (Hatfield-Dodds et al. 2008). Deakin’s mission implies that the University has an obligation to both its students and employers to ensure that its courses and teaching practices produce graduates who are “job ready”, equipped with the skills and knowledge to manage their career path and to contribute immediately to their chosen profession, whether this be through employment by an existing organisation or self-employment (Teaching & Learning Plan 2008). Embedding curriculum with the principles of environmental sustainability will contribute to increasing the employability of Deakin graduates who are able to integrate environmental sustainability into their future work, regardless of discipline.
20
METHODS
This section describes the methodology, including the recruitment of participants, data collection, data analysis and methodology of the curriculum implementation in 2009. This STALGS project adopted a mixed methods approach using qualitative and quantitative research design. ‘Mixed methods is formally defined here as the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language into a single movement’ (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004, p. 17). The combination of these methods gives strength to the findings of the research – if the results of both the quantitative and qualitative research corroborate this will provide greater confidence in drawing conclusions and recommendations than a single research method alone (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004). Creswell & Garrett (2008, p. 322) also support this notion and state that ‘when researchers bring together both quantitative and qualitative research, the strengths of both approaches are combined leading, it can be assumed, to a better understanding of research problems than either approach alone’. Drawing on both strengths of qualitative and quantitative research design can provide a robust study for complex, interdisciplinary research problems and is a useful method for bringing a team of individuals together with various backgrounds in research methods (Creswell & Garrett 2008). This method is also particularly useful for drawing strengths and limitations of the program intervention and provides invaluable information for future cross-faculty, interdisciplinary curriculum development initiatives around environmental sustainability. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004, p. 21) support this point and state that ‘qualitative and quantitative research used together produce more complete knowledge to inform theory and practice’. STUDY DESIGN Part I: Pre and Post Surveys All students who participated in Explain, Sustain, Remain were asked to complete a survey before and after the modules were implemented. The pre-survey consisted of 16 questions that consisted of a combination of likert scales and multiple choice questions, three questions were open ended. The pre survey was divided into 3 sections. The first section included questions designed to find out whether students had already undertaken studies which looked at environmental issues, or whether they would consider studying this area in the future. These set of questions were derived from experienced teaching staff in the STALGS committee. The second set of questions were developed from the key learning objectives of the Explain, Sustain, Remain curriculum and these were also used to measure student learnings from the modules (new skills, attitudes and knowledge). The third section measured attitudes and behaviours of students towards the environment using a combination of two survey instruments: firstly, the ‘New Ecological Paradigm Scale’ (NEP Scale). This instrument was selected as it has been tested as a good indicator of pro-environmental orientation and a powerful predictor of environmental behaviour (Dunlap et al. 2000); the second instrument was derived from a George Mason University study on American attitudes towards climate change (Leiserowitz et al. 2008). 21
Demographic questions were also asked to assess whether there were any differences between and within student groups (See Appendix 3 for pre-survey). The post-survey included an additional section which asked students to comment on the general program features and future design of education for sustainability curriculum. These questions were developed by teaching staff on the STALGS committee. In total there were 21 questions on the post-survey (See Appendix 4 for post-survey). A total of 93 students participated in the program and 84 students returned their pre-survey’s (90%). The response rate for the post-surveys were not as high where 39 students out of the 93 who participated in the program returned their completed surveys (42%), however, this is still above the 30 percent response rate which is required to determine statistical significance. Data from the pre and post-surveys was then entered into SPSS and analysed using descriptive statistics (including frequencies) and chi-square analysis. Part II: Focus Groups Focus groups are used to gain an understanding of perceptions, interpretations, and beliefs of a group of people who have similar experiences or concerns (Liamputtong 2009). The advantage of focus groups is that the interaction between the participants usually produces richer data than individual interview techniques as the interchange between the participants stimulates them to analyse their views more intensely. The focus group process encourages the interaction between research participants taking the research into new and often unexpected directions (Kitzinger 1994 as cited in Liamputtong 2009 p.69) In addition to being a “self-contained” method (Liamputtong 2009 p. 68)focus groups can also used as an augmentation to survey data. In this current research students participated in focus groups to supplement the pre and post surveys to ascertain further information about the content and delivery of Explain, Sustain, Remain. Students who took part in the Explain, Sustain, Remain program were randomly selected using excel and invited to take part in a focus group after the curriculum implementation took place in Trimester 2, 2009. A total of 16 students representing the four faculties responded to the invitation and were asked to take part in a 45 minute focus group. A total of 10 questions were included in the focus group transcript and asked students about the content, scope, process and delivery of the Explain, Sustain, Remain program. Focus groups were also undertaken with the teaching staff and reference group members who developed and implemented the curriculum. Focus groups were undertaken before (July) and after (October) the implementation of the curriculum and ran for approximately 45 minutes. All staff and reference group members were invited to participate. A total of 11 staff and reference group members participated in a focus group before program implementation and 8 after program implementation. A total of 11 questions were included in the focus group transcript before program implementation and asked participants to comment on the design, content, process and implementation of Explain, Sustain, Remain. The focus group which was conducted after program implementation included an extra section on the teaching and learning process and included a total of 23 questions and prompts. The pre-implementation guided focus groups explored: 1. The appropriateness of the workshop format and the timeframe for developing the Unit, 22
2. 3. 4. 5.
The composition of the reference and teaching groups, Predictions about the students’ response to the material, Professional gains from involvement and Suggestions for changing the modules and future delivery.
In addition to revisiting professional gains and thoughts about the future of the Unit, the second set of focus groups reviewed: 6. Implementation (curriculum and content, and mode of delivery) 7. The teaching and learning process 8. The research methodology Two student focus groups were held post delivery. These involved a total of 16 students although unfortunately they were predominantly from the Arts/Education Faculty due to the difficulty of attracting students at the end of third year Trimester 2. Altogether their experience covered 4 ports – waste (2), food (3), energy (1) and water (10). One of the Water groups had consisted entirely of Arts/Education students, and they formed one of the focus groups, however there were also three health, one environmental science student, and one commerce law student in the other focus group.
RECRUITMENT OF PARTICIPANTS Teaching Staff and Reference Group Members Teaching staff were initially staff members employed at Deakin University who completed the STALGS application. Additional teaching staff from across the university (including Geelong and Warrnambool Campuses) were recruited from all four faculties through purposive and snowball sampling to ensure a cross-faculty design of the curriculum. The recruitment of Reference Group members was primarily through snowball sampling. Teaching and Reference Group members who participated in the focus groups were emailed a Plain Language Statement and Consent form. Students The study was limited to students that were in a third year undergraduate course, due to the complexity of the curriculum it was agreed that this would be the most appropriate level to deliver the program. There were two participant groups among students. The first group were volunteers who were invited to participate in the program through the University’s Web Portal. Teaching staff members who were involved in the development of the curriculum also invited students from their lectures and tutorials to participate in the program. The second group had the program incorporated and trialled into an existing unit that the students were already undertaking; these units were from the School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Communication and Creative Arts. The two participant groups provided a comparison of student responses between student volunteers and students who had the program integrated into their unit. Due to the popularity of the program and request from students the program was extended to include the Geelong and Warrnambool Campuses. 23
PROGRAM INTERVENTION The ESR pilot curriculum program was delivered from July - October in Trimester 2, 2009. Students met 6 times overall, 4 times in small discussion groups (between 6-18 per group) for approximately 1.5 hours with assistance from 1 or 2 learning facilitators. The program commenced in week 1 with a 3 hour ‘launch’ involving all students (105) and included inspiring guest speakers, films, scientific reports, drama performances and a chance to become familiar with peers and learning facilitators. In week 6 all students and staff reconvened to complete their ‘journey’ with presentations and a green jobs / volunteering expo in a 3 hour finale. In the course of delivery, students were given the opportunity to utilise future scenarios, backcasting and small group solution based learning techniques. The program supported students to explore creative and interdisciplinary responses to the current climate crisis. A metaphor of a boat was used to convey the journey of sustainability, i.e. it is challenging (who’s going to steer the boat to ensure a safe journey/landing in 2030) – we are all in this together (can’t jump out when you’ve had enough). That is students/staff must work together like the crew on a ship to achieve a positive vision for 2030. As denoted in Table 1 and Diagram 1, students explored 6 themes (energy, water, food, waste, built and natural environments) which were termed “ports” to fit in with the metaphor of the boat. Each week students progressively “built” their boat while on this journey – ie “building” their own skills, knowledge & attitudes. Students listened to inspirational guest speakers from within Australia and globally, films, radio programs, poems, scientific reports, social activist literature. These skills knowledge and attitudes were indicative of their needs for future careers i.e. so that they could integrate environmental sustainability into their chosen career. At the end of the 6 weeks students were to have recorded a "story”. The "story" was a 10 minute group presentation of their journey to 2030 using whatever medium they choose - poetry, music, dance, drama, written word, PowerPoint etc and describe what is needed in 2009 to promote a "soft" landing/or carbon descent into the future. As an integral part of the Explain, Sustain, Remain learning program, students in week 6 also participated in a “Green Jobs” Expo with over 20 representatives from the private and public sectors, local government, not- for profit, commercial and volunteer sectors attended the highly successful information evening. Businesses, industry, organisations and services were chosen to reflect the multiple discipline backgrounds of the participating students. This served the dual purpose of modelling for students examples of environmentally concerned and active industries AND enabled students to network with potential employers. At the same time, the “Green Jobs” invitees were able to view the work undertaken by the students and appreciate their commitment to actively addressing climate change challenges. Some of the industry partners participating in Explain, Sustain, Remain Green Jobs Expo included: ANZ bank, City of Whitehorse; Vox Bandicoot; CERES, Moreland Energy Foundation, NECO; Australian Conservation Foundation; World Vision; Conservation Volunteers Australia; Sustainable Architecture; and the Brotherhood of St Laurence. In the spirit of modelling interdisciplinary process and delivery, the learning facilitators were drawn from each of the four faculties in addition to colleagues from La Trobe and Victoria Universities and not for profit environmental organisation – Environment Victoria. Students 24
were encouraged to utilise their combined discipline backgrounds and projected professions to create environmental awareness and strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Table 1: Explain, Sustain, Remain Program Themes and Topics Week 1 2 3 4 5 6
Theme / Topic Welcome to your journey State of the current world situation Connectivity of issues Change for a more sustainable outcome Enabling change for a sustainable future Presentation & greens jobs/volunteering expo
Diagram 1: The Journey Metaphor and ‘Ports’
25
LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH DESIGN
In order to critically appreciate the findings presented in the ensuing Results Section, below is a list of some of the key research design limitations. Further it is important to understand these variables in the context of a complex research vs. intervention nexus where it was necessary to continuously modify the research design during the developmental and implementation phases of the intervention. The Discussion sections of the report will further highlight these as a means of analysis of the overall findings. Pre and Post Survey Design and Participation
Post survey response rate - low number of post response (n = 39) compared to pre (n=84). However, this still represents a statistically significant response rate of 42%. Further a random sample of matched pre and post surveys (n=5) confirmed a general shift with increased levels of knowledge, confidence, optimism, satisfaction pre and post exposure to ESR. This gives confidence to interpret aggregate findings pre and post as represented in figures 1-30. Another observation worthy of note was that the post survey responses represented a cross section of all four faculties i.e. a sample was derived from each. However, in terms of true representation the Faculty of Science and Technology students returned fewer surveys as a proportion of those participating in the program. There were a number of questions which contained a double negative for example, question 16 in the post-survey instrument; or were difficult to interpret for example, question four in pre-survey instrument and / or contained more than one variable within the prompt i.e. question nine on the pre-survey instrument. This may have lead to students misinterpreting the true intent of the questions and their responses may not be an accurate representation of their actual attitudes. The survey questions were derived from a multitude of sources and subject to a consultation with a range of participants in the intervention design. In turn this meant that the tool was not standardized and contained various flaws. A small number of pre and post matched questions - only 5 (of 16) of the pre-test questions were carried over into the post-survey which contained a total of 21 questions. It therefore may be tenuous to use the labels – “pre and post test survey”. There were a number of incomplete surveys including those with incomplete demographics, incomplete boxes in the likert scales and / or open-ended response questions foregone.
Focus Group Design and Participation
Faculty representation in student focus groups was skewed towards Arts and Education students i.e. 11 out of the 16 focus group participants were from the Arts and Education faculty, one student was from Education specifically; 16 students were from the faculty of Science and Technology; one was from the faculty of Business and Law and three were from the Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Sciences faculty (HMNBS). In particular there was a significant under-representation of environmental students, however, all together their experience covered 4 ports – waste (2), food (3), energy (1) and water (10). One of the Water groups had consisted entirely of Arts and Education students, and they formed one of the two completed focus groups. 26
Table 2: Matrix of student focus groups Focus Group Number 1
Number of Students
Faculty
Port Group & number of student
11
Arts & Education
Waste Water Energy Food
Number of student in each port 2 10 1 3
2
5
Science & Technology HMNBS HMNBS Business & Law
Food Food Natural Environments Energy
1 2 1 1
Low participation rate in the student focus groups: this was despite one face-to-face invitation, a general emailed invitation to all students and a randomly selected sample invitation. Anecdotally, the low response rate may have been associated with the intensive academic period and the fact that many of the students were due to graduate. Otherwise variations in staff support for recruitment of participants may have been responsible for the skew.
Interviewer biases: not all of the focus groups (for both the student and staff) were conducted by the one interviewer which may of in-turn introduced interviewer biases.
Participant biases: the evolutionary development of the curriculum and the broad engagement of the members of the wider team (project team) led to some confusion about the roles of the reference, project management and teaching groups. This has the potential for loss of objectivity since members of the project team developed and in many cases also taught and in a few cases were part of the evaluation of the project.
Interview protocol variations: the protocols were subject to amendment for both the student and staff instruments as well as modified pre and post program implementation for the staff focus groups. Also observed through analysis of the transcriptions was that with the progression of the interviews the emphasis of the questions relating to particular themes was modified by the interviewer.
Transcription and record keeping: a lack of identification of speakers in aural recordings, which made it difficult to know whether a point was being repeated by one speaker or raised by others as well.
Finally worthy of note are those variables of recruitment and participation that were a function of the intervention itself. These include: 27
Differences in experiences of Explain, Sustain, Remain as a function of port specific exposure, i.e. water, waste, energy, natural environments, built environments, food (one only and how this relates to the response in knowledge / confidence questions)
The imbalance of students from different faculties (weighted towards Science and Technology, n =35)
Imbalance in gender profile of students, 54 female, 27 male (2:1)
Imbalance in gender profile for staff, 14 female, 5 male (3:1)
Over half the students had previously undertaken studies with environmental content which has implications for recommendations in terms of ‘pitch’ and ‘year level’ for future implementation.
The percentage of voluntary (34%) students compared to the number of students who had the modules integrated into existing units (66%) plus accompanying assessment tasks. The students from the Life & Environmental Sciences Course had an assessment task worth 15% while students from the Arts/Education course had an assessment task worth 60%.
Owing to the nature of the project i.e. small, discrete pilot intervention, not all schools were represented in each faculty.
Finally the focus group and survey research tools were not sufficiently aligned to facilitate a greater parity in analysis.
28
RESULTS
Pre and Post Student Surveys WHO PARTICIPATED IN EXPLAIN, SUSTAIN, REMAIN? Table 3: Student Demographics Demographics Faculty: - Arts and Education - Business and Law - Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Science - Science and Technology -
Domestic International
No. 23 7 20 35 77 4
Gender: - Male - Female
27 54
Study Load: - Full-time - Part-time
75 6
PARTICIPANT VIEWS ON EDUCATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY How many students have already undertaken a course or unit with environmental content prior to undertaking Explain Sustain Remain? Figure 1: Number of students who have undertaken a course or unit with environmental content
29
Figure 1 indicates that over half the students (56%) have undertaken a course or unit with environment/sustainability content prior to undertaking g the Explain, Sustain, Remain (ESR) program. Further analysis found that 74 percent of students who had previously undertaken a unit or course with environment/sustainability content were from the Faculty of Science and Technology (School of Life and Environmental Sciences) A small percentage of students (1%) tried but were unable to undertake a unit or course with environment/sustainability content and 6 percent of students were unsure if such a unit or course was available. The remainder of students (37%) did not try to undertake a unit or course with environment/sustainability content. How many students volunteered for Explain, Sustain, Remain and how many had the project integrated into their unit? Figure 2: Number of students participating as a volunteer or as part of a credited unit/course
Figure 2 indicates that a greater proportion of students participating in ESR completed the program as part of a ‘credited unit or course’ (66%) while 34 percent of students ‘volunteered’ to participate in the ESR program as a non-credit extra study option. This is not surprising as the majority of ESR participants who were trying to gain a unit credit were from the Faculty of Science and Technology (58%). A further 35 percent of students who were participating in the program as part of their unit or course were from the Faculty of Arts and Education (35%). Over half of the students who volunteered to participate in the ESR program (56%) were from the Faculty of Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Science. Only 10 percent of students participating in the ESR program were from the Faculty of Business and Law. Was there a difference between participant attitudes towards undertaking studies that address environmental challenges before and after the Explain, Sustain, Remain program?
30
Figure 3: Student attitudes towards undertaking studies that address environmental sustainability
Figure 3 indicates that the majority of participants, prior to completing the ESR program, regard undertaking environmental sustainability studies as ‘important’ (33%) or ‘very important’ (43%). 12 percent of students were ‘unsure or undecided’ about undertaking such studies, while 11 percent and 1 percent of students thought that environmental sustainability studies were ‘not particularly important’ and ‘completely unimportant’ respectively. The majority of these participants were from the Faculty of Arts and Education. There was no statistical significance between mode of participation (volunteer or credited) and attitudes towards undertaking studies that address environmental sustainability. A large percentage of students participating as part of a unit/course or as a volunteer consider it ‘important’/’very important’ that their studies address environmental sustainability. After completing the ESR program students had an increased attitude towards undertaking studies that address environmental sustainability (46%), with a greater percentage of students regarding environmental sustainability as a ‘very important ‘ (57%) area of study. How many students stated that they would undertake professional development opportunities after completing their degree? Figure 4: Student likeliness of undertaking further studies around environmental sustainability
31
It is evident that students had either a clear direction or were unsure towards undertaking further studies prior to participating in the ESR program. Figure 4 indicates that a higher percentage of students were either ‘unsure’ (26%) or ‘very likely’ (32%) to undertake further studies dealing with environmental sustainability prior to completing the ESR program. 81 percent of students who said they were ‘very likely’ to undertake further environmental sustainability studies were from the Faculty of Science of Technology. This comes as no surprise as many of these students are currently undertaking environmental studies. 43 percent of student who were ‘unsure/don’t know’ how likely they are to undertake further studies were from the Faculty of Arts and Education. After the completion of ESR there was a shift in the number of students likely to undertake further studies dealing with environmental sustainability with over half of students (55%) ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ to complete further studies.
PARTICIPANT KNOWLEDGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Did students with prior involvement in a unit or course with environmental content understand the concept of ‘Environmental Sustainability’ more than students who had undertaken no studies with regards to the environment? Figure 5: Student understanding of ‘Environmental Sustainability’ with/without previous unit addressing environment/sustainability prior to the ESR program
Figure 5 indicates that students who had previously undertaken a unit or course with environment/sustainability content have a greater understanding of environmental sustainability. 60 percent of students who have not undertaken a unit with environment/sustainability content indicated that they understood the concept ‘fairly well’. This was the same for a small percentage of students who tried to undertake an environment/sustainable unit or were unsure if such a unit was available. Did this change after Explain, Sustain, Remain? 32
Figure 6: Student understanding of ‘Environmental Sustainability’ with/without previous unit addressing environment/sustainability after completing the ESR program
Figure 6 indicates that the level of student understanding of ‘Environmental Sustainability’ increased after the completion of the ESR program. Students who responded to the post-test survey indicated that they understood the concept ‘fairly well’; with a greater percentage of students indicating that they understood ‘Environmental Sustainability ‘very well’. Students who had studied an environment/sustainability unit or course prior to the ESR program had a slightly greater understanding of the concept of ‘Environmental Sustainability’ compared to students who had not previously studied environment/sustainability content. However, students who had not previously undertaken a unit with environment/sustainability concepts had increased their understanding in accordance with students with previous environment/sustainability knowledge. Did knowledge on a number of environmental issues increase for students after their involvement in Explain, Sustain, Remain? I.e. climate change, peak oil, sustainable development etc Figure 7: Level of student understanding: Climate change
33
Figure 7 illustrates the progression of student understanding in relation to climate change. Initially the majority of students had a moderate to fair amount of understanding of the concept of climate change. The few students who had little knowledge of climate change prior to the ESR program were from the Faculty of Arts and Education and Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Sciences. The percentage of students whose concept of climate change increased after participating in the ESR program was 62 percent. These students indicated that they now have a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ while 22 percent indicated they now have ‘a lot’ of climate change knowledge. Only 3 percent of students felt that they had ‘little’ climate change knowledge after completing the ESR program. No students left the ESR program without any climate change knowledge! Figure 8: Level of student understanding: Peak oil
Peak oil was a more difficult area for students to grasp prior to the ESR program, as indicated in figure 8. 42 percent of students revealed that they had ‘little knowledge’ and 18 percent had ‘no knowledge’ regarding peak oil prior to participating in the ESR program. There was a significant change in the level of knowledge obtained by participating students after completing the ESR program. 43 percent indicated that they had a‘moderate level of knowledge’ and 38 percent specified that they had a ‘fair amount of knowledge’. This area of study was one of the greatest changes in level of understanding for participating students. Figure 9: Level of student understanding: Sustainable development
34
Figure 9 indicates that the level of understanding of sustainable development initially varied between students, however many students (41%) still specified that they had a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ in this area. After the completion of the ESR program, those students who had ‘no knowledge’ to a ‘moderate level’ had increased their sustainable development understanding significantly, with an 18 percent increase in students with ‘a lot of knowledge’ and almost half of students (49%) indicating that they had a’ fair amount of knowledge’. Figure 10: Level of student understanding: Consumerism and Sustainability
Again consumerism was an area in which students had little understanding of prior to the ESR program, as illustrated in figure 10. This changed significantly after the completion of the program, with 54 percent of students indicating that they had obtained a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ and 30 percent of students with ‘a lot of knowledge’ on consumerism and its relation to environmental sustainability. Interestingly enough, 88 percent of students ‘agree’/’strongly agree’ that consumerism is the most significant factor causing environmental problems. Validating that students understand the concept of consumerism and how it impacts on the environment. Figure 11: Level of student understanding: Government policy on environment
35
Figure 11 illustrates that students have a diverse level of understanding in government policy on the environment. Fewer students had a lot of knowledge prior to completing the ESR program, with more students having ‘little’ to ‘moderate levels of knowledge’. After participating in the ESR program 43 percent of students indicated that they had a ‘moderate level of knowledge’ and 32% with a ‘fair amount of knowledge’. Overall, 83 percent of students had some level of understanding in relation to Government policy and the environment. Figure 12: Level of Student understanding: Business practices and the environment
Figure 12 indicates that there was a significant change in the level of knowledge obtained by participating students on business practices and the environment at the completion of the ESR program. 41 percent of students indicated that they now have a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ in this area, revealing a 27 percent increase prior to participating in the ESR program. 24 percent of students, however, still only have little knowledge relating to business practices and the environment. Students who specified this were mainly from food, waste and water port facilitation groups. Figure 13: Level of Student understanding: Alternative energy sources
36
Knowledge regarding alternative energy sources was another area in which students indicated that they had a ‘fair amount’ of understanding in after participating in the ESR program. Figure 12 reveals that 60 percent of students gained a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ in this area, representing a 31 percent increase. Initially the majority of students (39%) indicated that they had a moderate level of knowledge in this area. Again no students had ‘no knowledge’ in this area after completing the ESR program! Figure 14: Level of Student understanding: Human rights and environmental action
The level of student understanding concerning human rights and environmental action was skewed towards ‘moderate’ to ‘little knowledge’ prior to the ESR program. Figure 14 indicates that initially 72 percent students fell into either ‘moderate level of knowledge’ or ‘little knowledge’. There was a slight increase in the student level of knowledge after completing the ESR program with majority of students (41%) still indicating that they had a ‘moderate level’ of understanding in this area. Figure 15: Level of Student understanding: Environmental impact on human well-being
37
A greater proportion of students indicated that they have a ‘fair amount of knowledge’ after participating in the ESR program. 79 percent of students indicated that they increased their knowledge a‘fair amount’ to ‘a lot’ regarding the environmental impacts on human well-being as a result of participating in the ESR program. There was also an increase in students who ‘strongly agree’ that they will be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years. This also coincided with other countries and Australia as a whole being affected over the next 10 years, indicating that students have a clear understanding of the impact that environmental changes will have on humankind in the future. Overall students increased their level of understanding and knowledge in a variety of environmental sustainability concepts throughout their participation in the ESR program. There are some outstanding areas in which students achieved a greater level of understanding including the concepts of peak oil, business practices and the environment, consumerism and environmental impact on human well-being. These results suggest the ESR program has initiated understanding, developed knowledge and promoted awareness amongst participating students.
38
PARTICIPANT ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Do students feel that their actions as a single individual will not make any difference to achieving environmental sustainability? Figure 16: Individual action towards achieving environmental sustainability
Figure 16 indicates that the majority of students either ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ with the statement ‘my actions as a single individual will not make any difference to achieving environmental sustainability’. This suggests that students are optimistic to make a change in working towards a sustainable environment. A small percentage of students (5%) still agree that their actions as an individual will not contribute to achieving environmental sustainability. Further analysis found that a high percentage of students (49%) ‘strongly agree’ that they will be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years, which may have influenced their response towards acting as a single individual towards sustaining the future environment. Did motivation to get personally involved to work towards environmental sustainability increase for students after their involvement in Explain, Sustain, Remain? Figure 17: Student motivation to get personally involved to achieve environmental sustainability
39
Student motivation to get personally involved to achieve environmental sustainability was evident prior to the ESR program this is not surprising as 34 percent of students volunteered to participate in the program! Students who were initially unmotivated to get personally involved were from the Faculty of Arts and Education and Science and Technology where the majority were completing the ESR program as part of a credited unit. The ESR program strongly motivated 57 percent of participating students to become personally involved to work towards environmental sustainability and a further 32 percent of students agreed that they now are motivated to work towards a sustainable future. Together almost 90 percent of students who participated in the ESR program are now motivated to get personally involved to achieve a more sustainable environment! Do students feel that if they were to change their lifestyle to reduce their personal impact on the environment, that it would it have a negative impact on their quality of life? Figure 18: If I were to change by lifestyle to reduce my personal impact on the environment, it would have a negative impact on my quality of life (decreased)?
Figure 18 indicates that nearly all students (90%) either ‘disagree’/’strongly disagree’ that a change in lifestyle will have a negative impact on the quality of their life. There was a slight increase in students who agreed that a change in their lifestyle will have a negative impact on the quality of their life after participating in the ESR program. The majority of students also revealed that they ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that they personally; Australia as a whole; and other countries will be affected by the impact of environmental changes over the next 10 years (see figures 19-21). The collaboration of these results suggests that the majority of students are optimistic and motivated to change their lifestyle to promote environmental sustainability. Did student views towards being personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years increase after being involved in Explain, Sustain, Remain?
40
Figure 19: Students response to being personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years
As mentioned previously, a large percentage of students ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that they will be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years, as discussed in figure 18. The data in figure 19 indicates that prior to ESR 44 percent of students ‘agreed’ that they would be personally affected while 21 percent were ‘unsure’ or had ‘no opinion’. The ESR program shifted these views where a greater proportion of students (90%) either ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that they would be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years. A small percentage of students (11%) are ‘unsure’ or have ‘no opinion’ of the impacts the environment will present to them personally post the ESR program. Did students feel that Australia as a whole would be affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years? Figure 20: Students response to Australians as a whole affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years
The data in figure 20 illustrate that students believe that Australia as a whole will be affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years. Prior to the ESR program 44 percent of 41
students indicated that they ‘agree’ that Australia will be affected. Post ESR 49 percent of students ‘strongly agreed’ that that they personally and Australia as a whole will be affected in the near future by changes to the environment. The ESR program raised awareness regarding the impact of environmental changes on human health and well-being which may have contributed to the increase in student numbers who strongly agree. A small percentage of students (11%) are ‘unsure’ or have ‘no opinion’ regarding the impacts to Australia as whole. Figure 21: Student response to other countries affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years
The results relating to other countries being affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years somewhat mirrors the student response to personal impacts and Australia as a whole. Figure 21 depicts that ‘strongly agree’ is again a popular student response post the ESR program. 60 percent of students ‘strongly agree’ that other countries will experience environmental impacts over the next 10 years. This represents that more students believe that other countries will be affected compared to Australia as a whole and themselves personally. Overall, the majority of students believe that environmental impacts on human wellbeing, local and internationally, will be evident in the future.
42
STUDENT SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITY Do students feel confident in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual? Figure 22: Student confidence in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual
The data in figure 22 indicates that prior to the ESR program 51 percent of students ‘agreed’ that they are confident in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual. There was a significant increase in student confidence after completing the ESR program, with 49 percent of students indicating that they ‘strongly agree’ and 46 percent of student who ‘agree’ that they felt confident in contributing to environmental sustainability as an individual. The increase in knowledge which was demonstrated in figures 5-15 may represent a relationship between level of knowledge and student confidence in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual. Do students feel that they are unable to communicate well with people in other fields of study about environmental issues? Figure 23: Student communication with people in other fields of study regarding environmental issues
43
There was a slight increase in students’ ability to communicate with different disciplines post ESR as demonstrated in figure 23. Almost half of students (49%) feel that they are able to communicate well with people in other fields of study about environmental issues. The number of students who felt that they could not communicate well with people in other fields of study decreased post ESR, for instance, 12 percent of students prior to ESR stated that they could not communicate well with people about environmental issues, this dropped to 7 percent post ESR. Do students feel well prepared to contribute to achieving environmental sustainability as an employee or professional? Figure 24: Student response to feeling well prepared as an employee/professional contributing to achieving environmental sustainability
The data in figure 24 indicate that the ESR program increased the number of students that felt well prepared as an employee/professional contributing to achieving environmental sustainability. 81 percent of students together ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that they are well prepared to endeavour as an employee/professional in this area. Initially the majority of students (39%) suggested that they were capable of achieving this, however for those students who felt that they were not prepared to contribute professionally, significantly increased there ability to do so. Did students feel well-informed about the causes of environmental problems and what is required for sustainability after their involvement in ESR? Figure 25: Student understanding of the causes of environmental problems and what is required for sustainability
Majority of 44
students ‘agree’ that they feel well-informed about the causes of environmental problems and what is required for sustainability both prior and after their involvement in ESR, as illustrated in figure 25. 95 percent of students ‘agree’/’strongly agree’ that they are well informed about this issue after participating in the ESR program, indicating that nearly all students understand environmental sustainability and what is required to achieve this. Do students feel that they could apply the general skills learned in their course to working on an environmental issue, without having specialist skills? Figure 26: Student response to applying their general skills learned in their course to working on an environmental issue, without having specialist skills
Similarly, majority of participating students indicated that they ‘strongly agree’ that they have the general skills to working on an environmental issue, without having specialist skills, through their involvement in the ESR program. Figure 26 highlights that again 93 percent of students ‘agree’/’strongly agree’ in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN THE FUTURE Do students feel that if things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe? Figure 27: Student response to experiencing a major ecological catastrophe if things continue on their present course
45
Initially, 20 percent of students were ‘unsure/no opinion’ in response to experiencing a major ecological catastrophe if things continue on their present course, as indicated in figure 27. While a large percentage of students (42%) indicated that they ‘agree’ that this could happen prior to participating in the ESR, a large percentage of students opted to ‘strongly agree’ (66%) at the completion of the ESR program. Do students believe that new technologies can solve global warming and allow us to continue to live comfortable lives? Figure 28: Student response to new technologies solving global warming and allowing us to continue our normal lives
Figure 28 illustrates that the perception of new technologies solving global warming and allowing us to continue to live comfortable lives has had little changed in accordance with the ESR program. Students have indicated, both prior and post ESR, that they are ‘unsure’ and have ‘no opinion’ on this aspect of environmental sustainability. The only significant change that has occurred is the percentage of student who ‘strongly disagree’ (6 % increase) that the solution lies in new technology. Further suggests that students believe in acting together as individuals in achieving environmental sustainability, rather than relying on new technologies to solve ecological issues. Do students believe that consumerism is the most significant factor causing environmental problems? Figure 29: Student response to consumerism being the most significant factor causing environmental problems
46
Again, consumerism has been an area of much debate for students, with initial responses changing dramatically after completing the ESR program. Figure 29 displays the significant change in the student response to consumerism being the most major factor causing environmental problems. 41 percent of students were initially ‘unsure/no opinion’ whether consumerism was a significant factor causing environmental problems. Post ESR, 84 percent of students (‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’) highlighted that consumerism was the most significant factor causing environmental problems. Do students feel that we can’t achieve sustainability if we deal with individual environmental issues on their own? Figure 30: My actions as a single individual won’t make any difference to achieving environmental sustainability
Interestingly, the opinions of students varied when it came to individual action in order to achieve environmental sustainability. Figure 30 represents this, indicating that initially the majority of students ‘agreed’ (36%) that we cannot deal with environmental sustainability as individuals alone while 29 percent of student were ‘unsure/ no opinion’. The ESR program allowed students to gain understanding on a diversity of concepts presented by environmental issues. A higher percentage of students who completed the program ‘disagree’ (22%) with this statement and believe that environmental sustainability can be achieved through addressing environmental issues individually, whilst more students also indicating that they ‘strongly agree’ (22%) that we can’t achieve sustainability if we deal with individual issues on their own. Do students feel that to achieve an environmentally sustainable world, most countries will have to stabilise or decrease their populations?
47
Figure 31: Student response to stabilising or decreasing world populations, to achieve environmental sustainability
Figure 31 illustrates that 36 percent of students initially indicated that they were ‘unsure/no opinion’ towards stabilising or decreasing world populations to achieve environmental sustainability. This changed significantly after completing the ESR program, with over half of students (53%) either ‘agreeing’ or strongly agreeing’ that world populations must be stabilised or decreased. 30 percent of students were still unsure about this issue and a small percentage of students disagreed with this statement. Do students feel optimistic that humankind will achieve an environmentally sustainable future? Figure 32: Student optimism that humankind will achieve an environmentally sustainable future
It was interesting to discover that a large percentage of students were either ‘unsure/no opinion’ or ‘agree’ that they are optimistic in humankind achieving environmental sustainability both prior and post the ESR program, as indicated in figure 32. A higher percentage of students felt that are ‘strongly’ optimistic (22%) in humankinds ability to achieve a sustainable future, 48
while only a small percentage of students changed their opinion after completing the ESR program.
DESIGNING THE IDEAL EDUCATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM What were the main benefits of participation in the ESR program for students? Prior to participating in the ESR program…. “Tools to be able to make a difference!” “To be inspired/energised to make change in terms of sustainability and climate change” “I will be able to pass the knowledge to others” “Gaining perspectives of opinions in multiple fields” After participating in the ESR program…. “The ability to confidently communicate sustainable ideas and issues” “Meet people from many backgrounds working towards a goal, which is to protect the environment and the natural resources” “Volunteer and green job connections” “Awareness of groups/activism/resources” What did students say was the most effective mode of delivery for environmental sustainability based on ESR and why? Figure 34: Mode of delivery for environmental sustainability based on the ESR program
49
Students were asked to rank the most effective mode of delivery for educating future students on environmental sustainability based on their participating in the ESR program. Figure 34 illustrates that 62 percent of students based their first preference as a trandisciplinary ‘dedicated’ unit as the most effective mode of delivery. 27 percent of students indicated that environmental sustainability content should be embedded throughout ‘all’ units of an existing degree as their first preference. Overall the majority of students believe that the most effective mode of delivering environmental sustainability content should be offering Deakin university students a ‘dedicated’ unit, followed by content embedded in ‘all’ units of an existing degree and lastly content ‘embedded’ within an existing unit. “I think it should be a transdisciplinary unit because the environment is affecting everyone and many non-environmental students could gain valuable knowledge” “Sustainability principles contradict with fundamental business principles. Therefore they need to be combined rather than taught separately” “It would loose its essence if it was not delivered through the creative delivery and with cross-faculty students. This is key! It is an issue that everyone should have to learn about and make new contacts and have perspectives from people in all areas. This issue affects everyone” “I think everyone should do it! It's the only way we will ever really make a difference” What did students say was the best way to deliver environmental sustainability based on ESR and why? Figure 35: Best way to deliver environmental sustainability based on the ESR program
50
Students indicated that environmental sustainability education should be mandatory unit (68%) for all Deakin University undergraduate students, as illustrated in figure 35. Students indicated that environmental sustainability education should be offered as a major (32%) for students in all undergraduate courses as their second preference of delivery, while 43 percent indicated that it should be an elective as their third preference. “All students need to be made aware of environmental issues and making it mandatory is important” “This project inspired me beyond belief, why not give other students the opportunity to see what is really going on in the world and let them get passionate about it” “People may not realise it even exists. Everyone needs to learn about these issues to keep it multi-disciplinary” Figure 36: Most effective and relevant year to offer a unit on environmental sustainability based on the ESR program
It was interesting to discover what students believed to be the most effective and relevant year to offer a unit on environmental sustainability based on their participation in the ESR program, as highlighted in figure 36. Students firstly preferred the unit to be offered to students in their first year of studies (41%), followed by second year (35%) and third year (22%). Students did not acknowledge a postgraduate unit in their ‘first preference’ of effective mode of delivery. The majority of students indicated ‘first year’ as their ‘first preference’ (41%), second year as their ‘second preference’ (38%), third year as their ‘third preference’ (27%) and postgraduate studies as their ‘fourth preference’ (43%). It is important to note, however, that 72.9 percent of students stated that a unit in environmental sustainability should be taught in second year as their first and second preference. This is reflected in the comments by students below: “I think the latter years of the degree all come together for students- making connections between and consolidating on what it’s taught. Environmental sustainability would integrate well at this time” “When students are young and impressionable they absorb more” 51
“By offering the unit in first year, students have a foundation to interrelate the knowledge throughout their degree. I feel the current offering to third year students was also beneficial, as we are heading into the professional workforce and can adapt sustainability into our practices- useful for considering prospective employers” “If interests can be developed in 2nd year, students have the opportunity to redirect their studies in another sustainability/environment orientated direction for their final year of studies”
What key aspects of the ESR did students enjoy most? Figure 37: What students enjoyed about the ESR program
The majority of students were ‘satisfied’ with the ‘journey metaphor’, ‘boat building’ and ‘port’ activities presented in the ESR program, as illustrated in figure 37. A higher percentage of students indicated that they were ‘very satisfied’ with the port facilitation groups (26%) compared to the journey metaphor and boat building activities. “The launch was very inspirational, yet confronting as the issues addressed propose a daunting future. However it was great to hear the speakers own personal journey and positively! Great night-well done” “I think everything was excellent- for those not studying environment (studies), I think incorporating field trips will help to grasp concepts and visualise the theory discussed week to week” “(I) liked the alternative arts performances, great idea to see sustainability in a new light”
52
Figure 38: What students enjoyed about the ESR program
Again, majority of students were ‘satisfied’ with the various activities of the ESR program, as illustrated in figure 38. 66 percent of students highlighted that they were ‘very satisfied’ with working with students from other faculties. “(It was beneficial) meeting new people and learning new perspectives” Students also indicated that they were satisfied with the reference letters and certificates provided by the ESR program port group facilitators. How satisfied were student experiences from the Explain, Sustain, Remain Launch? Figure 39: Student satisfaction with the ESR program launch
Figure 39 illustrates student’s satisfaction of the ESR program launch, where most participants were again either ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with the launch activities.
53
“The overall program was really good. Was planned and implemented by the students and the dedicated Deakin staff. Hats off for arranging a 'green snacks' to go along with the subject” Figure 40: Student satisfaction with guest speakers at the ESR program launch
Figure 41: Student satisfaction with environmental sustainability content presented at the ESR program launch
How satisfied were students with the facilitation of ESR?
54
Figure 42: Student Satisfaction with the ESR program workshop facilitation
“Cross faculty composition was mostly environment students, encouraging/enforcing more of a mix, could make it better. Group discussion and exchange of opinion was really good, especially with cross faculty and facilitators” “Learning facilitators were really helpful and very satisfied with their help. An increase in the number of workshops would be a suggestion” Figure 43: Student satisfaction with the ESR program content
“The cross-faculty makeup is the best part of this program including how the facilitators came from different backgrounds. Brian and Sonia were great. It’s a shame that we didn't get more of an opportunity to really delve deep into the issues” 55
How satisfied were students with the Green Jobs and Volunteering Expo? Figure 44: Student satisfaction with the Green Jobs and Volunteering Expo
“The presentations were an excellent way for sharing the different perspectives of the different ports” “I thought this was a really good way to end the session. The presentations were short but gave good insight into opportunities. The broad range of people in the expo and the variety of opportunities were also great. Really enjoyed talking to the lady from theatre group vox bandicoot” “Green jobs and volunteering was very helpful and provided direct information and opportunities to speak to employers about the types of jobs available and the types of volunteers opportunities available”
56
STUDENT AND STAFF FOCUS GROUPS
“We need to model for the students what we want them to do…we’ll work together across faculties, we’ll battle with our different paradigms and we’ll give it to you…so that they can have the faith and trust that they can go and do it” (Staff)
Pre-implementation Focus Groups The key themes that emerged from the three pre-implementation focus groups are concerned with the richness and messiness of interdisciplinary collaboration, in particular: a) the stimulation and challenge of interdisciplinary work; b) the need for an open and social process to provide time and space to negotiate different knowledge paradigms and find a shared way forward; c) the critical role of individual qualities of respect, goodwill, flexibility and commitment to the project; and d) the sense of professional benefit from the interaction, including adapting teaching approaches. Table 4 elaborates these themes through some of the participants’ comments. Table 4: Themes and Focus Group Comments: Interdisciplinary Work Themes 1.The challenge of interdisciplinary work
Examples of focus group comments
We thought we were starting out with an agenda but in fact we were building an agenda through those first meetings and at times…I thought…is this going to fall apart, because there is so much complexity and diversity here…but I think it’s come together really well.
I thought one of the real positives was the cross disciplinary approach and being exposed to different teaching approaches, but also different ways of looking at environmental issues, so different perspectives, has been really beneficial.
You know what I think works well? Giving people time, building kid of rapport, and people feel safe…that kind of group dynamics that people’s opinions are valuable and respected, and the sharing of food.
I found the process fantastic and sometimes a bit kind of scary, kind of not knowing who everyone was and where we were coming from… 57
2. Need for time and an open, face to face process
3. The high degree of respect, goodwill, commitment and interest/openness to others’ ideas and ways of doing things
Taking risks. Having arguments when need be. It was all part of it.
We need to model for the students what we want them to do…we’ll work together across faculties, we’ll battle with our different paradigms and we’ll give it to you…so that they can have the faith and trust that they can go and do it
The workshops have been great and the time element, it has taken time to evolve as content as well as a group
[time between meetings] I needed the time to come to terms with what I thought it was at the start was not what it was, what it is, and that took a bit of thinking
[the workshops] were very important for getting the perspectives from the different points of view, the different faculties…I can’t imagine any other way…that would have given the same sort of input and learning for me.
[having continuity for each participant is] really part of it; you’ve got to stick with the serious work of getting that negotiation done…[including] many of the social forms of the thing, getting together, sharing food, being a bit open and vulnerable
I feel a sense of ownership of what came out of it…because we did develop it and we did thrash it out together and in the end … I’m really quite excited
I find the input from everyone and the sense of goodwill and the sense of wanting to work together on something has been overwhelming and I’m so excited about that.
I’ve loved the food-sharing and talking about other things and kind of building a rapport…
I feel that people’s commitment has come from a sense of frustration of what we can do, and channeling that into this is a good thing, this is a worthwhile, practical, good thing to do…so it comes from that place which may override the territoriality and familiarity pools 58
4.Professional enrichment 5.The excitement of encountering new people and ideas, and new and creative ways of seeing the material and of teaching it
2.
I thought an important part, and valuable experience for me, was to meet people from different faculties around the university and people from beyond the university
I found it like some learning process, but how it’s impacted on my other work. I found it liberating to take risks and do other things and relate to students in a more kind of human way.
It was interesting to get a feel for the way other people think and look at these sorts of climate change issues, because we come from a very…disciplinary science and…analytical point of view.
I’d like to think about the research outcome…in terms of papers and conference presentations and things that might come out of this from a research perspective
I think it’s shaken and changed some of my concepts in the area of sustainability and it’s brought in a whole lot of areas…it’s put me in touch with people and ideas that I don’t think I would have normally come in contact with. We’ve been thinking of sustainability in an environmental way over there, and…that becomes like a bulge or a distortion…
To see people come through and that process has been the most interesting [for me]…I thought that [the process] was quite innovative and new and ideas are quite abstract. You can sort of throw them around and whatever, but humans engaging with each other and not cracking shits and carrying on like a two-bob watch or whatever…but how do you do that and still sort of keep the project going on, and so I’ve really enjoyed that and the sort of passion people have brought to that.
Composition of the Reference Group
Participants were also asked to comment on the composition of the reference group. Suggested additions from the university were the architecture and design and education faculties and politics and hard science representatives. Representatives from industry and the indigenous and student communities were also mentioned. However there was concern about the logistical nightmare of successfully working with a group any larger than the existing one. The need to 59
engage students appropriately was discussed in some detail; it was generally felt that the project would benefit from student involvement but that there might be better ways to involve students or get feedback from them, for example about the timing, content and format of the course. Involving recent graduates rather than undergraduates was mentioned as an alternative, and to provide extra insight into the interface between the university experience and the ‘real’ world. 3. Anticipating student response to the Unit. The first set of focus groups occurred at the stage when the curriculum was largely in place but prior to teaching. Participants were asked to anticipate the students’ response to the course. The optimistic expectation was excitement about the content and the fact that it is different and interdisciplinary, and that they would be attracted to being involved in something innovative. The main concerns were:
too much reading material, especially as they had been told that drama students don’t read, the quantity of material to be covered in a short time, the different knowledge levels of students, in particular the sophistication of the environmental science students compared to the other students, and issues caused by some students doing the course as part of a unit and being assessed for their involvement and others participating as volunteers; in particular that volunteers were more likely to drop out.
These issues were revisited in the post-implementation discussion and also with students, and are dealt with in more detail there. 5.
Responses to the finished Unit and suggestions for changing it
Participants were asked about the final curriculum and whether they thought the small group format was the most appropriate for the material and the interdisciplinary work to be done. They were asked whether alternatives such as online learning would be appropriate in the future to deliver the unit to a larger student group. They were also asked to comment on the content of the curriculum. Table 5 describes their responses and comments. Table 6 tabulates ideas for future delivery. The key themes emerging from this reflection were:
the importance of small group and face to face interaction although there were different views about how that should work; the value of a combination of online learning and use of current student communication and learning media with face to face contact, the need to manage the content so it was stimulating but not overwhelming given the tight time constraints, and anticipated outcomes of energized motivated students.
60
Table 5: Reflections on the prepared unit, its delivery mode and anticipated student responses Themes 1.The value of small groups and face to face group work
Examples of focus group comments
2.Types of communication – a mix of online, their preferred communication media and face to face
3.The need to manage the information and emotional content so it was stimulating but not overwhelming given the tight time constraints
Facilitated small groups are definitely the way to help them grapple with the issues If you get groups bigger than a critical number of, say, five, you get freeloaders…also it more or less represents the four faculties… That [high student: staff ratios] is not a model I’d use…If you’ve got two teachers…with thirteen students, they’re going to want to talk to them…the whole point of these sort of things is to take the teaching off…you’re there to facilitate, you’re there to encourage and inspire and get them working… The whole idea is to get people from different backgrounds, different perspectives, to meet together and even in chats online it doesn’t work like that. It’s a lot more spontaneous to talk than to…type in this little idea…In a group, you’ll say it. We need to be…inspiring students to want to unpack these issues more. That will only happen if they gain inspiration from one another and from the people who are transmitting the information to them and sharing it with them. The students from Science and Tech…will be coming in at a completely different level to some of the other students…it might work well because the environmental students can take the lead on some of the discussions…and that’s where the multi-disciplinary approach I think will work really well. Originally we were thinking about an online type of set-up and it’s much better to have them in the class faceto-face, just small discussions. Part of me wants to send SMSs to them as a way of learning and the other part wants to sit them down and ‘we need to talk about this and you need to have a voice’. I’m very much in favour of working in small groups as well as the technology stuff, but not one extreme or the other. Using technology…ones they actually deal with like, why not YouTube stuff and why not Facebook… Online for resources and for discussions outside the meeting time, perfect…but I think there need to be meetings face-to-face. I think there’s a really good mix with energy, water, the food, natural and built environments [and waste]. The difficulty is, how do you pick up which is the most important issue to deal with? …we don’t actually know the level of sophistication that we’re starting from and so I…think we…need to make sure that we have got…two levels of reading, the quick amount that fits into the hour that’s allocated for each port , but also, for those who have already covered that, they can actually just go and explore something in more depth…if they feel like it’s stuff they’ve already done, they won’t be very excited. I think it’s already groaning at the sides…with content…but I’d like a political critique…I’m talking about
4.Anticipated outcomes of energized motivated students
5.
everyday…what the hell’s Penny Wong doing?…What’s the role of money? Why aren’t the Greens a more powerful force? I think those things like policy and economics and legislation…will come through when the students are thinking about, well, how do we prevent this hard landing in 2030? Our job is to get into that problem [of the complexity of issues] where we meet with them, because some of them are pretty ‘Well, that’s easy. We should just do it this way’. They wouldn’t be able to talk [about the complexities] if the information was pitched at too high a level We’re trying to cover an awful lot in a small amount of time…My only concern is that some students might feel a bit disempowered at the end of it, that how can we solve these issues…my view would…be to make it a bit smaller so that it’s sort of bite-sized… We need to make sure not to overwhelm them with reading…because I know students always complain about how many readings there are for their units, and this is voluntary, so overloading them with too much I think will mean that they might drop out, or…feel this is all too much…Not just the module, the problem. If it’s engaging, if it’s relevant and they can see a point to it, you will find that they will react and take it on board and they’ll take it even further than you could expect, down the track. The way I see it is that we’re giving [the students] a taste of this and they’re thinking about the big issues, how we use our skills, share ideas to prevent this hard landing, and at the end of it hopefully they are left with some inspiration and some big questions of how do I contribute to this and what can I do next? How you can engage in the community on these issues and be a facilitator or livewire, if you like. Or I would like to do an honours research project… I think they will go away with both a heightened sense of the importance of sustainability and also a greater passion for it…we need to give them a sense of empowerment and I think they will have that.
The future
The discussion of the future was a small part of the pre-implementation focus group and the responses were fairly patchy, probably due in large part to the concerns about the imminent delivery of the pilot rather than a theoretical roll-out down the track. The central themes were: 62
maintaining a dynamic approach to the future of the model to account for changing issues and larger student numbers and maintaining a mixed media and face to face model
Table 6: Ideas for the ideal future program Themes 1.Maintaining a dynamic approach to the future of the model to account for changing issues and larger student numbers
Examples of focus group comments
We will learn out of this process. That’s the idea of the pilot. We need to understand that we’ve built something that is going to change itself, and we can’t hope to hold it as we would like it to be because next year the issues are going to be slightly different. If we were able to build in flexibility, then students could take the angles that are relevant to them…At the international, at the national, at personal level? What I think will ultimately happen is…rather than a linear arrangement of ports or information …some sort of mind map with something at the centre and the other things link into it.
2.Maintaining a mixed media and face to face model
I’m not sure if [people] who are going to be involved in this…understand…the idea of what facilitated learning is, what the enquiry-based learning is…If you get an army of casual tutors…there might need to be training of the tutors. If that [high student:staff ratios] was the model for the thousand, it just simply wouldn’t work anyway with staffing costs. It would blow out ridiculously. I think there will be a bit of trouble with…scoping because some of the material is international, some is national…or even state, whether we’re talking about personal sustainability or …national sustainability… …the issues of public change, and that’s kind of PR, Green marketing, those kind of campaigns, what works, what doesn’t, how you get[change]…I think there actually has been a significant change, and it’s not driven by money… We are trying to get students to come to an understanding of the material and then develop strategies forward. One of the best ways for doing that is in conversation with other people. A combination of DSO and facilitated meetings would be the way to go
63
Post-Implementation Focus Groups The post-implementation groups discussed the development process and delivery of the Unit as well as ideas about the future. These are outlined in tables 7 (Development and Delivery) and Table 8 (The Future). The comments about the development process build on those made in the first set of focus groups, so for brevity this section deals only with additional comments. Key themes about the project overall were:
the lack of time for a final reflection on and knowledge of the content of the ports, the difficult logistics of involvement in the development and teaching process (especially for the regional campuses), and the domination of the teaching over the research component of the research.
Participants talked about students’ and their own responses to Unit and the mode of delivery. The main themes were:
lack of time for activities as well as information and group work the generally positive impressions of how the Unit was implemented, mixed views about the first and last session; the contribution of young presenters (the drama students and Victoria), the film Freak Out? and the group presentations on the last night were highlights strategies for promoting critical engagement and activism and open up potential to act in a range of different ways the very different ways that the teaching and learning process was managed by port facilitators and the need to work with emotional responses students doing the course as volunteers was seen as an issue for regional groups but did not seem to have been a major factor at all in Melbourne, even though students were aware that some were getting course credits and others were not. the range of perceptions of the professional value of the experience and perceived outcomes for students - appreciation of the contribution other knowledges and skills can offer to issues of sustainability; new skills, experience of negotiating in the interdisciplinary space and tangible acknowledgement.
64
Table 7: Development and Delivery of the Unit Themes 1.Lack of time for a final reflection on and knowledge of the content of the ports
Examples of focus group comments
2.Difficult logistics of involvement and meeting attendance
3.The domination of the teaching over the research component of the research
4.Accreditation versus volunteer participation as an issue for students
5.Mixed responses to the launch
All of a sudden we were almost up to the delivery date and we all had to go and work individually to put together the ports and we never actually sat down and looked at how they worked, how the content was going to sit will all the ports together, so we never actually viewed the whole program at any stage. Everybody knew where we were going and where we were coming from…and it became easier to develop the activities within the group We didn’t really have a total overview of what was happening in each of the ports. Most of the meetings were when I was teaching, so I felt that I wasn’t able to really contribute and it was difficult to keep up with the development Maybe we could look at processes for those who can’t make it; we tried our best to liaise and come up to speed but… In the context of time you didn’t always look at the resources thoroughly…that was also a challenge for the students It’s become more like a teaching exercise to me than a research project…we could have touched in more as we were moving through: what are the research objectives, what are we going to actually produce out of this in terms of research papers and so on… Trying to think about the content was quite tricky without a sort of [educational] framework if you like, the methodology that we were planning to use It is equally important to document what we’ve done and maybe we did loose a bit of the focus on the research aspects Some of the things that we’ve tried to do, like the student focus groups, we didn’t think through the logistics. The post-questionnaire was too long and detailed I was surprised at how few students dropped out…most of the people who were doing it just for interest stayed They thought they were lucky because they didn’t have to feel stressed about the presentation and they could just enjoy doing it… The comment was made[by staff asked to promote the project]that it would have made a lot more interest if there had been assessment at stake…that might have impacted on their commitment to explaining it and…getting students They were basically positive, but the thing that stood out for them was that film Freak Out?…which seemed 65
and finale
6.Lack of time for activities as well as information and group work in the ports
7.Strategies for promoting critical engagement and activism and open up potential to act in a range of
to somehow crystallize things for them…and peak oil was another area they were quite confused about…but the point of that session is to just spark their interest, curiosity, and set the scene…it was a bit long The launch was a bit more heavily on the instructive side than it perhaps should have been We were trying to get some baseline information across…maybe there’s another way of doing that before they arrive at the first session I felt that the drama presentations were one of the things that spun it on…it just seemed to go a little too long…students were sort of falling off their chairs Winter at night was hard for them [Victoria from Environment Victoria]…Throughout the later sessions the students talked about how inspirational she was, so somebody I think as involved as she is obviously connected to them [The final session] worked well. Everybody was really excited to see each other’s presentations… What perhaps didn’t work was the Expo following immediately after. Everyone was exhausted and had had it. You have to think about people’s energy endurance levels By the time you showed a video, did a bit of this, did a bit of that, you wouldn’t have actually given them any time to talk, or they were just talking and there was no kind of context We were trying to do so much in such a short amount of time… We changed the way we delivered it quite a bit…to make sure they were covering the core stuff which everyone needed to do, but then not getting too many activities because they actually needed to talk We actually spent a lot of time in discussion…going over say the readings they might have done...and where they both stood in terms of their own understandings and …professional trajectories…they’d often go home and do the extra readings If they were really interested in finding out more they could go and watch the video It would have been fantastic [for the regional students] to be able to link in and we had a timetabling issue there….and we just couldn’t do it There wasn’t time for the students to develop their presentation, so I think both were being compromised a bit and the students had to find spaces and time…beyond what they actually signed up for…although all the students pretty much didn’t worry about the extra time. They were very happy to stay on provided they didn’t have something straight after The sense of sustainability that was portrayed…was very grassroots, transition towns, permaculture It’s upsetting the certainty that students would bring to their beliefs and kind of making them, even the environment students…question it They could cope with the idea of the apocalypse...but they were struggling to cope with a tough landing. They 66
different ways
8.The very different ways that the teaching and learning process was managed by port facilitators and the need to work with emotional responses
weren’t really able to take on what they would regard as…total deprivation of things that they have taken for granted…I found that they just couldn’t get their heads around that very uncomfortable ‘what the future really might be like’ space I talked [to my group] about the Purple Sage Project and…the idea of different layers of activism…It would be good to have a checklist to say these are the sorts of things that need to be dealt with From the Science and Technology point of view…the Environmental Management students…were thinking along those lines of policy…rather than grassroots, but that…was good because…they could think about what can I do myself Because I’m the industry rep, I kept also bringing the idea of NGOs and role of NGOs and how their[the students’] influence can be extended through their engagement with a group that’s engaging at a higher order level …education faculty, or sort of theory of learning, theory of knowledge, given that we were trying to do something transdisciplinary there wasn’t really much…input from people who have been working in that area I think one of the strengths is being in the same location… once I got them with butchers paper on the floor [away from the desks] things seemed to really kick off I set up an email group…to communicate about [the next week’s content] but also if something came up in the session I’d just…put together some material and email it…because it was quite topical the next week I gave them copies of the newspaper discussions and all the issues…that seemed to keep it bubbling along I had a lot of communication via email with my group…and it was much more informal and the feedback got very free to discuss things, bring ideas… A couple of students made comments…about ‘it was great to be in a small group’ The vision of building the boat and visiting the ports didn’t quite link with the reality of what the students were doing. It’s sort of overwhelmingly huge and so there was a lot of casting around initially to try to focus, but [that] wasn’t a formal part of the procedure…scoping is an important part of focusing…the second session sort of panic took over and they just grabbed something The students didn’t have enough time to feel and let their emotions come out, that we didn’t kind of factor that in…those resistances and tensions and contradictions, they’re really important times We talked about that journey process of taking time to go on this journey. That seems very important, so from what they heard on the first day to the last day, where they went was significantly moved, significantly changed. [in response to one speaker about market manipulation] there was a lot of anger and outrage…anything like 67
9.Range of perceptions of the professional value of the experience
10.Student Outcomes – appreciation of the contribution other knowledges and skills can offer to issues of sustainability; new skills, experience of negotiating in the interdisciplinary space and tangible acknowledgement
that where there appeared to be an injustice…but we didn’t give them time to sit back and say, ‘well in a better world what would happen?’ We found ourselves fighting all the time not to get into the lecture, didactic mode all the time, because you knew time was short. You wanted to present the material so they could process it, but It’s been a busy trimester, but it was just great being able to be working with people from different faculties and students from different faculties and to be doing something that was really quite different to the normal units that we run. I would have liked to have had a science and a non-science person as the co-facilitators…because I ended up having to try to be on top of all the science stuff as well as everything else...so that I feel that we lost a little a bit of opportunity for the teaching staff to learn from one another. It was a really sort of refreshing insight into other ways to deal with the material. It’s given me a chance to work much more closely with both staff from the environment school and also across then broader across the university, so it’s given me a better understanding of how the university works. I think that was incredibly valuable for them, just to sort of take that step back and look at how others might perceive their profession I think the students also really valued the certificate and reference at the end. …the same cohort did…another subject and the skills they’d leant in ESR clearly turned up in their final presentations …it was a complete step up from last year’s presentations…they learnt a lot more innovation from the drama students Even though we I didn’t have any drama students…they all commented on what a great contribution they had…somehow it seemed to have some synergy with them…and [nutrition health and science] they got so much from each other Some of the environmental students were sort of knocked back a little that the other students didn’t quite have the same points of view…That challenged them a bit, but the drama students also brought out quite a bit from some of the environmental students who were sort of a little bit in reserve The enviro students were explaining quite a few concepts to the other students…however they were horrified at the lack of knowledge and understanding…and the fact that they did have to explain things that seemed absolutely basic to them…they also had trouble with the…economic rationalist point of view…the learning that the enviro students took out of the mixed group was the fact that the rest of the world doesn’t think idealistically like they do
68
The Future: Sustainability in the Curriculum The development of a permanent Unit provoked a number of ideas about how sustainability enters into the curriculum of the university. There was less cohesion here about the ideal design, although a number of themes emerged:
whether the unit should be integrated into all courses, whether it should be a stand alone offering open to students from all faculties and designed to be interdisciplinary or a combination of both, whether it should be mandatory or an elective, how prescriptive or open the curriculum could/should be and the need for a shared assessment task, maintain a general event for all the students, and pitch the Unit at second or third year level, hand over the Green Jobs forum to Careers.
Table 8: The Future Design Themes
Examples of focus group comments
1.Placement within the university: whether the unit should be integrated into all courses, whether it should be a stand alone offering open to students from all faculties and designed to be interdisciplinary or a combination of both,
2.That the Unit should be pitched at third or possibly second year students
I guess if they explore some concepts in their own course and then enrol in the unit It would be great to see a stand-alone unit, but also to see that the principles of sustainability are integrated into all courses and maybe it’s our [the Project’s] duty to advocate for that You’d have to set up a central area for it, or you could set your ports within different faculties where it was appropriate…so they would be moving around the uni I would envisage…the different facilitators to come to them
I wouldn’t want to be doing it with first year students. I think having third year students was great, because they’re actually starting to think about themselves in the real world, both professionally and personally, and I think that…might have been one of the reasons they stayed with it, because it is feeling relevant They could bring more knowledge around sustainability in their area into the debate than…otherwise 69
3.How prescriptive or open the curriculum could/should be and the need for a shared assessment task
4.Keep the concept of a general event for all the students 5.Hand over the Green Jobs forum to Careers
My feeling is third year because there are some pretty sophisticated concepts in there and I think it takes a lot of maturity to come to terms with them. I could see third years enjoyed what they did. They didn’t find it greatly challenging because…they had the skills…I’m wondering whether second year without the distraction of ‘the end is nigh’. A wholly different approach…I believe that the people who are setting up the curriculum have a broad direction for what it is, then they’ve got to have the faith and courage not to make it prescriptive, and …to grab from the environment around us as it happens, so that its relevant…But you can’t plan for that when you’ve got to go and get the unit approved. In terms of overall curriculum I think that a stronger sense of some of the insights from policy studies and those kind of social science disciplines would…broaden out the material a bit more We could incorporate all the ports and port visits…it would be much more of a sort of learning experience and evolution…for the students’ understanding of the impacts of climate change if we did that. Ideally I would see one assessment task which is the final product and that’s it. Having marked the pieces of paper that my students gave back, they did put a lot of thinking into the questions that were asked and [they] were simply the stages of the four sessions that we had…also “what’s it look like in 2030?...and a definition of sustainability…it seemed to have focused their thoughts. You could offer, say, ten sessions and say ‘ you must choose five’. Deliver a couple of the [student] presentations…to say this is what has gone before A whole big session and then later they would have their specific areas of study that they wanted to do
Get Careers to organize it If you actually had the Expo towards the end of the Unit it could have helped with the presentations
70
Student Focus Groups Students who participated in the focus groups were overwhelmingly positive, but not uncritical. They were excited by the interdisciplinary aspects of the unit, by the quality of the information, and by the learning processes. Many were overwhelmed by the amount of information but hoped to go back to read it. The ports gave them a sense of focus for their group work although they wanted to learn about other areas to more successfully link the different areas. The issue of assessment was significant, with groups needing to negotiate around others’ needs. Many of them were energized and motivated to go on to learn more or to take action personally or socially. They were full of suggestions for the future of the Program. Table 9 focuses on the main themes of their experience. The themes were:
their anticipation that the Unit would be fun and their interest in the content as well as the interdisciplinary aspect, the positive and challenging experience of interaction with other faculties and perspectives, and the acquisition of new skills that the difference in assessment expectations was an issue and assessment should occur for everyone and be uniform the excellent but somewhat overwhelming quality of the information presented and the sense of new knowledge and understanding time pressure, support for the small group face to face model, links with current events and informal interaction via email as well as for more structured information delivery, mixed views about the one port focus, with support for it as a way to limit the amount of material to be covered but only getting a piece of the jigsaw increased personal engagement and motivation, and motivation to act personally and to influence other people.
Thinking about a future version of the Unit, there were mixed ideas about future course placement and content, but most thought it should be mandatory at some stage in the course and run for a whole trimester and there was considerable interest in the unit including a practical project.
71
Table 9: Student responses to the Unit
Themes 1.They anticipated fun and interest in the content as well as the interdisciplinary aspect
Examples of focus group comments
2.The positive and challenging experience of interaction with other faculties and perspectives, and the acquisition of new skills
3.That the difference in assessment
It sounded really fun. When we first got told it was going to be a volunteer thing …and just about everyone signed up and …then we got [told it would be assessed] which was even better news. It sounds really shallow but the reference letter at the end sounded pretty good..a really cool idea. I like that it was inter-faculty stuff…and that it was climate change I want to mix more with local students I had lots of environmental science students and they had really different points of view and they learnt stuff form us and we learnt stuff from them…I found that really valuable. The way that other people work differently to you, like environmental students don’t want to do drama stuff but we could work around that through discussion…that’s what I enjoyed One of the girls in our group she kept saying ‘can I just stand there, we’ll do a PowerPoint…and we had to encourage her that you can do it…she felt really good I think it was hard being with different students I still think that we learnt a lot…I didn’t know much about the topic at first and ..they would quickly go ‘ah, no sorry, that’s not quite right’ and they would literally help me out in understanding it and at first…I felt a bit stupid…and then I sort of thought ‘no, no, it’s good that I’m learning because otherwise how would I have known Even when we weren’t talking about the project it was nice to mix with different people who had different ways of looking at things Learning form a different world of perspectives…like from an environmental perspective…learning that sort of stuff I found interesting in actually seeing how everything interconnects I thought it was good that everyone cared about the environment so we can do things together We didn’t get the mix, they were either just health or environment…I am a little bit disappointed…and I lost out on the whole I think [we enviros needed time to reflect] for the health and the drama…because we don’t think that way so it’s important for us too. I’ve learnt the implications of health on the environment…you can’t just focus on the environment [I’ve learnt] the reasons for saving water If you’re working as a group the assessment for that group should be the same for every individual 72
expectations was an issue and assessment should occur for everyone and be uniform
4.The excellent quality of the information/content presented and the sense of new knowledge and understanding
5.Time pressure
6.Support for the small group face to face model, links with current events
There was a bit of a panic in our group thinking this is worth 60% and…the other 3 people in our group were going ‘this is only worth 15%’ There is a reason for working on presentation skills but you have to incorporate presentation skills…from the word go…every class has a presentation element.. I wasn’t getting marked on it and I did find I sort of slacked off a bit when it came to the group project…I felt like I was letting you guys down a bit because you were getting marked on it I felt a disjointedness between people who were getting marked and people who weren’t I know I didn’t do any of the readings or anything because I was like ‘well I don’t really need to’…I would have found them really interesting and I will probably go back and read them Small goups were good because we had xx and we really got to be on a good level with her and we were really comfortable to ask her anything We got some really good facts but the quality of the information was terrific and I couldn’t have researched all that, but there was also too much…I hope the DSO is still open…when this course is open I might have time to read some of the information The readings for homework…were so clear it was really easy to access the readings and…[they] were probably the most interesting readings I’ve had at university I thought all of xx’s slide shows, projections, explanations, mini-lectures, but she wasn’t talking at us she was having a discussion with us and giving us informative talk and they were brilliant The expo – we had lots of discussions about where you could volunteer and through local councils what you could do. So in that respect we got practical knowledge All the way through it was like ‘oh really’; like it was all interesting. I think the ah-ha moment was kind of when we watched The History Of Stuff…it just made everything connect…more of an ethical point of view I think it clicked for me when I was sitting watching the news and stuff and it sort of linked the big picture up and I’d think ‘oh I get that now’ and it was sort of like giving me that information, picture information. You do learn to interconnect every aspect of the world and how it impacts environmentally and socially…and it’s also broadened everyone’s perspective of how it all works It’s not too much information and you can concentrate just on that port and become knowledgeable about it It was great that we could see at the end what the other ports have been learning, so we could do a short-cut quick summary It would be valuable if we could have invited say parents and friends to that last presentation because I’ve been telling my parents about this for weeks More structure 73
and informal interaction via email as well as for more structured information delivery
7.Mixed views about the one port focus, with support for it as a way to limit the amount of material to be covered but only getting a piece of the jigsaw
8.Increased personal engagement and motivation
I wanted more time. I felt that there was so much information and such little time that I felt over-loaded and I couldn’t process and think about everything at once and therefore I sort of got lost in information. 2 hours seems kind of a more reasonable time You have only got 6 people so you got to know those people and you were able to talk and mix Maybe some group camaraderie sort of activities together With our group we didn’t have separation…everyone was together on everything and we worked really well…we did activities and it was really good…I think it depends on the group maybe People need discussion, people need hands on[not online at any stage in degree] I wouldn’t have minded the odd lecture as a big group perhaps, maybe like every second week or so just to get some more formal knowledge...it would give us a bit more structure Lectures so we’re all learning about it but then we go into our little groups we’re focusing just on our projects, our ports We were told to link them…but that didn’t seem to happen because of the lack of information I think I liked having little groups as well because I like being able to talk with a small amount of people I felt like our presentations were meant to be drama-ry and that didn’t work for everybody. You kind of feel bombarded with a lot of information, which is good, but ..we [didn’t have]enough time...as a group mentality it was hard to sort of bring it all together X would email us individually or as a group and sort of send things out that we might have been talking about in the class…and that was really cool, I really liked that…because you got more information By the time the green jobs came around …I was so tired and I didn’t really have the energy to go around and want to talk to people The dinner thing I kind of liked…maybe interact with lecturers and things like that as well…It’s a good networking opportunity I am very passionate about climate change and so when I found out that’s what we were doing… I was ecstatic. If you are passionate about something, and this completely sparked me, you start telling other people and then they start getting the message and then you start telling other people. I thought a lot of people, listening to what others were saying through the course, people felt weak and helpless and overwhelmed and so once we provide the information…then empower people by giving them that project…and make people feel more optimistic and that they can make a difference I would have liked more practical information…I want to know what are the little things that I can do Even incorporating[change] into the workplace because eventually all of us will…be out there as so-called professionals or even volunteering…and at least we’ll have the confidence to say ‘ okay, I could be an 74
9.Motivation to act personally and to influence other people
10.Mixed ideas about future course placement and content, but mandatory at some stage in the course and for a whole trimester
environmental officer for this workplace and I could take that position on because I’ve got that little letter of reference and I’ve got my certificate’ Being aware of what’s going on, just because I didn’t know as much as I thought I did It was beyond my expectations…in that I made such good connections within the group and across faculties…I actually became more passionate about the whole thing and I didn’t think it would evoke that feeling in me Being an environmental student you’ve got that passion…already but doing it sort of gave me a new set of eyes and I could look at it a bit differently, some of the health concerns and I think maybe a new interest in the food…changed me I feel the need to now do something, like I’ve got this knowledge behind me…there is a few things coming up at the end of the year like volunteering and stuff…I don’t think I would have done it without this project. For me it facilitated a passion for doing something bigger that just being part of our race, getting a job, getting a house…I think I’ve been spurred on to do something bigger than that...I want to [work] overseas I’m much better at saving and turning off switches…I’m just more alert to it Once I started to absorb [all this information] and sort of figure out my view on it then it was ‘this is great’ because I can use this. I actually ran the service on Sunday…I did a puppet show and I did the music and basically the entire thing was taking care of god’s world and everyone loved it because I was giving them all this information that I’ve been learning here. I’m definitely changing things at home. [at work] I have the facts to back up what I’ve been saying. I try to influence my friends or my house mates Nearly all our dinner discussions [at home]would end up around something to do with climate change, so it was interesting. I think it should be a pre-requisite to complete your course I’d like to know a bit about everything I just don’t know that the first years are mature enough to be able to really handle a discussion group like this I’m a mature age student…there are some people at university who are quite mature and there are some people who just want to get out there and party, so I think it’s a personal choice For other courses it won’t work if it’s their final year [industry/placements/teaching rounds etc.] I would prefer to do it later in my degree just because I feel that I have more skills in learning and drama and 75
11.The need to link the course to real action
things like that to be able to communicate with other people…I’ve grown enough to be able to participate with inter-faculty people Why not make it compulsory but let the individual choose I think most people would be happy to do it [cross faculty course] Make it a for the whole trimester I am interested in an event where you are just mixing with each other before you start working on a project…I think you need to have a bit of a social occasion first and then embark on the work I think that maybe one of the requirements throughout this course is to try and go home and get your family to switch off as many lights as possible just one night a week…during the course…then you feel unity as a group as well because you’ve done something…to know how much as a group we’ve all given back by doing that. It was really cool just to be aware of what was going on and the different groups you could tap into if you wanted to be involved, so…maybe more information about places you could join...to get people involved A unit…the content needs to be really clear…I think we got all this information but it’s like now what do we do with it…we get the information, we process the information and we try to do it, make a course of action of what we can do as individuals, but also as a community…I think it needs to more action sort of thing Instead of the final presentations why not actually make them physically change something…actually go and make a garden…put a solution [the course] was researched critically…to inspire [us], it’s been influential to make future actions, but [it]should try to focus on producing some sort of academic writing or material or petitions that actually create radical change because from the first lesson that’s been the goal and I don’t think that’s been achieved. I think it’s a good idea if each port focuses on something within our own community to show people that yes it is possible that you can adopt it within communities out there
76
DISCUSSION Student Survey This discussion section examines the links between the survey findings and the key features of the intervention. The analysis extends to linking sets of questions and contextualising the interpretations with respect to research design limitations. This section will begin to demonstrate that the strength of the interdisciplinary element of the curriculum transcended the limitations of the student participant profile (i.e. assessed vs. non assessed, students with significant environmental sustainability knowledge vs. students without significant environmental sustainability knowledge without, literacy, volunteer vs. enrolled, environmental management students vs. non environmental management students). Firstly, the pitch of the curriculum material was significantly distinguishable from existing Environmental Sustainability curriculum at Deakin. This was evidenced in Figures 5 and 6 showing that students who had previously undertaken units of study on Environmental Sustainability (ES) still indicated a shift (which was consistent with non exposed ES participants) in their understanding of ES. Further support for this finding can be garnered in the analysis of the cohort where 56 percent of participants were from the Faculty of Science and Technology (studying an discipline specific environmental course and had three years exposure to ES content). One of the features of ESR was to encourage students to seek further professional and personal education after completion of their undergraduate studies (i.e. Professional Development, life long learning etc.). As evident in Figure 4 this was the general trend regardless of discipline background. Figures 7-15, on all concepts (content knowledge indicators) indicate there was a positive shift in understanding. Of particular note: Peak Oil, Climate Change, environmental impact on human wellbeing and consumerism measured the greatest shift in knowledge level. On the other hand, government policy and businesses practices knowledge levels indicated less significant shifts in knowledge levels. This may be due to three factors: firstly, the individual vagaries of the port specific information (different emphasis in ports due to teacher experiences/knowledge of area); the low number of students from Business and Law; and thirdly, lower participation of Business and Law teaching staff in the design and delivery of the curriculum. With respect to attitudes and value indicators, student beliefs that their actions do make a difference to achieving ES was confirmed by the post survey (see Figure 16). Interestingly this was in line with the desired learning outcomes and philosophy of the program of enabling students to feel empowered to take action for the future. This was also evidenced in Figure 17 which indicates a shift in students agreeing with the statement that they are motivated to become personally involved in achieving ES. This is despite students indicating in Figure 27 that after doing the ESR course they agree that a major ecological catastrophe will occur if business as usual continues. In contrast to the individual student level of optimism for capacity to act on ES, Figure 32 illustrates that the ESR program did not instil a confidence in students about the role of achieving a sustainable future for all of humankind. This may be a function of students feeling a locus of control in their own actions but a lack of influence or control over the actions of others.
This dissonance between individual vs. societal influence raises concerns for future curriculum content and process in engendering affective action for change strategies. The results of Figures 19 – 21 examining personal intentions, behaviour and projected lifestyle impacts, indicated an optimism and motivation to change (without negatively compromising lifestyle) as a key outcome of their participation in ESR. Further, results from Figures 19 – 21 also inferred an increased awareness of the local and global context of ES which was consistent with the desired learning outcomes. Overall as indicated in Figures 22 -26 there was an increase in student confidence in their willingness to take action on ES. This confidence may be a result of the increase in their knowledge which was demonstrated in Figures 5-15, representing a relationship between level of knowledge and student confidence in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual/professional. Figure 28 also demonstrates an uptake of key principles of sustainability presented in ESR i.e. that community action and cooperation is preferable to new technologies solving ecological challenges. Another key feature of the ESR curriculum was the focus on consumerism as a determinant of environmental problems. Figure 29 indicates a willing uptake of this information by students. This finding reflects one of the strengths of the ESR which was the engendered trust that students perceived in the information presented to them. Figure 31 which relates to world population levels and the relationship to ES does not indicate a unanimous shift in response from the students (that is not all students indicated that population is a significant variable in addressing ES). This finding may be attributed to the absence of a population focus in weeks 1 and in the common curriculum. Indeed some port facilitators may have addressed this in greater depth than others which in turn may account for the student variation. This finding has implications for curriculum development in the future i.e. a greater emphasis is required on population, business practices and policy. The experience of participating in an interdisciplinary program on ES greatly influenced students’ preferences for how ES is best delivered in a Higher Education context. Overwhelmingly the most effective mode identified was a dedicated unit as evidenced by the following quotes: “I think it should be a Tran disciplinary unit because the environment is affecting everyone and many non-environmental students could gain valuable knowledge” “Sustainability principles contradict with fundamental business principles. Therefore they need to be combined rather than taught separately” “It would loose its essence if it was not delivered through the creative delivery and with cross-faculty students. This is key! It is an issue that everyone should have to learn about and make new contacts and have perspectives from people in all areas. This issue affects everyone” “I think everyone should do it! It's the only way we will ever really make a difference” Most students indicated a dedicated unit on ES should be offered at a 1st or 2nd year level. Given that participants in the 2009 program were 3rd year students (and hence on the verge of graduation) the results may indicate a desire for exposure to ESR earlier in their course. What 78
may be absent is an understanding that their participation in ESR was facilitated by the accumulated knowledge and experiences obtained at a 3rd year level. This point is echoed in a combined analysis of 1st & 2nd preference which was the overall majority preference for second year. Overwhelmingly students reported high levels of satisfaction with all aspects of the ESR program. This is evidenced in Figures 39-44. Of particular note is students overwhelming response to the interdisciplinary nature of the program (Figure 38), which in turn strengthens the case made in the literature for the benefit of interdisciplinary approaches to ES. Comments made by students also indicate they personally benefited from this ‘unique’ feature of the curriculum design and delivery. What worked from the perspective of the students according to both data sets? As evidenced by both the focus group findings (Theme 1 & 2, Table 6) and the survey results (Figure 38 & associated qualitative comments) the interdisciplinary aspect which involved, ‘working with students from other faculties’ and ‘learning from different points of view’ was one of the key features of ESR. The opportunity to mix with students from other faculties / schools / courses and indeed perspectives was a unique experience for these (3rd year) students. It appears that the interdisciplinary aspect facilitated a sense of collegiality, interest and fun despite the fact that the students also found the content confronting and challenging at times. The students satisfaction with the content including the range of topics pertaining to environmental sustainability and the quality of information was confirmed by both data sources (see Figures 37, 40, 41, 43 and Theme 4, Table 6). The focus group data highlighted that the combination of topics presented in various formats including readings, slide shows, minilectures, u-tubes, videos and small group discussions were a valuable aspect of the program. Indeed that the information presented was new and up-to-date, in turn this enabled motivation and learning. The larger group sessions in weeks 1 and 6 were also found to be a key satisfactory feature whereby the views of potential employers and personal journeys were highly commended by students. The small group (face-to-face) sessions were another feature which was consistently identified between data sets. Students reported high levels of satisfaction with this feature in the survey (see Figures 42 & 43) and was further highlighted in the focus groups (Theme 6, Table 6) refering to the value of intimate, interactive, smaller group facilitation approaches which were characteristic of weeks 2-5 of the program. However the ‘length of workshop’ issue was a point of contention between data sets. That is, in the focus groups the time pressure and length of workshop (Theme 5 & 7, Table 6) were consistently noted as a point of dissatisfaction, whereas in Figure 42 – Satisfaction with the ESR workshop facilitation - there was a comparatively normal level of satisfaction. An explanation for this contention being that the prompt in the survey limited the scope for a thorough analysis of the perceived ‘problem’. The core theme emerging overall though was that the session times should be at least 2 hours in length for future implementation of the program. Returning to the previous theme of satisfaction with combined teaching approaches, the data sets also indicated that the larger group sessions during the week 1 launch and week 6 green jobs / volunteering expo (see survey Figure 41 & 44, Theme 4, Table 6) were an important 79
feature of the program. The value of presenting the views of potential employers and the personal journeys of those working in the area of ES served to generate student enthusiasm, interest and motivation to learn. The themes associated with increased personal engagement, motivation and willingness to act were confirmed in Themes 6 and 7, Table 6 and were consistent with the findings of Figure 16 (individual action) and 17 (motivated to get personally involved). Students in the focus groups reported a motivation to act personally and influence others in their immediate sphere of influence which linked with the key attitude indicator in the survey - student agreement that they were motivated to become more personally involved in achieving ES. The focus group data also confirmed a willingness to act at an individual level and within the immediate spheres of influence i.e. friends and family. However, in contrast to the survey findings (Figure 32), the focus group participants also reported instances where they moved beyond their individual spheres of influence to act within their workplace or broader community settings for example church. This demonstrates an inconsistency in the findings and hence needs to be explored further for subsequent ESR programs and research designs. Perhaps for the purpose of this report though, a preliminary conclusion is that ESR has a significant impact on individual confidence and motivation and lesser impact on confidence to act at a broader level. Another synergy between the data sets was the future of the course. Theme 8, Table 6 and Figures 34, 35 and 36 both demonstrated a mixed set of opinions about whether an ESR type unit should be mandatory or an elective or at which year level. However what seemed to be echoed in both findings was that ESR should be developed up into a dedicated unit (full trimester in length). There was a sense that all university graduates should be exposed to content on ES. What did not work from the perspective of the students according to both data sets? The two core concerns about the program, which were highlighted particularly well in the focus group findings, related to assessment and length of program. With respect to assessment the main issue was that of uniformity in assessment. In Theme 3, Table 6 students highlighted the disparities between volunteers vs. assessed students and the differing weighting of assessment tasks (i.e. 60% vs. 15%). For future implementations this implies the need for a consistently weighted and uniform set of assessment tasks to ensure student satisfaction. The other point of interest was that of the perceived overwhelming volume of information vs. the short length of program (highlighted in Figure 38 and associated qualitative comments). This was confirmed in Theme 5 & 7, Table 6 whereby students reported time pressures, feeling overwhelmed and getting lost in the information. In future implementations of the program this maybe resolved through the up scaling of the module into a full semester load unit. An extension of the ‘what didn’t work theme?’ or perhaps the theme of ‘mixed teaching methods’ is that the students would recommend a ‘practical component’ for future versions of the program. The key finding was that a practical component would assist students to transfer learnt knowledge into practice and / or strengthening the sense of empowerment. In Figure 37 and Theme 11, Table 6 ‘a considerable interest in the unit including a practical project’ was identified. The need to link the course to real action and students having some experience in enacting change i.e. through a community-based project was consistently noted. This may 80
inturn form part of the solution to previous shortcomings of the program where a perceived lack of confidence to act at a community or societal level was identified. Perhaps, supervised fieldwork experiences (either nested within the ESR or as distinct follow-up program) would facilitate the learning of the key skills and attitudes which are associated with greater capacity to act on ES.
Student and staff comparison of focus groups and survey data This section discusses the findings taken from two data pools: 1. staff (5x focus groups – 3 pre and 2 post program); 2. student (pre and post program surveys and 2 post program focus groups) The focus of this discussion is to explore the congruence and dissonance between staff and students regarding their responses to the development and delivery of the Explain, Sustain, Remain program, with a particular emphasis on whether the aims of the program were perceived to have been met according to the two population cohorts. However a caveat for reading the discussion is necessary, that is while comparisons are freely made between the two population cohorts, it is acknowledged that in fact there was a diversity of opinions concerning the program within the two population pools. Cross faculty, interdisciplinary component of the ESR program. Overwhelmingly the most common element reported on by both staff and student cohorts as having high appeal and scoring very high satisfaction results was the cross faculty and interdisciplinary component of the program. Tables 1 and 6 and Figures 38 and 43 point to the positive responses staff and students accorded to their experience of developing, delivering and participating in the program. The similarity in response by both staff and students is significant at several levels. Primarily the common finding echoes and reinforces the literature on education for sustainability that emphasises the need for interdisciplinary approaches to complex and “wicked” problems characterised by peak oil and climate change (Haigh 2005). Secondly the findings indicate that the interdisciplinary element of the program resounded with staff and students alike as an appropriate, relevant and purposeful response to current environmental challenges. Thirdly the commonality and consensus in staff and students’ highly favourable response to the program’s interdisciplinary element indicates that the staff’s concerted effort to model multidisciplinary co-operation as an achievable and desirable method for problem solving was both acceptable to, as well as successfully communicated with, students participating in the program. This was attested to in typical comments such as the following: The cross-faculty makeup is the best part of this program including how the facilitators came from different backgrounds” (Figure 43). Process and program mode of delivery. A further common theme commented on by both staff and students was the process involved in the delivery of the ESR program. Both staff and students reported on the lack of time available to process both the volume and nature of the sustainability content. Figure 38 indicates a predominately “satisfied” response from students to the length of program while student focus 81
groups (Table 6) reveal a frustration with the limited time available for discussion of topics. This was echoed by staff responses in Table 4. One of the constraints in offering an education for sustainability program which would be appeal to both students volunteering in the program and students who were co-opted into participating was to reduce the contact hours and commitment required. Students were required to attend two x 3 hour seminars (week 1 and 6) and 4 x 1.5 hour small group discussions plus 3 hours allocated for reading/preparation = 15 hours commitment. Clearly attempting to accommodate new and broad level information in innovative teaching and learning methods in the advertised time was always going to be a challenge. Both staff and student results also indicated an appreciation for and valuing of small group and face-to-face learning environments. Tables 2, 3 and 6 paint a picture of both staff and students revelling in the small group learning environments, but also desiring the security of email and DSO backup. Some staff suggested other popular multimedia technologies with which to communicate with students such as SMS, facebook etc. Interestingly no students made such similar suggestions. This finding speaks to the relative rarity of small group learning opportunities in the students’ typical undergraduate course structure and the esteem to which they hold such learning opportunities. ESR also offered two 3 hour seminars at the commencement and conclusion of the program with the entire student contingent. Overall these learning venues provided opportunities for developing group identity and cohesion, intensive information dissemination as well as the inclusion of inspiring speakers and creative presentations to distinguish the program as topical, innovative, exciting and an alternative to standard curriculum contexts. Both staff and students valued these learning opportunities with only some reservations about the seminars’ duration. These findings highlight the necessity for a range of learning prospects that are valued by both staff and students as positively contributing to students’ learning outcomes. Assessment tasks – to assess or not to assess? The ESR program enabled a comparison to be made between students volunteering their participation with students co-opted into the program and required to have their presentations formally assessed as a percentage of their unit grade (60% for Arts and Education and 15% for Science and Technology students). Students working in small groups comprised a combination of these volunteer versus assessed students. While slightly more than half of all students participating in ESR (66%) undertook the program as part of a credited unit or course, there appeared to be no noticeable difference between the two groups of students in both their commitment to regular learning groups and their final presentations. Student focus groups (Table 6) revealed some dissatisfaction with what they saw as the unequal expectations required of variously assessed versus unassessed students. Contrary to this position were other students pleased to be participating in the program that accredited their efforts to their final unit grade. Staff overseeing assessment tasks were extremely pleased with the level of effort and standard of work these mixed groups of students produced (Table 4). While clearly most students volunteering to participate in the ESR program would be expected to have high levels of motivation, it seems that the relative harmony with which both assessed and unassessed students co-operated to produce consistently high standards of work speaks to 82
a higher order of motivation. It appears that students were able to transcend their diverse assessment status as a function of the interdisciplinary component of the program which engendered trust, commitment and accountability in the broader context of an assignment tasked with identifying positive future scenarios for a climate and resource challenged world. Taken together, staff and student responses to the ESR program indicates that apart from some minor differences, there was general congruence between staff and students that a high quality, interactive, creative and engaged mode of delivery for education for sustainability was achieved.
83
CONCLUSIONS The Explain, Sustain, Remain program was an innovative, interdisciplinary education for sustainability initiative that delivered high quality, creative curriculum designed and delivered by cross faculty staff and wholeheartedly embraced by over one hundred students representing each of Deakin University’s four faculties. The success of this pioneering work in cross faculty and interdisciplinary curriculum design and delivery can be measured in numerous ways, not least of which was the sense of empowerment and confidence to engage in environmental dialogue and action expressed by students at the completion of the program. This is a notable achievement in an increasingly climate changed world facing unprecedented challenges that require urgent and effective responses. At the inception of this project in 2008, aims and objectives were dutifully developed in an enthusiastic and ingenuous attempt to address the pressing needs generated by increasing global warming and the obligation of Higher Education educators to equip their students for a rapidly changing world. Through the process of exploring the most appropriate options for both content and delivery, the Explain, Sustain, Remain program adopted a journey metaphor as its founding structure and as a philosophy for interdisciplinary cooperation and collaboration. As a result the initial objectives set out 12 months previously became obsolete. In their place a set of research questions emerged which more aptly reflected the reality of addressing complex, multifaceted problems presented by rapid resource depletion, degradation, extreme weather events and the need to communicate confidence, optimism and capability to the workers and decision makers of the future. The success of the ESR program has overwhelmingly illustrated that it is not only possible but highly productive for Deakin University staff from different disciplines and cross faculties to work together to develop an interdisciplinary unit on sustainability. Staff involved at several or all levels of the program; development, management and delivery, reported favourably on their experiences, emphasising the value of sharing knowledge and indicating that they learnt not only new content, but also innovative methods of engaging with students. Constructive feedback from staff and students pointed to areas in which curriculum and process could be improved such as embracing students from each school within the four faculties and well as increased time to reflect on and discuss content. Suggestions were also made for increasing the formal knowledge content of the curriculum and for a practical application of content. Moreover findings from the pilot program categorically demonstrated that it is administratively and politically possible to deliver a unit of study across faculties engaging both staff and students from all faculties. Timetabling and other logistical impediments were surmountable in a context of shared visioning, goodwill and flexibility. That said, this pilot curriculum initiative was delivered outside of the ‘normal’ university administrative structures. The advantage of dedicated funds (which were augmented by three other funding grants throughout the course of the project implementation) enabled the extensive planning, implementation and evaluation processes required to create this material. Further, as the modules were delivered outside of ‘normal’ timetabling, unit coding, unit chairing and school / faculty teaching arrangements the authors recognise that the modules could not simply be plugged back into the system as is. Indeed, consideration would need to be given to how this curriculum material could be scoped up into a full unit load and maintain its integrity of pedagogy and teaching approach. 84
The overall positive response to ESR has its genesis in the interdisciplinary approach to the program. Represented in all data sets from staff and students was the overwhelming feedback affirming the value, relevance and importance of an interdisciplinary approach to educating for sustainability. This salient aspect of the program was manifest at several levels. Firstly the development of a rich multi level curriculum was possible by the contributions of staff from multiple disciplinary backgrounds. Secondly the delivery of dense, complex and inter-related curriculum was possible by the cross faculty small group tutorials facilitated by cross faculty staff. Utilising pedagogies placing students at the centre of the learning process and validating multiple learning styles, students were able to negotiate their learning with peers from multiple disciplinary backgrounds. Thirdly the use of an interdisciplinary approach mirrored the reality of tackling environmental challenges acknowledged by staff and students to be intractable and “wicked”. Moreover, in working collaboratively and creatively to address environmental concerns, cross faculty staff modelled for students the possibilities and benefits to be gained by an interdisciplinary approach to global environmental challenges. Overall each individual component of the ESR program had much to recommend it. Taken as a whole, the ESR program delivered more than innovative curriculum for sustainability. Hope, enthusiasm, purpose and trust were the much prized products of the interdisciplinary endeavour, reflecting the adage that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”.
85
RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations for the future design and implementation of Explain, Sustain, Remain (ESR) have been developed in response to a decision in September 2009 by Deakin University’s Academic Board to develop this pilot curriculum program into a cross-faculty, full trimester unit. The recommendations and model for design and delivery going forward are encapsulated in two documents. The first document – titled Proposed ESR Unit Outline 2010 - provides a detailed unit outline of ESR going forward (See Appendix 5). The second document – titled Model for Interdisciplinary, Cross Faculty Delivery - outlines a model and process for crossfaculty, interdisciplinary delivery at Deakin University (See Appendix 6). In summary these two documents indicate the author’s desire for an ongoing commitment of the STALGS project team and the university to develop the ESR in 2010 with the core features of ‘interdisciplinarity’, ‘cross-faculty designed & delivered’, ‘participatory’ and ‘innovative’ securely intact. These aforementioned documents contain recommendations for ESR 2010+ that will ensure that the integrity and appeal (to all) of this curriculum is maintained. Notwithstanding, the authors categorically support a broader university wide commitment to greening the curriculum. The university’s approval of one unit is seen as just the first step in ensuring the full integration of sustainability principles into the suite of undergraduate, postgraduate and professional development courses offered at Deakin University. The ESR STALGS initiative has demonstrated that an opportunity exists for the university to demonstrate leadership in the area of interdisciplinary and cross faculty teaching programs in environmental sustainability. Our final broader strategic recommendation is that the university consider the establishment of a Centre for Sustainability. This Centre would coordinate research, teaching and campus operations initiatives across the university and facilitate the achievement of a broader range of sustainability objectives relating to the 4 C’s - curriculum, culture, campus and community.
86
DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS The on-going process and findings from the 2009 Explain, Sustain, Remain program were presented at the following conferences: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Deakin University Teaching and Learning Conference – June 2009 Public Health of Australia Conference, NSW – September 2009 Deakin University Growing Research Together Conference, September 2009 Australian Campuses Towards Sustainability (ACTS) Conference, September 2009 HMNBS Teaching and Learning Conference, November 2009
The final report will be condensed into a shortened one that will be sent to all participants of the pre and post surveys and focus groups that requested a copy of the findings. This shortened report will also be sent to Academic Board and the Associate Deans Teaching and Learning.
CONFERENCES AND SEMINARS – 2010 The timeline below illustrates when results will be presented during 2010 at various seminars and conferences both within and external to Deakin. Within Deakin, the project results will be presented to staff within each Faculty at seminars held during trimester. The findings will also be made available through the Institute of Teaching and Learning’s web site, with notification and web link of the findings via the staff portal. Attendance at other relevant conferences identified by the Project Leader and Steering Group will also be undertaken.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov
Dec
School Research Seminars 2010 (HSD, LES) APAIE Conference DU Teaching & Learning Conference DU Growing Research Together Conference Australian Campuses Towards Sustainability Conference Faculty Teaching & Learning Conference Peer Reviewed Academic Journals By obtaining Deakin University Ethics approval for this project, findings can be published in peer reviewed academic journals. The findings will be of great interest to many professions, particularly the higher education and environment, discipline specific sectors. Dissemination to the national and international community is anticipated and will be via publication of the project results in various journals including the Journal of Environmental Education, Health 87
Promotion International, The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, Journal of Higher Education and Higher Education, Research and Development.
88
REFERENCES
ARIES (2009), ‘Education for Sustainability: the role of education in engaging and equipping people for change’, The Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability, Macquarie University, NSW. Breyman, S. (1998). ‘Sustainability through Incremental Steps? The Case of Campus Greening at Rensselaer’, GMI, vol. 23, pp. 117-126. Cleary, M., Flynn, R., Thomasson, S., Alexander, R., McDonald, B. (2007), ‘Graduate Employability Skills: Prepared for the Business, Industry and Higher Education Collaboration Council’, Precision Consultancy, Melbourne VIC. Commonwealth of Australia (2007), ‘Caring for our Future: The Australian Government’s Strategy for the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, 2005-2014’, Canberra, ACT. Commonwealth of Australia (2009), ‘Living Sustainably: The Australian Government’s National Action Plan for Education for Environmental Sustainability’, Canberra, ACT. Cortese, A. (1999), ‘Education for Sustainability: The Need for New Human Perspective’, Second Nature, Boston, USA, pp. 1-10. Cortese, A. (2001). Cited in Haigh, M. (2005). ‘Greening the University Curriculum: Appraising an International Movement’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 31-48. Cortese, A (2008), ‘Making the Commitment to a Healthy, Just and Sustainable Society’, Presented at the Presidential Institute Council of Independent Colleges, USA, p. 3. Creswell, J.W & Garrett, A.L (2008), ‘The “movement” of mixed methods research and the role of educators’, South African Journal of Education, Vol. 28, pp. 321-333. Deakin Teaching & Learning Plan (2008), ‘Teaching and Learning’, Deakin University Functional Area Plan, Deakin Univeristy. Delivering Effective Partnerships (2008), ‘Delivering Effective Partnerships’, Deakin University Strategic Plan, Deakin University. Dator, J (1993), ‘From future workshops to envisioning alternative futures’, Futures Research Quarterly, vol. 9, pp. 108-112. Edelstein, M.R. (2004). ‘Sustaining Sustainability: Lessons from Ramapo College’, chapter 15 cited in Barlett, P.F. & Chase, G.W. 2004. ‘Sustainability on Campus: Stories & Strategies for Change’, MIT, USA, pp. 271-292. Eisen, A. and Barlett, P. (2006), ‘The Piedmont project: fostering faculty development toward sustainability’, The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 25-36.
89
Environmental Sustainability Enabling Policy (2009), ‘Environmental Sustainability Enabling Policy’, The Guide, Deakin University. EPAC (2008), ‘Integrating Environmental Sustainability into Teaching and Research’, Agenda Paper 2, Environmental Policy Advisory Committee, Deakin University. Fien, J (2004), ‘ The Tao of Prius’, unpublished keynote address, 4th Australasian Conference of Sustainable Campuses, held 29 September – 1 October at Griffith University EcoCentre, Brisbane, QLD. Foster, J. (2002). ‘Sustainability, Higher Education and the Learning Society’, Environmental Education Research, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 35-41. Gayford, C (2003), ‘Participatory methods and reflective practice applied to research’, Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 8, Spring, pp. 129-142. Goodland, R. (1995). ‘The Concept of Environmental Sustainability’, Annual Review Ecological System, vol. 26, pp. 1-24. Haigh, M. (2005). ‘Greening the University Curriculum: Appraising an International Movement’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 31-4 Hatfield-Dodds, S., Turner G., & Schandl, H. (2008), ‘Growing the Green Collar Economy: Skills and Labour Challenges in reducing our greenhouse emissions and national environmental footprint’, Report to the Dusseldorp Skills Forum, June, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra. Hewlett Packard Labs and Forum for the Future (2008) at
[email protected] Hutchinson (1993), cited in Hicks (2006), ‘Envisioning the future: the challenge for environmental educators’, Environmental Education Research, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 101-109. Johnson, R.B & Onwuegbuzie, A.J, (2004), ‘Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm whose time has come’, Educational Researcher, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 14-26. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), ‘Summary for Decision Makers’ chapter cited in ‘Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis’, Island Press, Washington DC, pp. 1-24. Rensburn, E & Sisitka, H, (2000), ‘Learning for Sustainability: An environmental education professional development case study information education policy and practice’ Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. (2007a). ‘The Greening of Rensselaer: The Strategic Initiative Proposal – 1996’ accessed on 15th May 2007 at http://www.rpi.edu/dept/ess/greenings/si_96.html Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. (2007b). ‘Interdisciplinary Studies Index’ accessed on 15th May 2007 at http://www.rpi.edu/academics/catalog/pdf06-07/Interdisciplinary_Studies_0607.pdf Richmond, M (2009), ‘Education for sustainable development vital to tackle climate change’, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, accessed 10/12/09 at http://www.unesco.org/en/esd/dynamic-content-single90
view/news/education_for_sustainable_development_crucial_to_tackle_climate_change/back/12 904/cHash/2bc7777b65 Sherron, K. & Robin, L, (2006), ‘A Curriculum for a Cause?’, Sustainability in the Australasian Context, Chapter 2, pp. 33-44. Saugier, P (2009), ‘Education for sustainable development vital to tackle climate change’, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, accessed 10/12/09 at http://www.unesco.org/en/esd/dynamic-content-singleview/news/education_for_sustainable_development_crucial_to_tackle_climate_change/back/12 904/cHash/2bc7777b65 Tilbury, D., Keogh, A., Leighton, A. and Kent, L, (2005), ‘A National Review of Environmental Education and its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia – Key Findings: Australian Government Department, Department of the Environment and Heritage and Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability. Tilbury, D. & Cooke, K. (2005), ‘A National review of Environmental Education and its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia: Frameworks for Sustainability – Key Findings: Australian Government Department, Department of the Environment and Heritage and Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability. Tilbury, D. & Wortman, D. (2004), ‘Engaging people in sustainability’, Commission on Education and Communication, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Uhl, C. & Anderson, A. (2001). ‘Green Destiny: Universities Leading the Way to a Sustainable Future’, BioScience, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 36-42. UNESCO (2005), ‘United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (20052014): International Implementation Scheme’, Section for Education for Sustainable Development, France, pp. 1-35. UNESCO (2008), ‘About ESD’, United Nations Decade for Sustainable Development’ accessed 10/12/09 at http://www.desd.org/About%20ESD.htm UNSECO (2009a), ‘Education for sustainable development vital to tackle climate change’, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, accessed 10/12/09 at http://www.unesco.org/en/esd/dynamic-content-singleview/news/education_for_sustainable_development_crucial_to_tackle_climate_change/back/12 904/cHash/2bc7777b65 UNESCO (2009b), ‘ESD and Young People’, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, accessed 10/12/09 at http://www.unescobkk.org/en/education/esd/esdmuralcontest/ UNESCO (2009c), ‘Education for Sustainable Development and Climate Change’, Policy Dialogue 4: ESD and Development Policy, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, pp. 1-4.
91
Wheatley, M. (1993). ‘Green Business: Making it Work for Your Company’, Pitman Publishing, London, pp. 27-47. Woods, P (2005), ‘An Australian Government Perspective on the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development’, Address to the National Symposium on DESD, July, Melbourne, VIC. Wortman, D., Cooke, K., Herbert, K. & Tilbury, D, (2006), ‘Assessing Provision and Effectiveness of Coastal Management Education’, Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water Resources and the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES), Canberra, ACT.
92
APPENDIX 1 BUDGET
Direct Costs
Amount
Actual
Research Fellow (Part-time) 3 days per week
$26,761.13
$26,761.13
Research Assistant (Casual) 40 hours
n/a
$1,303
Research Assistant (Casual) 40 hours
n/a
$814
Personnel (Salaries and On-costs using 2009 pay scale)
Total Personnel $26,761.13
$28,878.13
Teaching Relief Faculty of Health, Medicine, Nursing & Behavioural Sciences
$4,932.73
$4,911
Faculty of Business & Law
$1,617.04
$0
Faculty of Science & Technology
$1,617.04
$1,630
Faculty of Arts & Education
$1,617.04
$1,630
Total Teaching Relief $9,783.85
$8,171
Support Services (Indicate ILT, KMD or Other) a. Project Leader (in-kind) (level A academic step 8) / 3 weeks
$4 357.94
$4 357.94
$4 969.75
$4 969.75
b. Mardie Townsend – IP (in-kind) (level D academic step 4) / 2 weeks
$3 631.77
$3 631.77
c. Teresa Capetola -IP (in-kind) (level B step 6) / 2 weeks
$4 816.86
$4 816.86
d. Peter Beech – IP (in-kind) (level D academic step 3) / 2 weeks
$5 810.92
$5 810.92
$3 746.44
$3 746.44
e. Tanya Castleman – IP (in-kind) (level E academic step 1) / 2 weeks
$283.20
$283.20
f. Colin Long – IP (in-kind) (level C step 1) / 2 weeks g. FHMN&BS Ian Story (in kind) 5 hours Total Support Services (in-kind) $27 616.88 Equipment Focus groups a. Transcription $38 per hour (x 4 hours per 1 hour) x 6
$1 368.00
$27,616.88
$1,306.90 93
groups x average 1.5 hours each b. Stationery Questionnaires c. Development of questionnaire through Research Services d. Stationery Workshops e. Lunch @ 4 workshops (based on current rates at Café Ava $10.50pp for 11 people; includes beverages)
$100.00
$0
$350.00
$0
$100.00
$0
$493.50
$902.35
Total Equipment $2,431.50 Travel Staff between Campuses x 4 days a. Geelong (intercampus bus) b. Warrnambool x 1 participant (Public Transport i.e. VLine service $88.20 per return) External participants – a. (Public Transport) x 2 participants x 4 meetings ($10.10 per daily ticket, zone 1 & 2) b. (Car) x 2 participants x 4 meetings x 40kms return @ 0.55c per km c. Taxi
$0 $352.80
$0 $0
$80.80
$7.40
$176.00
$373.50
n/a
$121.20
Student Reference Group – a. (Public Transport) x 2 participants x 4 meetings $80.80 ($10.10 per daily ticket, zone 1 &2) Total Travel $690.40 Other Student Reference Group x 2 students, at 40hrs participation on project each – Retail Vouchers
$2,209.25
$8 $510.10
$400.00
$0
Digital recorders (in-kind) - School of Health & Social Development
$240
$0
Rooms for focus groups (in-kind) – School of Health & Social Development
NO CHARGE
NO CHARGE
Rooms for Workshops (in-kind) – Building HE
NO CHARGE
NO CHARGE
Strategic Planning Day to progress project beyond 2009
$1000
$500
Memberships
$115
$115 94
Resources for teaching
$115.52
$115.52
Rod Quantock Comedy Show
$2,400
$2,400
Work Integrated Learning Student Placement
$500
$500
Conference attendance
$297
$198
Total Other $5,067.52
$3,828.52
Program Implementation Workshop 1 (Launch at Burwood) Guest Speakers a. Lecture (Basic Lecture 151B $135.88 + 14.85%) b. Lecture (Basic Lecture 151B $135.88 + 14.85%)
$156.05 $156.05
$156.05 $156.05
Food (100 students, 20 staff/facilitators @ $10 per head) Porterage Cleaning
$1,200 $74 $80
$866 $74 $80
Other misc
$0
$97.50
Workshop 6 (Green Jobs & Volunteering Expo, Burwood) Guest Presenters x 6 (reimbursements) a. Travel 60km x .55C per KM b. Gifts ($30 voucher x 6)
$360 $180
$0 $0
Food Porterage ($37 per hour x 2 hours) Cleaning ($40 per hour x 4 hours ) Other misc
$1,200 $74 $80 $0
$1,047.35 $74 $80 $89
Sessional staff for workshop facilitation Total program Implementation $3,716.10 $48,153.18
FUNDING RECEIVED: 1. STALGS 2. OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT 3. SCHOOL OF HEALTH & SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT 4. ALL FOUR FACULTY CONTRIBUTIONS
$35,000 $5,000 $3160 $2400
TOTAL FUNDS Total In Kind Contribution
$50,020 $27, 856.88
$6,066.15 $8,786.10 $52,725.4
95
APPENDIX 2 -MEMBERS OF PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE AND REFERENCE GROUP
Patrick
R
Health & Social Development
Nuttman
S
Health & Social Development
Capetola
T
Health & Social Development
McBurnie
J
Life & Environmental Sciences
James
K
Life & Environmental Sciences
Miller
K
Life & Environmental Sciences
Castleman
T
Deakin Business School
Townsend
M
Health & Social Development
Ciszewska
B
Communication & Creative Arts
Long
C
History, Heritage & Society
Ebden
M
Health & Social Development
Lamaro
G
Health & Social Development
Carroll
G
Life & Environmental Sciences
Graham
M
Business & Law
Kelly
D
Student Rep
Wheeler
J
Student Rep
Sita
J
La Trobe University
Noy
S
Environment Victoria
McNaughton
C
Victoria University
96
APPENDIX 3 PRE-TEST SURVEY Explain, Sustain, Remain - Survey This survey will help us to evaluate a cross-faculty interdisciplinary project on environmental sustainability which will be trialled in Trimester 2. Your feedback will be greatly appreciated and will help us to assess the relevance of the module and how we might improve the content and delivery. Your feedback will also be very helpful if we should happen to have the opportunity in the future to develop a cross-faculty major or course in environmental sustainability. We will make a summary of the results of our evaluation available to all student participants – you might be interested to see how this pioneering group found this experience! Your responses to this questionnaire are confidential which means that your identity will not be revealed to anyone or in any reports. Please make sure you do not write your name on the following questionnaire, but note that our analysis needs to be able to link your responses on this questionnaire and a second questionnaire at the end of the project. For this reason, we ask you to put in some details below (birthdate, name of your favourite sporting team). This information will be used only for the purposes of linking the questionnaires, not for identifying you. The survey will take around 10 – 15 minutes to complete. By filling out and submitting this questionnaire I acknowledge that: 1. Upon receipt, my questionnaire will be coded and my name and address kept separately from it. 2. Any information that I provide will not be made public in any form that could reveal my identity to an outside party. 3. Aggregated results will be used for research purposes and may be reported in scientific and academic journals 4. Individual results will not be released to any person except at my request and on my authorisation. 5. I am free to withdraw my consent at any time during the study in which event my participation in the research study will immediately cease and any information obtained from me will not be used
To help us manage responses, please write down your birth-date in the following space, i.e. if you are born on July 13th, 1973 then you will write 13071973 and the name of your favourite sporting team. Your birthdate dd / mm / yyyy Your favourite sporting team ________________________ 1.
Have you previously undertaken any unit/s with environmental &/or environmental sustainability themes? Yes (please list) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ No, I did not try to enrol for such units No, I tried but wasn’t able to enrol in such units within my course I am unsure whether any of my units addressed environmental sustainability issues.
2.
How likely are you to take further studies dealing with environmental sustainability (i.e. work based professional development, post-graduate) after you complete your degree? Very likely Somewhat likely Unsure/ don’t know Not very likely Very unlikely
97
3.
How important is it to you that your course enables you to undertake studies that address environmental challenges such as climate change or peak oil? Very important Important Unsure/ undecided Not particularly important Completely unimportant
4.
How would you rate your confidence in understanding how different fields of study deal with environmental issues? (Please put a tick in the appropriate square.)
Field of study
Very confident
Somewhat confident
Somewhat unconfident
Not confident at all
Neither confident or unconfident
Ecological science
Health sciences (incl. nutrition, exercise science, health promotion, disability studies, psychology, nursing, OT, social work) Social science
Policy studies
Economics
Business Management Legal studies (Law)
Education
Arts/History
5. 1. 2. 3.
What are the main reasons (up to 3) that you decided to take part in this project? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________
6. 1. 2. 3.
What do you expect will be the main benefits of your participation in this project? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________
7.
How well do you feel that you understand the concept ‘Environmental Sustainability?’ Very well Fairly well Unsure Not particularly well Not well at all
8.
Please rate yourself on your knowledge of the following environmental
Environmental topic
No knowledge
Little knowledge
Moderate level of
A fair amount of
A lot of knowledge
98
Climate change Peak oil Sustainable development Water resources Waste and pollution Economics and the environment Government policy on environment Land and soil issues Business practices and the environment Food, nutrition and environmental issues Environmental impact on human well-being Political responses to the environment Human Rights and Environmental Action Social and environmental justice Consumerism and sustainability Energy use and impact on the environment Alternative energy sources
knowledge
knowledge
9. We are interested in your views about environmental issues and your response to them. Below are a number of statements that relate to this. Please note that there are no RIGHT answers to these. We are interested in knowing your views. For each one, please indicate whether you STRONGLY AGREE, AGREE are UNSURE or DON’T KNOW, DISAGREE OR STRONGLY DISAGREE
My actions as a single individual won’t make any difference to achieving environmental sustainability. I feel motivated to get personally involved to work towards environmental sustainability. I feel confident in my ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an individual. I don’t feel that I can communicate well with people in other fields of study about environmental issues I am well prepared to contribute to achieving environmental sustainability as an employee or professional. If I were to change my lifestyle to reduce my personal impact on the environment, it would have a negative impact on my quality of life (would decrease as a result). I feel that I am well-informed about the causes of environmental problems and what is required for sustainability. I’m not a specialist but I could apply the general skills learned in my course to
Strongly Agree
Agree
Unsure/ no opinion
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
99
working on an environmental issue If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe. New technologies can solve global warming and allow us to continue to live comfortable lives. Consumerism is the most significant factor causing environmental problems We can’t achieve sustainability if we deal with individual environmental issues on their own To achieve an environmentally sustainable world, most countries will have to stabilise or decrease their populations I will be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years. Australians as a whole will be affected by environmental problems over the next 10 years. People in other countries will be affected by environmental problems over the next 10 years. I am optimistic that humankind will achieve an environmentally sustainable future
And now some questions about you: 10. What course are you studying? __________________________________________________ 11. Are you doing this project for credit in a unit or course? Yes, I will get this work credited to a unit No, I am doing this as a non-credit extra study option. 12. Are you enrolled as a full-time or part-time student? Full time Part-time 13. Are you a domestic or international student? Domestic International 14. Are you male or female? Male Female 15.
Last week, for how many hours a week were you employed? None Fewer than 20 hours a week Between 21 and 34 hours a week 35 hours a week or more
16. We welcome any comments you would like to make. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________
100
APPENDIX 4 POST-TEST SURVEY
EXPLAIN, SUSTIAN, REMAIN: Post Survey Thank you for participating in the cross faculty Education for Sustainability program – Explain, Sustain, Remain. Your input into the program will contribute to the development of a proposed university program on sustainability. This POST-survey is your response to the program and education for sustainability and is divided into FOUR parts: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Background Your views on education for sustainability Your feedback on Explain, Sustain, Remain Program 2009 Designing the ideal education for sustainability program.
Your responses to this questionnaire are confidential and anonymous. Please make sure you do not write your name or any other comments that will make you identifiable on the following questionnaire. The survey will take around 10 – 15 minutes to complete. By filling out and submitting this questionnaire I acknowledge that: 6. Upon receipt, my questionnaire will be coded and my name and address kept separately from it. 7. Any information that I provide will not be made public in any form that could reveal my identity to an outside party. 8. Aggregated results will be used for research purposes and may be reported in scientific and academic journals 9. Individual results will not be released to any person except at my request and on my authorisation. 10. I am free to withdraw my consent at any time during the study in which event my participation in the research study will immediately cease and any information obtained from me will not be used PART ONE: BACKGROUND You will recall you were required to develop a personalised code on the survey that we asked you to complete during the launch or in class. In order to facilitate comparison with this pre program survey and the post program survey responses, please reproduce that code here. To assist you, here are the required fields from the pre program survey: Please write down your birth-date in the following space, i.e. if you are born on July 13th, 1973 then you will write 13071973 and the name of your favourite sporting team. Your birthdate: dd / mm / yyyy Your favourite sporting team____________________________________________________ PART TWO Your views on education for sustainability 1.
2.
How likely are you to take further studies dealing with environmental sustainability (i.e. work based professional development, post-graduate) after you complete your degree? Very likely Somewhat likely Unsure/ don’t know Not very likely Very unlikely How important is it to you that your course enables you to undertake studies that address environmental challenges such as climate change or peak oil? Very important Important
101
Unsure/ undecided Not particularly important Completely unimportant 3.
How would you rate YOUR confidence in understanding how different fields of study deal with environmental issues? (regardless of how the field actually deals with the issues) (Please put a tick in the appropriate square.) Field of study
Very confident
Somewhat confident
Somewhat unconfident
Not confident at all
Neither confident or unconfident
Ecological science
Health sciences (incl. nutrition, exercise science, health promotion, disability studies, psychology, nursing, OT, social work) Social science
Policy studies
Economics
Business Management Legal studies (Law)
Education
Arts/History
4. What have been the main benefits of your participation in this project? 4. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 6. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 5.
How well do you feel that you understand the concept ‘Environmental Sustainability?’ Very well Fairly well Unsure Not particularly well Not well at all
6. Please rate yourself on your knowledge of the following environmental issues: Environmental topic
No knowledge
Little knowledge
Moderate level of knowledge
A fair amount of knowledge
A lot of knowledge
Climate change
Peak oil
102
7.
Sustainable development
Water resources
Waste and pollution
Economics and the environment
Government policy on environment
Land and soil issues
Business practices and the environment
Food, nutrition and environmental issues
Environmental impact on human well-being
Political responses to the environment
Human Rights and Environmental Action
Social and environmental justice
Consumerism and sustainability
Energy use and impact on the environment
Alternative energy sources
We are interested in your views about environmental issues and your response to them. Below are a number of statements that relate to this. Please note that there are no RIGHT answers to these. We are interested in knowing your views. For each one, please indicate whether you STRONGLY AGREE, AGREE are UNSURE or DON’T KNOW, DISAGREE OR STRONGLY DISAGREE
My actions as a single individual won’t make any difference to achieving environmental sustainability. I feel motivated to get personally involved to work towards environmental sustainability. I feel confident in my ability to contribute to environmental sustainability as an
Strongly Agree
Agree
Unsure/ no opinion
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
103
individual. I don’t feel that I can communicate well with people in other fields of study about environmental issues I am well prepared to contribute to achieving environmental sustainability as an employee or professional. If I were to change my lifestyle to reduce my personal impact on the environment, it would have a negative impact on my quality of life (would decrease as a result). I feel that I am well-informed about the causes of environmental problems and what is required for sustainability. I’m not a specialist but I could apply the general skills learned in my course to working on an environmental issue If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe. New technologies can solve global warming and allow us to continue to live comfortable lives. Consumerism is the most significant factor causing environmental problems We can’t achieve sustainability if we deal with individual environmental issues on their own To achieve an environmentally sustainable world, most countries will have to stabilise or decrease their populations I will be personally affected by changes to the environment over the next 10 years. Australians as a whole will be affected by environmental problems over the next 10 years. People in other countries will be affected by environmental problems over the next 10 years. I am optimistic that humankind will achieve an environmentally sustainable future
104
PART THREE: Your feedback on Explain, Sustain, Remain Program WEEK 1 LAUNCH 8.
Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the launch of the Explain, Sustain, Remain program where 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied. 1 = very dissatisfied
2= dissatisfied
3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4 = satisfied
5 = very satisfied
Venue
Length of session
Dinner
u-tube film Wake up, freak out, then get a grip
Victoria McKenzieMcHarg, Environment Victoria
Pam Morgan, Permaculture in Cuba
Drama students’ performance
Overall content:
Consumerism
Climate change
Peak oil
Social justice
Sustainability
9.
Please comment including anything else that could have been included or done better ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
WEEKS 2-5 PORTS 10. Which port did you participate in (please tick one): Natural Enviro (Mon 12pm) Energy (Tues 10am) Water (Tues 10am)
105
Water (Tues 1.30pm) Waste (Tues 1.30pm) Food (Thurs 10am) Food (Thurs 1.30pm) Built Enviro (Tues 12pm) Food (Geelong) 11. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the facilitation of your port during weeks 2 – 5 where 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = nether satisfied or dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied 1 = very dissatisfied
2= dissatisfied
3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4 = satisfied
5 = very satisfied
Venue
Length of workshops (1.5 hr)
Number of workshops (4)
Learning facilitator/s
Size of port
Cross faculty composition of students
Resources (film, music, guest speakers etc.)
Readings
Story task
12. Please comment including anything else that could have been included or done better ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________ WEEK 6 GREEN JOBS AND VOLUNTEERING EXPO 13. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the green jobs and volunteering expo where 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = nether satisfied or dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied 1 = very dissatisfie d
2= dissatisfie d
3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfie d
4= satisfied
5 = very satisfied
106
Venue
Length of session
Dinner
Story presentations
Green jobs
Green volunteering
14. Please comment including anything else that could have been included or done better ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________ GENERAL PROGRAM FEATURES 15. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the general program features of Explain, Sustain, Remain during weeks 1 – 6 where 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, 5 = very satisfied 1 = very dissatisfied
2= dissatisfied
3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4 = satisfied
5 = very satisfied
Journey metaphor
Boat building
Ports
Length of program (6 wks) Certificates
Reference letters
Mode of communication ie. DSO and email Working with students from other faculties
16. Please comment including anything else that could have been included or done better? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________ 17. Did you participate in the Explain, Sustain, Remain program as (please tick one only): A volunteer (i.e. in addition to normal study load)
107
Part of a unit (i.e. mandated as part of unit AND assessment task) 18. Please comment on whether and how this mode of participation may have impacted on your experience of the program: _________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
PART 3: DESIGNING THE IDEAL EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM
19.The most effective mode of delivery for environmental sustainability based on the Explain, Sustain, Remain program would be (please rank from 1-3: with 1= first preference): A transdisciplinary1 dedicated unit on environmental sustainability e.g. SUS 3XX Environmental Sustainability content embedded into an existing unit Environmental Sustainability content embedded throughout all units of an existing degree Other 20.Reason for your choice: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________ 21.Environmental sustainability is best delivered as (please rate from 1-3: with 1= first preference): A mandatory unit for all undergraduate students A major of study for all undergraduate courses As an elective unit only Other 22.Reason for your choice: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ 23.The most effective and relevant year to offer a unit on environmental sustainability is (please rank 1-4: with 1= first preference): First year Second year Third year Post graduate
1 Transdisciplinary Studies are an area of research and education that addresses contemporary issues [such as climate
change & peak oil] that cannot be solved by one or even a few points-of-view. It brings together academic experts, field practitioners, community members, research scientists, political leaders, and business owners among others to solve some of the pressing problems facing the world, from the local to the global. In Explain, Sustain, Remain teachers from across the four faculties developed the curriculum and the ports were comprised of students from each of the four faculties. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transdisciplinary_studies accessed 26/08/09)
108
24.Reason for your choice: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________
Thank you for your participation
109
APPENDIX 5 PROPOSED ESR UNIT OUTLINE 2010
Week beginning Monday
Theme
Workshop Activity
Learning Objective
Mapped to assessment task
Resources
Week 1
MODULE A: Think Introduction to sustainability Hard and soft landings 2030. What are future scenarios? What is backcasting? What does resilience have to do with climate change and peak oil? Example of resilience. Exploring concepts for sustainability
Group seminar Welcome and introduction The context for sustainability. Guest speakers Presentation of ESR 2009 “stories” eg House of Water DVD Climate change, peak oil and consumerism. What is sustainability? What is the relationship between climate change, peak oil, consumerism AND sustainability? What is environmental and social justice and its relationship to the current state of the world? What is the role of civic democracy? Current state for: water, energy, built environment, natural environment, waste
To implement futures thinking to environmental challenges
Establishing concepts for ground work for AT1 and AT2
Few, R. (2007)
To understand the spectrum of environmental sustainability concepts, principles and definitions
Establishing concepts for ground work for AT1 and AT2
Commissioner For Environmenta Sustainability (2008) Department Of Sustainability And Environment (2006) Elkington (2007) Fromm (1974) Hopkins (2008) McKibbon (2008) Myers (2003) Sustainability and environmental justice (2009)
To develop in-depth understanding of one key environmental
Building on “story” for AT1
Port specific resources
Week 2
Week 3
State of the current situation (port specific)
Milne, Stenekes and Russell (2008)
and food.
resource/issue (eg food, water, waste, energy, built environmental, natural environment
How do the ports relate to each other? Story of stuff DVD. Identifying collective and individual spheres of influence
To understand the interconnectivity between resources/issues To analyse common antagonists’ or barriers towards changes to enable sustainable practice
Building on “story” for AT1
Story of Stuff (2008)
Building on “story” for AT1
National Centre for Sustainability (2009)
Building on “story” for AT1
Eckelsey, R. (2008) Ruskin, et al. (2002) Holmgren, (2009)
Gathering evidence for AT2
To be advised
Week 4
Connectivity of issues
Week 5
Change for a more sustainable outcome
Week 6
Enabling change for a sustainable future
Nihilism, fundamentalism and activism activity
To suggest ways in which to promote and enable change to more sustainable practices
Week 7
Consolidating presentations
Groups to work on finalising presentations
Week 8
Presentations
Week 9
MODULE B: Act Action Plan: choose issue
Small groups present their “2030” stories to half of large group. Setting and issue identification and evidence
To develop group negotiation skills and explore creative means for presenting information To practice public presentation skills. To initiate skills in developing action plan
111
gathering Week 10
Gathering data
Consultation with relevant setting stakeholders
Week 11
Developing action
Week 12
Finalising action plans
Presentation of draft action plan to peers. Peer feedback Incorporation of peer feedback
To explore and practice consultation skills for developing action plan. To work in team environment in developing action plan
Developing material for AT2
To be advised
Consolidating material for AT2
To be advised
112
APPENDIX 6 MODEL FOR ESR CROSS-FACULTY, INTERDISCIPLINARY DELIVERY
