International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Educational Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedures

Embedding Education for Sustainable Development in higher education: A case study examining common challenges and opportunities for undergraduate programmes
Paula Jones a, Colin J. Trier b,*, Jonathan P. Richards c
a b c

Centre for Sustainable Futures, Kirkby Lodge, Plymouth University, Plymouth, PL4 8AA Devon, UK School of Earth Ocean and Environmental Sciences, Fellow of Centre for Sustainable Futures, University of Plymouth, PL4 8AA Devon, UK School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Science, University of Plymouth, PL4 8AA, Devon, UK

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history: Received 4 October 2007 Received in revised form 3 November 2008 Accepted 13 November 2008 Keywords: Education for Sustainability Development Students perception Lecturers perception Curriculum content Teaching methods and practices Pedagogy

This paper explores the perceptions of academics and students towards embedding Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) into undergraduate degree programmes in the School for Earth, Ocean and Environmental Science (SEOES) at the University of Plymouth. The main purpose of the research was to identify current ESD related teaching and learning in a science-based undergraduate programme and the opportunities for, and barriers to, further extensions of ESD. The results indicate that there is general support for the embedding of ESD in the curriculum, but there is considerable uncertainty expressed by lecturers concerning how this can best be done. There is a general concern that additional embedding into the degree programme might lead to reductions in the amount of core subject matter being taught. The programme and ESD agendas are to an extent seen by lecturers as conicting. ESD is viewed mainly in terms of curriculum content as opposed to the pedagogy employed. 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction We are in the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (20052014) and the challenges that such an initiative entails are now both acutely visible and urgent. The contribution from the higher education sector to this initiative has been recognised by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and articulated as follows: Within the next 10 years, the higher education sector in this country will be recognised as a major contributor to societys efforts to achieve sustainability - through the skills and knowledge that its graduates learn and put into practice, and through its own strategies and operations. (HEFCE, 2008, 2005, p. 8) Given that an estimated 42% of 1830 year olds in the UK currently participate in higher education it is clear the tertiary sector has a potentially very important role in developing sustainability-literate citizens (Forum for the Future/UCAS, 2007). Furthermore, it is recognised that investment in environmentally orientated universities and their graduates is necessary to achieve the effective implementation of the range of environmental policies (Giacomelli, Travisi, & Nava, 2003). Support for the relevance and signicance of ESD for employability is elaborated in a recent report to the Higher Education Academy (Cade, 2007). However, in order to achieve the status implied in the HEFCE vision within 10 years, UK universities must

* Corresponding author. Fax: +44 1752 584710. E-mail address: ctrier@plymouth.ac.uk (C.J. Trier). 0883-0355/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2008.11.001

342

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

develop the means to help graduates address the challenges and responsibilities of sustainability. Furthermore, it is important that all disciplines engage with this initiative. Some subject areas such as Geography and Environmental Science have, to some degree, already integrated Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) into their programmes. However, it is important to recognise that it is not only the curriculum content but also the pedagogical approach that determines the extent to which ESD is embedded in degree programmes. ESD remains a somewhat contested phrase which, given the difculty in establishing a clear denition, has the potential to compromise the inclusive, process-orientated concept it means to convey. As Barry (2007, p. 442) suggests ESD should be presented as about coping with rather than denitively solving the ecological crisis. . . In this way ESD can be viewed as an approach to learning that enhances the capacity to cope with the uncertainties inherent in a complex world that is facing unprecedented challenges. The phrase ecological literacy has a historical association with sustainability. The role of ecological literacy in education has been explored in-depth (Orr, 1992), as has sustainability in consideration of what this means in operational terms to the work of the Center for Ecoliteracy (Stone & Barlow, 2005). The adoption of a pedagogical approach capable of addressing global contradictions in terms of human wellbeing and the state of the environment is, Marinova and McGrath (2004) suggest, overdue. They argue for a transdisciplinary approach to teaching and learning that supports the four pillars of education1: learning to know; learning to do; learning to live together; and learning to be. The signicance of this argument in terms of ESD is that sustainability is a holistic concept within which the process of learning is as important as what is learnt. Deep learning is considered to be particularly crucial in the case of sustainability education (Warburton, 2003, pp. 45). This approach is contrasted against surface learning which is dominated mainly by transmissive forms of teaching deemed particularly inadequate for sustainability education, as suggested by Warburton (2003, pp. 55): The challenge for educational institutions is not simply to teach concrete facts about the environment but to create an active, transformative process of learning that allows values to be lived out and debated, and permits a unication of theory and practice. Consequently, the challenge for universities is to critically assess themselves and re-orientate their approach in order to fully engage with the sustainability agenda. The purpose of this paper is to explore such transitions with reference to the specic case of the Geosciences curriculum. An insight is offered into the current position with reference to existing good practice and future potential developments in support of ESD. The perceived barriers and challenges that exist are identied with the intention of informing the academic community and encouraging discussion about ways forward. It is hoped that those working to embed ESD within the higher education sector will recognise the relevance of this research, which extends beyond the specic case of Geosciences in the University of Plymouth. Research was undertaken in association with the School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Sciences (SEOES), one of three Schools that comprise the Science Faculty, during the second year of the ESD Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL)a 5-year project funded by the Higher Education Foundation Council for Education (HEFCE). The CETL has adopted a 4Cs (Curriculum, Community, Campus and Culture) approach to embed ESD in all aspects of the University by 2010 as explained in its Vision Statement: The Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning aims to transform the University of Plymouth from an institution characterized by signicant areas of excellence in education for ESD into an institution modelling University-wide excellence. . . (Dyer & Selby, 2004, pp. 1). During the last 10 years a number of disciplines have made contributions to ESD research. Many come from the eld of Geography (Pearson, Honeywood, & OToole, 2005; Summers, Corney, & Childs, 2004; Wellens et al., 2006), although new studies drawing on pedagogical research in the areas of Architecture, Built Environment (Murray, Goodhew, & TurpinBrooks, 2006) and English Language (Stibbe, 2007) have appeared more recently. In contrast, studies investigating lecturers perceptions of ESD have tended to generalise across disciplines (Cotton, Warren, Maiboroda, & Bailey, 2007; Reid & Petocz, 2006). These are valuable contributions, but do not offer the depth of insight that can be gained by focussing on one specic degree programme. One subject area which has been under researched is Geosciences. This discipline area is closely associated with the oil and gas industry (widely perceived as being environmentally unsustainable) through the provision of graduates and research facilities (Muttitt, 2003). This apparent tension between ESD and the industrial agenda provides this study with the special opportunity to offer insights into the difculties of embedding ESD into the HE curriculum. Several previous studies have focussed on the barriers to embedding ESD in curricula, but it has been suggested that little attention has been given to the exploration of lecturers views on appropriate pedagogies for ESD (Cotton et al., 2007). Pedagogy has been seen to be a key issue to accommodating ESD within different disciplines. Other work by Cotton et al. (2007) investigated the impact of lecturers beliefs and attitudes on ESD. These studies have all used a broad cross-discipline approach and so lacked the in-depth exploration that can be provided by a single subject approach. In this study the main focus of the research has been in one subject area and has aimed to explore the following issues:  the perception and understanding of ESD by academic staff within one course subject area;  the current form ESD is taking (course content and pedagogy) in this subject area;

As recommended in reports to United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO, 1996, 1998).

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

343

 the perceived opportunities for and barriers to enhancing ESD in the curriculum of core modules across all stages of the Geosciences undergraduate degree programmes. 2. Methods A case study approach was chosen because it enabled the authors . . .to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events. . . (Yin, 2003 pp. 2). It was considered that the case chosen was likely to be of general interest to the academic community and that the underlying issues, pertaining to the embedding of ESD in programmes of study, were nationally (and internationally) important particularly in policy and practical terms (Yin, 2003) The Geosciences programme area was chosen for the case study for a number of reasons. Firstly, the authors do not teach on degree programmes run by Geosciences, therefore the issue of being both researcher and part of the research was avoided. Secondly, the Geosciences staff do not share the same location on campus as most of the staff from the other programme areas administered by the School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Sciences. Consequently there are fewer opportunities for informal interactions between Geosciences staff and School colleagues from different programme areas. An interpretative approach was employed (Fien, 2002). The research design incorporated three methods of data collection: document analysis, structured interviews with academic staff and the responses of a student focus group. The interviews and focus group were designed to generate qualitative data, which would yield explanations concerning the opportunities for, and barriers to, embedding ESD in degree programmes. Specic respondents quotes were selected from the interview and focus group transcripts that either illustrated a generally representative view, or offered particularly interesting explanations. The dynamics involved in a focus group situation contrast with those of an in-depth interview (Hakim, 2000). In the former a group perspective can be developed through interaction and dialogue and therefore caution was exercised in the subsequent comparison of students and academics perceptions. 2.1. Document analysis Learning and teaching at the University is organised by Schools within Faculties. The School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Sciences offers six course subject areas, which run a total of 22 undergraduate degree programmes, e.g., Bachelor of Science, with Honours in Geology. The programmes are composed of modules, some of which are compulsory (core) whilst others are optional. Denitive Module Record documents for each module of a degree programme receive ofcial validation from the University. Within each Denitive Module Record there is a list of Assessed Learning Outcomes that dene what must be demonstrably achieved by students on completion of the module. Module content is summarised in the Indicative Syllabus Content section of the document but it is not denitive. This is signicant because the presence of ESD-related phrases in the Indicative Syllabus Content might suggest that it is an important component of the module whereas only reference to ESD within the Assessed Learning Outcomes will reveal that ESD is central to the module. Initially, all core module Denitive Module Records for the Geosciences degree programmes were collected and analysed to assess the extent of ESD content. ESD related teaching, both in terms of what (content) and how (teaching practices) modules were being delivered to students, were subsequently explored during the interviews. 2.2. Semi-structured interviews Semi-structured interviews were carried out using a set of open questions designed to offer respondents freedom in their choice of answer, in terms of both the interpretation of questions and length of response. This allowed respondents to let their thoughts ow without being directed and heavily inuenced by the interviewer (Oppenheim, 1992). No time restriction was imposed and the length of interviews ranged from approximately half an hour to over an hour. Interviews were conducted with a total of fourteen respondents all of whom had both teaching and research responsibilities. The sample included male and female academics, and encompassed a number of career stages and a range of duration of service at the University. Personal data such as the age, sex and career path of individual respondents was not reported because this would have compromised the anonymity of the individuals and would consequently have contravened the Universitys ethical guidelines. Prior to interview, lecturers with module leader responsibilities were requested to highlight or annotate copies of the relevant Denitive Module Record(s) to inform discussion and assist in answering specic questions relating to their module(s). The interviews conducted were with respondents that included the Head of School, Associate Heads and Module Leaders for the core modules of the Geosciences degree programmes. Following transcription, respondents were asked to make any necessary amendments to the text before analysis was carried out. Interview data were then analysed using a framework approach (Ritchie & Spencer, 1994) which involved a process of systematically coding and grouping data to provide a coherent thematic framework to encapsulate and explain (Holstein & Gubrium, 1995). The following statement was composed by the authors and presented to interviewees and the focus group participants. Its purpose was to offer a working denition of ESD by specifying the outcomes graduates would achieve from the embedding of ESD in their undergraduate programmes. However, no further clarication concerning the graduate attributes of personal, professional social responsibility or ecological literacy was given. It was left for the respondents to interpret this for themselves.

344

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

The team of staff involved with the Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning within the School consider that the successful embedding of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in the curricula of our programmes would achieve the graduate attributes of personal and professional social responsibility and ecological literacy. We offer this as a working denition for ESD in the following questions. 2.3. Focus group A student focus group was organized to complement the interview data and to act as a method of triangulation of responses. The interviews and focus group were designed to enable data from each to be usefully compared (Wolff, Knodel, & Sittitrai, 1993). The focus group discussion was guided by the moderator, but participants were free to steer the conversation themselves and debate matters that they considered important and relevant to the main subject. Students were invited to attend the focus group session using an e-mail invitation that was sent to over 1000 SEOES students via the Universitys email system. The focus group participants were therefore a self-selected sample from the SEOES student population. Four students attended the focus group session representing a range of the SEOES degree programme pathways: Chemistry, Geology and Physical Geography, Marine Science and Surf Science. The group also included one moderator and one note taker. Three students were in stage one with one student in stage 3 (nal year). Two of the four were mature students; three students were male and one female. Although four participants might be considered a small number, the qualitative data produced provided a valuable student perspective on the research topic. 3. Results and discussion Before addressing the more specic questions pertaining to the how and where ESD is located in the Geosciences degree programmes, the extent to which respondents generally supported the concept of embedding ESD at the University was measured, by probing their understanding and perception of the term. Academics perceptions and understandings of ESD strongly inuence the form that ESD is currently taking in School of Earth Ocean and Environmental Sciences and also inuence the future embedding of ESD. Academics generally supported ESD in principle but expressed reservations about its practical implementations. This nding can be seen to echo the notion of the both rm and shaky ground of ESD (Selby, 2006). There were three main attitudes that respondents expressed in addressing the term ESD. Some academics were comfortable with the term and elaborated on their own interpretation of it through case study examples and anecdotes. Other individuals demonstrated an underlying hostility toward the term ESD, making repeated reference to its lack of clarity. Thirdly some respondents considered their lack of knowledge was a barrier to greater engagement with the term. These attitudes are not mutually exclusive and respondents shifted between them during the course of an interview. Respondents were generally comfortable with the working denition [see Section 2.1 in this paper], and in particular the graduate attributes of, personal, professional and social responsibility. There was some discussion around the inclusion of the term ecological literacy. In general those who voiced an objection to the term considered it to be too narrow. One respondent explains this: But its where people see sustainable development. I dont see it just there I see it elsewhere Another respondent viewed the term as counter-productive for engaging others in the School and especially in his department. An alternative was presented in the form of resource literacy and the respondent continued to question the meaning of ecological literacy: . . .why are you singling out ecology, is that the only thing? Are the butteries and the trees the only important things? The participants involved in the student focus group discussed the statement at length. They weighed the attributes presented in the statement against their own experiences from the courses they were following. The issue of achieving the graduate attribute of, personal responsibility was viewed as presenting a particular challenge. One participant expressed this: . . .it has to go through the head into the heart and so on, if you get it there then you absorb it as a person. . .. If it stays out there and if its in books and if all it is lectures and tick boxes and people dont absorb it, (and there is no evidence of that absorption in their behaviour) then youre in a closed loop. 3.1. Obstacles to embedding ESD With regard to the obstacles and limiting factors that respondents identied for the embedding of ESD in Geosciences, two main categories emerged. The rst can be termed as internal obstacles that relate to an individuals mind set and personal motivation. The second can be termed external factors that highlight issues connected with institutional organisational structure and perhaps reect the overarching culture of the University. This approach is useful for understanding where the signicant challenges in a University may exist.

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

345

3.1.1. Lecturer engagement and motivation Lecturers expressed the need for the University to win hearts and minds in order to enable the embedding of ESD and prevent just paying lip service. This was a recurring theme connected to staff and their personal involvement with the ESD agenda. I think if youre trying to (embed) sustainability for much of the university in terms of serious policy, (the University) has to win hearts and minds more effectively than it is. . . Another respondent expressed the sentiment that, even if lecturers are motivated to act on a personal level, external inuences, beyond the University may prevent teaching and learning in degree programmes engaging with the sustainability agenda. This lead to questions regarding power and inuence with respect to universities, professional accreditation bodies and industry. . . . a person might be fairly green on a personal level but if they are governed and controlled by a professional body and all the Geosciences programmes are accredited by the Geological Society, I can bet your bottom dollar theres very little on sustainability within the professional code of conduct. . . One of the challenges in the current ESD initiative is to overcome the underlying hierarchical culture, concerning how participants consider that change can be accomplished, as exemplied by one respondent: I dont think its for staff to say . . . this is what we think we want to transfer the university to. Negativity and some hostility were evident when discussing the practical changes required to embed ESD in degree programmes and the University. This was in sharp contrast to the general support for sustainability indicated by respondents at the outset of the interviews. This expressed negativity may be connected with the ambiguity of the term the ESD. 3.1.2. Time as a limiting factor (or an excuse) Lack of time as an obstacle to embedding ESD in the curriculum has been referred to in previous studies. In Reid and Petoczs (2006) study a lecturer associates both energy and effort with time, suggesting that in her teaching changes necessary to accommodate the sustainability agenda would require considerable time to implement. Lack of time was perceived as a fundamental obstacle by academics that prevent the practical implementation of ESD. This could indeed reect the way in which aspects of teaching and learning are prioritised in an institution. Many respondents, therefore perhaps unsurprisingly, named time as a signicant limiting factor concerning the embedding of ESD. It appears that the inclusion of ESD in degree programmes is seen as a generic course element akin to professional skills which have been embedded over recent years and impinged on subject specic content. This may explain the somewhat guarded approach to embedding ESD in the curriculum, displayed through the majority of interviews. One lecturer emphasised: I think were. . ., at the maximum of embedding at the moment you know. Our time is spent . . . embedding all these things which arent geology on top of a course or subject area A second respondent illustrated the view that the Geosciences curriculum could be eroded by the embedding of ESD. The respondent repeatedly spoke of ESD being tted into the curriculum, which illustrates the notion that it is related to content but not yet considered in terms of a process which could enrich current teaching and learning. I suppose my main reservation would be perhaps the time aspect of it as to where its actually going to t into our curriculum because we actually have a awful lot we want to teach, and I think its already been cut down in the last couple of years. . . This interpretation of ESD reects a compartmentalised view of curricula with discrete disciplines where borders are defended (Sterling, 2001). This can act to cultivate an obvious hostility towards embedding ESD into degree programmes. In the long term, one response might be to adopt a lip-service approach, based on the incorporation of minimal ESD related content and incurring limited change. As Reid and Petocz (2006, p.120) explain, sustainability can be viewed as interrupting real work and warn that: Academic thinking at the most limited level focuses on the particular area being studied, the techniques important in this subject, and the syllabus that needs to be covered. . . The way in which Geosciences degree programmes have evolved is such that, although issues relating to sustainability are not seen as irrelevant to the subject, the dominant focus is upon subject specic knowledge. The values relating to this knowledge base were left unexplored in relation to ESD. In general, modules aligned to the Applied Geology part of the course were seen as offering the most favourable opportunities for extending ESD. This might be because they apply to reallife scenarios in which interdisciplinary agendas more readily apply. 3.1.3. Compatibility of ESD with Geosciences The perceived incompatibility of ESD and Geosciences is likely to discourage the embedding of ESD within the degree programmes. This view was connected to the role of the professional geoscientist and the careers that students are interested in pursuing. One lecturer perceived this conict of interest as a mutual exclusivity of student career aspirations and ESD.

346

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

I think if youre training to be a geologist and your end occupation that you want to do is work in the oil industry which by denition isnt very sustainable. Then how would you . . ., resolve these two things. This raises questions concerning the introduction of multiple perspectives and ethical frameworks, and whether these should be avoided in order to offer a coherent, attractive career path. This has implications for the bodies accrediting degree courses as well as the way in which courses attract students and therefore support course continuation. However, messages from industry have changed and give more priority to sustainability, though the academic community may be slow in recognising this. This was highlighted by one respondent in the following extract as the discussion concerning course approval with Marine Geoscience is described. I made the response that we didnt put it [sustainability] overtly into our curriculum because we rely on the oil industry for a lot of jobs and a lot of funding and therefore we have to be. . . well we dont have to be but we are mindful of saying things that might be seen as offending the oil industry. Now I think Im wrong in that, in some ways. . . I think the oil industry is actually starting to recognise in the need itself to promote sustainable alternatives and I think were behind on that. The lecturer also acknowledged that colleagues may not be aware of this shift in position (as he himself was previously unaware) and they may consequently adopt a guarded stance when addressing sustainability issues with respect to the oil industry. These new developments could be interpreted as a move by the industry towards a more sustainability-orientated agenda. If this is the case then a change in curriculum is suggested by one respondent as necessary to support and enable the geologist of today: . . .we still need to nd those resources but in a more sustainable way and look at alternatives and look at what the role of the geoscientist is in nding those alternatives. Further support for this positive view was produced by a representative for all the oil and gas companies, who was consulted for guidance on employers recruiting criteria for Geosciences graduates. The statement that the oil and gas industry want to work on the two biggest challenges of 21st Century providing and securing a safe, sustainable and affordable energy production and consumption on the planet was presented. The statement had been used to inform the approval process for the Marine Geoscience degree programme, during which the issue of sustainability was raised. This provides a powerful message to institutions involved in preparing individuals to full such career paths and in doing so contradicts the belief that Geosciences and sustainability agendas are incompatible. An overarching consideration concerning this perceived conict of interests between Geosciences and ESD is the marketability of the degree programmes. The advertising and selling of degrees programmes to students is an integral part of the way universities operate today. Consequently Schools and degree programmes, compete within and between institutions for a share in a competitive marketplace. The message received from the majority of academics who referred to this in their interviews was not one of competitive advantage from ESD but rather the vulnerable position this might render the degree programmes in with respect to marketing and the ability to draw students. . . .all the time were kind of worrying about making sure that the degrees look really attractive. So we do long haul eldtrips and lots of ying around and that kind of thing. This point is born out further by another academic, offering insight into the importance of eldwork to worldwide destinations in attracting students. The emphasis is placed on the ability to offer an exciting element to degree programmes and that alterations to change to more local (and therefore more sustainable) destinations would put the degree programmes in jeopardy. This led the respondent to conclude that: One of our main recruiting aspects of geoscience is . . . eldwork. The criteria that potential students use to make their choice of institution and degree programme upon are however little understood. During the course of the interviews one academic commented on there being a range of factors inuencing students course choices. Another respondent made reference to the use of eldtrips to entice potential students but then qualied this by adding that there is a lack of knowledge as to whether this really did attract students. With regard to eldtrips the issue of carbon emissions was often mentioned as a consideration associated with ESD. The ethical element of working in the eld was also explored by some respondents and related to the course code of conduct. It was also acknowledged that in respect to annually repeated eldtrips continuing to, or indeed ceasing to continue to visit, an area could have social, economic and environment implications for the host area. McGuiness and Simm (2005) explore something of the notion of going global in relationship to Geography eldtrips, and touch on the associated ethical issues. 3.2. Embedding ESD in specic modules Core curriculum Denitive Module Records were initially examined for evidence of ESD. In doing this it became apparent that these documents are written in general terms avoiding excessive detail, thereby leaving academic staff the freedom to interpret in-depth in their own style. Consequently these documents offer little understanding of if, or how, ESD is to be addressed within particular areas of Geosciences degree courses.

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350 Table 1 The identied current state and opportunities for ESD in core modules, from Geoscience degree programmes. Geosciencescore module title Stage 1 Introductory geological eldwork and skills 1 Introductory geological eldwork and skills 2 Earth materials Introductory eldwork and skills Stage 2 Geological eldwork and skills Research methods Earth internal systems Earth surface systems Earth sciences eldwork and skills Applied geological techniques and methods Stage 3 Geoscience research project and professional skills Geoscience trends and applications Global change Applied geoscience Georesources Geohazards ESD not identied in module ESD identied in module ESD not deemed appropriate

347

Additional ESD opportunities identied

U U U U U

U U U U

U U

U U

U U U U U U

Some of the interview respondents and those involved in the focus group suggested how ESD content could be included within the existing degree programmes. The suggestion of an optional module which could be taken as an elective was referred to with varying levels of enthusiasm and apprehension. The response from the University is to support multi-faceted approaches to infusing ESD within curricula. Indeed encouraging a diversity of approaches can be seen to be at the philosophical heart of sustainability (Dawe, 2005, p. 8). Evidence of ESD or sustainability issues in terms of module content and pedagogy was sought in the Assessed Learning Outcomes and the Indicative Syllabus Content sections in Denitive Module Records for core curriculum modules for the Geosciences degree programmes. No explicit reference was made, although in some cases it was implied. From those documents it was impossible to determine the extent to which ESD was already embedded in a module, so consulting module leaders directly was a useful strategy. Respondents were not presented with a denition or list of keywords to check their modules against in terms of content and pedagogy as this would have been a somewhat prescriptive approach, potentially resulting in a narrow check-list approach to identication of sustainability within modules. In the case of the content the majority of respondents were able to identify specic links to ESD. Table 1 shows a basic overview of modules for the Geosciences degree programmes where ESD related content has been identied2. In most cases lecturers did not regard ESD as central to modules, but elements of ESD were often included in the modules. One respondent summarised the presence of ESD: e but. . . certainly as far as nibbles. . . and condiments. I wouldnt claim that Ive got ESD as a main course. Or even as an entre Its deliberately used, and actually I think that can be very effective. . . . at this stage. And I think if. . . theres more of that then you end up with an appropriate avour. And you give people a choice in terms of how theyre going to run with it. Given the absence of ESD in the Assessed Learning Outcomes of the Denitive Module Records consulted, its identied presence by lecturers in various modules in Geosciences degree programmes is an interesting nding. This could mean for instance, as is suggested in the previous quote, that ESD is not made explicit in the majority of modules but instead is woven in through optional anecdotes. This has been noted by one participant in the student focus group who remarked on his uncertainty as to whether ESD is a required element of the course or a consequence of the interests of lecturers: . . .There have been various (sustainability) topics raised . . . but Im not sure if thats more a combination of course content and the lecturers personal views on things rather than theyre being told to infuse this information into the course. . . Further credibility is given to this possibility by the language used by one lecturer when talking about ESD module content. Now the areas that interest me are things like the reuse of materials for construction. This is not surprising given the admittedly vague nature of the Denitive Module Records which are written to accommodate the expertise and particular perspective that different academics have concerning their subject. Furthermore,

2 Excluded from the table are modules led by ve academics that did not participate in the interviews. This means that 10 core modules could not be explored in the interviews.

348

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

given the ve yearly course review process and research opportunities for academics that materialise during that time, it can be seen as strategically prudent to allow for changes in module leadership. The strategy of winning hearts and minds in order to successfully embed ESD into programmes of study could have a more immediate impact than waiting for a formal course review. The ndings from the student focus group are generally in accord with those from previous research involving a university wide student and staff survey undertaken at Plymouth in October 2005 (Kagawa, 2007). The student focus group centred their discussion on whether ESD was made explicit in the programmes. Focus group participants also identied missed opportunities where an element of ESD could have been drawn or expanded upon to enhance teaching but currently was not: Ive had lectures in palaeo-climatology and you would think it would naturally progress into sort of future climate change and things like that but really it was brushed so lightly you wouldnt have noticed it in the lecture really. . . It is interesting to note that the example this student cited was mentioned by a number of lecturers during their interviews. They did so either as a way of demonstrating the inclusion of ESD in the curriculum or identifying a place where ESD could be expanded upon in future. In either case curriculum content rather than pedagogy was identied and highlighted. The notion of transdisciplinary teaching and learning was introduced to the students in the focus group as a pedagogical dimension of ESD. The difculties in realising this approach to teaching have been explored in the context of the University of Newcastle in New South Wales, Australia (Pearson et al., 2005). The structure of universities was identied as inhibiting this pedagogical approach. In the focus group one student offered a particular example relating to the professional skills part of a degree programme where he thought opportunities for transdisciplinary teaching were present. He spoke enthusiastically about the possibility of inviting external industrial representatives to talk: It would have been quite nice for someone to come in and talk about the oil crisis. . . We have frequently weeks where we have no lectures because . . .. . .., there wasnt enough content there. So they could have easily got a guest lecturer to come in and talk. . . Further signicance is offered perhaps by the fact that the student is from the Chemistry degree programme offered in the School of Earth, Ocean, Environmental Sciences, arguably rmly rooted in the pure science domain, more so than the degree programmes offered in Geosciences. This is interesting because the interview respondents referring to ESD opportunities in the Geosciences degree programmes repeatedly cited the pure science modules as lacking relevance for ESD. Admittedly this is a professional studies element of the Chemistry programme, nevertheless it bears relevance, especially from the student point of view of ESDs place in a science faculty. In order to discover where ESD related teaching methods and practices might be perceived to already have a place, or opportunity for development in the Geosciences degree programmes, respondents were asked to again consult the Denitive Module Records. The term pedagogy was not used in the interview questions and it was not volunteered by those taking part. In general respondents tended to talk about the components of course structure i.e. eldwork, tutorials, lectures, rather than the educational philosophy underpinning that structure. The role of the teacher; the way knowledge is generated in a learning situation and; the signicance this offers for graduates future careers and indeed its role in wider society were not linked with ESD. Instead respondents generally referred back to the content of the module/degree programmes or the use of resources (paper, electricity, fuel), it was necessary to tease out pedagogical related information. This suggests that the academics interviewed interpreted ESD as having a bearing on curriculum content and not the process of teaching and learning. At times during the course of the interviews respondents came close to exploring the philosophy behind the way teaching is organised but the implication was that this was viewed as a distraction away from the real business of identifying the presence of ESD in the curriculum. . . .its very much. . . interacting with the students. . . we had them in breakout groups and they discuss things, we get them to feedback and scribe things up on the whiteboards. . . This respondent emphasised that this way of teaching is very unusual in the Geosciences, explaining that lectures and reading followed by an exam were the normal format of a module, with the exception of practical sessions. He explained this particular module to be a facilitation of discussion. There were however further examples volunteered by respondents which offered support for: collaborative working, discussion, learner as educator and student inuenced direction of learning, as already having a place in the Geosciences degree programmes. Some extremely inspiring examples were identied within modules. The third year module Geohazards culminates with students presenting their ndings in a mock conference situation. In another third year module, Geoscience Trends and Application, students work collaboratively in small groups to produce a magazine drawing upon their GIS (Geographical Information Systems) skills. Although it has been possible to identify aspects of the process as well as the content that are relevant to ESD, they may not be recognised as such by the academic involved. This illustrates how ESD can merge into a wider group of desirable graduate attributes, offering further support for embedding it. Support was shown for the suggestion of infusing ESD throughout a degree programme rather than only offering stand alone optional modules. If, however ESD is viewed in terms of being simply part of the content of a module then this infusion

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

349

is very unlikely to be achieved. The risk could be that ESD is compromised by low prioritisation of what is perceived to be a discrete, optional or bolt-on element of the course. The reality could be minimal student attendance on such modules regardless of their signicance and worth. 4. Conclusion There was found to be general support amongst academic staff and students for the embedding of ESD in curricula; and there is evidence that ESD related teaching and learning is already occurring in some of the core modules of Geosciences undergraduate degree programmes of this particular university. There is however a widely held view that the term ESD relates to content rather than pedagogy. In addition there is a general uncertainty about the: meaning, scope, boundaries, application and limitations of the term. This uncertainty is manifested by the perceived need for a clear denition as a prerequisite to embedding ESD in the curriculum. We would argue that this need is misconceived, as no such denition suitable for all curricula can exist without being undesirably restrictive. There was much uncertainty amongst our participants about how the embedding of ESD would be achieved, and indeed about whether ESD is even compatible with the Geosciences. There was a concern that the amount of time given to the teaching of the Geosciences would be compromised as a result of embedding ESD into the curriculum. When issues relating to sustainability or ESD in the degree programmes were considered by respondents, in most cases, it was through a career/transferable skills perspective. It was likened to the embedding of Personal Development Planning and thought mostly appropriately delivered through the generic parts of a degree programme concerned with professional and career skills development. This may indicate where ESD would most easily gain credibility. The potential for emphasising the link between ESD and employability as part of the marketing of degree programmes should not be overlooked. Evidence from industry indicates that the traditionally perceived role of the geologist is changing and that ESD would support this shift. Responses concerning the best way to overcome barriers to embedding ESD in the curriculum support a multidimensional approach, and one that enables interaction with the ESD agenda on many levels. This supports the need for a more holistic approach to learning in higher education. ESD is not about squeezing in more subject content or making space in curricula for a seemingly irrelevant topic in order to satisfy course requirements. If holistic and interdisciplinary perspectives are embraced, the justication for embedding ESD into curricula becomes no longer necessary. The relevance of enabling all graduates to grapple with the challenges of creating a sustainable approach in the world of the future is clear. Acknowledgements To all interview respondents and focus group participants, and to ESD Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning for funding the work. References
Barry, J. (2007). Spires, plateaus and the infertile landscape of Education for Sustainable Development: re-invigorating the university through integrating community, campus and curriculum. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 2(3/4), 433452. Cade, A. (2007). Employable graduates for responsible employers: Report to the Higher Education Academy http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ ourwork/tla/sustainability/EmployableGraduates2008.pdf. Cotton, D. R. E., Warren, M. F., Maiboroda, O., & Bailey, I. (2007). Sustainable development, higher education and pedagogy: A study of lecturers beliefs and attitudes. Environmental Education Research, 13(5), 579597. Dawe, G. (2005). Approaches to teaching education for sustainable development (esd)Report of Workshop held in York, 13th December 2005. http://www.mathstore.ac.uk/workshops/ESD2005/slides/ESDWorkshopReport-Gerald%20Dawe.pdf. Dyer, A., & Selby, D. (2004). Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning: Education for Sustainable Development Stage 2. Plymouth: The University. Forum for the Future/UCAS, (2007). The Future Leaders Survey 2006/2007. http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/les/Futureleaders0607.pdf. Fien, J. (2002). Advancing sustainability in higher education, issues and opportunities for research. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(3), 243253. Giacomelli, P., Travisi, C., & Nava, M. (2003). Are graduates in environmental sciences potential managers of the environment? Some problems and examples in the north of Italy. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 916. Hakim, C. (2000). Successful Designs for Social and Economic Research. New York: Routledge. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), (2005). Sustainable development in higher education, July 2005/28 Policy development. http:// www.hefce.ac.uk/susdevresources/strat/. Holstein, C., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The Active Interview: Qualitative Research Methods Series 37. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Kagawa, F. (2007). Dissonance in students perceptions of sustainable development and sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(3), 317338. Marinova, D., & McGrath, N. (2004). A transdisciplinary approach to teaching and learning sustainability: A pedagogy for life. In Seeking educational excellence. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Teaching and Learning Forum, 910 February 2004. Perth: Murdoch University. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2004/ marinova.html. McGuiness, M., & Simm, D. (2005). Going global? Long-haul eldwork in undergraduate geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(2), 241253. Murray, P. E., Goodhew, S., & Turpin-Brooks, S. (2006). Environmental sustainability: Sustainable construction educationA UK case study. The International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability, 5(2), 922. Muttitt, G. (2003). Degrees of capture: Universities, the oil industry and climate change. London: New Economics Foundation, Corporate Watch and Plateform. Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London: Pinter. Orr, D. W. (1992). Ecological Literacy: Education and the transition to a postmodern World. New York: State University of New York Press. Pearson, S., Honeywood, S., & OToole, M. (2005). Not yet learning for sustainability: The challenge of environmental education in a university. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 14(3), 173186. Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2006). University lecturers understanding of sustainability. Higher Education, 51, 105123.

350

P. Jones et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 47 (2008) 341350

Ritchie, J., & Spencer, E. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data (pp. 173194). London: Routledge. Selby, D. (2006). The rm and shaky ground of education for sustainable development. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(2), 351365. Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable Education: Re-visioning learning and change. Dartington: Green Books on behalf of The Schumacher Society. Stibbe, A. (2007). Developing critical awareness language skills for sustainability: A transdisciplinary approach. In C. Roberts & J. Roberts (Eds.), Greener by degrees: Exploring sustainability through higher education curricula (pp. 1016). Cheltenham: Geography Discipline Network (GDN). Stone, M. K., & Barlow, Z. (Eds.). (2005). Ecological literacy: Educating our children for a sustainable World. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. Summers, M., Corney, G., & Childs, A. (2004). Student teachers conceptions of sustainable development: The starting-points of geographers and scientists. Educational Research, 46(2), 163182. United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), (1996). Learning the treasure within. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), (1998). Education for the twenty-rst century. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. Warburton, K. (2003). Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 4456. Wellens, J., Berardi, A., Chalkley, B., Chambers, B., Healey, R., Monk, J., et al. (2006). Teaching geography for social transformation. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(1), 117131. Wolff, B., Knodel, J., & Sittitrai, W. (1993). Focus groups and surveys as complementary research methods. In L. D. Morgan (Ed.), Successful Focus Groups (pp. 118 136). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.