592
E. Staniškien˙ e and Ž. Stankeviˇ ci¯ ut˙ e
Furthermore, the relevance of ESD has been recognised worldwide with the establishment of the United Nations Decade for Education for Sustainable Development
(DESD) (2005–2014). UNESCO as the official leading international agency for the
DESD defines ESD as “a process of learning how to make decisions that consider the
long-term future of the economy, ecology and equity of all communities” (UNESCO
2005, p. 17).
In this context, HEIs have signed a lot of declarations demonstrating their commitment to embed the sustainability in their systems (Lozano et al. 2013b, 2015).
The list of the success stories how the on-paper commitments were translated by universities into broad-scale, long-term mainstream changes is not impressive (Bekessy
et al. 2007); however, some progress is apparent (Lambrechts et al. 2013). As the
present paper focuses on curricula, the illustrations of the positive shift to sustainability encompass specialist courses in SD or interdisciplinary courses (Sleurs 2008),
new pedagogical and methodological approaches (Ceulemans and De Prins 2010) or
competencies for SD (Barth et al. 2007; De Haan 2006; Roorda 2010; Sleurs 2008).
Despite the mentioned achievements, HEIs are still seen as contributing to the
sustainability crisis and “business managers are still being schooled into business
assumptions that serve to exploit people and planet” (Tilbury 2011, p. 24). Disterheft
et al. (2013) introduced several transfer problems that impede the paradigm shift
towards the sustainability. Some of them will be shortly discussed as they are relevant
within the context of this paper.
Firstly, universities remain traditional with strong disciplinary structures that hinder inter- and transdisciplinary approaches (Disterheft et al. 2013). As stated by
Elton (2003), historically, universities have played a significant role in transforming societies while remaining remarkably traditional themselves. Meanwhile, SD
challenges the predominant practices in higher education and requires from HEIs to
follow the open-minded perspective. This is not straightforward as universities are
considered as semi-open systems, where diverse resources enter the system, some of
them remain in the system and some, after being evolved, exit from the universities
(for example, students) (Lozano et al. 2013a).
Secondly, signing the declarations for higher education for SD does not ensure
that HEIs implement SD in their systems. Lozano et al. (2015) highlight the “green
wash” issue and Leal Filho (2012) warns that the majority of the declarations and
action plans have never been fully implemented by HEIs. As stated by Bekessy et al.
(2007), the process of change is complex and requires various strategies for success.
Continuing the debates on barriers for the SD implementation in learning and
teaching, Lambrechts et al. (2013) underline that sustainability has been integrated
into the curricula in piecemeal, rather than holistic approaches. According to Wals
(2010), the rigid disciplinary structures of universities and content-based learning
are the key barriers in integrating the sustainability in curriculum. Lambrechts et al.
(2013) conclude that “until now, teaching and learning in HEIs has provided few
opportunities for students to develop their own values, skills, and attitudes” (p. 67).
Seeing that the attention given to competency-based education has recently grown,
competencies can be the starting point for proper integration of SD in HEIs.
E. Staniškien˙ e and Ž. Stankeviˇ ci¯ ut˙ e
Furthermore, the relevance of ESD has been recognised worldwide with the establishment of the United Nations Decade for Education for Sustainable Development
(DESD) (2005–2014). UNESCO as the official leading international agency for the
DESD defines ESD as “a process of learning how to make decisions that consider the
long-term future of the economy, ecology and equity of all communities” (UNESCO
2005, p. 17).
In this context, HEIs have signed a lot of declarations demonstrating their commitment to embed the sustainability in their systems (Lozano et al. 2013b, 2015).
The list of the success stories how the on-paper commitments were translated by universities into broad-scale, long-term mainstream changes is not impressive (Bekessy
et al. 2007); however, some progress is apparent (Lambrechts et al. 2013). As the
present paper focuses on curricula, the illustrations of the positive shift to sustainability encompass specialist courses in SD or interdisciplinary courses (Sleurs 2008),
new pedagogical and methodological approaches (Ceulemans and De Prins 2010) or
competencies for SD (Barth et al. 2007; De Haan 2006; Roorda 2010; Sleurs 2008).
Despite the mentioned achievements, HEIs are still seen as contributing to the
sustainability crisis and “business managers are still being schooled into business
assumptions that serve to exploit people and planet” (Tilbury 2011, p. 24). Disterheft
et al. (2013) introduced several transfer problems that impede the paradigm shift
towards the sustainability. Some of them will be shortly discussed as they are relevant
within the context of this paper.
Firstly, universities remain traditional with strong disciplinary structures that hinder inter- and transdisciplinary approaches (Disterheft et al. 2013). As stated by
Elton (2003), historically, universities have played a significant role in transforming societies while remaining remarkably traditional themselves. Meanwhile, SD
challenges the predominant practices in higher education and requires from HEIs to
follow the open-minded perspective. This is not straightforward as universities are
considered as semi-open systems, where diverse resources enter the system, some of
them remain in the system and some, after being evolved, exit from the universities
(for example, students) (Lozano et al. 2013a).
Secondly, signing the declarations for higher education for SD does not ensure
that HEIs implement SD in their systems. Lozano et al. (2015) highlight the “green
wash” issue and Leal Filho (2012) warns that the majority of the declarations and
action plans have never been fully implemented by HEIs. As stated by Bekessy et al.
(2007), the process of change is complex and requires various strategies for success.
Continuing the debates on barriers for the SD implementation in learning and
teaching, Lambrechts et al. (2013) underline that sustainability has been integrated
into the curricula in piecemeal, rather than holistic approaches. According to Wals
(2010), the rigid disciplinary structures of universities and content-based learning
are the key barriers in integrating the sustainability in curriculum. Lambrechts et al.
(2013) conclude that “until now, teaching and learning in HEIs has provided few
opportunities for students to develop their own values, skills, and attitudes” (p. 67).
Seeing that the attention given to competency-based education has recently grown,
competencies can be the starting point for proper integration of SD in HEIs.