The Integration of Competencies for Sustainable …
597
Each interview lasted 30 min on the average (ranging from 20 to 40 min) and all
of them were recorded and transcribed. Qualitative data were analysed by coding
and categorising the responses into the major conceptual areas.
During interviews, the questions about competencies for SD, were based on the
set of competencies provided recently by UNESCO (2017) (Table 2).
Five main themes were covered during the interview: (1) Does the wording of
competencies fit the meaning of the same competencies provided by the heads of
study programmes? (2) Which competencies of SD are treated by the heads of study
programmes as the most relevant in the context of each study programme? (3) To
what extent are the competencies of SD integrated in the study programmes? What
are the intentions and actual behaviour of the heads of study programmes as regards
the SD competencies? (4) What are the main barriers for the integration of the SD
competencies in study programmes? (5) What is the main value of integrating the
SD competencies into the curricula?
5 Results and Discussion
The wording and the meaning of competencies for SD from the point of view of the
heads of study programmes. At the beginning, it should be admitted that all interviewees indicated that they were highly aware of the SD principles. Sustainability-based
commitments made by the university, and the university strategy which focuses on
the transition towards sustainability were familiar to participants. However, knowing
some information does not imply that the content and the meaning of this information
is a part of daily life of the university and heads of study programmes.
As it was conceded, the majority of heads of study programmes treated the
UNESCO’s (2017) list of competencies for SD as a broad and extensive list. Some
of the interviewees even raised the question that competencies for SD reflected the
general key competencies, which were indeed relevant for the curricula. The majority of the heads of study programmes described precisely such competencies as
system thinking, critical thinking, integrated problem-solving, strategic and collaboration. There were more difficulties with the anticipatory competency and only a
few of participants were able to characterise clearly the content of normative and
self-awareness competencies. The lack of knowledge about the normative competency or self-awareness competency revealed that it could be quite problematic to
translate the wording of the mentioned competencies into the meaning. If people do
not understand something, they are not able to implement the same in real life. Referring to study programmes, it could be problematic for some of the heads to integrate
normative or self-awareness competencies in study programmes as they themselves
do not realise the explicit meaning of the wording. Actually, the presented findings
concerning the lack of knowledge in the field of SD are not surprising. For instance,
Bekessy et al. (2007) found that leaders of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
University felt the lack of knowledge what sustainability itself is due to its ambiguous
definition.
597
Each interview lasted 30 min on the average (ranging from 20 to 40 min) and all
of them were recorded and transcribed. Qualitative data were analysed by coding
and categorising the responses into the major conceptual areas.
During interviews, the questions about competencies for SD, were based on the
set of competencies provided recently by UNESCO (2017) (Table 2).
Five main themes were covered during the interview: (1) Does the wording of
competencies fit the meaning of the same competencies provided by the heads of
study programmes? (2) Which competencies of SD are treated by the heads of study
programmes as the most relevant in the context of each study programme? (3) To
what extent are the competencies of SD integrated in the study programmes? What
are the intentions and actual behaviour of the heads of study programmes as regards
the SD competencies? (4) What are the main barriers for the integration of the SD
competencies in study programmes? (5) What is the main value of integrating the
SD competencies into the curricula?
5 Results and Discussion
The wording and the meaning of competencies for SD from the point of view of the
heads of study programmes. At the beginning, it should be admitted that all interviewees indicated that they were highly aware of the SD principles. Sustainability-based
commitments made by the university, and the university strategy which focuses on
the transition towards sustainability were familiar to participants. However, knowing
some information does not imply that the content and the meaning of this information
is a part of daily life of the university and heads of study programmes.
As it was conceded, the majority of heads of study programmes treated the
UNESCO’s (2017) list of competencies for SD as a broad and extensive list. Some
of the interviewees even raised the question that competencies for SD reflected the
general key competencies, which were indeed relevant for the curricula. The majority of the heads of study programmes described precisely such competencies as
system thinking, critical thinking, integrated problem-solving, strategic and collaboration. There were more difficulties with the anticipatory competency and only a
few of participants were able to characterise clearly the content of normative and
self-awareness competencies. The lack of knowledge about the normative competency or self-awareness competency revealed that it could be quite problematic to
translate the wording of the mentioned competencies into the meaning. If people do
not understand something, they are not able to implement the same in real life. Referring to study programmes, it could be problematic for some of the heads to integrate
normative or self-awareness competencies in study programmes as they themselves
do not realise the explicit meaning of the wording. Actually, the presented findings
concerning the lack of knowledge in the field of SD are not surprising. For instance,
Bekessy et al. (2007) found that leaders of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
University felt the lack of knowledge what sustainability itself is due to its ambiguous
definition.