600
E. Staniškien˙ e and Ž. Stankeviˇ ci¯ ut˙ e
petency. As one head of a study programme claimed: “teaching how to deal with
risk and changes in very complex world requires profound knowledge from staff
and close collaboration with business. Evaluation of the future is a huge challenge”
(R3). Normative, self-awareness and integrated problem-solving competencies were
the least integrated in undergraduate programmes. This could be explained by the
attitude of heads of study programmes as they, as it was told before, do not treat the
mentioned competencies as relevant in the context of study programmes. Moreover,
normative and self-awareness competencies were not accurately perceived by heads
of study programmes and such mismatch between wording and meaning leads to
poor integration.
The situation with the graduate programmes reflected essentially the situation with
the undergraduate programmes. Systems thinking and strategic competencies were
mostly referred to the group of competencies integrated in the study programmes.
Self-awareness and normative competencies were lacking integration in the graduate
programmes. According to one interviewee: “university cannot develop all competencies. We expect that students enter a university with some skills and attitudes. And
this hope is related with such competencies as self-awareness or normative competencies” (R2). During the interviews, economic growth, environmentally friendly
and socially responsible practices were mentioned as the main indicators showing
that competencies for SD are part of programme: “our alumni are able to accept the
decisions which are beneficial not only for stakeholders of the companies, but also
for the society and environment” (R2).
The previous research mainly provided analysis using the key competencies for SD
defined by Roorda (2010) or other authors, but not recently introduced by UNESCO
(2017). That makes it quite difficult to compare the findings. Nonetheless, some
insights could still be proposed. For instance, the findings concerning the integration
of competencies are only partly in line with findings of Lambrechts et al. (2013) as
the competency of system orientation is one of the most integrated competencies
according to the recent research.
The study revealed a certain mismatch between the intentions and actual behaviour
of the heads as regards the SD competencies. Heads of study programmes are part
of university administration. It is widely known that leadership of administration is
essential to achieve the SD goals (Bekessy et al. 2007). Although the heads acknowledged their responsibility for the implementation of SD competencies and emphasised the relevance of competencies, they did not behave proactively. The heads of
study programmes relied heavily on teachers hoping that they would spontaneously
integrate competencies of SD in their subject. Some of them said: “I think teachers
include competencies for SD, I fully trust the teachers and, to be honest, it is impossible to document all the aspects; we believe that students acquire the competencies
for SD” (R11).
The main barriers for the integration of the SD competencies in study programmes.
Several barriers were mentioned for deeper integration of competencies in study
programmes. One of the barriers was related with the duration of studies. Several
interviewees stated that in graduate programmes it was quite difficult to devote much
time for competencies for SD as the majority of students generally wished to acquire:
E. Staniškien˙ e and Ž. Stankeviˇ ci¯ ut˙ e
petency. As one head of a study programme claimed: “teaching how to deal with
risk and changes in very complex world requires profound knowledge from staff
and close collaboration with business. Evaluation of the future is a huge challenge”
(R3). Normative, self-awareness and integrated problem-solving competencies were
the least integrated in undergraduate programmes. This could be explained by the
attitude of heads of study programmes as they, as it was told before, do not treat the
mentioned competencies as relevant in the context of study programmes. Moreover,
normative and self-awareness competencies were not accurately perceived by heads
of study programmes and such mismatch between wording and meaning leads to
poor integration.
The situation with the graduate programmes reflected essentially the situation with
the undergraduate programmes. Systems thinking and strategic competencies were
mostly referred to the group of competencies integrated in the study programmes.
Self-awareness and normative competencies were lacking integration in the graduate
programmes. According to one interviewee: “university cannot develop all competencies. We expect that students enter a university with some skills and attitudes. And
this hope is related with such competencies as self-awareness or normative competencies” (R2). During the interviews, economic growth, environmentally friendly
and socially responsible practices were mentioned as the main indicators showing
that competencies for SD are part of programme: “our alumni are able to accept the
decisions which are beneficial not only for stakeholders of the companies, but also
for the society and environment” (R2).
The previous research mainly provided analysis using the key competencies for SD
defined by Roorda (2010) or other authors, but not recently introduced by UNESCO
(2017). That makes it quite difficult to compare the findings. Nonetheless, some
insights could still be proposed. For instance, the findings concerning the integration
of competencies are only partly in line with findings of Lambrechts et al. (2013) as
the competency of system orientation is one of the most integrated competencies
according to the recent research.
The study revealed a certain mismatch between the intentions and actual behaviour
of the heads as regards the SD competencies. Heads of study programmes are part
of university administration. It is widely known that leadership of administration is
essential to achieve the SD goals (Bekessy et al. 2007). Although the heads acknowledged their responsibility for the implementation of SD competencies and emphasised the relevance of competencies, they did not behave proactively. The heads of
study programmes relied heavily on teachers hoping that they would spontaneously
integrate competencies of SD in their subject. Some of them said: “I think teachers
include competencies for SD, I fully trust the teachers and, to be honest, it is impossible to document all the aspects; we believe that students acquire the competencies
for SD” (R11).
The main barriers for the integration of the SD competencies in study programmes.
Several barriers were mentioned for deeper integration of competencies in study
programmes. One of the barriers was related with the duration of studies. Several
interviewees stated that in graduate programmes it was quite difficult to devote much
time for competencies for SD as the majority of students generally wished to acquire: