396
O. Khalaim and S. Urenje
The assumption about a personal “goodwill” of a teacher in the decision of
including the climate change topic in his/her discipline, preliminary indicated in the
crosscut survey results, was clearly confirmed by answers under in-depth interview.
All teachers include topics related to sustainability, environmental issues, and climate
change to their disciplines as their own initiative and decision. Nobody claimed that
it was an obligation of curricula or external requirement of the department or faculty.
There were few courses mentioned as originally designed by teachers themselves;
the majority of respondents expressed their satisfaction related to courses’ content
and explained it as an expression of their personal awareness, as well as an attempt
to follow the current global challenges. Here it is important to recall the national
policy documents analyzed in the “Contextual Profile” section above, that do not
provide any formal basis for including CCESD in university disciplines. Since there
are neither ministerial nor university policy recommendations on ESD and CCESD in
particular, teachers have to make their own initiative based on their personal interest.
The second block of interview questions was related to personal attitudes of
respondents towards climate change problem and observations on any climatic skepticism in the university community (see Annex I). Here all respondents agree that
climate change is a relevant problem for Ukraine and feel its impact on themselves.
The majority do not observe any climatic skepticism neither in terms of climate
change denial, nor in its anthropogenic origin. Few teachers were complaining about
the low level of students’ interest in this topic, and somewhat practical, “cynic” attitude towards the educational process. “I have a feeling that they just need a university
degree for a further carrier… They are not truly interested in the content and not motivated to really dive in the climate change problem”—claimed one of the respondents.
This point turns us to a discussion on the purpose of education for sustainable development as that growing good citizens participating in civic activities and taking care
of the future of society, rather than good specialists in their field. The students’ attitude
towards education described by respondent shows a misperception of the educational
goals by students. On the one hand, it could be a result of general fatigue and helplessness caused by general negative pressure of mass media about the issue. On the
other hand, it raises a question if the university community and the Ukrainian system
of formal higher education efficiently introduce ESD to avoid these misperceptions.
Additionally, teachers’ personal example of ecological awareness and sustainable
lifestyle can be questioned. Do they provide enough personal evidence for students
to take action and be motivated in solving climate change induced threats? Alternatively, do we have a situation of a commonly inactive citizen position of the majority
of teachers which results in the students’ “eco-cynicism” described by respondents?
To solve the problem of students’ lack of basic knowledge and motivation to
interdisciplinary studies, some respondents proposed to set up an obligatory course
of Ecology or Sustainable Development to all students regardless the specialty.
However, none of them mentioned ESD framework as an approach to induce positive changes, to face lack of concern and lack of civic action. The promise of ESD is
on rethinking how appropriate and successful practices may change and transform
society by engaging with new forms of learning and human activities which sustain
viable livelihoods. Four responses to the sustainability challenge were identified by
O. Khalaim and S. Urenje
The assumption about a personal “goodwill” of a teacher in the decision of
including the climate change topic in his/her discipline, preliminary indicated in the
crosscut survey results, was clearly confirmed by answers under in-depth interview.
All teachers include topics related to sustainability, environmental issues, and climate
change to their disciplines as their own initiative and decision. Nobody claimed that
it was an obligation of curricula or external requirement of the department or faculty.
There were few courses mentioned as originally designed by teachers themselves;
the majority of respondents expressed their satisfaction related to courses’ content
and explained it as an expression of their personal awareness, as well as an attempt
to follow the current global challenges. Here it is important to recall the national
policy documents analyzed in the “Contextual Profile” section above, that do not
provide any formal basis for including CCESD in university disciplines. Since there
are neither ministerial nor university policy recommendations on ESD and CCESD in
particular, teachers have to make their own initiative based on their personal interest.
The second block of interview questions was related to personal attitudes of
respondents towards climate change problem and observations on any climatic skepticism in the university community (see Annex I). Here all respondents agree that
climate change is a relevant problem for Ukraine and feel its impact on themselves.
The majority do not observe any climatic skepticism neither in terms of climate
change denial, nor in its anthropogenic origin. Few teachers were complaining about
the low level of students’ interest in this topic, and somewhat practical, “cynic” attitude towards the educational process. “I have a feeling that they just need a university
degree for a further carrier… They are not truly interested in the content and not motivated to really dive in the climate change problem”—claimed one of the respondents.
This point turns us to a discussion on the purpose of education for sustainable development as that growing good citizens participating in civic activities and taking care
of the future of society, rather than good specialists in their field. The students’ attitude
towards education described by respondent shows a misperception of the educational
goals by students. On the one hand, it could be a result of general fatigue and helplessness caused by general negative pressure of mass media about the issue. On the
other hand, it raises a question if the university community and the Ukrainian system
of formal higher education efficiently introduce ESD to avoid these misperceptions.
Additionally, teachers’ personal example of ecological awareness and sustainable
lifestyle can be questioned. Do they provide enough personal evidence for students
to take action and be motivated in solving climate change induced threats? Alternatively, do we have a situation of a commonly inactive citizen position of the majority
of teachers which results in the students’ “eco-cynicism” described by respondents?
To solve the problem of students’ lack of basic knowledge and motivation to
interdisciplinary studies, some respondents proposed to set up an obligatory course
of Ecology or Sustainable Development to all students regardless the specialty.
However, none of them mentioned ESD framework as an approach to induce positive changes, to face lack of concern and lack of civic action. The promise of ESD is
on rethinking how appropriate and successful practices may change and transform
society by engaging with new forms of learning and human activities which sustain
viable livelihoods. Four responses to the sustainability challenge were identified by