Sustainability Education and Organizational Change: A Critical Case Study of Barriers and Change Drivers at a Higher Education Institution

Abstract

Integrating sustainability within institutions of higher education can have a tremendous impact on students, faculty, and the larger community. Sustainability efforts also experience many barriers to implementation within higher education contexts. A change management perspective can help characterize these barriers and ways to overcome them. In this critical case study, we use a process model to examine the kinds of barriers Kennesaw State University (KSU) has faced regarding implementation of academic sustainability and to evaluate change drivers that can advance sustainability during a time of leadership change. The process model evaluates barriers and change drivers according to published frameworks, and provides a way for higher education institutions to identify the most difficult barriers, easily surmountable barriers, and areas where change drivers can have the most impact. At KSU, the process model identified the self-determination of middle-tier change drivers as the most important way to advance sustainable development in higher education institutions (SD in HEI) until new leadership emerges. The process model is iterative and modifiable, because the specific frameworks used in the process model may vary depending upon the needs of each HEI and stage of progression toward SD.

Investigating Students’ Sustainability Awareness and the Curriculum of Technology Education in Pakistan

“…Sustainability conceptualization and its practices in the technology development field are necessary for addressing the industry's current and future needs [28]. To address the concern of the industry, it has been argued that an appropriate curriculum should provide sustainability education to students of related technology disciplines [29].…”

Imperatives of Sustainable University Excellence: A Conceptual Framework

“…This latter observation is a critical motivation of so-called "springboard" models and assessment methods-ones that are relatively simple as a means of "springing" users of such models and methods toward relevant objectives-in this case, progress toward sustainable university excellence. In this spirit, assessment of institutional progress and performance relative to each of the seven core areas is examined through four simply expressed lens, symbolized by N, E, W and S [127]. Lenses for each core area are cited in Table 1, with those described in the table being initial "strawmen" and hence subject to refinement or substitution as this methodology evolves.…”

“…Such scales typically use a gradation approach, with gradation ranging from, say, 0-to-10 or 0-to-5, with each level representing progress beyond the prior level and each level clearly described [1]. Similarly, a university will describe their performance and progress in each assessed area, so that the gap between actual progress and performance, and (descriptive) maturity levels can be identified and strategies aimed at closing or eliminating gaps can be formed and executed [127,128].…”

Sustainable Academic Motivation

“…The concept of sustainable development is very general and can be applied to many different problems in the areas of science, technology, philosophy, and even politics [7] (p. 43). "Sustainable development in higher-education institutions presents distinct challenges, which require an understanding of the inherent, multifaceted complexity of sustainability and the interdisciplinary nature of the subject matter" [8] (p. 1). Motivation is the most important power that provides a great space for sustainable development, but, on the other hand, it also strongly complicates and interferes with sustainable development [9][10][11][12].…”