About a year ago, I wrote this:
We are encouraged to take both the Copernicus Alliance, and EAUC’s LiFE (Learning in Future Environments), seriously, as major initiatives supporting sustainability and learning, and I have no doubt that, for those involved, there is something to be gained by membership. But those involved seem as rare as a Vice Chancellor who’s got a good word to say about ESD. Building on what remained of the Copernicus Campus, the Alliance currently has 19 members across Europe, more than a third of which are in Austria (with over half of these in Graz). Similarly (although over a shorter time, and only in the UK) LiFE has 17 university members signed up.
Who will be the first to 25, I wonder? My money (though not much of it) is on LiFE as it seems to have more to offer institutions, even if they are ponderously slow to appreciate this.
Well, there are now 15 university members of LiFE, which is something of a backward step, and 21 universities in Copernicus, (more than a third of which are still in Austria). This is not exactly a great leap forward.
So, what does this say about LiFE or Copernicus? Are they are too pricey for what they offer? Or is what they are offering not felt appropriate by those that might join? Or is it just that there's a tide ebbing against the joining of such things?
And will they both still be around in 12 months time? Well, this time, my money (though still not much of it) is on Copernicus because of its smart linking with UN processes.
Respond