My keynote at the 6th Beijing Forum on ESD was about the problem of identifying sustainable development indicators that focus on the contribution of education; that is, ESD. \u00a0This is the text of the talk ...<\/p>\n
The Development of<\/em><\/strong> ESD indicators \u2013 e<\/em><\/strong>xploring frameworks and criteria<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The issue of writing indicators for both sustainable development and for ESD is one that UN agencies and national governments have struggled over for some time.\u00a0 In terms of sustainable development, this is particularly important if we are to know whether we\u2019re becoming more sustainable \u2013 or at least less unsustainable, and whether policy and strategy need to be changed.\u00a0 This is a significant challenge, but a necessary one.<\/p>\n The use of indicators is now widespread, but it carries considerable risk.\u00a0 Both the rationale, that is, the need for good information, and the risk that we will measure the wrong thing, are noted here:<\/p>\n Where there is no reliable accounting and therefore no competent knowledge\u00a0of the economic and ecological effects of our lives, we cannot live lives that are\u00a0economically and ecologically responsible<\/em>.\u00a0 Wendell Berry<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n That which is good and helpful ought to be<\/em> <\/em>growing and that which is bad and hindering<\/em> <\/em>ought to be diminishing.\u00a0 ...\u00a0 We therefore need,<\/em> <\/em>above all else, ...\u00a0 concepts that enable us to<\/em> <\/em>choose the right direction of our movement and<\/em> <\/em>not merely to measure its speed. <\/em>EF Schumacher<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n We try to measure what we value.\u00a0 We come to value what we measure<\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0 Donella Meadows<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The challenge is just as great in relation to ESD, as it is for sustainable development itself, if we\u2019re serious in thinking that ESD can make a contribution to sustainable development, as well as to student learning.\u00a0 Conceptually, this is all complex.\u00a0 However, it is something that practitioners, school leaders, and policy-makers need to consider as they promote ESD beyond the Decade in the global action programme for educational reform and development.\u00a0 I shall explore these issues and the criteria for an ESD school indicator framework based on both theoretical and pragmatic perspectives.<\/p>\n I\u2019ll begin by saying something about indicators in general before moving on to sustainability and ESD as, what you can say in general must also apply in particular to ESD indicators.\u00a0 Indicators can \u2026<\/p>\n Indicators summarise information, measure change, raise awareness, warn of problems, aid communication, and help decision-making, and need to be written with clarity, and to be developed systematically.\u00a0 This is the logic to their generation ...<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n To evaluate is to form a judgement about progress made towards purposes, and indicators help us understand the value of such judgements.\u00a0 We use indicators to show the extent to which desired outcomes are met.\u00a0 In our professional practice, the idea and use of key performance indicators is now commonplace.\u00a0 But this does not make their use easy, or uncontroversial.<\/p>\n While it\u2019s important to have indicators, it\u2019s also important not to accept uncritically what they appear to tell us, particularly in contexts where complexity and uncertainty are the norm.\u00a0 Let me illustrate this.\u00a0 The UK had 68 sustainable development indicators before they were changed 6 months ago.\u00a0 The indicator for education was the proportion of <\/em>19 year-olds with Level 2 qualifications and above<\/em>.<\/p>\n This is easy to understand, and to measure, but what does it really tell us?\u00a0 Probably, only the proportion of 19 year-olds with particular qualifications, as there\u2019s no obvious link to whether we\u2019re developing on a sustainable pathway.\u00a0 The new indicators remove this problem as they don\u2019t mention education directly at all.<\/p>\n These are the 12 headline indicators that are high-level outcome measures which capture priority issues in line with the \u2018guiding principles\u2019 of sustainable development.\u00a0 These are organised in terms of economy, society, and environment, with 4 headline indicators each.<\/p>\n Economy<\/strong> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Economic prosperity \/ Long term unemployment \/ Poverty \/ Knowledge & skills<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Society<\/strong> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Healthy life expectancy \/ Social Capital \/ Social mobility in adulthood \/ Housing provision<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Environment<\/strong> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Greenhouse gas emissions \/ Natural resource use \/ Wildlife: bird population indices \/ Water use<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n There is an implicit reference to education as part of the knowledge and skills<\/em> indicator under \u201cEconomy\u201d.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Human capital stock & Human capital per head<\/span><\/p>\n Where human capital is defined as \u201cthe knowledge, skills, competencies and attributes embodied in individuals that facilitate the creation of personal, social and economic well-being\u201d (OECD, 2001). <\/span> <\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n This is not straightforward.\u00a0 There\u2019s no clear link to sustainable development, and no mention of ESD.\u00a0 It\u2019s much the same as the old indicator.\u00a0 Although it is more sophisticated, it\u2019s now much harder to make sense of \u2013 and to measure.<\/p>\n Because of this limited view of human capital, we find that a lifetime of education and training will count as a contribution to sustainable development, whether or not there\u2019s any focus on sustainability \u2013 that is, any ESD.\u00a0 This seems strange.\u00a0 However, it also means that, even if there is ESD, it will not be acknowledged.\u00a0 This seems even stranger.<\/p>\n There is, of course, a much bigger problem which applies to all indicators.\u00a0 It\u2019s been suggested that such headline indicators represent a sort of barometer or compass bearing.\u00a0 For example, if all the indicators can be lined up so that they\u2019re all pointing in the right direction, then we can conclude that we\u2019re making progress along the sustainable development pathway.\u00a0 It\u2019s a pleasing, and reassuring, metaphor.<\/p>\n However, there\u2019s a major problem with this view:<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n In other words, if you fail to meet an indicator, then you know there\u2019s work to do; if you do meet it, however, there\u2019s always uncertainty about how appropriate the indicator was in the first place.\u00a0 And there\u2019s the risk that positive results will send the wrong message.\u00a0 For example, if we were to succeed in keeping the global temperature rise below, say, 3o <\/sup>C, we\u2019d still have to wait for years to see whether that had been enough.<\/p>\n In this sense, using indicators is rather like looking in a car\u2019s rear-view mirror.\u00a0 It enables us to see where we\u2019ve been \u2013 to see how well we\u2019re driving \u2013 to see something of the progress we\u2019ve made.\u00a0 On a good journey, there will be a clear road behind us.\u00a0 On a bad day, however, we will see the crashed cars and the bodies in the road.\u00a0 The mirror alerts us to how we\u2019ve been doing so far, but tells us nothing about what\u2019s ahead.\u00a0 The point here is that though mirrors \u2013 and indicators \u2013 are useful, they are an imperfect guide to the future.\u00a0 You need to keep your eye on rear-view mirrors \u2013 to ensure that they don\u2019t distort what has happened.\u00a0 The same applies to indicators.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Accuracy, timeliness, clarity, field of view, and ease of access, are all crucial qualities in an indicator (and a mirror), and the view you have should be both valid and meaningful.\u00a0 A constant danger is that you produce indicators that are easy to measure, but which lack intellectual and policy coherence.\u00a0 This is particularly true of ESD.\u00a0 The potential benefits and risks of ESD indicators are probably the same as for any indicator.\u00a0 These are:<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Benefit:<\/span><\/p>\n Risk:<\/span><\/p>\n So much is straightforward, and applies to ESD as it does to, say, biodiversity.<\/p>\n Both of these need a conceptual frame if indicators are to be developed.\u00a0 With biodiversity, the link to sustainable development seems clear, but to what extent is this the case with ESD? \u00a0This is the UK\u2019s new headline indicator measure for bird populations:<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Indicator measure<\/strong>: <\/span>Wildlife: Bird population indices - farmland birds, (b) woodland birds, (c) seabirds and (d) water and wetland birds<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Rationale<\/strong>: <\/span>Natural capital includes those elements of the environment that yield resources and ecosystem services, but we cannot determine our entire capital of natural resources and instead have to focus on selected aspects of the natural environment and changes in its state.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The rationale here is that populations of key species of birds are a good indicator of the broad state of wildlife and the countryside because they occupy a wide range of habitats and have key positions in the food chain.\u00a0 This seems sound because the conceptual framing of biodiversity is robust.\u00a0 We\u2019re using bird population measures to infer information about much broader issues \u2013 which is sound indicator practice we should bear in mind for ESD.<\/p>\n There is, for example, little ambiguity about bird populations, though there will be methodological issues in the estimation of their numbers.\u00a0 We are, of course, really interested in how these indicator values change over time, with upward trends being desired.<\/p>\n So what can we say about an indicator for ESD?\u00a0 We might start by asking about the relationship between ESD and sustainable development, and whether it is sufficiently conceptually robust?\u00a0\u00a0 You will have your own views on this.<\/p>\n Here are two frameworks from the literature illustrating how we might both think about ESD, and research its effectiveness:<\/p>\n ESD<\/strong> is \u2026 <\/span>Teaching which develops in students an understanding of the nature of society and its relationship with the environment, together with the capabilities and potential to promote justice in the distribution of economic, social and environmental assets, now and for the future.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n ESD<\/strong> is \u2026 <\/span>Teaching which contains a significant element of work related to either or both of the natural environment and natural resources, plus a significant element of work related to either economic or social issues (or to both).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The first of these is about students developing an understanding of the nature of society and its relationship with the environment, and sees sustainable development primarily in terms of increasing<\/em> equity and global social justice.\u00a0 The second has a prime focus on the natural environment and natural resources, and sees sustainable development more in terms of reducing<\/em> the environmentally unsustainable impacts of economic and social development.\u00a0 Are both these ESD?\u00a0 Can both be ESD?\u00a0 If so, are they poles on a continuum of ideas, or mutually inconsistent and competing views?\u00a0 Either way, any attempt to generate indicators for these two frames would lead to different outcomes.<\/p>\n A lot of the thinking about ESD indicators has been at the system level, and has been about structures and quality assurance.\u00a0 And there\u2019s always a temptation to cover a lot of ground \u2013 to try to identify every aspect of what is being considered.\u00a0 But this is always a mistake as it results in so many indicators that they obscure rather than illuminate, as any meaningful signals are lost in the noise of communication.<\/p>\n We can think of ESD indicators at different levels.\u00a0 Three possible levels are: an institution, a course of study, and the actual learning that results.<\/p>\n The following sets out a number of attributes that might characterise an educational institution that takes sustainability seriously; that is, issues around sustainability \u2026<\/p>\n As possible precursors of indicators, these seem fine, up to a point.\u00a0 But they are generic.\u00a0 They mention, sustainability, but are not obviously about it, and other ideas could be substituted: health<\/em>, or enterprise<\/em> are both possibilities.\u00a0 For example, if you replace sustainability by health & well being in the above, it still makes sense, and so it seems that this cannot be specific enough.<\/p>\n The risk in all this is that we have an approach to ESD indicators where they don\u2019t really relate to sustainable development.\u00a0 So, perhaps more detail will help.\u00a0 The following attributes seem to be characteristic of an institution that is orientated towards sustainability.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n A social learning community with a systemic view of the world and a heightened sense of place that \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n Here we see a focus on environmental impact, on reducing natural resource use and waste, and on how facilities are used for learning and social cohesion.\u00a0 There\u2019s a focus on outdoor and experiential learning, and on engagement with real-world issues in authentic settings.\u00a0 Here, even though sustainable development is not mentioned, these seem more obviously about it that the previous set.<\/p>\n So, what about the next level: courses or programmes of study?\u00a0 What can we look for in these?\u00a0 This is more tricky, although you might think it should be straightforward.\u00a0 Can\u2019t we just look at what curricula and schemes of work say?\u00a0 This is an approach that is used in some parts of Europe.\u00a0 But is it really enough to see whether terms such as \u2018sustainability\u2019 are mentioned, or whether there\u2019s a focus on the interplay of social, economic and environmental issues?<\/p>\n But just relying on counting things does not seem enough.\u00a0 After all, it\u2019s what teachers do with such programmes that tells you whether the experience has a sustainability focus, and, whether the learner experience is any good.\u00a0 In a similar way, as well as estimating numbers, you have to ask how healthy and viable bird populations are.\u00a0 This brings us to the question of what people actually learn from all this.<\/p>\n So, can we say anything about how that might be framed?\u00a0 Here\u2019s one possible frame for ESD learning that sees such outcomes in terms of Knowledge and Understanding, Skills, and Attributes:<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Knowledge and understanding<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Skills<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Attributes<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n This is a conventional way of viewing such things although the sub-headings used here show a particular emphasis on understanding systems and interconnections, and on bringing about change.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n The following is another way of thinking about knowledge and understanding that seems to show a different emphasis \u2026<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Whilst it seems possible to develop a large number of indicators based on all these, is it sensible?\u00a0\u00a0 We\u2019ve seen the problems with that sort of approach: you get a lot of information, but not much clarity.<\/p>\n There\u2019s also another issue.\u00a0 Stephen Sterling warns us about being too focused on determining or predicting the outcome of an action or intervention, because of complexity and uncertainty.<\/p>\n \"In complex situations, it is simply impossible to determine or predict the outcome of an action or intervention.\u00a0 We live in a culture interested in certainty, prediction, and control through setting measures such as 'performance indicators', and 'specific learning outcomes'.\u00a0 Yet increasing uncertainty means that we need to become more comfortable with ambiguity and approximation.\"<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Sterling says that we need to become more comfortable with ambiguity and approximation.\u00a0 And learning is always complex, and its outcomes are not only uncertain, but largely indeterminate.\u00a0 Thinking about birds again, we might remember that a few key species were a good indicator because they occupy a range of habitats and have key positions in the food chain.\u00a0 Here, bird population measures allow us to infer information about much broader issues.\u00a0 Can we use this approach for education and ESD?<\/p>\n Could we agree on a few key aspects of an educational experience that would allow us to infer information about its effectiveness in relation to sustainability?\u00a0 If so, what should we look for?<\/p>\n Stephen Gough has argued that, because sustainable development necessarily implies a change in the models we use to live by, then any ESD programme should challenge these models by asking questions about how we live \u2013 and might live.\u00a0 He said that we should try to \u2018catch this change\u2019 \u2013 the dynamic in the educational process, and focus on the choices that have been made in relation to change and to learning.\u00a0 I wonder, do such choices and change offer the possibilities of being a useful focus for an indicator for education and ESD?<\/p>\n This brings me back to the question of what\u2019s to count as sustainable development in the first place, and therefore what\u2019s to count as ESD.\u00a0 As this is where I usually end up, it seems a good place to stop.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" My keynote at the 6th Beijing Forum on ESD was about the problem of identifying sustainable development indicators that focus on the contribution of education; that is, ESD. \u00a0This is the text of the talk ... The Development of ESD...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":237,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4907","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-talks-and-presentations"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4907","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/237"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4907"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4907\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4907"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4907"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4907"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n