Advertisement

Evaluating core competencies and learning outcomes for training the next generation of sustainability researchers

  • Samuel G. RoyEmail author
  • Simone Pereira de Souza
  • Bridie McGreavy
  • Caroline Gottschalk Druschke
  • David D. Hart
  • Kevin Gardner
Case Report
  • 134 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Sustainability Science Innovation and Capacity Development

Abstract

The need to train sustainability scientists and engineers to address the complex problems of our world has never been more apparent. We organized an interdisciplinary team of instructors from universities in the states of Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island who designed, taught, and assessed a multi-university course to develop the core competencies necessary for advancing sustainability solutions. Lessons from the course translate across sustainability contexts, but our specific focus was on the issues and trade-offs associated with dams. Dams provide numerous water, energy, and cultural services to society while exacting an ecological toll that disrupts the flow of water, fish, and sediment in rivers. Like many natural resource management challenges, effective dam decisions require collaboration among diverse stakeholders and disciplines. We linked key sustainability principles and practices related to interdisciplinarity, stakeholder engagement, and problem-solving to student learning outcomes that are generalizable beyond our dam-specific context. Students and instructors co-created class activities to build capacity for interdisciplinary collaboration and encourage student leadership and creativity. Assessment results show that students responded positively to activities related to stakeholder engagement and interdisciplinary collaboration, particularly when practicing nested discussion and intrapersonal reflection. These activities helped broaden students’ perspectives on sustainability problems and built greater capacity for constructive communication and student leadership.

Keywords

Sustainability science Pedagogy Interdisciplinary Class Course Evaluation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The data used in this paper are available upon request. This Grant was supported by NSF- 1539071 to K. Gardner, P. Kirshen, D. Hart, E. Uchida, and A. Gold. This paper benefitted from comments by two anonymous reviewers, and contributions by A. Gold, V. Levesque, C. Ashcraft, J. Zydlewski, K. Wilson, all participating students, all stakeholders, and members of the future of dams cohort.

Supplementary material

11625_2019_707_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (81 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 80 kb)
11625_2019_707_MOESM2_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 15 kb)
11625_2019_707_MOESM3_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 17 kb)
11625_2019_707_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (757 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 756 kb)

References

  1. Addor N, Ewen T, Johnson L et al (2015) From products to processes: academic events to foster interdisciplinary and iterative dialogue in a changing climate. Earth’s Futur 3:289–297.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2015EF000303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson TW (1958) An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashcraft C, Susskind L (2008) Long river: confronting the challenges of instream flow. Harvard Law School, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Barth M, Michelsen G (2013) Learning for change: an educational contribution to sustainability science. Sustain Sci 8:103–119.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-012-0181-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barth M, Godeman J, Rieckmann M, Stoltenberg U (2007) Developing key competencies for sustainable development in higher education. Int J Sustain High Educ 8:416–430.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370710823582 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brewer GD (1999) The challenges of interdisciplinarity. Policy Sci 32:327–337.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004706019826 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F et al (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:8086–8091.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231332100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Choi BCK, Pak AWP (2006) Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clin Investig Med 29:351–364.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.201090065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark WC, van Kerkhoff L, Lebel L, Gallopin GC (2016) Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:4570–4578.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1601266113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook C, Heath F, Thompson RL, Thompson B (2001) Score reliability in web- or internet-based surveys: unnumbered graphic rating scales versus likert-type scales. Educ Psychol Meas 61:697–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Creswell JW (2014) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  13. Daniels SE, Walker GB (2012) Lessons from the trenches: twenty years of using systems thinking in natural resource conflict situations. Syst Res Behav Sci 29:104–115.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dewulf A, François G, Pahl-Wostl C, Taillieu T (2007) A framing approach to cross-disciplinary research collaboration: experiences from a large-scale research project on adaptive water management. Ecol Soc 12:14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Druschke CG, Hychka KC (2015) Manager perspectives on communication and public engagement in ecological restoration project success. Ecol Soc 20(1):58.  https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07451-200158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardner SK (2013) Paradigmatic differences, power, and status: a qualitative investigation of faculty in one interdisciplinary research collaboration on sustainability science. Sustain Sci 8:241–252.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-012-0182-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Habron G, Goralnik L, Thorp L (2012) Embracing the learning paradigm to foster systems thinking. Int J Sustain High Educ 13(4):378–393.  https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780610660013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart DD, Buizer JL, Foley JA et al (2016) Mobilizing the power of higher education to tackle the grand challenge of sustainability: lessons from novel initiatives. Elem Sci Anthr 4:000090.  https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heemskerk M, Wilson K, Pavao-Zuckerman M (2003) Conceptual models as tool for communication across disciplines. Conserv Ecol 7:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jackson FR (1993) Seven strategies to support a culturally responsive pedagogy. J Read 37:298–303.  https://doi.org/10.2307/40017437 (CR–Copyright ©; 1993 International) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jasanoff S (2004) Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In: Jasanoff S (ed) States of knowledge: the co-production of science and the social order. Routledge, New York, NY, pp 25–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kagan S (1989) The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educ Leadersh 47:12–15Google Scholar
  23. Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R et al (2001) Sustainability science. Science 292:641–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Knowlton JL, Halvorsen KE, Handler RM, O’Rourke M (2014) Teaching interdisciplinary sustainability science teamwork skills to graduate students using in-person and web-based interactions. Sustainability 6(12):9428–9440.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su6129428 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Komives SR (2011) Advancing Leadership Education. In: Komives SR, Dugan JP, Owen JE, Slack C, Wagner W (eds) Student leadership development, 2nd edn. Wiley, San Francisco, CA, pp 1–32Google Scholar
  26. Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M et al (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7:25–43.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lindenfeld LA, Hall DM, Mcgreavy B et al (2012) Creating a place for environmental communication research in sustainability science. Environ Commun A J Nat Cult 6:23–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyman F (1987) Think-pair-share: an expanding teaching technique. MAA-CIE Coop News 1:1–2Google Scholar
  29. McGreavy B, Druschke CG, Sprain L et al (2016) Environmental communication pedagogy for sustainability: developing core capacities to engage with complex problems. Appl Environ Educ Commun 0389:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1533015X.2016.1181018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McGreavy B, Druschke CG, Sprain L et al (2017) Praxis-based environmental communication training: innovative activities for problem solving. In: Milstein T, Pileggi M, Morgan E (eds) Environmental communication pedagogy and practice. Routledge, New York, pp 229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer SR, Levesque VR, Bieluch KH et al (2016) Sustainability science graduate students as boundary spanners. J Environ Stud Sci 6:344–353.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0313-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morse WC, Nielsen-pincus M, Force JE, Wulfhorst JD (2007) Bridges and barriers to developing and conducting interdisciplinary graduate-student team research. Ecol Soc 12:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Neuendorf KA (2017) The content analysis guidebook. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  34. Opperman JJ, Royte J, Banks J et al (2011) The Penobscot river, Maine, USA: a basin-scale approach to balancing power generation and ecosystem restoration. Ecol Soc 16:04.  https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04117-160307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roy SG, Uchida E, de Souza SP et al (2018) A multiscale approach to balance trade-offs among dam infrastructure, river restoration, and cost. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115:12069–12074.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1807437115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scodanibbio L, Mañez G (2005) The World Commission on Dams: a fundamental step towards integrated water resources management and poverty reduction? A pilot case in the lower Zambezi, Mozambique. Phys Chem Earth 30:976–983.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2005.08.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Seemiller C (2013) The student leadership competencies guidebook: designing intentional leadership learning and development. Wiley, USAGoogle Scholar
  38. Senecah SL (2004) The trinity of voice: the role of practical theory in planning and evaluating the effectiveness of environmental participatory processes. In: Depoe SP, Delicath JW, Elsenbeer M-FA (eds) Communication and public participation in environmental decision making, 1st edn. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 13–33Google Scholar
  39. Sprain L, Timpson WM (2012) Pedagogy for sustainability science: case-based approaches for interdisciplinary instruction pedagogy for sustainability science: case-based approaches for interdisciplinary instruction. pp 37–41.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2012.714394
  40. Stauffacher M, Walter AI, Lang DJ et al (2006) Learning to research environmental problems from a functional socio-cultural constructivism perspective: the transdisciplinary case study approach. Int J Sustain High Educ 7:252–275.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370610677838 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tamura M, Uegaki T (2012) Development of an educational model for sustainability science: challenges in the mind-skills-knowledge education at Ibaraki University. Sustain Sci 7:253–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0156-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tamura M, Onuki M, Sekiyama M et al (2018) Developing joint educational programs in sustainability science across different universities: a case study from Japan. Sustain Sci 13:849–860.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0503-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thompson JL (2009) Building collective communication competence in interdisciplinary research teams. J Appl Commun Res 37:278–298.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880903025911 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thoren H, Persson J (2013) The philosophy of interdisciplinarity: sustainability science and problem-feeding. J Gen Philos Sci 44:337–355.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-013-9233-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trott CD, Weinberg AE, McMeeking LBS (2018) Prefiguring sustainability through participatory action research experiences for undergraduates: reflections and recommendations for student development. Sustainability 10:3332.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093332 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van der Leeuw S, Wiek A, Harlow J, Buizer J (2012) How much time do we have? Urgency and rhetoric in sustainability science. Sustain Sci 7:115–120.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0153-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Voorberg WH, Bekkers VJJM, Tummers LG (2015) A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Manag Rev 17:1333–1357.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Walker GB, Senecah SL, Daniels SE (2006) From the forest to the river: citizens’ views of stakeholder engagement. Hum Ecol Rev 13:193–202Google Scholar
  49. Wamsler C, Brossmann J, Hendersson H et al (2018) Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Sustain Sci 13:143–162.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0428-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Westberg L, Hallgren L, Setterwall A (2010) Communicative skills development of administrators: a necessary step for implementing participatory policies in natural resource management. Environ Commun A J Nat Cult 4:225–236.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17524031003755309 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Whitmer A, Ogden L, Lawton J et al (2010) The engaged university: providing a platform for research that transforms society. Front Ecol Environ 8(6):314–321.  https://doi.org/10.1890/090241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wiek A, Withycombe L, Redman CL (2011) Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustain Sci 6:203–218.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0132-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wiek A, Farioli F, Fukushi K, Yarime M (2012) Sustainability science: bridging the gap between science and society. Sustain Sci 7:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0154-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiesendanger KD, Bader L (1992) Cooperative grouping in literacy instruction. Read Horizons 32:403–410Google Scholar
  55. Wiggins G, McTighe J (eds) (2005) Understanding by design, 2nd edn. Pearson, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. Winowiecki L, Smukler S, Shirley K et al (2011) Tools for enhancing interdisciplinary communication. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 7:74–80Google Scholar
  57. Woods C (2007) Researching and developing interdisciplinary teaching: towards a conceptual framework for classroom communication. High Educ 54:853–866.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-006-9027-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. World Commission on Dams (2000) Dams and development: a new framework for decision-making. In Asmal K (ed). Earthscan, London, UK. Retrieved from https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001703-201102000-00012
  59. Yarime M, Trencher G, Mino T et al (2012) Establishing sustainability science in higher education institutions: towards an integration of academic development, institutionalization, and stakeholder collaborations. Sustain Sci 7:101–113.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-012-0157-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zarin DJ, Kainer KA, Putz FE et al (2003) Integrated graduate education and research in neotropical working forests. J For 101:31–37Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Senator George J. Mitchell Center for Sustainability SolutionsUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  2. 2.College of Engineering and Physical SciencesUniversity of New HampshireDurhamUSA
  3. 3.Department of Communication and JournalismUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  4. 4.Department of EnglishUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  5. 5.School of Biology and EcologyUniversity of MaineOronoUSA

Personalised recommendations