Article MiE

Management in Education
2016, Vol. 30(3) 105–111
An integrated leadership model for ª 2016 British Educational Leadership,
Management & Administration Society

leading education for sustainability (BELMAS)

Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
in higher education and the vital DOI: 10.1177/0892020616653463
mie.sagepub.com
role of students as change agents

Paul Warwick
Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK

Abstract
This paper explores the leadership of education for sustainability (EfS) in higher education, focusing specifically on the key
role students can play as internal catalysts for change. It presents a case study of Plymouth University, a higher education
institution with an international reputation for EfS leadership. The paper outlines the importance of seeking cultural
transformation in the leadership of sustainability, highlighting the benefits of an integrated approach that encompasses
teaching and learning, research, and campus and operations. This manifold and coordinated approach requires top-down
strategic support in order for EfS to take root and gather momentum. However, in this paper it is argued that the bottom
up empowerment of ‘students as change agents’ is just as important. Reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of a
number of student leadership initiatives at Plymouth University, this paper argues that EfS reform in HE has significant
implications for staff training and the design of participatory learning spaces in order for students to have their voices
heard and to be partnered with as leaders.

Keywords
Education for sustainability, educational innovation, educational leadership, higher education, student voice

Introduction In recent guidance to the HE sector in the UK, the Quality

Assurance Agency for Higher Education and the Higher
Debate rages over appropriate forms of higher education
Education Academy defines EfS as:
(HE) in the 21st century. From the standpoint of sustain-
ability, the multiple points of crisis in the midst of which
. . . the process of equipping students with the knowledge and
our students are growing up requires a radical rethink of
understanding, skills and attributes needed to work and live in
what we mean by ‘graduateness’ and the experiences of HE
a way that safeguards environmental, social and economic
that dominate our students’ lifeworlds.
wellbeing, both in the present and for future generations.
This paper focuses upon Plymouth University in the UK,
(QAA, 2014:5)
an institution that has attempted to frame notions of quality
HE through the lens of sustainability. This institution’s
Importantly, this guidance document gives attention to
trajectory of education for sustainability (EfS) leadership
the pedagogy of EfS, the how of teaching and learning, as
has led to recent moves to raise the status of students from
well as the content and the what of the curriculum. It frames
being mere consumers of this educational reform to becom-
ing partners in the innovation process. Pursuing an inte- the holistic agenda of EfS recognising, in a matrix of 38
grated model of leadership in education has required graduate outcomes, the need to draw out specific attributes
and skills, alongside knowledge and understanding.
greater attention to how students can be engaged as ‘critical
This holistic framing of EfS is echoed by the model of
creatives’ with both a unique insight into the current pro-
education for sustainable development that is currently being
vision of sustainability education and a collaborative
applied at Plymouth University. As shown in Figure 1, this
capacity to invent new learning spaces.
theoretical representation of EfS, highlights a set of holistic
relational and pedagogical dimensions that stem from the
Education for sustainability – framing a value base of an active concern for well-being.
catalytic starting point
The foundational aspect in the leadership of EfS at an insti-
Corresponding author:
tutional level has been to frame this call for educational Paul Warwick, University of Plymouth, Kirkby Lodge, Drake Circus,
reform, to both staff and students, in a way that sparks Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK.
interest and engagement across disciplinary boundaries. E-mail: [email protected]
106 Management in Education 30(3)

of communication, industrialisation and commerce, our

lives today are caught up in a network of mutuality that
goes beyond local neighbourhoods and nation states. This
dimension recognises the interconnectivity of life across
place and landscape and invites learners to consider their
personal links to worldwide issues of peace, justice,
rights, inclusion and environmental stewardship.

3. The temporal dimension

Concern for the common good stretching across time; from
present to future. This dimension involves a consideration
of the interconnectivity of life across time and the links that
exist between the past, present and future. It encourages
examination of the historical roots of the sustainability
challenges we currently face as well as consideration of the
implications of our lifestyles on future generations and
landscapes. It advocates the development of more long
term views within policy, civic engagement and lifestyle
Figure 1. The education for sustainable development butterfly decision-making processes.
model. Source: Peterson and Warwick (2015: 133). From this expanded consideration of an active concern
for the common good that highlights relational interconnec-
This model of EfS firstly acknowledges a paradigm of tivity across species, place and time, the butterfly model of
education oriented by the centrality of extrinsic values EfS proposes pedagogical processes that are deemed con-
such as care and compassion for the common good. The gruent to achieving these educational objectives. There are
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe three key dimensions of this pedagogy.
(UNECE, 2012: 6) frames EfS as being underpinned by
‘an ethic of solidarity, equality and mutual respect’. At the
heart of EfS is explicit attention to learners being ener-
4. The critical dimension
gised and enthused by exploring the ethical stance of Space for dialogue and systems thinking. This first of the ped-
holding an active concern for well-being and stretching agogical dimensions presents the need for dialogic learning
their compassionate consideration across three relational opportunities where sustainability issues can be critically
dimensions, as follows. considered through engagement with multiple perspec-
tives. This dimension gives greater emphasis to interdisci-
plinary learning and systems-thinking approaches (Morris
1. The biosphere dimension and Martin, 2009; Sterling, 2005; Stone and Barlow, 2005).
Concern for the common good encompassing people and planet. This is to help learners understand the dynamic and inter-
This relational dimension goes beyond anthropocentric connected nature of sustainability challenges and to
considerations and seeks to draw out from learners the develop the capacity to navigate the risks and unpredict-
capacity to consider critically both human and environmen- able consequences of these challenges as they unfold.
tal well-being. It acknowledges that human problems and Within this dimension the aim is not simply to raise sus-
ecological problems are inextricably intertwined and need tainability literacy through awareness of ‘other perspec-
to be understood in relation to each other. This raises the tives’, but also to provide consciousness-raising
importance of a 21st century higher educational system that opportunities for reflexivity, where individuals consider
nurtures new forms of sustainability literacy which go their own perspectives, assumptions and the implications
beyond political, social and economic considerations. As of civic and lifestyle choices. As identified by Vare and
Stone (2009: 4) suggests: Scott (2007), this critical dimension ensures that EfS is
not simply about the unproblematic transmission or pro-
This generation will require leaders and citizens who can think motion of certain sustainable behaviours.
ecologically, understand the interconnectedness of human and
natural systems and have the will, ability and courage to act.
5. The creative dimension
Space to imagine new sustainable futures. This dimension
2. The spatial dimension supports a re-conception of the importance of education
Concern for the common good spanning across place; from local nurturing learners’ creative capacities. It holds as being
to global. This dimension of EfS involves learners con- of fundamental importance the need to encourage learners
sidering their local, national and global interdependen- in the process of generating and exploring what Robinson
cies. It seeks to raise awareness of how, through (2011) refers to as ‘original ideas that are of value’. This is
environmental processes coupled with global processes based upon the view that all citizens have the potential to
Warwick 107

play a vital role in creating sustainable futures. Whilst edu-

cators can share useful insights into current sustainable
policies and practices, it is impossible for them to foresee
entirely how global challenges are going to play out in the
lifetimes of their students. EfS therefore seeks to provide
creative learning spaces that give explicit attention to draw-
ing out from learners the ability to problem-solve colla-
boratively, imagine new ways of being and successfully
navigate unpredictable change events.

6. The active learning dimension

Space to act collaboratively in pursuit of sustainability. This
pedagogical dimension recognises the potential of both
staff and students serving as ‘compassionate critical
creatives’, learning experientially through the process Figure 2. A whole institutional approach to EfS leadership.
of putting into action their ideas for preferable futures. Source: Sterling (2015:3).
Whilst a wide variety of educational approaches can be
utilised within EfS, emphasis needs to be given to pro- Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in EfS.
viding the collaborative and intergenerational learning Titled the Centre for Sustainable Futures (CSF), it began
space where people are able to gather together and a programme of systemic change and support, developing
actively explore sustainability challenges. In her review an integrated model of whole institutional change, as
of EfS learning processes for the United Nations Decade shown in Figure 2.
of Education for Sustainable Development (UNDESD), This approach identified four key interconnected
Tilbury (2011) cites more than 20 studies from scholars spheres within which sustainability needed to be devel-
worldwide that highlight the alignment of EfS with oped: the campus, curriculum, community and, ulti-
active and participatory approaches. Through the active mately, the whole institutional culture. This ‘4Cs’
learning process of conceptualising, planning, acting and model of change leadership has since been adopted by
reflecting, students are better able to engage holistically many other HEIs.
with the values, skills and knowledge areas of sustain- Led by pioneers in the EfS field, including Alan Dyer,
able development. David Selby and Stephen Sterling, this approach resulted
Notions of sustainability and EfS remain contested and in Plymouth University adopting sustainability as one of
complex. The key objective in the leadership of EfS at an its key corporate ambitions and the development of one
institutional level is not to mask this contested nature, but of the first whole institutional sustainability strategies in
rather to provide a framing narrative that serves as a cata- the sector.
lytic starting point. The butterfly model of EfS, presented in With the ‘permission’ of this top-down strategic man-
Figure 1, succeeds or fails by its ability to capture stake- date, CSF has been able to coordinate a manifold range of
holders’ interest from across the disciplines. It seeks to EfS leadership activities. This has included working col-
invite all into a dialogic space for engaging with EfS lead- laboratively with more than 100 staff, from across all
ership. From this starting point an interdisciplinary com- schools and faculties, on the development of new modules
munity of inquiry has the possibility to emerge, but a and programmes, pedagogic research and professional
conducive institutional context is essential in order for EfS development. In recent years the leadership structures
practice to take root and become established. have diversified and expanded, with new units being
formed to focus specifically on the co-ordination of sus-
tainability research and the systematic development of the
Plymouth’s pursuit of a conducive sustainable campus, overseen by a university sustainable
institutional environment for the advisory group (SAG). The SAG ensures that various sus-
integrated leadership of EfS tainability action points across the institution remain coor-
dinated and interlinked.
The UK’s Plymouth University is working toward a compre- As a result, Plymouth University has played a distinctive
hensive integration of sustainability practice and teaching . . . role in supporting the development of EfS across the sector.
with a strong focus on sustainability since 2005. Clugston and It has produced a range of resources and publications that
Calder (2014:123) have influenced policy and practice in other HEIs both
nationally and internationally. These include a guidebook
Plymouth is widely recognised as a pioneer in the HE to introducing sustainability into teaching and learning,
sector through re-orienting its policy and practice towards commissioned by the Higher Education Academy
sustainability. Having begun the work some years before, (Sterling, 2012); and a book outlining the progress of 10
in 2005 the university was awarded funding by the Higher UK universities, including Plymouth, towards the more
Education Funding Council for England to establish a sustainable university (Sterling et al., 2013).
108 Management in Education 30(3)

The missing link – recognising students as EfS that can lay claim to having gained a deeper insight
internal agents of educational change into aspects of the reality of this module. However, this
is what the study attempted, by integrating and overlap-
In its most recent strategic leadership of EfS, Plymouth ping different data collection methods including obser-
University has recognised the need for greater student vations, student focus groups, a student evaluation
engagement. An integrated EfS leadership approach needs workshop, and staff and student one-to-one semi-
continually to embrace students as partners in the endea- structured interviews. Collecting data from a cohort of
vour. This aspect of an institution-wide collaborative 52 students and seven teaching staff revealed a number
approach to leadership has been advanced in a number of of insights into students’ experiences of this particular
ways, two of which are considered in greater depth here to EfS module, including the following.
highlight key lessons.
 Comparatively the students feel there is some-
thing qualitatively different about this module due
Case Study 1: harnessing student voices to its collaborative and personalised learning
within module improvement processes opportunities.
One ‘students as partners’ initiative at Plymouth Univer-
sity has been to capture systematically students’ experi- Feels refreshing to learn from other students rather than just
ences of new EfS undergraduate modules, in order to help being told what is right or wrong by a lecturer.
staff identify areas for future improvement. An example Out of my six modules this year, this is the one I’ve learnt the
of this approach being applied is in a pioneering under- most on because it’s more for what you want to do rather than
graduate EfS module run by the Plymouth Business you’ve got to learn this for exams.
School. This second-year optional module was designed
to be interdisciplinary in content and participatory in pro-  The dialogic nature of teaching is changing patterns
cess. Learning sessions were organized into themed clus- of student engagement. The students participating in
ters and taught by a team of staff, enabling students to the research spoke of the deliberative and dialogic
consider the concept of sustainability in organisations nature of the teaching session having significant
through a range of lenses including accounting and impacts upon their learning.
finance, economics, marketing, business management,
organisational development and entrepreneurship. It also You don’t necessarily realise that you’re learning at the time,
sought to offer a deliberative and active pedagogy, with but then when you go away from it, you’ve got what you’ve
each themed cluster offering opportunities for student subconsciously absorbed from the session. It’s actually quite
discussion, world cafés, problem-based learning, colla- amazing compared to what I would have had if I had been
borative group work and independent study. taking notes. Because it would have been on the notes, not in
On paper, the course exemplifies what international my brain.
EfS pedagogical research is advocating; but what were
the students’ experiences? Could data collection tech- I always refer back to that one lecture when we had the
niques designed to gather students’ perspectives on their debate . . . . and just the way [the facilitator] ran that by
lived experiences of the module provide an important not talking and letting us carry on and I’ve just never been
insight into where further improvements were needed? in a lecture like that before . . . . I think that’s going to be
These questions were addressed using a broad participa- like a lecture that you’ll always remember throughout
tory action research strategy (Kemmis and McTaggart, my life.
2005) that also drew from ‘lesson study’ as a form of
professional learning. As described by Dudley (2014),  For some, the course has been transformative. A
lesson study is specifically concerned with collecting data number of participating students spoke of the mod-
that focus on students’ learning rather than on teachers’ ule leading to far reaching changes in their perspec-
teaching, whereby the deeper understanding of students’ tives on sustainability.
experiences contributes to the leadership of a continu- Almost makes you feel contempt for current practices and
ously refined pedagogy. This empathetic approach to edu- norms and for the allowance for this wasteful practice to
cational improvement is very much in contrast with top- continue and progress so far. It has encouraged the pool of
down, lesson-dipping approaches to teacher development thought that it is through collective action rather than depen-
that are currently dominant in formal educational systems dence on businesses/Government/organisations to change
(Puchner and Taylor, 2006). Such a small-scale qualita- and that a cultural shift in regards to sustainability is
tive research project is not without its limitations with imperative.
regard to its capacity to shed light on the complex phe-
nomenon of an educational module, and in its attempt to As well as capturing a range of appreciative viewpoints
capture and construct meaning from an individual stu- about this module, the student voice has crucially revealed
dents’ consciousness and interpretations of their specific areas for staff to consider in the leadership of future
pedagogical experiences (Pring, 2000). At best it is an improvement. These include the following four key
example of partnering with students in the leadership of considerations.
Warwick 109

1. From the students’ perspective, in the early stages collaborative leadership approach that enables staff and
of the module there is a need to provide more in the students to join together and discover new ways to ‘walk
way of helping students to transition into this new the talk’ of EfS more effectively.
interactive, collaborative and issue-based peda-
gogy. Students spoke of the need to provide explicit
guidance on the learning processes this module was Case study 2 developing future leaders
going to engage them with, such as problem-based Giving priority to engaging students as partners in creating
learning and to provide study skills’ development new sustainability education opportunities is a key objec-
on key aspects such as guidance on note-making tive of Plymouth University’s sustainability strategy.
approaches suitable for dialogic engagement. This Towards this aim, the CSF launched the Future Leaders
raises the importance of appropriate staff training in Programme, in 2014, which enables students to use their
EfS to ensure the expert facilitation of active peda- creativity and enterprising spirit by collaboratively leading
gogies and students transitioning into these poten- their own EfS innovations.
tially less familiar learning processes. The Future Leaders Programme draws from servant
2. Students called for the module’s real-world learning leadership models (Greenleaf, 2002) and service learning
objectives requiring more real world learning pedagogies (Stanton et al., 1990; Butin, 2010) and seeks to
spaces being provided. Future leadership of the engage students from across all disciplines and levels of HE
module, students suggested, needed to make greater study. The co-curricular positioning of the programme
use of community partnerships and place-based affords the space for leadership workshops to be based
learning, where students are able to learn through upon the interests, progress and experiences of the students
connection to and applied learning opportunities rather than to be pre-determined in content and timetable.
with local companies, social enterprise and charita- This means the students’ enthusiasm, questions, ideas and
ble organisations that are seeking to apply sustain- actions essentially guide the ‘flightpath’ of the programme.
ability practices. In so doing, this EfS initiative is seeking to explore in a
3. Students experienced a critical tension between the practical way a new learning space for students to develop
course wanting to be interdisciplinary and also valu- what Wayman (2009: 96) refers to as ‘informed purposive
ing student autonomy. They felt free to opt in and action’. By engaging with students as ‘compassionate crit-
out of themed clusters of teaching, depending upon ical creatives’, they are able to pursue collaboratively their
their personal interests, because the main assess- preferred images of the future of sustainability education at
ment task allowed them to choose a specific disci- Plymouth University. The applied nature of the programme
plinary area of focus. Drawing from the students’ is intended to help students to develop the competencies,
perspectives, and the work of scholars such as Biggs relationships and wisdom necessary for engaging with
and Tang (2007), there is a need in this module to pressing sustainability challenges with a sense of hope and
re-align constructively the main assessment task in efficacy, whether at personal, community or institutional
order to encourage and capture the intended inter- level. In so doing, the Future Leaders Programme is also in
disciplinary learning outcomes, whilst still allowing tune with the recent Higher Education Academy’s guidance
for a degree of student freedom to choose specific on student engagement that recognises a range of different
areas for deeper exploration. levels through which students can participate actively in
4. Students identified the need for help in perceiving shaping their own learning (Healey et al., 2014).
threads of interconnectivity and synergy between The Future Leaders Programme has given rise to stu-
the different themed clusters and different staff con- dents identifying a range of gaps and shortfalls in the uni-
tributions, in order to address experiences of the versity’s current EfS practice and has provided an
course feeling disjointed in its multi-disciplinary invaluable insight into where their interest and passion for
nature. This perspective advocates an ever-present change reside. As a result the students have developed a
‘learning-facilitator’, helping students to make the range of EfS innovations including the following:
links between and flows across the different disci-
plinary areas. This raises institutional management  Addressing the problem of student unawareness of
issues with regard to appropriate workload models the University’s sustainability profile by transform-
and the allocation of sufficient staff time to enhance ing the way sustainability is introduced within
interdisciplinary educational provision. induction week activities using a peer education
approach that reached over 800 undergraduates in
This small-scaled action research project highlights the 2015;
professional development opportunities that exist for EfS  Developing ‘wild walk’ and sustainable bike ride
staff who seek to improve their teaching practice through opportunities for students – using outdoor learning
conversational narratives with their students. It represents a approaches to help broaden students’ horizons
pedagogical research approach that is based on partnership beyond the city centre and out into the countryside
between module teaching staff and their students in order to and coastline that surround the city;
advance interdisciplinary, deliberative and active pedago-  Contributing to a greening the campus initiative that
gical approaches. In so doing the hope is that it represents a includes staff and students learning through
110 Management in Education 30(3)

gardening; growing food and increasing biodiversity a ‘world ready’ citizenry that is informed and equipped for
on campus; sustainable development in the 21st century.
 Addressing students’ interest in waste reduction on The experiences of Plymouth University have shown
campus by supporting the development of a Waste that staff and students there were enthused and engaged by
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) recy- a paradigm of educational change framed with regard to
cling site; the compassionate notion of serving better the common
 Creating interactive workshops that introduce sus- good. EfS provides an important opportunity of challenge
tainability to other students engaged in leadership and growth for students. It invites them to develop both
roles across the university such as school course the competencies and social capital oriented towards
reps, student union elected executive officers and meeting the well-being needs of people and the natural
the leadership teams of clubs and societies; environment, from the local to the global, today and
 Partnering with staff to create an annual one-week tomorrow. EfS is based upon the premise that not only
intensive co-curricular opportunity for students to can students help others in their pursuit of a quality of
explore the interface between sustainability and glo- life, but also that they themselves need the help of others
bal citizenship; – pointing towards the interconnected nature of how all
 Enabling students to have the opportunity to learn our lives are bound together.
through community partnerships with cultural A systems-thinking approach has proved effective in
change organisations such as a language school developing a leadership strategy for EfS at an institutional
helping to meet the needs of asylum seekers and level. It has highlighted the complexity and interconnected
refugees who arrive in the city; and nature of seeking to change the culture of an institution and
 Creation by the students of their own social media the integrity of the ambition to go through this process with
site for sharing sustainability education news, events staff and students as partners, rather than simply impose it
and opinion pieces with peers, above and beyond the upon them through a top-down insistence. Plymouth Uni-
University’s corporate sites. versity’s journey has also highlighted the potential of stu-
dents as agents of change – able to bring about innovation
in EfS that is apt and vibrant and of their own making.
This Future Leaders Programme has highlighted the
potential of students as change leaders, offering a fresh
insight into where EfS issues of concern are located and Declaration of conflicting interests
how students can take the lead through collaborative lead- The author declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect
ership. Facilitation of this programme has highlighted the to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
challenging skill set and relational dexterity that the role
requires of staff and the need for considerable staff devel- Funding
opment and training to extend this type of learning space to This research received no specific grant from any funding agency
more students across the institution. It has also highlighted in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
the need for flexible learning spaces for such relational,
student-centred and community partnered EfS to flourish, References
calling for the design in HE of new learning spaces that are
Biggs J and Tang C (2007) Teaching for Quality Learning at
dynamic, engaged, ecological and participatory (Wood
University. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
et al., 2012). It has also revealed a potential weakness of
Butin D (2010) Service-Learning in Theory and Practice: The
this pedagogical approach with regard to the lack of con-
Future of Community Engagement in Higher Education. New
tinuation of many of the students’ EfS innovations. Cur-
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
rently there is a risk of the students’ creating mere ‘bubble
Clugston R and Calder W (2014) Higher education for strong
practices’ that are planted by a specific group of students
sustainability. In: Corcoran PB and Hollingshead BP (eds)
and flourish for a season only to wither away when those
Intergenerational Learning and Transformative Leadership
students graduate and move on. The effective leadership of
for Sustainable Futures. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic
educational change needs to give careful attention to con-
Publishers, pp. 113–126.
tinuation aspects within the overall process (Fullan, 2016)
Dudley P (2014) Lesson Study: Professional Learning For Our
and this remains an area requiring further investigation in
Time. Oxford: Routledge.
the Future Leaders Programme.
Fullan M (2016) The New Meaning of Educational Change, (fifth
edition). Oxford: Routledge.
Conclusions
Greenleaf R (2002) Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the
Radical changes are currently in motion with regard to the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Pau-
role and function of HEIs (Light et al., 2009). At its best list Press.
this reform is research informed by theoretical develop- Healey M, Flint A and Harrington K (2014) Engagement Through
ments about how people learn and effective teaching prac- Partnership: Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching
tice (Illeris, 2009). Strands of this reform are also informed in Higher Education. York: Higher Education Academy.
by emerging theory and practice concerning the need for Illeris K (ed.) (2009) Contemporary Theories of Learning.
educational institutions to address the challenge of enabling London: Routledge.
Warwick 111

Kemmis S and McTaggart R (2005). Participatory action York: Higher Education Academy. Available at: https://
research: communicative action and the public sphere. In: www.heacademy.ac.uk/node/3573 (accessed 01 June 2016).
Denzin N and Lincoln Y (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Sterling S (2005) Linking Thinking: New Perspectives on Think-
Research (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. ing and Learning for Sustainability. Dunkeld: WWF Scotland.
559–603. Sterling S (2015) The Centre for Sustainable Futures: A Ten Year
Light G, Cox R and Calkins S (2009) Learning and Teaching in Journey. Warwick P. (ed) Marking Ten Years of the Centre
Higher Education: The Reflective Professional (2nd edition). for Sustainable Futures: Sustainable Education in Motion.
London: Sage. Plymouth: Plymouth University. pp 3–4.
Morris D and Martin S (2009) Complexity, systems thinking and Sterling S, Maxey L and Luna H (2013) The Sustainable Univer-
practice. In: Stibbe A (ed.) The Handbook of Sustainability sity: Progress and Prospects. Abingdon: Routledge/Earthscan.
Literacy. Dartington: Green Books. Stone M (2009) Smart By Nature: Schooling for Sustainability.
Peterson A and Warwick P (2014) Global Learning and Educa- Healdsburg, CA: Watershed Media.
tion. Oxford: Routledge. Stone M and Barlow Z (eds) (2005) Ecological Literacy Educat-
Pring R (2000) Philosophy of Educational Research. London: ing Our Children for a Sustainable World. San Francisco, CA:
Continuum. Sierra Club Books.
Puchner L and Taylor A (2006) Lesson study, collaboration and Tilbury D (2011) Education for Sustainable Development: An
teacher efficacy: stories from two school-based math lesson Expert Review of Processes and Learning. Paris: UNESCO.
study groups. Teaching and Teacher Education 22(7): UNECE (2012) Learning for the Future: Competencies in Edu-
922–934. cation for Sustainable Development. Paris: United Nations
QAA (2014) Education for Sustainable Development: Guidance Economic Commission for Europe.
for UK Higher Education Providers. Gloucester: Quality Vare P and Scott W (2007) Learning for a change: exploring the
Assurance Agency for Higher Education. relationship between education and sustainable development.
Robinson K (2011) Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 1(2): 191–98.
Chichester: Capstone. Wayman S (2009) Futures thinking. Stibbe A (ed.) The Handbook
Stanton T, Giles D and Cruz N (1990) Service-Learning. San of Sustainability Literacy. Dartington: Green Books, pp. 94–98.
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Wood P, Warwick P and Cox D (2012) Developing learning spaces
Sterling S (2012) The Future Fit Framework: An Introductory in higher education: An evaluation of experimental spaces at the
Guide to Teaching and Learning for Sustainability in HE. University of Leicester. Learning and Teaching 5(2): 49–72.