IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i9p2652-d229493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to Integrating Sustainability across the Curriculum at a Teaching-Oriented University

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Pompeii

    (Sociology, Social Work & Anthropology, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA 23606, USA)

  • Yi-Wen Chiu

    (Natural Resources Management & Environmental Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • Dawn Neill

    (Social Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • David Braun

    (Electrical Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • Gregg Fiegel

    (Civil and Environmental Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • Rebekah Oulton

    (Civil and Environmental Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • Joseph Ragsdale

    (Landscape Architecture, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

  • Kylee Singh

    (Facilities Energy, Utilities, and Sustainability, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407, USA)

Abstract

This research collects and analyzes student and faculty knowledge and perceptions toward sustainability education at a predominately undergraduate, teaching-oriented university. In-depth, qualitative methods distinguish low- and high-knowledge student and faculty cohorts, identify perceived barriers to sustainability education in each cohort, and recognize strategies to overcome the barriers identified by each cohort. Data collected from recorded and transcribed semi-structured interviews of student and faculty subjects underwent analysis via repeated readings to uncover key themes. Results required developing metrics for student and faculty sustainability knowledge and attitudes across disciplines, determining discipline-specific gaps in sustainability knowledge and differences in attitudes, and relating implementation barriers to general or specific knowledge gaps and attitudes. Findings identified low and high levels of sustainability knowledge within the student and faculty subject population and revealed barriers in pursuing interdisciplinary sustainability curricula across disciplines and among both students and faculty at the study university. Overall, higher sustainability knowledge participants tend to identify barriers related to institutional accountability while lower sustainability knowledge participants tend to identify barriers related to personal responsibility. Distributing barriers and solutions along a continuum from personal responsibility to educational institution responsibility reveals more recognition of barriers at the personal level and more solutions proposed at the institutional level. This result may reflect a common tendency to deny personal responsibility when addressing sustainability challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Pompeii & Yi-Wen Chiu & Dawn Neill & David Braun & Gregg Fiegel & Rebekah Oulton & Joseph Ragsdale & Kylee Singh, 2019. "Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to Integrating Sustainability across the Curriculum at a Teaching-Oriented University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:9:p:2652-:d:229493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2652/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2652/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrigo Lozano & Maria Barreiro-Gen & Francisco J. Lozano & Kaisu Sammalisto, 2019. "Teaching Sustainability in European Higher Education Institutions: Assessing the Connections between Competences and Pedagogical Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, March.
    2. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    3. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. María Consuelo Sáiz-Manzanares & Sara Gutiérrez-González & Ángel Rodríguez & Lourdes Alameda Cuenca-Romero & Verónica Calderón & Miguel Ángel Queiruga-Dios, 2020. "Systematic Review on Inclusive Education, Sustainability in Engineering: An Analysis with Mixed Methods and Data Mining Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Lazar Gitelman & Mikhail Kozhevnikov & Olga Ryzhuk, 2019. "Advance Management Education for Power-Engineering and Industry of the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Łukasz Sułkowski & Katarzyna Kolasińska-Morawska & Robert Seliga & Piotr Buła & Paweł Morawski, 2021. "Sustainability Culture of Polish Universities in Professionalization of Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Sandra Caeiro & Ulisses M. Azeiteiro, 2020. "Sustainability Assessment in Higher Education Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-4, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pastore, Erica & Alfieri, Arianna & Zotteri, Giulio, 2019. "An empirical investigation on the antecedents of the bullwhip effect: Evidence from the spare parts industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 121-133.
    2. Berry, D. & Naim, M. M., 1996. "Quantifying the relative improvements of redesign strategies in a P.C. supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 181-196, December.
    3. Towill, Denis R. & Zhou, Li & Disney, Stephen M., 2007. "Reducing the bullwhip effect: Looking through the appropriate lens," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1-2), pages 444-453, July.
    4. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    5. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    6. Ma, Yungao & Wang, Nengmin & He, Zhengwen & Lu, Jizhou & Liang, Huigang, 2015. "Analysis of the bullwhip effect in two parallel supply chains with interacting price-sensitive demands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 815-825.
    7. Rich, Karl M. & Ross, R. Brent & Baker, A. Derek & Negassa, Asfaw, 2011. "Quantifying value chain analysis in the context of livestock systems in developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 214-222, April.
    8. Li Chen & Hau L. Lee, 2012. "Bullwhip Effect Measurement and Its Implications," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 771-784, August.
    9. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2012. "Impact of Growth Opportunities and Competition on Firm-Level Capability Development Trade-offs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 138-154, February.
    10. Gérard P. Cachon & Paul H. Zipkin, 1999. "Competitive and Cooperative Inventory Policies in a Two-Stage Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 936-953, July.
    11. Zhang, Xiaolong & Burke, Gerard J., 2011. "Analysis of compound bullwhip effect causes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(3), pages 514-526, May.
    12. Lin, Jinchai & Fan, Ruguo & Tan, Xianchun & Zhu, Kaiwei, 2021. "Dynamic decision and coordination in a low-carbon supply chain considering the retailer's social preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Arunachalam Narayanan & Brent B. Moritz, 2015. "Decision Making and Cognition in Multi-Echelon Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(8), pages 1216-1234, August.
    14. Charles L. Munson & Jianli Hu & Meir J. Rosenblatt, 2003. "Teaching the Costs of Uncoordinated Supply Chains," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 24-39, June.
    15. Rosanna Cole & Brent Snider, 2020. "Rolling the Dice on Global Supply Chain Sustainability: A Total Cost of Ownership Simulation," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 165-176, May.
    16. F Ackermann & C Eden & T Williams & S Howick, 2007. "Systemic risk assessment: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(1), pages 39-51, January.
    17. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.
    18. Florian Kapmeier, 2020. "Reflections on developing a simulation model on sustainable and healthy diets for decision makers: Comment on the paper by Kopainsky," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 928-935, November.
    19. Rana Azghandi & Jacqueline Griffin & Mohammad S. Jalali, 2018. "Minimization of Drug Shortages in Pharmaceutical Supply Chains: A Simulation-Based Analysis of Drug Recall Patterns and Inventory Policies," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-14, December.
    20. U Benzion & Y Cohen & R Peled & T Shavit, 2008. "Decision-making and the newsvendor problem: an experimental study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1281-1287, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:9:p:2652-:d:229493. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.