IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03149-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What difference does one course make? Assessing the impact of content-based instruction on students’ sustainability literacy

Author

Listed:
  • Inan Deniz Erguvan

    (Gulf University for Science and Technology)

Abstract

Composition studies, with their cross-disciplinary role in students’ academic lives, can be essential in placing sustainability at the center of students’ learning. This research assessed the impact of content-based instruction on students’ sustainability literacy in a first-year composition course through a mixed-method design. In the quantitative part of this case study, 221 students in different classes of a first-year writing course in a higher education institute in Kuwait during the Fall term of 2022 were first given a pretest to determine their sustainability literacy levels. During a 6-week period, 121 students participated in the content-based instruction emphasizing sustainability, while 100 students comprised the control group, receiving curriculum without any emphasis on sustainability. The allocation of students in these two groups was random, determined solely by the classes they were enrolled in at the beginning of the semester. At the end of the semester, both the experimental and control groups were given a posttest to measure the impact of the instruction on their sustainability literacy levels. For the qualitative component, 60 students from the experimental group and 60 students from the control group were tasked with composing an essay identifying Kuwait’s major sustainability challenges and proposing corresponding solutions. The impact of content-based instruction on students’ literacy levels was measured by conducting a qualitative and quantitative content analysis on their writing. The results showed that the experimental group students made statistically significant improvements in their sustainable literacy levels, scored better on the posttest, used more sustainability terms and concepts, and identified more sustainability-related challenges and solutions in their essays.

Suggested Citation

  • Inan Deniz Erguvan, 2024. "What difference does one course make? Assessing the impact of content-based instruction on students’ sustainability literacy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03149-4
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03149-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03149-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03149-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nadeem A. Burney & Jill Johnes & Mohammed Al-Enezi & Marwa Al-Musallam, 2013. "The efficiency of public schools: the case of Kuwait," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 360-379, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kristof De Witte & Laura López-Torres, 2017. "Efficiency in education: a review of literature and a way forward," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(4), pages 339-363, April.
    2. Delprato, Marcos & Antequera, Germán, 2021. "School efficiency in low and middle income countries: An analysis based on PISA for development learning survey," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Agasisti, Tommaso & de Oliveira Ribeiro, Celma & Montemor, Daniel Sanches, 2022. "The efficiency of Brazilian elementary public schools," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. Arora, Nitin & Talwar, Shubhendra Jit, 2020. "Modelling efficiency in budget allocations for Indian states using window based non-radial non-concave metafrontier data envelopment analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Johnes, Jill, 2015. "Operational Research in education," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 683-696.
    6. Huguenin, Jean-Marc, 2015. "Adjusting for the environment in DEA: A comparison of alternative models based on empirical data," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 41-54.
    7. Agasisti, Tommaso & Zoido, Pablo, 2019. "The efficiency of schools in developing countries, analysed through PISA 2012 data," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. Aatzaz Hassan & Muhammad Ramzan Sheikh & Rana Zafar Hayat & Neelam Asghar Ali, 2022. "An Efficiency Analysis of Public and Private Elementary Schools in Dera Ghazi Khan," Journal of Policy Research (JPR), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 8(3), pages 135-150, September.
    9. Tommaso Agasisti, 2014. "How does schools’ efficiency look like across Europe? An empirical analysis of Germany, Spain, France, Italy and UK using OECD PISA2012 data," Working papers 9, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    10. López-Torres, Laura & Johnes, Jill & Elliott, Caroline & Polo, Cristina, 2021. "The effects of competition and collaboration on efficiency in the UK independent school sector," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 40-53.
    11. Yahia, F.B. & Essid, H., 2019. "Determinants of Tunisian Schools’ Efficiency: A DEA-Tobit Approach," Journal of Applied Management and Investments, Department of Business Administration and Corporate Security, International Humanitarian University, vol. 8(1), pages 44-56, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03149-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.