ArticlePDF Available

Interdisciplinary environmental education: elements of field identity and curriculum design

March 2011
Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 1(1):14-35

DOI:10.1007/s13412-011-0007-2

Authors:

Shirley Vincent

Vincent Evaluation Consulting, LLC

Will Focht

Oklahoma State University - Stillwater

Interdisciplinary environmental degree programs (environmental studies/science(s) and similar programs) in higher education in the U.S.A. are both diverse and dynamic in their curriculum designs. Though these characteristics afford flexibility and adaptability, they are also seen as weaknesses that can undermine programs’ perceived legitimacy both within and beyond their host institutions. The lack of a clear identity, definition of core competencies, and prescriptions for interdisciplinary pedagogy can create confusion among program stakeholders and skepticism among institutional administrators. To learn more about how interdisciplinary environmental curricula vary across the U.S.A., a national survey was conducted of program administrators to investigate their programs and identify their views of what an ideal curriculum would entail. The study demonstrates that consensus exists on field identity: an applied, interdisciplinary focus on the interface of coupled human-natural systems with a normative commitment to sustainability. The study also reveals that three ideal curricular models are espoused by these administrators: Systems Science, Policy and Governance, and Adaptive Management. Program attributes related to these models are also reported. We conclude the article with a brief description of how the three models are related to developing an interdisciplinary environmental workforce, describe the potential next steps for extending the study, and express our optimism that a consensus can be forged on core competencies guidelines and model-specific recommendations for curricular content related to three broad knowledge areas and two skill sets. KeywordsInterdisciplinary environmental education–Sustainability education–Environmental studies and science core competencies–Environmental studies and science field identity–Environmental studies and science curricula

nterdisciplinary IE knowledge components (ideal curricula)

…

ntegrated IE skills components (ideal curricula)

…

Skills component means by educational approach/model

…

Skills factor correlation matrix (ideal curricula)

…

Discriminant analysis correlation coefficients and standard- ized function coefficients

…

Figures - uploaded by Shirley Vincent

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Shirley Vincent

Content may be subject to copyright.

Interdisciplinary environmental education: elements of field

identity and curriculum design

Shirley Vincent &Will Focht

Published online: 26 March 2011

#AESS 2011

Abstract Interdisciplinary environmental degree programs

(environmental studies/science(s) and similar programs) in

higher education in the U.S.A. are both diverse and

dynamic in their curriculum designs. Though these charac-

teristics afford flexibility and adaptability, they are also

seen as weaknesses that can undermine programs’perceived

legitimacy both within and beyond their host institutions.

The lack of a clear identity, definition of core competencies,

and prescriptions for interdisciplinary pedagogy can create

confusion among program stakeholders and skepticism

among institutional administrators. To learn more about

how interdisciplinary environmental curricula vary across

the U.S.A., a national survey was conducted of program

administrators to investigate their programs and identify

their views of what an ideal curriculum would entail. The

study demonstrates that consensus exists on field identity: an

applied, interdisciplinary focus on the interface of coupled

human-natural systems with a normative commitment to

sustainability. The study also reveals that three ideal

curricular models are espoused by these administrators:

Systems Science,Policy and Governance, and Adaptive

Management. Program attributes related to these models are

also reported. We conclude the article with a brief

description of how the three models are related to

developing an interdisciplinary environmental workforce,

describe the potential next steps for extending the study,

and express our optimism that a consensus can be forged on

core competencies guidelines and model-specific recom-

mendations for curricular content related to three broad

knowledge areas and two skill sets.

Keywords Interdisciplinary environmental education .

Sustainability education .Environmental studies and

science core competencies .Environmental studies and

science field identity .Environmental studies and science

curricula

In 2003, the National Science Foundation Advisory

Committee for Environmental Research and Education

(NSF AC-ERE, established in 2000) released a 10-year-

outlook report for the National Science Foundation titled

Complex Environmental Systems: Synthesis for Earth, Life

and Society in the 21st Century. The report highlighted the

interdependence of ecological health and human well-being

and the complex environmental challenges posed by an

expanding human global footprint.

Because of the complex relationships among people,

ecosystems, and the biosphere, human health and

well-being are closely linked to the integrity of local,

regional, and global ecosystems. Therefore, environ-

mental research and education are central elements of

local, national, and global security, health, and

prosperity. (Pfirman and the AC-ERE 2003:1).

The report stressed the importance of developing

innovative interdisciplinary environmental (IE) research

and educational approaches to train scientists, policymakers,

and professionals in environmental synthesis—the merging

of approaches and data across spatial, temporal, and societal

scales to address multifaceted environmental issues.

Subsequent AC-ERE reports—Complex Environmental

Systems: Pathways to the Future (NSF AC-ERE 2005) and

Transitions and Tipping Points in Complex Environmental

S. Vincent (*)

National Council for Science and the Environment,

Washington, DC, USA

e-mail: svincent@ncseonline.org

W. Focht

Oklahoma State University,

Stillwater, OK, USA

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

DOI 10.1007/s13412-011-0007-2

Systems (NSF AC-ERE 2009)—continue to underscore the

urgency of the need to transform environmental higher

education and research. The 2009 report urges a shift toward

societal needs-driven education and research that focuses on

interdisciplinary approaches to understanding the complex,

adaptive interaction of social and natural systems.

Concurrently with the NSF AC-ERE's call for the

development and support of new interdisciplinary

approaches to environmental education and research,

student demand for IE education is also growing rapidly,

reaching new heights in 2009–10. The escalating interest in

environmental degree programs has been widely reported

by the media including articles in the Newsweek-Kaplan

College Guide, the Princeton Review, the New York Times,

and USA Today.

The growth in enrollment has been dramatic. The

University of Michigan's Program in the Environment was

initiated in 2003 with 35 students and today has over 500

students. The University of California at Los Angeles

launched its Environmental Science program in 2006 with

ten students and 3 years later has 221 majors. Salisbury

University founded its Environmental Studies program in

2004 and today has 93 majors. This level of growth is not

unique to these three programs; the majority of IE programs

are experiencing expanding enrollments.

A survey of 260 IE programs conducted by us in 2008

found that two thirds reported a growth trend from 2003 to

2008. In addition, many programs that reported their

enrollments as steady during that period experienced a

surge in student interest in the semesters following the

survey. For example, Antioch University New England

reports that applications for their Master of Science programs

in Environmental Studies and Resource Management

and Conservation are up 42% from 2009. Similarly, the

University of Vermont reports that between 2008 and

2010 the number of environmental science and environ-

mental studies majors grew 37% from 495 to 679, and

the number of degrees awarded rose 48% from 98 to an

estimated 145.

Responding to this burgeoning student demand, univer-

sities and colleges have been initiating new IE degree

programs. The 2008 survey revealed that two thirds of

existing IE programs were created after 1991, and almost a

quarter since 2000. The pace of the creation of new IE

programs is remarkable. A 2009 study by the National

Wildlife Federation—the State of the Campus Environment

report (McIntosh et al. 2009)—found that the proportion of

colleges and universities offering baccalaureate and gradu-

ate IE degrees jumped to 44% from the 40% identified by a

2008 census conducted by CEDD/NSCE (Vincent 2010a).

In a recent 6-month period (May–September 2010), 13 new

IE programs—six masters and seven baccalaureate pro-

grams—were announced.

Job opportunities for the graduates of IE programs are

also rising rapidly. The United States Department of Labor

(2010) predicts a 28% increase in the number of environ-

mental scientist and specialist positions between 2008 and

2018, a growth rate much higher than most occupations. In

2008, environmental scientists and specialists held 85,900

jobs; an additional 6,200 jobs were held by environmental

faculty. About 37% of environmental scientists and special-

ists are employed in state and local governments; 21% in

management, scientific, and technical consulting services;

15% in architectural, engineering, and related services; and

7% in the Federal Government, primarily in the Environ-

mental Protection Agency and the Department of Defense.

Job growth is expected to be strongest in private sector

consulting firms, but job prospects are also especially

favorable for environmental health positions in state and

local governments. Other emerging opportunities for IE

program graduates include environmental jobs in public

administration (environmental planning, urban develop-

ment), sustainability (private and public sector sustainabil-

ity management, sustainable community development,

international sustainable development), environmental man-

agement (private and public sector environmental manage-

ment systems, water management, energy management,

greenhouse gas accounting and management, materials and

waste management) and natural resources management

(watershed systems, ecosystems, costal and marine systems,

land use planning).

Environmental protection expertise and sustainability

knowledge are increasingly applicable across a wide

spectrum of jobs, creating demand for IE degree programs

as well as minors, certificates, and professional continuing

education programs. The 2008 Jobs and Environment

Initiative study identified the size of the environmental

protection industry as $394 billion/year and estimated the

industry was responsible for the creation of 5.3 million jobs

in 2005 distributed across all employment sectors (Bezdek

et al. 2008).

The Council of Environmental Deans and Directors

(CEDD), an association of academic environmental

program leaders, was established in 2000. The National

Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE), a

non-profit organization dedicated to improving the

scientific basis of environmental decision making, serves

as the secretariat for the association. The primary goal

of the CEDD is to improve the quality, stature, and

effectiveness of academic environmental programs at

colleges and universities (see www.ncseonline.org for

more information).

One of the key initiatives of the CEDD is to conduct

research on IE programs to inform and facilitate

discussions on curriculum design, field identity, and

essential knowledge and skills for program graduates.

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 15

IE study is a virtually unbounded field, as exhibited in

the wide variety of IE degree-granting programs. Shaped

by the traditions, missions, and cultures of their host

institutions as well as their participating faculty and other

stakeholders, extensive variability is found in their

education goals, curricular content, and locations within

institutional hierarchies. Moreover, environmental pro-

grams, perhaps more than any other area in higher

education, are constantly evolving to address emerging

issues and prepare graduates for new careers. New

programs are being established and existing programs

change in response to shifting political and social

environments, funding opportunities, and advances in

technology and knowledge.

A 2008 census of IE degree programs conducted by the

CEDD/NCSE identified 840 programs offering 1,183

baccalaureate and graduate degrees located at 652 colleges

and universities (Vincent 2010a). IE programs are offered

in all 50 states, as well as Guam and Puerto Rico. A large

proportion of IE degree programs, 44%, are named

environmental science(s). Another 25% are named envi-

ronmental studies. Degrees in environmental studies are

awarded primarily at the baccalaureate level; only 3% of IE

masters degrees and 1% of doctoral degrees are named

environmental studies. The remaining 31% of IE degree

program names and focus areas vary widely, and include:

Urban and Environmental Policy (Tufts University), Envi-

ronmental Systems and Society (University of California at

Los Angeles), Environmental Dynamics (University of

Arkansas), Earth Systems Science and Policy (California

State University at Monterey Bay), Watershed Science

(Utah State University), and Natural Resources and

Decision Making (Purdue University). Many institutions

have more than one IE program and/or offer more than one

type of IE degree. For example, the Department of

Environmental Science at Barnard College offers under-

graduate degrees in Environmental Science and Environ-

mental Policy, and Cornell University has three different IE

programs offering degrees in Biology and Society, Natural

Resources, and Science of Natural and Environmental

Systems.

Flexibility is a key attribute of IE degree programs. Most

IE programs offer an array of specialization options that

reflect the expertise of their faculty and the mission and

geographical locations of their institutions. For example,

California State University at Monterey Bay offers under-

graduate degrees in Earth Systems Science and Policy with

five specializations: Environmental Policy, Marine and

Coastal Ecology, Watershed Systems, Science and Social

Justice or Science Education. Many programs also allow

students to design their own concentrations to match their

specific goals and interests. The Environmental Study

programs at the Evergreen State College and the Program

in the Environment at the University of Michigan are two

examples.

This flexibility and diversity represent both opportunities

and challenges. Opportunities because program leaders can

draw upon core strengths at each institution to develop IE

programs that prepare graduates to address a multitude of

environmental issues using a variety of approaches.

Challenges because employers, students, and other impor-

tant constituencies may not understand the competency

gained by the graduates of IE programs and program

leaders have to decide how to structure their programs in

the face of rapid change and diverse approaches. The lack

of consensus on IE field identity, core curriculum, and

interdisciplinary pedagogy fuels criticism that IE programs

lack rigor, sustains vigorous debate on program assessment,

and contributes to confusion about the competence of

graduates and the role of IE programs in higher education

and society.

In response to these concerns, and given the lack of

empirical studies on IE program curriculum design, the

CEDD/NCSE launched the first comprehensive study of IE

programs in the United States. The purposes of the study

were to enhance understanding of IE programs and explore

the potential for reaching consensus on IE field identity and

core competencies to help guide curriculum design and

facilitate recognition of the field.

Competence in higher education is often defined as

achieving specified learning outcomes that include theoret-

ical and practical understanding, cognitive abilities, and

techniques relevant to a specific field of study. Defining

learning goals are a required prerequisite for designing

curricular content and structure and determining pedagog-

ical methods for implementing effective educational pro-

grams. Learning outcomes can also be expressed in terms

of core competencies. Defining core competency criteria

for IE programs serves several purposes: (1) provides a

guide for curriculum development and, in a broader

sense, for the overall development of the IE field of

study; (2) promotes recognition of the IE field and the

expertise and qualifications of its graduates; (3) facili-

tates cooperation and communication among faculty from

a wide range of disciplines (an important component for

IE programs that often draw upon expertise across

campuses); and (4) forms a potential basis for IE

program assessment, professional licensure, and perhaps

degree program certification/accreditation.

In the context of this study, competency is defined as the

knowledge and skills students should learn—what con-

cepts, problem-solving strategies and abilities they should

acquire in their course of study. It does not include personal

and social competencies which may also be considered

important educational goals for IE programs. Our concept

of competence is not narrowly defined vocational training

16 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

or skills acquisition, but rather the development of holistic

understanding and abilities that are flexible and adaptable

and that foster reflexive life-long learning. A competence

approach for IE education must prepare students to

creatively address problems in different contexts, continu-

ously reflect upon their own perspectives and practices, and

adapt to rapidly changing contemporary societies where

narrowly defined traditional competencies may quickly

become obsolete.

This article presents the key findings from the CEDD/

NCSE study. These include agreement among program

leaders on key characteristics that form the identity of the

field of IE education, common curricular elements that

form a framework for understanding IE program curriculum

design, and three distinct but complementary broad ideal

approaches to IE education. The study was conducted in

two phases; the findings of the first phase have been

previously published (Vincent and Focht 2009; Vincent and

Focht 2010) and are only briefly reviewed in this article.

The remainder of the article focuses on key findings from

the second phase of the study which analyzed data from a

comprehensive national survey of IE programs.

Research design

The CEDD/NCSE IE programs study addressed four broad

research questions designed to inform and facilitate

discussion on IE program field identity and essential

knowledge and skills:

1. What are the perspectives among IE program leaders

regarding curriculum design? What do they have in

common and how do they differ? (phase I)

2. What dimensions underlie the inclusion of various

knowledge and skill areas in IE program curricula?

How are these areas related and how may they be

combined into interdisciplinary knowledge and skills

areas? (phase II)

3. What types of ideal models of IE program curricula

exist? What are the characteristics of each model?

(phase II)

4. How are administrative and degree program attributes

related to ideal curriculum types? What do these

relationships indicate concerning program structure

and evolution? (phase II)

Phase I—perspectives on interdisciplinary environmental

program curricula

The first phase of the curriculum study sought to answer the

first research question about the number of perspectives on

environmental program curriculum design that program

administrators hold, how the perspectives differ, and what

they have in common. This phase of the study was

conducted in 2003 with 61 volunteer participants from the

CEDD membership who identified themselves as admin-

istrators of IE programs.

The study used Q methodology to discern the various

perspectives regarding environmental program curriculum

design held by the administrators. Q methodology is widely

used as a research tool for empirically determining the

perspectives of participants in a variety of policy develop-

ment and decision-making processes. It can be used to

identify various viewpoints and perceptions about a

particular situation, provide insight into the attributes of

each perspective, explicitly outline areas of consensus and

conflict, and assist in developing a common view.

See Vincent and Focht (2009) and Vincent (2010b) for

details on the methodology used in this phase of the study.

Phase II—national survey of interdisciplinary

environmental programs

The second phase of the curriculum study was designed to

answer the remaining three research questions: (1) the

identity of the dimensions that underlie the inclusion of

knowledge and skill areas in IE program curricula, (2) the

number and characteristics of ideal curricular models for IE

education; and (3) how administrative and degree program

attributes may be related to the ideal curriculum types and

what these relationships indicate concerning program

structure and evolution. This phase of the study was based

on a 2008 comprehensive survey that elicited responses

from a nationally representative sample of IE program

administrators representing 260 programs awarding 343 IE

degrees.

Program administrators were targeted because not only

were they expected to be most familiar with their

programs but also because fewer than half of these

programs have their own appointed faculty. The web-

based questionnaire included four broad groups of

questions: institution information, program administrator

information, administrative program information, and

degree program information.

Survey population The survey was limited to U.S. bacca-

laureate and graduate IE degree-granting programs that focus

on human and natural systems from a broad interdisciplinary

perspective. This population included all degree programs

named environmental science(s) or environmental studies as

well as degree programs with other names such as

sustainability, environmental policy, environmental manage-

ment, and natural resources management. Programs that offer

only associate degrees, minors/certificates, and degrees in

allied or professional fields were not included. Excluded

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 17

programs include professional programs such as environ-

mental engineering, environmental law, and environmental

health and safety, and discipline-oriented programs in allied

fields such as environmental chemistry, environmental

geology, conservation biology, sustainable agriculture, for-

estry management, environmental economics, and environ-

mental statistics. Altogether, 840 IE programs at 652

institutions awarding 1,183 degrees were identified that met

the selection criteria.

Survey response Completed survey responses were re-

ceived from administrators of 260 of the 840 programs

identified (including information on 343 degrees)—a re-

sponse rate of 31%. This sample was sufficient to measure

correlations between attributes with a power of 0.90 to detect

a 0.20 effect size at α=0.05 (a low-moderate effect);

statistical frequencies have a margin of error of ±5%.

The representativeness of the sample was assessed by

comparing four defining program attributes between the

sample and target population at α=0.05: institution basic

Carnegie class, institution control (public or private-not-for-

profit), institution location (U.S. census division), and

degree types (name/degree level). No significant differences

were found between the sample and population concerning

institutional control type or census region. Similarly, no

significant differences in institutional basic Carnegie clas-

ses were found, with the single exception of an over-

representation of doctoral institutions with very high

research activity (these institutions are much more likely

to have IE programs than other institutional types). With

respect to degree types, no significant differences were

found except for an under-representation of graduate

environmental science(s) degree programs and over-

representation of environmental studies masters-level de-

gree programs. We conclude from these results that our

sample is sufficiently representative of the population to

justify the generalization of our findings to IE programs

nationwide.

Analytic methodology

Several statistical methods were employed to analyze the

survey results. First, answers to all questions were screened

and coded for statistical analysis (responses to open-ended

questions were coded according to emergent themes) and

descriptive statistics calculated using measures appropriate

for each question's data. Subsequently three types of

statistical analyses were conducted to address the three

research questions: (1) exploratory factor analysis to

determine the dimensions of knowledge and skills in ideal

IE program curricula, (2) cluster analysis to determine the

number and characteristics of ideal IE curriculum models,

and (3) analyses of variance to determine relationships

between IE program attributes and the ideal curriculum

models.

Exploratory factor analysis Factor analysis reduces a

number of interrelated variables to a smaller number of

dimensions or factors, each representing a common entity

or construct, thus revealing how responses are related and

enhancing understanding of relationships between varia-

bles. The data subjected to factor analysis was IE program

administrators' judgments of the importance of 16 knowl-

edge areas and 23 skills in an ideal curriculum for each

degree their program offered (using a four-point Likert

scale—minimal, low, moderate, high). The knowledge and

skills variables includedwerevettedbyIEprogram

administrators prior to the survey and a total of 304

knowledge sets and 308 skills sets were obtained for

analysis. Maximum likelihood factor extraction was chosen

because it includes a statistical goodness-of-fit test and

allows generalizations from an unbiased sample to a

population of subjects. In this case, the factors reveal how

various areas of knowledge and skills are combined into

interdisciplinary components and the factor models how

these components are related to each other in idealized IE

program curricula. Thus, the factors represent broad

interdisciplinary core competency areas and the factor

models’structure provides understanding of how these

components are generally related in an ideal IE curriculum

structure.

Five criteria can be considered when determining the

number of factors to retain for interpretation. All five

criteria were evaluated; the popular Kaiser criterion was

selected, which recommends retaining all factors with

eigenvalues≥1. The meaning of each factor is interpreted

using factor loadings. A factor loading is the Pearson

correlation coefficient of the original variables (in this

study, the importance ratings of knowledge and skill areas)

with a factor. Factor loadings indicate an association of the

variable with a factor and ranges from 1 (perfect positive

association) to −1 (perfect negative association). In social

science research, 0.32 is cited as a conservative value for

the minimum loading of a variable on a factor because it

equates to approximately 10% overlapping variance. This

value was used as the critical value for this study. The

relative importance of each variable for explaining a factor

is indicated by the magnitude of the squares of the factor

loadings.

Factor rotation is used to simplify data structures by

rotating factor axes so that the variables are loaded

maximally on only one factor (minimizes unexplained

variance). Orthogonal rotation maintains factor indepen-

dence while oblique rotation allows factors to correlate.

Oblique rotation should be used if factors are believed to be

18 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

related. Since it was suspected that some factors would be

related, an oblique (Promax) rotation method was chosen.

Cluster analysis Cluster analysis is used to combine or

classify objects into groups that exhibit high internal

(within cluster) homogeneity and high external (between-

cluster) heterogeneity. Cluster analysis was used to identify

groups of program administrators who rated the importance

of the knowledge and skills variables similarly, thus

representing different ideal educational approaches/curricu-

lum models for IE programs. The analysis was conducted

on principal component scores using the SPSS two-step

clustering method. Principle component scores were ana-

lyzed instead of the original 39 importance ratings because

in cluster analysis multicollinearity results in a weighting

process that affects the analysis; multicollinear variables are

implicitly weighted more heavily. Since several of the

importance-rated variables exhibited multicollinearity, prin-

cipal components analysis was used to group related

variables prior to clustering. Reducing the original impor-

tance rating variables into sets of knowledge and skill

components eliminated multicollinearity while retaining all

variables and their variances in the analysis.

Analysis of variance Finally, two types of analysis of

variance tests (α<0.05) were used to explore relationships

among ideal curriculum types, knowledge and skill factors,

and other program and degree attributes: one-way analysis

of variance (ANOVA) for scale variables and Kruskal–

Wallis one-way analysis of variance by ranks (KWANOVA)

for ordinal and categorical variables.

Review of the research findings from phase I—IE field

identity

The first phase of the curriculum study identified three

characteristics of the identity of IE programs (Vincent and

Focht 2009; Vincent and Focht 2010; Vincent 2010b).

These characteristics include what IE programs study, the

unique role of IE programs—why these programs are

important and the distinctive role they fill in the higher

education landscape—and how they accomplish their

educational goals.

Focus of study The first characteristic addresses the

question of “what does the IE field study?”Not surpris-

ingly, we found that leaders of IE programs in higher

education identify the human-nature interfaces (coupled

human and natural systems) as their focus. They recognize

that study of these systems requires that program curricula

include concepts from the natural sciences, social sciences,

applied sciences, and the humanities. Students should be

expected to gain an appreciation of the sociopolitical and

natural aspects of environmental problems, the limits of

technology and science, and the importance of acknowl-

edging and reporting uncertainty.

Role in higher education and society The second charac-

teristic addresses the question “whyisthisareaofstudy

important?”IE program leaders believe that balanced,

resilient systems that lie at the natural-human systems

interfaces are essential to human and ecological well-being.

It is therefore important to sustain the health of these systems

if we are to continue to improve quality of life for all and

preserve natural resources. This rationale aligns closely with

characteristics of sustainability-oriented environmental re-

search and practice as described in sustainability literature

and U.S. government documents pertaining to environmental

education and research (U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency 2007; Pfirman and the AC-ERE 2003; National

Science Foundation AC-ERE 2005,2009). In addition, our

discussions at several workshops held at environmental

science and studies conferences reveal that IE programs

share a normative commitment to sustainability and that the

goal of degree programs is to prepare students to be

sustainability-oriented scientists, leaders, problem solvers,

and decision makers (Vincent and Focht 2010).

Sustainability in this context is interpreted modestly

as a resilient, sustainable relationship between actions

taken to improve the human condition and the natural

environment. We do not attempt to define sustainability

in the context of IE education since we believe that

students should be aware of the various ways in which

sustainability is understood.

The results from the survey of IE programs conducted

during the second phase of the study confirm the centrality of

the concepts of sustainability for IE education. The importance

of sustainability knowledge in program curricula has a mean

rating of “moderate to high importance”across all IE degree

program types and levels, and the large majority of programs

rate its importance in their degree curricula as either moderate

or high (86% of undergraduate programs and 88% of graduate

programs). In addition, almost all IE degree programs already

include sustainability in their curricula in coursework and

experiential learning opportunities; over half require course-

work in sustainability (Vincent and Focht 2010).

The results of the 2008 survey also revealed that a third

of IE programs considered sustainability as the core guiding

principle in their curriculum design. For example, the

primary objective of the Environmental Dynamics program

at Arkansas State University is to “aid development of

strategies for sustainable societies based on results of

scientific research and respect for human cultures.”

This trend is increasing. Since the completion of the

survey, more IE programs have adopted sustainability as a

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 19

core principle. For example, the new mission, vision, and

values statement for the Department of Environmental

Studies at Antioch University New England includes: “We

train effective local, national, and international environ-

mental leaders working to create a sustainable society that

embodies respect and care for the community of life,

ecological integrity, social and economic justice, democra-

cy, nonviolence, and peace.”

Notably, the survey also discovered that growth in IE

program enrollment is positively and significantly associat-

ed sustainability inclusion in program curricula (α< 0.05).

A positive 5-year enrollment trend (2003–2008) for

programs is associated with inclusion of sustainability in

the curriculum via coursework, as a core guiding principle,

and through experiential research and applied/service

learning opportunities.

Educational approach and perspectives on purpose The

third characteristic addresses the question of “how should

the study of coupled human-natural systems best be

accomplished?”Substantial agreement exists among IE

program leaders that a cross-disciplinary approach that

synthesizes insights and fosters systems thinking to obtain a

more holistic understanding of these interfaces is essential.

We did find, however, differences in how IE program

leaders prefer to approach this integration in terms of

educating program graduates (Vincent and Focht 2009).

&Some leaders believe that competence is best achieved

through a firm grounding in a natural science discipline

that is augmented by exposure to other, related disci-

plines. Their focus is on training environmental scientific

and technological experts who can utilize disciplinary

tools to devise practical solutions for environmental

problems. They support an interdisciplinary approach to

the extent that graduates are able to participate effectively

as part of an interdisciplinary team and communicate

with policymakers and the public, but assert that

disciplinary depth should be a requirement for environ-

mental programs and that scientific expertise is most

important. They favor strictly defined and universal core

competencies for IE programs.

&Other leaders advocate an informed environmental

citizenship foundation anchored in the liberal arts. They

assign priority to producing knowledgeable and

advocacy-oriented environmental citizens regardless of

the career they choose. Curricular breadth and flexible

core competencies are favored, with an emphasis on the

social and political aspects of environmental change.

&Still others prefer a systems-focused integration of

disciplines with a commitment toward to professional

career preparation and heavy emphasis on systems

thinking and disciplinary integration aimed at solving

complex environmental problems. This perspective

strongly favors disciplinary breadth, with flexible and

dynamic core competencies.

Taken together, the results of the first phase suggest to us

that a potential exists for forging consensus on program

focus: sustainability-oriented scholarship, research, and

practice through interdisciplinary problem solving.

Research findings from phase II—dimensions of IE

knowledge and skills

The first research question addressed in phase II of the

study concerns the dimensions that underlie the inclusion of

knowledge areas and skills in IE program curricula, and

how these dimensions could define interdisciplinary core

competency areas. Survey respondents were asked to rate

the importance of 16 knowledge and 23 skills variables in

an ideal curriculum for each of their program's degrees.

Exploratory factor analysis of these ratings revealed two

factor models: an IE knowledge factor model with five

interdisciplinary IE knowledge factors and an IE skills

factor model with five integrated IE skills factors.

The validity of each factor model structure was

established statistically using the maximum likelihood

goodness-of-fit test and by testing the reliability of each

factor using Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. The

model goodness-of-fit tests for both the knowledge factor

solution and the skills factor solution are highly significant

at p<0.001; all ten factors were shown to be reliable. The

knowledge factor solution explained 64% and the skills

factor solution 62% of the total variance in program

administrators' ratings.

The two factor models elucidate how knowledge and

skills are structured in ideal IE program curricula and

provide a framework to guide the development of courses

and curricula. IE programs combine and incorporate the ten

knowledge and skills factors into their courses and

curriculum designs in myriad ways, however, broad

similarities in how these components contribute to IE

degree curricula can be discerned by the knowledge and

skills factor model structures. These ten factors may be

considered general core competencies for all IE programs,

although the level of emphasis on the factors differs by

educational approach as discussed later in this article.

Interdisciplinary IE knowledge components The five inter-

disciplinary IE knowledge factors are: natural sciences,

natural resources, social sciences, humanities, and eco-

nomic development. Each of these factors represents an

amalgam of knowledge areas that significantly contribute to

the factor to variable extents. For example, the natural

20 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

sciences knowledge factor includes concepts from three

areas—life sciences, physical sciences and ecology—with

the life sciences most influential, contributing approximate-

ly 60% of the content of this knowledge factor (Table 1).

Table 1illustrates the relationships between disciplinary

knowledge areas and the five interdisciplinary IE knowl-

edge factors. The center column lists the five interdisci-

plinary knowledge factors. The right column lists the

disciplinary areas that comprise the content of each

knowledge factor and the proportion each contributes to

the factor. The left column illustrates that the natural

resources,social sciences,andhumanities factors are

highly correlated with each other to create an interdisci-

plinary knowledge area labeled coupled human-nature

systems (Table 2). All 16 knowledge areas are significantly

correlated with at least one factor.

The knowledge factor model structure suggests that the

natural resources factor occupies a central position in IE

programs; all four of the other factors are significantly

correlated with this factor (Table 2). It also explains the

most variance (29%) in how program leaders rate the

importance of combined disciplinary knowledge concepts

to form interdisciplinary IE program components. The

social sciences and humanities factors are highly

correlated with natural resources and with each other,

forming an integrated knowledge area labeled coupled

human-nature systems. The natural sciences and economic

development factors are also moderately correlated with

natural resources, but not with each other or with the social

sciences or humanities factors (Fig. 1).

Analysis of the knowledge factor structure combined

with program administrator's comments from the study

indicates that: (1) the sustainable stewardship of natural

resources is the central focus for IE programs, (2)

understanding of the natural sciences is essential founda-

tional knowledge, (3) sustainable stewardship is realized

through knowledge of coupled human-nature systems, and

(4) the role of economic development—the business

practices and technologies that together comprise the built

environment and influence human behavior—provide

context for understanding coupled human-nature systems.

Given the sustainability-oriented focus of IE programs, it

is important to note that the sustainability knowledge

variable is significantly associated with the natural resources

knowledge factor and therefore, the coupled human-nature

systems knowledge area. This is another indication that

sustainable stewardship of natural resources through under-

standing of coupled human-nature systems forms the central

focus for all IE programs (Fig. 1).

IE integrated skills components The five integrated IE skills

factors are: cognition,technical research and analysis,

management,community engagement,andpublic communi-

cations. Each of these factors represents an amalgam of

related skills that significantly contribute to the factor to

variable extents. For example, the cognition skills factor

includes five cognitive skills—synthesis, problem solving,

analysis, creativity, and critical thinking—with synthesis and

problem solving most influential (Table 3).

Table 3illustrates the relationships between skills areas

and the five integrated IE skills factors. The center column

lists the five integrated skills factors. The right column lists

the skills that comprise the content of each skills factor and

the proportion each contributes to the factor. The left

column illustrates the two subsets of skills factors that are

highly correlated with each other to create the two

integrated skills areas: problem analysis and problem

solutions and management. Two skills variables, social

research, and literature research, are not significantly

correlated with any of the skills factors indicating their

rated importance was not directly related to other skills.

The skills factor model structure reveals that the skills

fall into two integrated sets—problem analysis and problem

solutions and management (Table 4). The cognition and

technical research and analysis skills factors are highly

correlated, forming an integrated skills area labeled prob-

lem analysis. Note that the management and public

communication skills components are also moderately

Table 1 Interdisciplinary IE knowledge components (ideal curricula)

Interdisciplinary

knowledge area

IE knowledge

factor

Disciplinary knowledge areas

(proportion of contribution to

knowledge factor)

Natural sciences Natural

sciences

Life sciences (60)

Physical sciences (27)

Ecology (13)

Coupled human-

nature systems

Natural

resources

Natural resources management

and agriculture (31)

Geography (20)

Sustainability (15)

Education (14)

Research methods (11)

Ecology (8)

Social

sciences

Policy and public

administration (42)

Economics (42)

Business (9)

Other social sciences (8)

Humanities History (48)

Literature and language

arts (31)

Philosophy and ethics (21)

Economic

development

Economic

development

Engineering and built

environment (73)

Business (27)

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 21

correlated with technical research and analysis.The

cognition,management,community engagement, and pub-

lic communication skills factors are all highly correlated

with each other, forming a second integrated skills area

labeled problem solutions and management (Fig. 2).

Analysis of the skills factor structure combined with

program leader's comments from the study indicates that:

(1) problem analysis skills include technical and analytic

research skills, but also include a lesser emphasis on

management and public communication skills, (2) cognitive

skills, with their emphasis on systems thinking and problem

solving, are a key element for both the analysis of

environmental problems and the formulation of solutions,

and (3) devising solutions and implementing adaptive

management plans for addressing environmental problems

requires management skills and societal engagement (Fig. 2).

Research findings from phase II—ideal approaches/

curriculum models

The second research question addressed in Phase II

concerns the number and characteristics of ideal curricular

models for IE education. Cluster analysis conducted on

principal component scores derived from program admin-

istrators’ratings of the importance of the knowledge and

skill variables (for each degree) reveals three ideal

curriculum models. These are closely aligned with the

three perspectives on curriculum design discovered in the

first phase of the curriculum study, reinforcing the

existence of three approaches to curriculum design. The

three ideal curriculum models emphasize different knowl-

edge and skill areas to prepare graduates for three types of

sustainability-oriented scholarship, research, and practice:

Systems Science,Policy and Governance, and Adaptive

Management.

Because cluster analysis involves a subjective judgment

on an optimal cluster solution, it is important to validate the

solution. Four methods were used to insure the validity and

practical significance of the results. First, the sample was

randomly split into two groups and the results compared.

Second, two different clustering algorithms (SPSS two-step

method and Ward's method) were used and the results

compared. Third, descriptive discriminant analysis was

used to test the fidelity of cluster membership using the

original importance rating variables. The discriminant

analysis revealed 94% of the cases were correctly classified

and that two dimensions that separate the clusters; both are

highly significant predictors at p<0.001. Finally, analysis of

variance tests were conducted using program attribute

variables to demonstrate significant differences between

clusters. A number of significant differences in degree

program attributes between the clusters were evident.

The three approaches represent the views of groups of

program administrators that rate the ideal curricular

emphasis of the ten IE knowledge and skills areas in

similar ways. The labels for the model approaches are

based upon their characteristics. The most important

characteristics are the levels of importance placed on the

five IE interdisciplinary knowledge and five IE integrated

skills factors. Each of the approaches emphasizes the

factors differently from the other two approaches and from

the mean emphases for IE programs overall. Figures 3and

4illustrate how the mean importance ratings for each of the

three ideal approaches—Systems Science,Policy And

Governance, and Adaptive Management—differ from the

Table 2 Knowledge factor correlation matrix (ideal curricula)

Knowledge factor Natural resources Humanities Social sciences Natural sciences Economic development

Natural resources 1.000 0.521 0.545 0.275 0.303

Humanities 1.000 0.636 0.112 0.103

Social sciences 1.000 0.128 0.149

Natural sciences 1.000 −0.030

Economic development 1.000

Social Sciences

Factor 3

Economic

Development

Factor 5

Humanities

Factor 2

Natural Resources

Factor 1

Natural Sciences

Factor 4

Coupled Human-Nature Systems

Fig. 1 IE interdisciplinary knowledge model

22 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

overall mean for all IE programs and from the other two

approaches (overall mean=0).

The three approaches are also characterized by features

of the degree programs associated with each. These include:

(1) the proportions of degree types (name and level), (2)

certain degree program requirements, (3) specific degree

program objectives, and (4) sustainability inclusion. The

characteristics of each of the three approaches are pre-

sented, followed by a framework that illustrates their

interrelationships. The framework for understanding the

model reveals that the three approaches are not opposed to

each other; instead they overlap considerably so that some

IE programs are situated on the boundaries of two or three

models (Fig. 8). In addition, many IE degree-granting

programs or higher education institutions offer degrees that

align with more than one approach.

The systems science approach The Systems Science ap-

proach stresses in-depth knowledge of the natural sciences

and technical research and analysis skills centered on

laboratory analyzes and fieldwork. It manifests an analytic,

diagnostic orientation that emphasizes problem analysis

using traditional scientific skills and expertise in the natural

sciences.

This model places highest emphasis on the natural

sciences knowledge component and the technical research

and analysis skills component and a lower emphasis than

the overall mean on all other factors (Fig. 5). The mean

factor score of this model is higher than the other two

models for the natural sciences factor; significantly so in

comparison to the Policy and Governance model. The

mean factor scores for this model are significantly lower in

comparison to both other models for the social sciences and

humanities knowledge factors, and for the management and

community engagement skill factors. This model also places

significantly lower emphasis on the economic development

factor in comparison to the Adaptive Management model

and significantly higher emphasis on the technical research

and analysis factor compared with the Policy and Gover-

nance model.

This model was the least popular (representing the ideal

for 22% of all IE degree programs) and the most distinctive,

exhibiting the most significant differences from the other

two models. Programs associated with this model are more

likely to be named environmental science(s) or have

another science-focused name such as Science of Natural

Table 3 Integrated IE skills components (ideal curricula)

Integrated skills

area

IE skills factor Skills areas (proportion

of contribution to skills

factor)

Problem analysis Cognition Synthesis (25)

Problem-solving (23)

Analysis (19)

Creativity (17)

Critical thinking (16)

Technical

research and

analysis

Field research (26)

Laboratory research (23)

Mathematics (15)

Statistics (13)

Spatial analysis (11)

Technical and academic

writing (8)

Oral communication (5)

Problem solutions

and management

Cognition (Same as above)

Management Personnel

management (36)

Project management (27)

Leadership (17)

Decision science (10)

Information

management (10)

Community

engagement

Community relations (54)

Advocacy and

outreach (35)

Leadership (11)

Public

communication

Creative and journalistic

writing (64)

Mass

communications (28)

Creativity (10)

Table 4 Skills factor correlation matrix (ideal curricula)

Skills factor Technical research

and analysis

Management Cognition Public communication Community engagement

Technical research

and analysis

1.000 0.323 0.540 0.294 0.209

Management 1.000 0.494 0.534 0.454

Cognition 1.000 0.509 0.417

Public communication 1.000 0.544

Community engagement 1.000

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 23

and Environmental Systems (Cornell University) or Earth

System Science (University of Wyoming)—and with a

higher proportion of undergraduate programs (85% versus

68–70% for the other two models). Degree programs

associated with this model are also more likely to be

located within a non-IE department such as biology or earth

science (43% versus 27–28% for the other two models).

The objectives of the undergraduate degree programs

associated with this model are significantly more likely to

include preparing students for graduate and professional

school and less likely to include preparing students as

environmental leaders and change agents or to improve

environmental policy decisions. Graduate programs are

more likely to include the objective of preparing students

to be environmental academics. This model is also

significantly less likely than the other two models to

include sustainability in degree curricula as a core principle,

required coursework, optional coursework, research expe-

rience, or applied/service learning experiences.

The policy and governance approach The Policy and

Governance approach emphasizes the social sciences,

humanities, and public engagement skills. The orientation

for this model is societal and institutional change with a

focus on public awareness and an emphasis on policy and

governance processes. It includes programs reflecting the

liberal arts perspective as well as programs designed for the

professional preparation of students who plan careers in the

environmental policy, advocacy, and government arenas.

This model places significantly lower importance on the

natural sciences knowledge factor and the technical

research and analysis skills factor compared to the other

two models. It places the highest emphasis on the social

sciences knowledge component (significantly compared to

the Systems Science model) and the public communication

skills component (significantly compared to the Systems

Science model) and lower emphasis on the natural

resources knowledge factor (significantly compared to

Adaptive Management model; Fig. 6).

This model represents the ideal for 33% of all IE degree

programs. Degree programs associated with this model are

more likely to be named environmental studies or have a

policy-focused name such as Master of Public Affairs in

Energy and Environmental Policy (University of Wisconsin

Problem Solutions & Management

Problem Analysis

Management

Factor 3

Technical

Research and

Analysis

Factor 1

Cognition

Factor 2

Public

Communication

Factor 5

Community

Engagement

Factor 4

Fig. 2 IE interdisciplinary skills

model (ideal curricula)

Fig. 3 Knowledge component means by educational approach/model

24 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

at Madison) or Science, Technology and Policy (University

of Minnesota at Twin Cities).

Graduate programs associated with this model are

significantly less likely to require a graduate thesis or

research project because they include more professional

degree programs. Undergraduate programs associated with

the Policy and Governance model are most likely to

include the objectives of preparing students to be environ-

mental leaders and change agents and to improve environ-

mental policy decisions; and all degree programs

(undergraduate and graduate) are most likely to include

sustainability in their curricula, although not significantly

more so than degree programs associated with the Adaptive

Management model.

The adaptive management approach The Adaptive Manage-

ment approach emphasizes coupled human-nature systems

knowledge and both problem analysis and problem sol-

utions and management skills. This approach has an

applied, professional orientation that emphasizes interdisci-

plinary knowledge production and decision-making pro-

cesses that include the input of societal stakeholders.

Compared with the other two models, this model

places significantly higher emphasis on the natural

resources and economic development knowledge factors

and on the management and cognitive skills factors

(synthesis and problem solving). It also places higher

emphasis on the humanities knowledge factor and on the

community engagement skills factor (significantly com-

paredtotheSystems Science model). Notably, this model

places higher importance than the other two models on

two of the three correlated factors that comprise the

coupled human-nature systems knowledge area—natural

resources and humanities—and three of the four correlated

factors that comprise the problem solutions and manage-

ment integrated skills area—cognitive,management,and

community engagement (Fig. 7).

The Adaptive Management model is the most popular of

the three approaches, representing the ideal for 45% of all

IE degree programs. Degree programs associated with the

Adaptive Management approach are more diverse and are

more likely to have a name other than environmental

science or environmental studies, such as Coastal Water-

shed Science and Policy (California State University-

Monterey Bay) or a management-focused name such as

Environmental Economics and Management (University of

Rhode Island) or Environmental Resource Management

(Pennsylvania State University). These programs include a

Fig. 4 Skills component means by educational approach/model

Fig. 5 Knowledge and skills

means for the systems science

model

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 25

higher proportion of master of science and doctoral

programs and are significantly more likely to require

undergraduate participation in a research project.

Discriminant analysis of the models An analysis of the

three model clusters and their relationship to each other was

explored with discriminant analysis using the factors scores

for the ten knowledge and skills factors as the discriminat-

ing variables. The analysis revealed two dimensions, both

highly significant, that discriminate between the groups of

IE programs associated with each model.

The first dimension accounts for the majority of overall

variance that distinguishes the three groups (64%), while

the second dimension accounts for the remainder (36%).

The social sciences and public communication factors are

positively associated with the first dimension while the

technical research and analysis and natural sciences factors

are negatively associated with this dimension (Table 5). The

second dimension is positively associated with the other six

factors, especially management,community engagement,and

economic development.

Using these results, we can graphically illustrate the

relationships among the three ideal curriculum models to

illustrate a framework for understanding IE education in the

United States (see Fig. 8). Along the vertical dimension, we

differentiate the Adaptive Management approach from the

other two in terms of a curriculum with an applied,

solutions-oriented focus versus a problem analytic focus.

Along the horizontal dimension, we differentiate the

Systems Science approach from the Policy and Governance

approach in terms of a technical analysis focus versus a

societal understanding focus; the Adaptive Management

approach is located in an intermediate position. All three

curriculum models prepare students to engage in problem

solving for sustainability, but using different approaches.

In addition to the 343 degree programs included in the

survey, two new degree programs and a proposed frame-

work for sustainability science are indicative of the ways in

which IE degree programs may be organized based on these

three models. Kajikawa (2008) synthesized information

from research papers published in key journals to identify a

proposed framework for integrative sustainability science

that could serve as a model for Systems Science programs.

The new Master's in Development Practice developed by

the International Commission on Education for Sustainable

Development Practice provides an example of a program

focused on Policy and Governance (International Commis-

sion on Education for Sustainable Practice 2008). The

recently redesigned 5-year environmental science program

at ETH Zurich may span all three models depending upon

the desired career paths and options chosen by the

participating students. Notably, this program analyzed its

curricular components to assess how well it prepared

graduates for environmental careers and used the results

Fig. 6 Knowledge and skills

means for the policy and

governance model

Fig. 7 IE knowledge and skills

means for the adaptive

management model

26 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

to align the program more closely with professional practice

(Hansmann 2009).

Results—relationships and influences

The third research question addressed in phase II of the

study asked how administrative and degree program

attributes may be related to the ideal curriculum types and

what these relationships indicate concerning program

structure and curriculum design. Relationships between

ideal curriculum types and program attributes were inves-

tigated through analysis of variance tests appropriate for

each attribute analyzed (α< 0.05). Influences were also

determined through qualitative analysis of the respondents'

answers to questions related to program success.

Curriculum models and program growth In addition to the

degree program characteristics associated with each of the

models discussed above, we also found two models differed

significantly on enrollment trend. Although most IE degree

programs report growth, those associated with the Systems

Science model have the highest proportion of degree

programs experiencing declining enrollment, while the

Adaptive Management model has the highest proportion

of degree programs with growing enrollment (Table 6).

A possible explanation is suggested by degree program

attributes significantly and positively associated with

program enrollment—sustainability inclusion (as a core

principle, in coursework, and through research and applied/

service learning opportunities) and four program objectives.

The three program objectives positively associated with

undergraduate program growth are: (1) preparing students

to be environmental leaders and change agents, (2)

providing community service, and (3) advancing environ-

mental research. The program objective of improving

environmental policy decisions is positively associated with

graduate program growth. These relationships suggest why

more programs in the Systems Science model are declining

since this model, in contrast with the other two models, was

significantly less likely to include sustainability or share

two of these four program objectives—preparing students

to be environmental leaders and change agents and

improving environmental policy decisions.

Based on our previous findings and review of the IE

program literature we postulated four program attributes

may exert influence on ideal curriculum preferences: (1)

Carnegie class of the host institution, demonstrated to

influence program administrators' perspectives on curricu-

lum design in the first phase of this study (Vincent and

Focht 2009); (2) the program institution's census region

(due to economic and sociopolitical differences); (3) the

program's location within the administrative hierarchy

(which may influence faculty participation, autonomy,

resource allocation, and other attributes); and (4) the

program administrators' educational preparation (which

may influence design of the curriculum).

Only one of these attributes—program administrators'

formal preparation—differs significantly between the three

ideal curriculum models: degree programs associated with

the Systems Science model are least diverse in program

administrators' preparation and include the highest propor-

tion of those prepared exclusively in the natural sciences

(Table 7). Administrators were grouped into one of four

categories based upon degrees earned: natural sciences,

applied/professional fields, social sciences/humanities, and

Fig. 8 Framework for understanding IE education in the U.S.

Table 5 Discriminant analysis correlation coefficients and standard-

ized function coefficients

Knowledge and skills factors Correlation coefficients

with discriminant dimension

First Second

Technical research and analysis −0.493

0.337

Natural sciences −0.452

0.291

Social sciences 0.360

0.311

Public communication 0.124

−0.006

Management 0.157 0.497

Community engagement 0.255 0.360

Economic development 0.002 0.347

Natural resources −0.091 0.304

Humanities 0.155 0.258

Cognition −0.050 0.195

Largest absolute correlation between each variable and any discriminant

function

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 27

interdisciplinary. Although most IE program administrators

hold degrees exclusively in the natural sciences, the

programs associated with the other two models exhibit

more diversity. The Policy and Governance model has the

highest proportion of administrators prepared in the social

sciences and humanities, and the Adaptive Management

model the highest proportion of those with interdisciplinary,

applied or professional preparation.

The lower diversity of administrator preparation in the

Systems Science model is due partly to a higher proportion

of these degree programs located within natural science

departments. However, this difference can also be attributed

to the dissimilarity in the way administrators with different

educational backgrounds rate the importance of knowledge

and skill factors. Three knowledge factors (natural scien-

ces,natural resources, and economic development) and one

skills factor (management) exhibit significant differences in

mean scores based on administrator preparation. Admin-

istrators with interdisciplinary or applied/professional prep-

aration rate the importance of the natural resources,

economic development, and management factors higher

than those with degrees earned primarily in the natural

sciences or social sciences/humanities. Those prepared in

the natural sciences rate the importance of the natural

sciences factor higher than the other groups, and those

trained in the social sciences/humanities place significantly

lower importance on the economic development and

management factors.

Administrative location influences administrators' views on

program success Although programs' administrative loca-

tions are not significantly associated with the ideal

curriculum models, our analysis provides evidence that

programs housed within their own IE academic units

(environmental department, school or college, or cross-

institutional entity) may have important advantages when

compared to programs administratively housed in other

locations. We found significant differences in program

administrators' levels of satisfaction with factors influenc-

ing program success and the ability of programs to offer an

ideal interdisciplinary curriculum depending upon their

administrative location.

IE degree programs are found in a variety of institutional

locations ranging from an IE degree program within a

traditional disciplinary department to IE degree programs

offered through a consortium of colleges. Altogether, only

about a third of IE degree programs are located within their

own IE administrative units—an environmental department,

school or college, or cross-institutional center, institute, or

program (Fig. 9).

The largest proportion of these, representing 23% of all

programs, are located within their own department such as

the Department of Environmental Science at Allegheny

College, the Department of Environmental Studies at

Antioch University New England, or the Department of

Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of

Pennsylvania. A few, about 4% of all programs, are situated

within their own IE school or college such as the Huxley

College of the Environment at Western Washington

University or the Nicholas School of the Environment and

Earth Sciences at Duke University. Another group, repre-

senting 11% of all programs, are positioned within their

own cross-institutional programs, institutes, or centers, such

as the Center for Environmental Policy at Bard College or

the Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies at

the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

The remaining two thirds of IE degree programs are split

between locations as a degree program within a non-IE

department or jointly offered by a few non-IE departments

(31%) or as programs that cross one or more colleges

(31%). Examples of these include the Environmental

Studies degree program located in the Department of

Geology and Planetary Science at the University of

Pittsburg and the Environmental Studies Program at the

University of Nebraska at Lincoln that spans the College of

Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources and the

College of Arts and Sciences.

Table 7 Program administrator educational preparation and ideal

curriculum models

Ideal curriculum model

Educational

preparation

category

Systems

science

(n=66)

Policy and

governance

(n=101)

Adaptive

management

(n=137)

Natural sciences 68% 48% 52%

Applied sciences

and/or professional

12% 22% 20%

Social sciences

and/or humanities

9% 16% 6%

Interdisciplinary 11% 14% 22%

Ideal curriculum model Rapid growth (n=63) Growth (n=113) Steady (n=88) Decline (n=37)

Systems science 16% 32% 35% 17%

Policy and governance 19% 40% 31% 10%

Adaptive management 24% 39% 25% 12%

Table 6 Ideal curriculum mod-

els and enrollment trends

28 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

An interesting example of a multi-institutional approach

occurs in southern California where degrees are offered in

Environmental Science or Environment, Economic, and

Politics by the Claremont Colleges Consortium comprised

of Claremont Graduate University, Claremont McKenna

College, Harvey Mudd College, Keck Graduate Institute of

Applied Life Sciences, Pitzer College, Pomona College,

and Scripps College.

Program administrative locations also vary based on

degree program names. Programs named environmental

science(s) are most often located within other departments

(46%), while environmental studies programs are the most

likely to be located within their own department (32%).

The survey asked program administrators to gauge the

importance of various factors on the success of IE programs

in general and the level of their satisfaction with how their

own program addressed or utilized each factor in its own

success. Five groups of influencing factors were rated: (1)

curriculum factors, (2) institutional factors, (3) graduate

employment factors, (4) external support factors, and (5)

partnership factors (Table 8).

The factors rated of mean high importance for program

success included curriculum (incorporating real world

problems into courses, developing courses) and institutional

factors (leadership, faculty support). Factors rated of

moderate importance included curriculum (defining degrees

and specializations, course sequencing), institutional (loca-

tion within the administrative hierarchy, institutional sup-

port, competition with other academic units) and graduate

employment factors (local and/or regional employment,

national employment). The external support and partnership

factors were all rated of mean low importance for program

success.

Levels of satisfaction with various factors that influence

program success are generally higher for programs within

their own IE administrative units (Table 8). Over half of the

programs located within their own IE academic units are

highly satisfied with their administrative location in

contrast to less than a third of programs in other depart-

ments or that cross other academic units. Programs located

in their own IE environmental academic units are also

significantly more likely to be highly satisfied with their

ability to offer relevant degrees and specializations, provide

effective program leadership, prepare students for employ-

ment, compete for funding and public support, and

participate in partnerships with other educational institu-

tions and organizations.

Programs located in their own IE departments, colleges,

or cross-institutional centers or programs are also more

likely to provide an ideal curriculum. The survey asked

program administrators to rate the importance of 39

knowledge and skills areas in an ideal curriculum for each

degree their program offers and then to rate the actual

emphases in their current curricula. IE degree programs

located within their own environmental school or college

are most likely to provide curricula with ideal levels of

emphases on knowledge and skills areas, meeting or

exceeding the ideal mean emphases in all knowledge and

skills areas (Tables 9and 10). In contrast, programs located

within other departments were clearly at a disadvantage,

meeting the ideal emphases for only 17 of the 39—ten

knowledge and seven skills.

Given the wide diversity of institutional types and

structural reform initiatives designed to promote interdisci-

plinary learning and research, the optimal location for an

individual IE program may depend on the program and its

host institution. However, a trend is emerging; more

programs are transitioning or merging into their own IE

academic units and hiring their own faculty. Seven percent

of the programs participating in the survey reported that

they are moving into new administrative structures and/or

hiring their own core or jointly appointed faculty: three in

new departments, two in new institutes, two in new

schools, and five as mergers with other departments to

form new renamed, repurposed departments. Several others

report new institutional arrangements allowing them to hire

Fig. 9 IE degree program

administrative locations

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 29

core faculty or share faculty appointments with other

departments.

A steady stream of new colleges, schools, and campuses

dedicated to the study of the environment and sustainability

are being established. These include the School of Global

Sustainability at the University of South Florida, the School

of Sustainability at Arizona State University, the College of

the Environment at the University of Washington—

purported to be the largest environmental college in the

world, the School for Global Environmental Sustainability

at Colorado State University, the School for Sustainability

and the Environment at Chatham University, and the State

University of New York at Stony Brook's Southampton

campus dedicated to the study of sustainability.

Building workforce capacity

Two trends influence the evolving roles for graduates of IE

programs and indicate how the three ideal curriculum

models may prepare students for emerging environmental

careers. The first is the need for the participation of most, if

not all, fields in solving complex and interrelated global

environmental problems. Jane Lubchenco (1998:491),

writing on behalf of the board of the American Association

for the Advancement of Science, challenged all scientists to

rethink the way science is deployed to meet the challenges

of the future.

The concept of what constitutes “the environment”is

changing rapidly. Urgent and unprecedented environ-

mental and social changes challenge scientists to

define a new social contract….The new and unmet

needs of society include more comprehensive under-

standing and technologies for society to move toward

a more sustainable biosphere—one which is ecolog-

ically sound, economically feasible and socially just.

In response, the federal government, institutions of

higher education, non-profit and for-profit organizations,

and thousands of individual scientists have realigned

Table 8 Effect of program location on high satisfaction with factors that influence program success

Influencing factor IE department

(n=50)

Within other

department(s)

(n=88)

IE college, institute or

other primary academic

unit (n=32)

Within or across other

academic unit(s) (n=76)

Curriculum factors

Offer relevant degrees and specializations 63% 41% 52% 40%

Develop courses 54% 42% 35% 35%

Sequence courses 33% 34% 32% 32%

Incorporate real world problems 71% 72% 65% 72%

Institutional factors

Institutional support 29% 16% 22% 20%

Program location 55% 27% 59% 32%

Program leadership 72% 44% 66% 62%

Faculty support 54% 38% 53% 53%

Compete w/other academic units 22% 8% 34% 23%

Graduate employment factors

Prepare graduates for local/regional employment 49% 49% 65% 38%

Prepare graduates for national employment 38% 21% 45% 19%

External support factors

Compete for federal funding 16% 8% 31% 11%

Compete for state and local funding 14% 7% 6% 4%

Compete for foundation and private finding 27% 9% 22% 11%

Win public support 12% 2% 22% 11%

Win political support 9% 1% 9% 6%

Partnership factors

Participate in educational institution partnerships 24% 11% 22% 16%

Participate in governmental agency partnerships 27% 15% 20% 18%

Participate in private sector partnerships 21% 17% 10% 11%

Participate in NGO partnerships 25% 7% 25% 14%

Participate in professional society partnerships 11% 4% 10% 4%

30 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

research priorities, instituted new funding programs, and

designed new interdisciplinary structures to facilitate

interdisciplinary human-nature systems research, assist in

the development of new sustainability policies, and support

action aimed at solving pressing environmental problems.

The national Sustainability Research Strategy (U.S. Envi-

ronmental Protection Agency 2007) and the strategies

recommended by the National Science Foundation's Advi-

sory Council for Environmental Research and Education

(National Science Foundation AC-ERE 2009) illustrate

how the federal government is working to engage many

disciplines and entities in working toward enhanced

understanding of complex environmental systems, promot-

ing a higher level of public environmental literacy, and

providing a foundation for informing policy decisions.

The second trend is the increasing importance placed on

new modes of research, knowledge production, and

education that transcend disciplinary boundaries and ad-

dress scientific and societal problems using systems

thinking and analysis (Hirsch Hadorn et al. 2008; Frodeman

et al. 2009). Linking science, policy, and management is an

important component of such modes (van Kerkhoff 2005;

Runhaar et al. 2006; Pohl 2008). Lubchenco (1998), Clark

(2002), Runhaar et al. (2005), Holmes and Clark (2008),

and Pohl (2008) are among those who identify the linkage

of policy and science as one of the critical unmet needs of

society and the need for “translators”trained to work at the

policy-science and management-science interfaces.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA)

Workforce Assessment Project completed in 1999 stressed

that the environmental workforce of the future should

have sustainability expertise, multifaceted knowledge with

an emphasis on broad understanding of environmental

problems—knowledge of a variety of fields to know

where to look outside and inside the agency for expertise

relevant to solving sustainability-oriented problems, lead-

ership and management skills, and multi-dimensional,

audience-customized communication skills (U.S. Environ-

mental Protection Agency 1999).

Environmental professionals point to the relevance of

sustainability-oriented integrative processes in their work,

particularly the need for professional skills related to

Table 9 Effect of program location on the ability to provide ideal emphases on knowledge areas in IE degree program curricula

Knowledge area Mean ideal

emphasis

IE department

(n=50)

Other

department(s)

(n=88)

IE school,

college

(n=7)

Other school,

college (n=76)

IE center, institute

or cross-institutional

program (n=25)

Mean curriculum emphases

Natural sciences knowledge

Physical sciences 2.5 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.3 2.3

Life sciences 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.3

Social sciences knowledge

Policy, planning and administration 2.3 2.2 1.7 2.3 2.1 2.2

Economics 1.8 2.5 1.4 2.2 2.0 1.9

Other social sciences 1.7 2.2 1.4 1.9 2.0 1.6

Humanities knowledge

History 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.2

Philosophy and ethics 1.8 2.3 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.7

Literature and language arts 1.2 1.6 1.2 1.9 1.2 1.1

Applied sciences and professional

knowledge

Engineering and built environment 1.2 1.6 1.0 1.6 1.2 1.5

Business 1.4 1.7 1.0 1.7 1.4 1.3

Education 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.3 1.3 1.2

Research methods 2.3 2.5 2.2 2.6 2.4 2.2

Interdisciplinary knowledge

Ecology 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.5

Geography 1.9 2.1 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.8

Natural resources management

and agriculture

2.0 2.5 1.7 2.3 1.8 2.2

Sustainability 2.2 2.3 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.2

Knowledge area emphases

met/exceeded (within 0.2)

15/16 10/16 16/16 16/16 16/16

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 31

context-specific problem solving that engages a variety of

public and private entities (Jǿrgensen and Lauridsen 2005;

Martin et al. 2005; Newman 2005; Runhaar et al. 2005).

They emphasize that professional competence is linked to

problem solving in specific contexts—“working with

environmental issues in the interplay of companies,

consultants, regulatory authorities, local communities and

non-governmental organizations”(Jǿrgensen and Lauridsen

2005:49). They conclude that environmental professionals'

education should be structured “more along thematic

guidelines that provide students with a set of problem-

solving strategies, and integrate general management

principles and organizational theory”(Jǿrgensen and

Lauridsen 2005:49).

A recent analysis by Brand and Karvonen argues that an

“ecosystem of expertise”is needed to effectively develop,

implement, and manage sustainability projects. This exper-

tise should include an “outreach expert who communicates

effectively to non-experts,”an “interdisciplinary expert

who understands the overlaps of neighboring disciplines,”

a“meta-expert who brokers the multiple claims of

relevance between different forms of expertise,”and a

“civic expert who engages in democratic discourse with

experts and non-experts”(Brand and Karvonen 2007:21).

Table 10 Effect of program location on the ability to provide ideal emphases on skills areas in IE degree program curricula

Skills area Mean ideal

emphasis

IE department

(n=50)

Other

department(s)

(n=88)

IE school,

college

or division

(n=7)

Other school,

college, or

division (n=76)

IE center, institute

or cross-institutional

program (n=25)

Mean curriculum emphases

Cognitive skills

Critical thinking 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.7 2.6 2.8

Problem solving 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.8 2.7 2.8

Creativity 2.3 2.4 1.8 2.7 2.2 2.5

Synthesis 2.6 2.4 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.5

Analysis 2.4 2.2 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.4

Communication skills

Technical and academic writing 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.4

Creative and journalistic writing 1.4 1.7 1.2 1.6 1.5 1.3

Oral communication 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.3 2.4

Mass communication 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.4

Research skills

Literature research 2.2 2.3 2.0 2.3 2.1 2.1

Field research 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.8 2.4 2.8

Laboratory research 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.5 2.3 2.8

Social research 1.9 2.2 1.6 2.4 2.0 2.1

Computational skills

Mathematics 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.6 2.0 2.4

Statistics 2.4 2.5 2.2 2.9 2.2 2.5

Spatial analysis 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.3

Decision sciences 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.8 1.6 1.6

Information management 1.6 1.9 1.3 1.7 1.8 1.4

Managerial skills

Personnel management 1.1 1.0 0.7 1.3 1.2 1.3

Project management 1.3 1.3 0.9 2.0 1.4 1.5

Leadership 1.7 1.7 1.2 2.7 1.8 1.5

Community relations 1.8 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.8 1.7

Advocacy and outreach 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.7 1.8 1.6

Skills area emphases met/exceeded

(within 0.2)

23/23 7/23 23/23 22/23 22/23

Total knowledge and skills area emphases

met/exceeded (within 0.2)

38/39 17/39 39/39 38/39 38/39

32 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

These forms of expertise align with the three IE programs'

approaches to curriculum design: Systems Science (interdis-

ciplinary expert), Policy and Governance (outreach expert

and civic expert), and Adaptive Management (meta-expert).

There is substantial terminological ambiguity concerning

the terms describing integrated, cross-disciplinary process-

es, as well as considerable diversity in how these processes

are structured, implemented, and evaluated (Balsiger 2004;

van Kerkhoff 2005; Lengwiler 2006; Barry et al. 2008;

Jacobs and Frickel 2009). Substantial, but by no means

universal, agreement is evident on two terms often used to

describe these processes: interdisciplinary and transdisci-

plinary. The most frequently cited distinction between these

two is based on the purpose of the process and therefore

who is included. Interdisciplinary processes are those

undertaken by scientific and technological experts to gain

understanding of complex environmental systems and

phenomena. Transdisciplinary processes add environmental

practitioners, policymakers, economic sector representa-

tives, and public stakeholders to participate in decision

making, policy development, and governance protocols to

guide the management of complex coupled human-nature

systems. Though both processes are designed to address

problems through knowledge integration and mutual learn-

ing (Fiksel 2006; Bosch et al. 2007; Pohl 2008; Wiek and

Walter 2009), they incorporate different value rationalities

and forms of knowledge (Godemann 2008;Polkand

Knutsson 2008). These two trends suggest that students

trained in IE programs are uniquely qualified to participate

in these new interdisciplinary research, knowledge produc-

tion, and decision-making processes.

Conclusions and next steps

Our findings provide a broad framework based on coupled

human-nature systems and sustainability that can serve as a

foundation for understanding IE programs and guiding

curriculum design. The framework proposes that a core

curriculum that addresses three interdisciplinary knowledge

areas (natural sciences,coupled human-nature systems, and

economic development) and two integrated skill sets

(problem analysis and problem solution and management)

could win support in the IE education community.

While considerable diversity currently exists, our study

finds that three ideal approaches to interdisciplinary

environmental education are expressed: Systems Science,

Policy and Governance, and Adaptive Management. These

approaches place differential emphasis on knowledge and

skill components but share a common identity centered on

sustainability-oriented problem solving. Students prepared

in these programs fulfill roles as IE participants, guides,

facilitators, analysts and managers.

The Systems Science model, focused on systems scien-

ces, is analytical, diagnostic, and problem-oriented. This

approach can prepare scientists who, through broad

understanding of sustainability and human-nature interac-

tions combined with disciplinary depth in an area of natural

science, can effectively participate in interdisciplinary

research to inform decision-making processes.

The Policy and Governance model, focused on commu-

nities and policy, is aimed at institutional and societal

reform through increased awareness, empowerment, and

behavior change. This approach can prepare citizens,

community leaders, and administrative professionals as

effective participants in transdisciplinary decision-making

processes by serving as translators working at the policy-

science and policy-management interfaces.

The Adaptive Management model, focused on adaptive

management, is applied, flexible, responsive, and solutions-

oriented. This approach can prepare professionals as “meta-

experts”who understand competing knowledge claims and

expertise and are therefore able to construct, facilitate, and

manage sustainability-oriented transdisciplinary decision-

making processes and sustainability-oriented management

programs.

We recognize that more remains to be learned before

core competency recommendations can be formulated to

gain broad acceptance. The specific knowledge and skill

elements included within each curriculum component have

not been determined. While many elements could apply to

all programs, others will vary based on specific program

themes related to topic (e.g., biodiversity, watersheds,

climate change), economic sector (e.g., energy, architecture,

agriculture), or region (e.g., coastal, arid, alpine). Extensive

dialogue is needed to explore the possibility for consensus

on guidelines for curricular content, pedagogy, and admin-

istration and on whether such recommendations should

vary across the three ideal curriculum models. However, we

are comfortable in proposing that the IE field is concerned

with coupled human-nature systems and with a commit-

ment toward the sustaining the health of these systems.

Based on the correlations among importance ratings of

knowledge factors, we believe that an IE core curriculum

would need to address natural resource sustainability

through appropriate application of the social sciences and

the humanities to the human-nature interface and informed

by appropriate understanding of natural sciences and

applied sciences related to economic development.

The next phase of the IE programs study is currently

being implemented by the NCSE and CEDD. A follow-up

national survey will include sustainability degree programs

in addition to IE degree programs to learn about their

similarities and differences. The 2011 survey will allow us

to elucidate trends in administrative and degree program

design and determine if the three types of ideal approaches

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 33

to curricula are converging, diverging into additional

approaches, or remaining steady. The Association of

Environmental Studies and Science is partnering with

NCSE on the follow-up study and leaders the Association

for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education

in the American Association for the Advancement of

Science Initiative on Science and Technology are providing

input on the survey design.

Our ongoing study will allow us to acquire a more

thorough understanding of IE and sustainability program

curricula at colleges and universities in the United States.

This understanding will be used to inform a national

dialogue on core competence areas that can form the basis

of a consensus leading to guidelines for program develop-

ment and curriculum design, and perhaps eventually to

accreditation or program certification criteria. The findings

will also reveal how program leaders view the role of

interdisciplinary and sustainability program graduates in the

twenty-first century in meeting the needs of sustainability-

oriented scholarship, research, and professional practice.

References

Balsiger PW (2004) Supradisciplinary research practices: history,

objectives and rationale. Futures 36(4):407–421

Barry A, Born G, Wezkalnys G (2008) Logics of interdisciplinarity.

Econ Soc 37(1):20–49

Bezdek RH, Wendling RM, DiPerna P (2008) Environmental

protection, the economy, and jobs: national and regional

analyses. J Environ Manage 86:63–79

Bosch OJH, King CA, Herbohn JL, Russell IW, Smith CS (2007)

Getting the big picture in natural resource management—systems

thinking as ‘method’for scientists, policy makers and other

stakeholders. Syst Res Behav Sci 24(2):217–232

Brand R, Karvonen A (2007) The ecosystem of expertise: comple-

mentary knowledges for sustainable development. Sustain Sci

Pract Policy 3(1):21–31

Clark TW (2002) The policy process: a practical guide for natural

resource professionals. Yale University Press, London

Fiksel J (2006) Sustainability and resilience: toward a systems

approach. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 2(2):14–21

Frodeman R, Thompson Klein J, Mitcham C (2009) The oxford

handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Godemann J (2008) Knowledge integration: a key challenge for

transdisciplinary cooperation. Environ Educ Res 14(6):625–641

Hansmann R (2009) Linking the components of a university program

to the qualification profile of graduates: the case of a

sustainability-oriented environmental science curriculum. J Res

Sci Teach 46(5):537–569

Hirsch Hadorn G, Hoffmann-Reim H, Biber-Kleem S, Grossenbacher-

Mansuy W, Joye J, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Kemp E (2008)

Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer, Dordrecht

Holmes J, Clark R (2008) Enhancing the use of science in

environmental policymaking and regulation. Environ Sci Policy

11(8):702–711

International Commission on Education for Sustainable Development

Practice (2008) Report from the international commission on

education for sustainable development practice. The Earth

Institute at Columbia University. http://www.wfeo.org/docu

ments/download/ICESDP%20Final%20Report%202008.pdf

Accessed 1 September 2010

Jacobs JA, Frickel S (2009) Interdisciplinarity: a critical assessment.

Annu Rev Sociology 35(1):43–65

Jǿrgensen U, Lauridsen EH (2005) Environmental professional

competences: the role of communities of practice and spaces

for reflexive learning. Green Manag Int 49:57–67

Kajikawa Y (2008) Research core and framework of sustainability

science. Sustain Sci 3(2):215–239

Lengwiler M (2006) Between charisma and heuristics: four styles of

interdisciplinarity. Sci Public Policy 33(6):423–434

Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new

social contract for science. Science 279(5350):491–498

Martin S, Brannigan J, Hall A (2005) Sustainability, systems thinking

and professional practice. J Geogr High Educ 29(1):79–89

McIntosh, M, Cacciola K, Clermont S, Keniry J (2009) State of

the campus environment: a national report card on environ-

mental performance and sustainability in higher education.

National Wildlife Federation, Reston VA http://www.nwf.org/

Global-Warming/Campus-Solutions/Resources/Reports/State-

of-the-Campus-Environment-Report/Read-the-State-of-the-

Campus-Environment-Report.aspx Accessed 1 September

2010

National Science Foundation AC-ERE (2005) Complex environmental

system: pathways to the future. National Science Foundation,

Washington, DC

National Science Foundation AC-ERE (2009) Transitions and tipping

points in complex environmental systems. National Science

Foundation, Washington, DC

Newman P (2005) Can the magic of sustainability revive environ-

mental professionalism? Green Manag Int 49:11–23

Pfirman SL, the AC-ERE (2003) Complex environmental systems:

synthesis for earth, life, and society in the 21st century: a report

summarizing a ten-year outlook in environmental research and

education for the national science foundation. National Science

Foundation, Washington, DC

Pohl C (2008) From science to policy through transdisciplinary

research. Environ Sci Policy 11(1):46–53

Polk M, Knutsson P (2008) Participation, value rationality and mutual

learning in transdisciplinary knowledge production for sustain-

able development. Environ Educ Res 14(6):643–653

Runhaar H, Driessen P, Vermeulen W (2005) Policy competences of

environmental sustainability professionals. Green Manag Int

49:25–41

Runhaar H, Dieperink C, Driessen P (2006) Policy analysis for

sustainable development: the toolbox for the environmental

social scientist. Int J Sustain High Educ 7(1):34–56

United States Department of Labor (2010) Occupational outlook

handbook, 2010–11 Edition. http://www.bls.gov/oco/ Accessed 1

September 2010

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Adminis-

tration and Resource Management (1999) Workforce assessment

project: executive summary and tasks 1–4 Final Reports. http://

www.epa.gov/epahrist/workforce/wap.pdf Accessed 1 September

2010

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research

and Development (2007) Sustainability research strategy. http://

www.epa.gov/Sustainability/pdfs/EPA-12057_SRS_R4-1.pdf

Accessed 1 September 2010

van Kerkhoff L (2005) Integrated research: concepts of connection in

environmental science and policy. Environ Sci Policy 8(5):452–

463

Vincent S (2010a) Interdisciplinary environmental education on the

nation's campuses: elements of field identity and curriculum

design. National Council for Science and the Environment,

Washington, DC

34 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35

Vincent S (2010b) A search for identity: exploring core competencies for

interdisciplinary environmental programs, Dissertation, Oklahoma

State University

Vincent S, Focht W (2009) U.S. higher education environmental

program managers' perspectives on curriculum design and core

competencies: implications for sustainability as a guiding

framework. Int J Sustain High Educ 10(2):164–183

Vincent S, Focht W (2010) In search of common ground:

exploring identity and the possibility of core competencies

for interdisciplinary environmental programs. Environ Pract

12(1):76–86

Wiek A, Walter AI (2009) A transdisciplinary approach for formalized

integrated planning and decision-making in complex systems.

Eur J Oper Res 197(1):360–370

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:14–35 35

Latinx STEM Students’ Values toward Conducting Research for Social Change: Examining STEM Educational Experiences, HSIs, and Moderating Effects

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2022

Juan C Garibay

This study uses a national longitudinal sample of 612 Latinx STEM bachelor’s degree recipients across 171 higher education institutions to examine the STEM undergraduate experiences and institutional contexts that predict their values toward conducting research that will have a meaningful impact on underserved communities. Results show that several background and precollege characteristics, particular STEM majors, learning about science and technology in society, and institutional characteristics predict this empowerment outcome. While attending a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) did not have a direct effect on the outcome, it was found to reduce the negative effect of majoring in math/statistics and computer science/tech. Implications for our current understanding of Latinx STEM success and the role of HSIs and PWIs are provided.

El Batri et al Environmental education education-12-00837

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2022

Citation: El Batri, B.; Maskour, L.; Ksiksou, J.; Jeronen, E.; Ismaili, J.; Alami, A.; Lachkar, M. Teaching Environmental Themes within the "Scientific Awakening" Course in Moroccan Primary School: Approaches, Methods and Difficulties. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 837.

education-12-00837-v2

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2022

Abstract: In addition to identifying the pedagogical approaches favoured by teachers in environmen�tal education, the study aims to reveal the impact of the teaching methods and tools used as well as the teaching difficulties encountered on the effectiveness of teachers’ pedagogical action, particularly in the “Scientific Awakening” course.The study concerns a sample of 636 primary school teachers from the urban and rural areas of the Fez-Meknes Regional Academy of Education in Morocco. The data was collected using a 37-item questionnaire covering the following variables: the teaching methods adopted, the preferred pedagogical approaches, the teaching material used, and the teaching difficulties encountered. The study fits under a descriptive correlational design. The most used teaching methods were the teacher-centred oral methods (dialogue and demonstration method) lacking learner-centred activities (working in small groups, discovery method). The least used ones were laboratory experiments and ICT-based demonstrations. The study shows that teachers who use active methods are the most aware of difficulties in teaching environmental issues and were the most capable of effectively solving learning problems and achieving pedagogical objectives. The study shows that Moroccan primary school teachers need in-service training for the adoption of a systemic and interdisciplinary pedagogical approach. In addition, to address the issue of the alarming failure to complete the “Scientific Awakening” program, we recommend continuous training for the benefit of teachers. This training should cover the appropriate active methods to effectively complete this program. Finally, the study underlined the need to solve the problem of the enormous lack of teaching tools. Certainly, this shortage significantly influences the pedagogical action of teachers regardless of the pedagogical methods adopted.

Teaching Environmental Themes within the “Scientific Awakening” Course in Moroccan Primary School: Approaches, Methods and Difficulties

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2022

In addition to identifying the pedagogical approaches favoured by teachers in environmental education, the study aims to reveal the impact of the teaching methods and tools used as well as the teaching difficulties encountered on the effectiveness of teachers’ pedagogical action, particularly in the “Scientific Awakening” course.The study concerns a sample of 636 primary school teachers from the urban and rural areas of the Fez-Meknes Regional Academy of Education in Morocco. The data was collected using a 37-item questionnaire covering the following variables: the teaching methods adopted, the preferred pedagogical approaches, the teaching material used, and the teaching difficulties encountered. The study fits under a descriptive correlational design. The most used teaching methods were the teacher-centred oral methods (dialogue and demonstration method) lacking learner-centred activities (working in small groups, discovery method). The least used ones were laboratory experiments and ICT-based demonstrations. The study shows that teachers who use active methods are the most aware of difficulties in teaching environmental issues and were the most capable of effectively solving learning problems and achieving pedagogical objectives. The study shows that Moroccan primary school teachers need in-service training for the adoption of a systemic and interdisciplinary pedagogical approach. In addition, to address the issue of the alarming failure to complete the “Scientific Awakening” program, we recommend continuous training for the benefit of teachers. This training should cover the appropriate active methods to effectively complete this program. Finally, the study underlined the need to solve the problem of the enormous lack of teaching tools. Certainly, this shortage significantly influences the pedagogical action of teachers regardless of the pedagogical methods adopted.

Unearthing green potential: Assessing the state of managed urban landscape curricula in Minnesota's higher education institutions

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2024

As urbanization increases, managed urban landscapes are frequently the mode through which people experience nature and where careers in natural resources are increasing. There is a lack of knowledge related to curricula and programs where students are exposed to managed urban landscapes and careers related to them. We aimed to evaluate the current status of managed urban landscape curricula (MULC) in undergraduate programs in Minnesota through a systematic investigation of programs and courses at higher education institutions. All undergraduate courses offered by included higher education institutions were reviewed to determine the presence, absence, or possibility of MULC based on the course's publicly available descriptions and were combined with departmental and institutional characteristics to identify patterns of MULC across the state. Only about 1% of over 50,000 courses reviewed contain MULC. Courses with MULC were concentrated in public doctoral-level institutions and in departments such as biology and environmental studies, however MULC courses were found at 94% of included institutions and across 60 different departments. While the number of courses with MULC was minimal, courses with the possibility of including MULC show there are ample opportunities for MULC to be added to existing courses, especially core requirements such as introductory biology or a survey of environmental science in the state of Minnesota and more broadly.

Alignment among environmental programs in higher education: What Food-Energy-Water Nexus concepts are covered in introductory courses?

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2023

Interdisciplinary environmental and sustainability (IES) programs are different from other fields because they focus on a complex integration of humanities, social, and natural sciences concepts centered on the interactions of coupled human and natural systems. The interdisciplinary nature of IES programs does not lend itself to traditional discipline-specific concept inventory frameworks for critically evaluating preconceptions and learning. We discuss the results of the first phase of a research project to develop a next generation concept inventory for evaluating interdisciplinary concepts important for introductory IES courses. Using the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) Nexus (the intersections/interdependencies of food, energy, and water sectors) as our focus, we conducted a content analysis of eight representative college-level introductory environmental course syllabi and course materials (e.g., textbooks, journal articles, print media) to identify common interdisciplinary FEW Nexus concepts taught in introductory IES courses. Results demonstrate that all IES introductory course materials reference the FEW Nexus. Food, energy, and/or water resources as individual elements of the FEW Nexus are frequently described, but connections between these resource systems are included less often. Biology, energy systems, waste and pollution in the natural environment, agriculture, earth sciences and geology, climate change, behavioral social sciences, and economics concepts are most associated with FEW concepts, hinting at commonalities across IES topics that anchor systems thinking. Despite differences in IES programs, there appears to be some alignment between core concepts being taught at the FEW Nexus in introductory courses.

A review and framework for evaluating conservation biology curricula

Technical Report

Full-text available

Nov 2017

Ruth Kansky

Global biodiversity in a rapidly changing world is diminishing at unprecedented rates. While the problems and solutions are much larger than the discipline of Conservation Biology can address, conservation biologists have an important role to play in training graduates who can have greater impact. A key question is whether tertiary education curricula reflect this potential impact and whether we are reviewing our curricula and evaluating the outcomes of our programs. I reviewed recent global literature (2010-2016) of conservation biology curricula to identify current issues and critiques that could inform a curriculum review process. I found 133 relevant publications from 75 different journals and 22 countries; read and coded them using a grounded theory approach where eight themes emerged. The "Interdisciplinary" theme was the most frequent category (31 articles), followed by "graduate attributes" (26), "collaboration" (20), "advocacy" (17), "values and ethics" (13), "implementation gap" (9), "sustainability on campus" (8) and "curriculum general" (8). Typically not part of traditional disciplinary and biology focused teaching, I discuss these themes and propose a generic theory of change to use in the design of a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework for conservation biology curricula. I conclude that to ensure curricula remain relevant, curriculum review needs to be tackled at two scales; a broader level where regions or countries conduct skills need-analyses for the biodiversity sector including what curricula are being offered at other institutions. At the second level departments or program managers initiate an adaptive and ongoing review and M&E system.

Population growth as the elephant in the room: teachers’ perspectives and willingness to incorporate a controversial environmental sustainability issue in their teaching

Article

Jan 2024

Multidisciplinary Nature of Environmental Problems: Critical Implications for Environmental Education

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2023

Science courses have traditionally been discipline-centred, with little attention paid to the way in which the natural sciences are influenced by sociology, economics and politics. Understanding these influences is essential for developing and implementing long-term solutions to environmental problems. This paper goes into the question of the roots of the environmental crisis, and thereof advances prospects for environmental education. It is an inquiry into the philosophical background to environmental education. It questions the philosophical framework of modern science that produces the environmental crisis and prospects for a framework for environmental education cultivated from the perspective of multidisciplinarity. The paper explores the implications of multidisciplinary nature of environmental research for teacher training review, curriculum renewal, teaching methods and evaluation in environmental education. The paper concludes that these prospects for environmental education constitute the environmentalist Manifesto to the crucial environmental change of behaviour on which the survival of human civilization as we know it today stands precariously.

An on-campus stream restoration project as interdisciplinary senior capstone experience

Article

Oct 2022

Senior capstones and practicum courses can provide environmental studies majors with real-world skill sets and pride in their environmental engagements. This article presents a capstone project that connected students with on- and off-campus communities and produced measurable environmental change through stream restoration. Students researched ecological and historical aspects of the land, developed campus community awareness of the stream, created a restoration plan, and conducted a community cleanup of Snyder Branch Creek. Students planted over 120 riparian plants, removed 900 gallons of invasive species, stabilized 200 linear feet of stream bank, educated the community on the ecological importance of the area, and crafted a restoration plan for the remaining stream channel. Students reported increased pride in the program and campus as well as improvement in career readiness.

Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research

Book

Full-text available

Jan 2008

When Roderick Lawrence and Carole Després introduced a special issue of the journal Futures on transdisciplinarity in 2004, they called it a word ‘à la mode’ (Lawrence and Després,2004). More attention has been paid in the literature to research practice. From the beginning, however, the concept was linked with the goal of changing higher education and its relationships to society. This chapter presents an overview of theoretical and conceptual frameworks for transdisciplinary (TD) education, curriculum models, in situ modes of learning in professional practice and community settings, and a culminating reflection on transdisciplinary skills.

A SEARCH FOR IDENTITY: EXPLORING CORE COMPETENCIES FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

Thesis

Full-text available

May 2010

Shirley Vincent

Sustainability, Systems Thinking and Professional Practice

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2005

This article explores the impact of the new sustainability agenda on the occupational and professional needs of those who have taken educational and training programmes in the environmental field at either undergraduate or postgraduate level or through relevant professional institutions' continuing professional development programmes. It also describes a one-day workshop for the professions on sustainable development, based on systems thinking and practice. The workshop provides a model for developing greater understanding and effective action in professional practice, by using dialogue and inter-professional learning to explore approaches to sustainability in a variety of business and professional contexts. It introduces the principles underpinning the concept of sustainability and provides tools to support the integration of sustainable development into professional practice and organizational change.

The Policy Process: A Practical Guide for Natural Resources Professionals

Book

Mar 2002

Susan G. Clark

Sustainability and resilience: toward a systems approach

Article

Oct 2006

Joseph Fiksel

A comprehensive systems approach is essential for effective decision making with regard to global sustainability, since industrial, social, and ecological systems are closely linked. Despite efforts to reduce unsustainability, global resource consumption continues to grow. There is an urgent need for a better understanding of the dynamic, adaptive behavior of complex systems and their resilience in the face of disruptions, recognizing that steady-state sustainability models are simplistic. However, assessing the broad impacts of policy and technology choices is a formidable challenge, as exemplified in life-cycle analysis of the implications of alternative energy and mobility technologies. A number of research groups are using dynamic modeling techniques, including biocomplexity, system dynamics, and thermodynamic analysis, to investigate the impacts on ecological and human systems of major shifts such as climate change and the associated policy and technology responses. These techniques can yield at least a partial understanding of dynamic system behavior, enabling a more integrated approach to systems analysis, beneficial intervention, and improvement of resilience. Recommendations are provided for continued research to achieve progress in the dynamic modeling and sustainable management of complex systems.

Environmental professional competences: The role of communities of practice and spaces for reflexive learning

Article

Mar 2005

Professional environmental competence is constituted and shaped in the interplay between disciplinary knowledge and practices from the field of environmental regulation and management. Environmental professionals are in this article conceptualised and analysed as a community of practitioners who span the traditional disciplinary fragmentation of (natural) sciences and established institutional arrangements. This community has come to function as a series of trans-disciplinary networks, where key features of recognising and constituting socially and politically relevant environmental issues and objects are maintained and developed as operational knowledge and routines. The work involved in constituting the field of environmental engagement is not easily accessible to outsiders because of the rather heterogeneous character of the environmental objects. The importance of these 'hidden' networks of practice in the environmental community is reflected in the master and apprentice model used in most professional consultant and auditor companies. As a supplement to this model of learning of practice-related knowledge, it is pointed out that necessary competences can be developed through continued education of professionals in a combination of educational and practice learning, which has been termed 'reflexive learning'. Danish experiences from working with reflexive learning are discussed in relation to the role that this type of continued education can play, in developing new professional environmental competences that can improve both governmental regulation and companies' environmental performance.

Sustainability, Systems Thinking and Professional Practice

Article

Jan 2005
SYST PRACT ACT RES

Stephen Martin

Logics of interdisciplinarity

Article

Feb 2008

This paper interrogates influential contemporary accounts of interdisciplinarity, in which it is portrayed as offering new ways of rendering science accountable to society and/or of forging closer relations between scientific research and innovation. The basis of the paper is an eighteen-month empirical study of three interdisciplinary fields that cross the boundaries between the natural sciences or engineering, on the one hand, and the social sciences or arts, on the other. The fields are: 1) environmental and climate change research, 2) ethnography in the IT industry and 3) art-science. In the first part of the paper, in contrast to existing accounts, we question the idea that interdisciplinarity should be understood in terms of the synthesis of two or more disciplines. We stress the forms of agonism and antagonism that often characterize relations between disciplinary and interdisciplinary research, and distinguish between three modes of interdisciplinarity. In the second part we outline three distinctive logics or rationales that guide interdisciplinary research. In addition to the logics of accountability and innovation, we identify the logic of ontology, that is, an orientation apparent in diverse interdisciplinary practices in each of our three fields towards effecting ontological transformation in the objects and relations of research. While the three logics are interdependent, they are not reducible to each other and are differently entangled in each of the fields. We point to the potential for invention in such interdisciplinary practices and, against the equation of disciplinary research with autonomy, to the possibility of forms of interdisciplinary autonomy.

Can the Magic of Sustainability Revive Environmental Professionalism?

Article

Mar 2005

Peter Newman

The author has been involved for several decades in the teaching of environmental science and sustainability, the completion of the world's first State Sustainability Strategy and the formation of a Sustainability Professionals Association. This paper uses both practical case studies and theoretical exploration to offer explanations for how and why magic occurs during processes involving sustainability by environmental professionals. This quality appears to be an emergent property of a complex process involving a wide number of stakeholders who suspend their professional labels in order to contribute. The sum is observably greater than the assembled parts with the result that apparently impossible things happen. A more human dimension seems to be needed to make some aspects of the environmental agenda work. The paper examines the core competences associated with such an anti-professional approach in terms of its challenge to reductionist techniques and to experts as it seeks more integrated, long-term solutions. Finally it explores whether such competences will shape future economies or whether the pressure of conformity and standardisation will destroy the magic.

Shepherds, sheep and forest fires: a reconception of grazing land management.

Chapter

Jan 2008

New research relating to Mediterranean grazingland management issues, e.g. fire hazard control, biodiversity conservation, vibrant rural areas, etc. addresses the role that livestock farming systems can play. Established technical knowledge about livestock farming cannot contribute to these issues because it relies on standardised animal feeding techniques, focusing on cultivable forage areas and distribution of feed. These have led to the decline of the herders’ knowledge of grazing management and of herding practices. Thus original research works were needed. The works have been carried out by an interdisciplinary team of researchers in animal sciences, ecology and social sciences, from an INRA laboratory in Avignon (France) The research focuses on how the herders interact with ecosystems and landscapes through the management of their flocks, and investigations deal with the question of ‘how can one steer grazing for animal production and environment maintenance?’ (i.e. control scrub development, maintain biodiversity and promote the habitat of particular populations of plants and animals in need of protection). The paper presents the chronicle of this research over twenty years. It asks how the problematic evolved as a result of the accumulated scientific knowledge and the shift in societal questioning in relation to the rise of environmental concerns and the changes in rural and residential issues. Field observations, surveys and inquiries, public policies analysis, farm monitoring and systems modelling were used, combined or successively, in the course of five different research stages The authors lead up to an analysis of the different epistemological standpoints of disciplines and types of actual action representing a transdisciplinary approach. This approach is founded on a distributed view of knowledge, articulating different forms of scientific knowledge – according to the set of involved disciplines – and lay person knowledge and know-how in order to produce relevant categories and rules of action.

Interdisciplinary environmental education: elements of field identity and curriculum design

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

Ultimate Causation and Evolving Social Strategies in the Anthropocene: A Global Education Perspectiv...

Perverse consequences? The impact of quotas for women on democratization in Africa

For Analytic Phenomenology

Ian McEwan_A Novel Approach to Political Communication