Content uploaded by Jayakumar Chinnasamy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jayakumar Chinnasamy on Oct 10, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Andragoška spoznanja/Studies in Adult Education and Learning, 2019, 25(3), 47-60
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/as.25.3.47-60
UDK: 37.014:378
Scientific article
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels
THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES AND
EDUCATORS IN DEVELOPING AND
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS
ABSTRACT
Universities and Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are seen as having a social mission to deliver
common good to society, both locally and globally. These institutions develop different policies due to
global changes in Higher Education (HE), such as internationalisation and Sustainable Development
(SD). They have an important role in setting sustainable developmental goals (SDGs) and also deliver-
ing them through teaching, research and other services. Effective delivery of SD practices relies upon
educators who are directly involved in making the links between students and community. However,
educators are not everywhere involved in developing policies, which impacts on their ability to deliver.
This research, set in Scottish HEIs, investigates educators’ perceptions of internationalisation in HE,
how the concept is constructed and delivered in their universities, and what – if any – involvement these
educators have in developing policy. This paper argues that educators, especially HE educators, have
potential that is neglected in developing SDGs.
Keywords: educators, internationalisation, sustainable developmental goals, policy-development,
universities
VLOGA UNIVERZ IN UČITELJEV PRI RAZVIJANJU IN URESNIČEVANJU
CILJEV TRAJNOSTNEGA RAZVOJA - POVZETEK
Univerze in druge visokošolske ustanove naj bi imele družbeno poslanstvo, da prispevajo k skupnemu
dobremu v družbi, tako lokalno kot globalno. Zaradi globalnih sprememb v visokem šolstvu te ustano-
ve razvijajo različne politike, na primer internacionalizacije in trajnostnega razvoja. Pomembno vlogo
opravljajo pri zastavljanju ciljev trajnostnega razvoja in pri doseganju teh ciljev prek poučevanja, raz-
iskav in drugih storitev. Učinkovita realizacija praks trajnostnega razvoja je odvisna od učiteljev, ki so
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Research Student, School of Education, University of the West of Scotland,
Jayakumar.Chinnasamy@uws.ac.uk
Jeannie Daniels, PhD, Sr. Lect., School of Education, University of the West of Scotland,
Jeannie.Daniels@uws.ac.uk
AS_2019_3_3.indd 47 7.10.2019 11:46:44
48 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
neposredno vpeti v ustvarjanje vezi med študenti in skupnostjo. Vendar pa učitelji niso vedno vključeni v
razvijanje politik, kar vpliva na njihovo zmožnost doseganja ciljev. Raziskava škotskega visokega šolstva
proučuje, kako učitelji dojemajo internacionalizacijo visokega šolstva, kako je ta koncept zastavljen in
realiziran na njihovih univerzah in koliko – če sploh – učitelji sodelujejo pri oblikovanju politik. Članek
zagovarja tezo, da imajo učitelji, posebej v visokem šolstvu, zmožnosti, ki so pri razvijanju ciljev trajno-
stnega razvoja spregledane.
Ključne besede: učitelji, internacionalizacija, cilji trajnostnega razvoja, razvoj politik, univerze
INTRODUCTION
The role played by educators in Higher Education (HE) is an important one in developing
policies and practices that might address Sustainable Development (SD) needs within
local communities and more broadly in a global context. There is a claim that universities
and HE Institutions (HEIs) in the United Kingdom (UK) are well equipped to contribute
towards SD (HEFCE, 2014). According to the Higher Education Funding Council for
England (HEFCE), universities, HEIs and colleges are
well positioned to make a key contribution to the challenges and opportunities
posed by sustainable development through their teaching and research, through
their influence on students, staff and communities, and through their own op-
erations. (HEFCE, 2014, p. 3)
In addressing the challenges posed by SD goals (SDGs) (UN General Assembly, 2015)
educators play a key role as mediators, implementers, and creators of local and global
education policies. In addition, they can be instrumental in developing sustainable pol-
icies in areas such as curriculum design/development, engaging students from different
cultural backgrounds, internationalisation and its role in local and global communities,
and enhancing quality of higher education in teaching and research.
Internationalisation in HE is globally accepted as a necessary policy, one which is un-
deniably linked to SD, at least in the global context. Regardless of internationalisation’s
global application, there is lack of clarity in defining the concept, which is constructed
differently in the literature, in practice and in HE institutions in different countries. In ad-
dition, despite the acceptance of the concept of the internationalised university, there is a
gap in research and documentation of educators’ perceptions on internationalised univer-
sities (Daniels, 2013; Rizvi, 2010; Tran & Le, 2018). Yet, being an integral part of higher
education institutions, educators play – or have the potential to play – a critical role in
contributing to institutional strategies and policymaking (Tran & Le, 2018). In this paper
we consider the linkages between internationalisation and SD, and claim that educators
working in HE are well-placed to develop Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)
through their pedagogical skills and direct connections to communities.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 48 7.10.2019 11:46:44
49
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
Cotton, Warren, Maiboroda, and Bailey (2007) have noted a rise in the significance of SD
in education, and its emergence in universities and in HEIs, where there is support from
leaders along with a commitment to promoting UNESCO’s vision of SDGs (UNESCO,
2014b). However, in research currently being undertaken by one of the authors of this paper,
it is suggested that some Scottish educators at least have been offered few opportunities,
perhaps none at all, to have their say in developing institutional policies, such as inter-
nationalisation, which has a significant role in SD. In addition, the data from that study
suggests that educators have different understandings of internationalisation as well as dif-
ferent opinions on developing internationalisation policies, possibly due to the different
philosophies and priorities of the particular institutions and their geographical locations.
Yet this diversity of thought could be better captured and applied to enhancing policy devel-
opment in HEIs. Due to educators’ limited role in institutional policymaking, their ability
to influence policy application is constrained. There is a gap in the literature on studying
educators’ perspectives of the internationalisation phenomenon, and we claim that educa-
tors’ knowledge of internationalisation could inform the application of SD strategies. We
argue that educators in HEIs need to be given greater opportunities to be involved in policy
development as mediators, implementers, and creators of local and global education poli-
cies. Such involvement, we claim, has the potential to create opportunity for much greater
– and pedagogically appropriate – incorporation of SD into HE curricula and policy.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
This paper is informed by ongoing doctoral research focusing on educators working in
HE and their lack of involvement in important strategic activities, such as policymaking,
in their workplaces. The research, set in Scottish HEs, investigates educators’ percep-
tions of internationalisation in HE, how the concept is constructed and delivered in their
universities, and what – if any – involvement these educators have in developing policy.
Gathering the perspectives of educators is an important aspect of that research and we
believe they are well placed to play a major role in driving HEI strategies and policies.
Whilst the focus of that research is on internationalisation, the potential of the HE educa-
tor to influence and develop policy has relevance across all areas of HE, including that of
Sustainable Development (SD). In fact, understanding the concept of internationalisation
may be an advantage when considering SD – an essential aspect of the education remit
according to UNESCO (2018) – since sustainability must be understood in a global as
well as local context.
The focus on internationalisation in HE and becoming an internationalised universi-
ty has become a key priority (de Wit, 2013; Knight, 2014; Wihlborg & Robson, 2018).
The drivers for internationalisation of higher education impact on various stakeholders:
students (Leask, 2001), educators (Carrozza & Minucci, 2014), and managers (Margin-
son, 2011). Internationalisation operates through the mobility of educators and students
(Kim, 2009), institutional strategy (Marginson, 2007), curriculum development (Knight,
2011), research and publications (Knight, 2003), and international research partnerships
AS_2019_3_3.indd 49 7.10.2019 11:46:44
50 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
(Kim, 2017). According to de Wit (2010), the rationales that drive the internationalisation
agenda in HE are mainly constructed on four comprehensive categories: “political ration-
ales, economic rationales, social and cultural rationales, and academic rationales” (p. 9).
The first major category, the political rationale, includes “foreign policy, national secu-
rity, technical assistance, peace and mutual understanding, national identity and regional
identity” (ibid.). These are all significant factors in considering institutional SD policies
that could impact on society.
Economic rationales, the second category, are “growth and competitiveness, national ed-
ucational demand, labour market, [and] financial incentives” (ibid.), and are of interest to
governments which focus and rely increasingly on globalisation. It has been shown that
universities and HEIs increase their revenue system through the export of education-re-
lated services and charging a premium fee for international students (Altbach & Knight,
2007), helping them to sustain and develop international competitiveness (Harris, 2009).
The third category, social and cultural cohesion in HEIs, has always been problematic
and, according to de Wit (2010), has a coercive element: problematic because HEIs may
not have a holistic approach to diversity of culture, and coercive because staff and students
are expected to fit into the ‘home’ culture. In addition, as Scott (2005) reports, educators
act as mediators for students to experience national and international cultures. This helps
to construct international values and, above all, to promote cross-cultural understandings
which, in turn, leads to global citizenship (Chan & Dimmock, 2008; Knight, 2007).
Finally, academic rationales include “developing an international and intercultural di-
mension in your research, teaching and services, extension of the academic horizon,
institutional building, profile and status, the improvement of quality and international
academic standards” (de Wit, 2010, p. 9). This institutional driver involves high levels
of competition, modernisation globally, and building a competitive brand; these have
become the focus of internationalisation of higher education systems (Marginson, 2011).
HEIs compete to succeed in the top rankings so that they can attract students and parents;
these high rankings can also serve to showcase the institution to other stakeholders, such
as knowledge transfer partnerships and funding bodies (Chan & Dimmock, 2008).
Clearly, therefore, there is a relationship between the concepts of internationalisation and
sustainable development, and the role of education (and so the educator) in both is an im-
portant one. Education, according to Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO, “is the
most powerful path to sustainability” (UNESCO, 2014a, p. 16). Yet, while SD is clearly
defined by international organisations like UNESCO, there is less clarity around what
internationalisation means.
DEFINING INTERNATIONALISATION IN HE
The concept of internationalisation has been interpreted in various ways and finding a
single common definition is a challenging task; the concept is viewed differently across
AS_2019_3_3.indd 50 7.10.2019 11:46:44
51
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
countries, cultures and educational systems (Knight, 2003). Indeed, Knight claims that
any definition of the concept would need to be broadly accepted in the field of educa-
tion and to consider the specific role played by educational systems in society. Concepts
that many researchers consider key to successful implementation of internationalisation
strategies at HEIs, such as curriculum development, research, partnership, and mobility,
concur with de Wit’s (2010) categories above. However, beyond this broad agreement,
perceptions of internationalisation differ greatly. In fact, Knight (2003) suggests that,
because of the evolving nature of internationalisation, no single policy statement could
be used to define this complex phenomenon. For example, Hudzik’s (2011) focus is on a
holistic view, one that shapes the ethos and values of the institution, while de Wit (2015)
focuses on process. Arum and van de Water (1992), in their activity-based definition,
focus on three elements in particular, defining internationalisation as “the multiple activ-
ities, programs and services that fall within international studies, international education
exchange and technical cooperation” (p. 202). Jane Knight is perhaps the most prominent
scholar addressing the issue of defining internationalisation and her definition has been
adopted by the International Association of Universities (IAU):
[Internationalisation is] the process of integrating an international, intercultur-
al, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of higher educa-
tion at the institutional and national levels (Knight, 2008, p. 21).
Knight’s process-based definition acknowledges the evolutionary nature of internation-
alisation and, in particular, emphasises the need for continuous effort at all levels, fitting
well with the characteristics of SD. The scope of internationalisation is thus specified
using three main dimensions: international, cultural, and global. The international di-
mension denotes the relation between countries and nations; the intercultural dimension
represents the relation between different cultures; and the global dimension reflects a
worldwide view and global reach in the 21st century.
The ongoing research from which this paper is drawn uses a definition of internationali-
sation based on Arum and Van De Water (1992) and Knight (2008), as follows:
Internationalisation is a collection of multiple activities including developing
an international curriculum, student-staff mobility, and technical coopera-
tion that reflects multiple processes such as relationships between countries
and cultures, representation of different cultures within countries, and ap-
plying this global perspective to teaching, research and other services of HE
institutions.
Within this definition are activities and approaches that are in line with, and facilitators
of, a number of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) developed by the UN Gen-
eral Assembly in 2015.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 51 7.10.2019 11:46:44
52 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE ROLE OF HEIS
AND EDUCATORS
The role played by HE in achieving SD is made clear in the UN’s 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development (UN General Assembly, 2015). Seventeen SDGs have been
proposed as part of this agenda, and a number of these goals are relevant to HEIs and
universities, showing how they might address SD in local communities and in broader
society. The UN has also suggested that HE should have a global focus because of the
significance of its role. This definition of SD suggests that not only should present condi-
tions be taken into account, but that future needs must be treated with equal importance.
Bass and Dalal-Clayton (2012) explain this, noting that over the past decades there have
been significant developments in many areas, due to increases in industrialisation, popu-
lation, life expectancy rates, literacy rates, food production, and income levels. They also
recognise that some of these developments can cause substantial damage and their effects
can impact significantly on future generations.
As key institutions in society, HEIs are expected to contribute to the development of local
and global communities through teaching and research activities (Waas, Verbruggen, &
Wright, 2010). They have a responsibility in both shaping strategies for the development
of society and also in delivering them through a diverse range of teaching and other activ-
ities and services. According to Lozano et al. (2013), in doing so, many universities and
HEIs have in fact contributed significantly in developing and educating “decision-mak-
ers, leaders, entrepreneurs, and academics” (p. 3). Universities, however, have become
increasingly commercialised, and now compete in an ever more challenging, economi-
cally-driven market (Ball, 2012; Giroux, 2016). In doing so, the meaning and purpose of
HE has shifted, according to Giroux (2016), who notes that the force of neoliberalism has
led not only to these changes but also to a “diminished belief” in the purpose of HE as
producer of critical thought. Giroux claims that, in fact, “the only questions being asked
about knowledge production, the purpose of education, the nature of politics, and our
understanding of the future are largely determined by market forces” (pp. 195–6). Such
changes are significant for both education and sustainability; they make the case for uni-
versities serving their communities through relevant research, knowledge production, and
critical engagement more difficult, yet more crucial.
Despite this market-driven push, researchers such as Wright (2004) and Barth, Michels-
en, and Sanusi (2011) claim that society in fact still sees universities and HEIs as key pro-
viders of knowledge and contributors to progress in society, and expects that they should
be leading action on SD locally, nationally, and globally. Waas et al. (2010) go further,
suggesting that HE has a social and moral responsibility to work to address the needs of
society through SD policies and practice. According to Cortese (1992), universities bear
profound responsibilities to increase the awareness, knowledge, technologies, and
tools to create an environmentally sustainable future. Universities have the exper-
tise necessary to develop the intellectual and conceptual framework to achieve
AS_2019_3_3.indd 52 7.10.2019 11:46:44
53
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
this goal, and must play a strong role in education, research, policy development,
information exchange and community outreach. (Cortese, 1992, p. 1110)
As major educational institutions, HEIs are perfectly positioned to influence, reinforce,
and deliver education in line with the UN’s SDGs (Cotton et al., 2007; IAU, 2016). In-
deed, IAU (2016) claims that HE “underpins all the SDGs” (p.1), and to this end the
organisation has been instrumental in developing tools for HE research into SD. These
tools are available to all HEIs (IAU, 2016), yet many HEIs and academics do not make
full use of these and other online tools. In some cases this is because SD is viewed as a
discrete discipline (Santos & Filho, 2005). Because it is only usually environmentally-re-
lated courses and programmes that focus on SD (Waas et al., 2010), there is a need for HE
to focus more on developing a holistic approach that sees the integration of SD across all
disciplines (Ferrer-Balas et al., 2010; Fien, 2002).
Cortese (1992) forecast that universities and HEIs could play a vital role in future and that
SDGs could be delivered successfully on a large scale since universities have extensive
resources ranging from expertise to technology. Despite this, SD, as part of HE philos-
ophy, is still in its initial stages in many universities (Lozano, Lozano et.al., 2013) with
many still following traditional methods in contributing to the SDGs (Elton, 2003). It is
also suggested that in some universities there can be a resistance to change and this leads
to unsustainable practices (Sterling & Scott, 2008). Lozano, Luckman et al. (2013) claim
that as long as universities and HEIs follow traditional teaching approaches, they will lack
the capacity to deliver for a sustainable society.
THE ROLE OF EDUCATORS IN SD
Educators working in HE understand the importance of the concepts that define inter-
nationalisation, the concepts that are integral to Education for Sustainable Development
(ESD). Their roles as curriculum designers and teachers mean they are also well-placed
to relate those concepts to real-life contexts, and their expertise is invaluable to appropri-
ate programme design. Having direct links with their students and the community places
them centrally as facilitators of both their HEI’s policies and community needs. In ad-
dition, the research capacities of academics provide them with opportunities to establish
understandings of diverse community needs and to identify potential solutions. Educators
are also part of those communities, so often have a direct interest in seeing their commu-
nity thrive.
Educators in HEIs are encouraged to reflect on their own particular social and cultural
assumptions, as well as to reflect on their own practices. They must ensure that their ped-
agogical methods are appropriate to an international audience, and in doing this they are
expected to deliver an internationalised curriculum, outline culturally-appropriate eval-
uation methodologies, and engage in cross-border research and educational exchanges
(Black, 2004; Leask, 2007). Understanding what internationalisation is, and how it is
applied in different contexts, is an essential part of HE work in the 21st century. SD is also
AS_2019_3_3.indd 53 7.10.2019 11:46:44
54 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
a global concept, and educators’ increased understanding of internationalisation could
enable them to develop appropriate curricula and undertake research that is relevant to
culturally-specific community needs.
Educators’ understanding of the context in which they perform their academic work –
their insider knowledge – may have crucial value in maintaining relevance in policy de-
velopment. Educators can be seen, in fact, as central to the successful implementation
of SD policies in HE. IAU (2016) has recognised the importance of educators and their
significance in driving the process for SD in HEIs both in the present and in future. As
developers, mediators, and implementers of institutional policies, educators play a key
role in facilitating the whole process of education (Arnold & Burke, 1983).
The role of educators is viewed as multi-dimensional (Reid & Petocz, 2006), and not lim-
ited just to the multiple tasks they perform in an educational context. It is more than that,
for they also have a social responsibility towards the community for which that education-
al provision is designed (IAU, 2016). UNESCO (2014b) recognises that HE educators in
certain contexts, due to global location or cultural expectations, for example, still practice
unsustainable lifestyles. Educators may therefore, in some cases, need further training to
develop the required skills and competencies in developing and delivering the institution-
al vision. Stromquist (1997) suggests that this training should be relevant to both learner
needs and political context. Various initiatives provided by UNESCO, such as the “Global
Action Programme (GAP)” on “Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)” (UNES-
CO, 2018) are designed to overcome these concerns.
UNESCO (2018) also suggests that HEIs need re-orientation in order to develop the scope
for all learners to gain “knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes” that are directed towards
contributing to the SDGs (p. 133). The emphasis on learners and learning suggests that
UNESCO understands the important role of the educator in these processes. However,
to play a genuinely significant role, educators must have opportunities for developing
the areas of their professional practices that are essential to embed and deliver SD in the
curriculum. UNESCO (2018) also emphasises the importance to institutions of this focus,
and of motivating educators by involving them in framing institutional policies; doing so
will not only reflect positively on institutional practices but will also bring about posi-
tive changes to curricula by using educators’ pedagogical skills and knowledge of their
communities. Educators’ insider knowledge could be used in developing policies and a
culturally sensitive curriculum that addresses the sustainability needs of society.
Internationalisation in HE is instrumental in supporting educators in understanding, ac-
commodating, and developing a culture that facilitates the successful implementation of
SD policies in their institutions. UNESCO (2005) notes that there is a need to integrate
culture and SD, and that “[c]ulture is increasingly recognized as an essential dimension of
sustainable development, particularly since the 2002 Johannesburg Summit” (p. 30). This
global organisation thus makes it clear that, to be successful, SDGs must have culture
integrated into their policies and practices, as is the case with internationalisation.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 54 7.10.2019 11:46:44
55
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
CHALLENGES FACED BY EDUCATORS IN HE
Studies show that the perspectives of senior academics such as Deans and Heads of
Schools play a vital role in initiating and executing change in HE, and yet they are not
often involved in constructing such significant policies (Bell, 2004; Green & Mertova,
2010). Given this fact, it is not surprising that educators themselves do not seem to play a
significant role either. This under-representation could be due to a number of factors. For
example, pressure to compete academically – the “responsibility to perform” (Ball, 2012,
p. 19) – often leads to anxiety and stress, and leaves educators with little time to focus
elsewhere (Hall & Bowles, 2016). Tran and Le (2018) suggest that educators need signif-
icant professional development to implement institutional policies successfully. Indeed,
as educators interviewed as part of an ongoing doctoral research project have suggested,
there may also be a lack of encouragement from senior management, or even pressure not
to become involved.
While educators face a number of challenges in current HE practice, one that could be
addressed easily and effectively is that of involvement in policy development. HE aca-
demics are well situated to understand the processes of policy implementation and have a
wealth of expertise that could be employed by increasing their involvement in developing
policy. The role of educators in the process of internationalising universities, for example,
has been investigated by a number of scholars, and these studies show that educators are
by and large viewed as the empowering agents of internationalisation in HEIs and are the
academics who will decide the achievement or failure of internationalisation methodol-
ogies (Black, 2004; Poole, 2005; Leask, 2007). The same potential applies to integrating
SD into policy development.
However, educators face institutional barriers; as Tran and Le (2018) state, the universi-
ties’ role in addressing the needs of educators is being neglected. Institutional policies
directly impact upon educators’ roles, yet the literature indicates that educators do not
have enough input into developing these policies. Curriculum development is a key area
in which educators could apply expertise, yet they may be limited due to time and other
institutional constraints. Another reason for the lack of educators’ input may be due to
the fact that there is no shared understanding of SDGs, for example, at the institutional
level (Reid & Petocz, 2006). Whilst educators are believed to play a key role in facilitating
policies, and although these policies have a direct impact on educators, students, and soci-
ety (Beelen & Leask, 2010), the participants in the ongoing research project observe that
policies are usually dictated by a top-down approach. Velazquez, Munguia, and Sanchez
(2005) also suggest that educators’ views on sustainability in HE are not fully investigat-
ed and this is reflected in institutional change initiatives. The risk is that, by universities
ignoring the views of educators, these organisations may experience a resulting resistance
to change and to the integration of institutional SDGs (Cotton et al., 2007). According to
Dawe, Jucker, and Martin (2005), lack of input from educators could result in non-partic-
ipation in institutional initiatives, affecting successful implementation of SDGs.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 55 7.10.2019 11:46:45
56 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
Whatever the reasons, there seems to be a clear lack of input from educators into devel-
oping and delivering policy in HEIs. The expertise of educators is being neglected (Bell,
2004; Green & Mertova, 2010) by not involving them in the process of planning. Our
claim is that, if educators were more involved in policy design and implementation, HEIs
would be more prepared to produce sustainable and culturally-appropriate policies that
are more globally applicable and, at the same time, more relevant to sustainability issues
of particular communities.
Proctor (2016) suggests that, as educators are the ones who deliver institutional policies,
their involvement is significant, and institutions should recognise their needs, because
appropriate recognition for educators could result in higher levels of commitment and
involvement. Negotiating the specific demands of educators could result in the successful
implementation of institutional strategies useful to both local and global communities
(Tran & Le, 2018).
CONCLUSION
HE is well-placed to develop the capacity to address the needs of the communities it is
expected to serve and to deliver education and research that will promote sustainability in
those communities. By embedding SD as an institutional concept, HE can, in fact, be in-
strumental in effecting changes. Such changes to the institutional agenda, however, could
bring with them challenges if HE is to participate in addressing SD issues. As we have
seen, these issues include: increasing social and economic inequality in communities; en-
vironmental deprivation and degradation; and other issues that affect global communities
and their quality of life.
We have shown that an understanding of internationalisation is helpful in developing SD
policy and practice, and that educators in HEIs have the, as yet largely underappreciated,
expertise to contribute to policy development. Internationalisation of HE brings not only
economic benefits for the university but also brings an understanding of cultural diversity
both locally and globally, and with this global perspective, educators have the expertise
to successfully design and deliver SDG-focused curriculum for many culturally diverse
contexts.
Through their curriculum design and teaching, educators play a key role in implementing
institutional strategies; they could also be instrumental in developing sustainable policies,
that is, they have the expertise to incorporate SDGs into university work, but they do face
challenges. Understanding the challenges faced by educators is important if their role in
embedding SD in HE is to be facilitated.
Educators, as the conduit between management and learners, are the key implementers
of institutional educational policies and have the capacity to influence shaping the cur-
riculum in a way that could deliver to the needs of community and enhance learning in
the community. But educators need to have greater say and greater involvement in poli-
cymaking. Any educational process of developing community links for sustainability is
AS_2019_3_3.indd 56 7.10.2019 11:46:45
57
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
contextually dependent, but, using the concept of internationalisation, and informed by
the understandings of HE educators, the university could become a more important and
a much more relevant player in developing a sustainable society. Although the doctoral
research referred to in this paper has been undertaken in selected Scottish universities with
educators working in those universities, the data can be, to some extent, applicable more
globally, and the project will serve as a starting point for similar research in other contexts.
REFERENCES
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and real-
ities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305.
Arnold, R., & Burke, B. (1983). A popular education handbook. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education.
Arum, S., & Van de Water, J. (1992). The need for a definition of international education in US universi-
ties. In C. B. Klasek (Ed.), Bridges to the Future: Strategies for Internationalizing Higher Education
(pp. 191–203). Carbondale: Association of International Education Administrators.
Barth, M., Michelsen, G., & Sanusi, Z. A. (2011). A review on higher education for sustainable develop-
ment – Looking back and moving forward. Journal of Social Sciences, 7(1), 100–103.
Ball, S. J. (2012). Performativity, commodification and commitment: An I-spy guide to the neoliberal
university. British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(1), 17–28.
Bass, S., & Dalal-Clayton, B. (2012). Sustainable development strategies: A resource book. London:
Routledge.
Beelen, J., & Leask, B. (2010). Enhancing the engagement of academic staff in international education.
Proceedings of a Joint IEAA-EAIE Symposium. Melbourne: International Education Association of
Australia.
Bell, M. (2004). Internationalising the higher education curriculum – Do academics agree? HERDSA
Conference Proceedings – Research and Development in Higher Education: Transforming Knowl-
edge into Wisdom. Holistic Approaches to Teaching and Learning Vol. 27. Retrieved from http://
www.herd-sa.org.au/publications/conference-proceedings/research-and-development-higher-educa-
tion-transforming-3.
Black, K. (2004). A review of factors which contribute to the internationalisation of a programme of
study. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 3(1), 5–18.
Brundtland, G. (1987). Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carrozza, C., & Minucci, S. (2014). Keep on movin’? Research mobility’s meanings for Italian ear-
ly-stage researchers. Higher Education Policy, 27(4), 489–508.
Chan, W. W., & Dimmock, C. (2008). The internationalization of universities: Globalist, internationalist
and translocalist models. Journal of Research in International Education, 7(2), 184–204.
Cortese, A. D. (1992). Education for an environmentally sustainable future. Environmental Science &
Technology, 26(6), 1108–1114.
Cotton, D. R., Warren, M. F., Maiboroda, O., & Bailey, I. (2007). Sustainable development, higher edu-
cation and pedagogy: A study of lecturers’ beliefs and attitudes. Environmental Education Research,
13(5), 579–597.
Daniels, J. (2013). Internationalisation, higher education and educators’ perceptions of their practices.
Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 236–248.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 57 7.10.2019 11:46:45
58 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
Dawe, G., Jucker, R., & Martin, S. (2005). Sustainable development in higher education: Current practice
and future developments. A report to the Higher Education Academy, York (UK). Retrieved from http://
www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/doc-uments/ourwork/tla/sustainability/sustdevinHEfinalreport.pdf.
de Wit, H. (2002). Internationalization of higher education in the United States of America and Europe:
A historical, comparative, and conceptual analysis. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
de Wit, H. (2010). Internationalisation of higher education in Europe and its assessment, trends and
issues. The Hague: NVAO.
de Wit, H. (2013). Internationalisation of higher education, an introduction on the why, how and what. In
H. de Wit (Ed.), An introduction to higher education internationalisation (pp. 13–46), Milan: CHEI
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore.
de Wit, H. (2015). Internationalization misconceptions. International Higher Education, (64). Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2011.64.8556.
Elton, L. (2003). Dissemination of innovations in higher education: A change theory approach. Tertiary
Education and Management, 9(3), 199–214.
Ferrer-Balas, D., Lozano, R., Huisingh, D., Buckland, H., Ysern, P., & Zilahy, G. (2010). Going beyond
the rhetoric: System-wide changes in universities for sustainable societies. Journal of Cleaner Pro-
duction, 18(7), 607–610.
Fien, J. (2002). Advancing sustainability in higher education: Issues and opportunities for research.
Higher Education Policy, 15(2), 143–152.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Green, W., & Mertova, P. (2010, June). Listening to the gatekeepers: faculty perspectives on developing
curriculum for globally responsible citizenship. Paper presented at the Internationalisation of the
Curriculum Conference. Oxford.
Giroux, H. (2016). Public intellectuals against the neoliberal university. In N. K. Denzin, & M. D. Gi-
ardina (Eds.), Qualitative Inquiry – Past, Present, and Future: A Critical Reader (pp. 194–219).
Abingdon: Routledge.
Hall, R., & Bowles, K. (2016). Re-engineering higher education: The subsumption of academic labour
and the exploitation of anxiety. Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor, 28, 30–47.
Harris, S. (2009). Translation, internationalisation and the university. London Review of Education, 7(3),
223–233.
HEFCE (2014). Sustainable development in higher education HEFCE’s role to date and a framework for
its future actions. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/me-dia/hefce/content/pubs/2014/201430/
HEFCE2014_30.pdf.
Hudzik, J. K. (2011). Comprehensive internationalization: From concept to action. Washington: NAFSA
Association of International Educators.
IAU. (2016). Higher Education and Research for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from http://www.
iau-hesd.net/sites/default/files/documents/IAU-HESD-Nov2016.pdf.
Kim, T. (2009). Transnational academic mobility, internationalization and interculturality in higher ed-
ucation. Intercultural Education, 20(5), 395–405.
Kim, T. (2017). Academic mobility, transnational identity capital, and stratification under conditions of
academic capitalism. Higher Education, 73(6), 981–997.
Knight, J. (1994). Internationalization: Elements and Checkpoints. CBIE Research No. 7. Retrieved
from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED549823.
Knight, J. (1995). A national study of internationalisation at Canadian universities. In H. de Wit (Ed.),
Strategies for the Internationalisation of Higher Education. A Comparative Study of Australia, Can-
ada, Europe and the USA (pp. 99–120). Amsterdam: EAIE.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 58 7.10.2019 11:46:45
59
Jayakumar Chinnasamy, Jeannie Daniels: The Role of Universities and Educators...
Knight, J. (2003). Updating the definition of internationalization. International Higher Education,
33(6), 2–3.
Knight, J. (2007). Internationalization: Concepts, complexities and challenges. In J. J. F. Forest, & Philip
G. Altbach (Eds.), International Handbook of Higher Education (pp. 207–227). Dordrecht: Springer.
Knight, J. (2008) Higher Education in Turmoil: The Changing World of Internationalization. Rotter-
dam: Sense.
Knight, J. (2011). Five Myths about Internationalization. International Higher Education, (62), 14–15.
Knight, J. (2013). The changing landscape of higher education internationalisation – for better or worse?
Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 17(3), 84–90.
Knight, J. (2014). Three generations of crossborder higher education: New developments, issues and
challenges. In B. Streitwieser (Ed.), Internationalisation of Higher Education and Global Mobility
(pp. 43–58). Oxford: Symposium Books.
Leask, B. (2001). Internationalisation: Changing contexts and their implications for teaching, learning
and assessment. Retrieved from http://ascilite.org/conferences/aset-archives/confs/aset-herdsa2000/
procs/leask1.html au/aset/confs/aset_herdsa2000/cd/html/menu. html
Leask, B. (2007). A holistic approach to internationalization – Connecting institutional policy and the
curriculum with the everyday reality of student life. Paper presented at Education for Sustainable
Development: Graduates as Global Citizens, Bournemouth University.
Lozano, R., Lozano, F. J., Mulder, K., Huisingh, D., & Waas, T. (2013). Advancing higher education for
sustainable development: International insights and critical reflections. Journal of Cleaner Produc-
tion, 48, 3–9.
Lozano, R., Lukman, R., Lozano, F. J., Huisingh, D., & Lambrechts, W. (2013). Declarations for sus-
tainability in higher education: Becoming better leaders, through addressing the university system.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 10–19.
Marginson, S. (2007). Globalisation, the ‘idea of a university’ and its ethical regimes. Higher Education
Management and Policy, 19(1), 1–15.
Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education and public good. Higher Education Quarterly, 65(4), 411–433.
Poole, G. S. (2005). Reform of the university English language teaching curriculum in Japan: A case
study. In J. S. Eades, R. Goodman, & Y. Hada (Eds.), The ‘Big Bang’ in Japanese Higher Education:
The 2004 Reforms and the Dynamics of Change (pp. 242–273). Melbourne: Trans-Pacific Press.
Proctor, D. J. (2016). Academic staff and international engagement in Australian higher education (Dis-
sertation). The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2006). University lecturers’ understanding of sustainability. Higher Education,
51(1), 105–123.
Rizvi, F. (2010). International students and doctoral studies in transnational spaces. In M. Walker, & P.
Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion: Supporting effective research in
education and the social sciences (pp. 158–170). London and New York: Routledge.
Santos, M. A., & Filho, W. L. (2005). An analysis of the relationship between sustainable development
and the anthroposystem concept. International journal of environment and sustainable development,
4(1), 78–87.
Sawir, E., Marginson, S., Deumert, A., Nyland, C., & Ramia, G. (2008). Loneliness and international
students: An Australian study. Journal of Studies in international Education, 12(2), 148–180.
Scott, P. (1992). Mass higher education in Europe: Implications for student mobility and international
education. EAIE Occasional Paper. Amsterdam: European Association for International Education.
Sterling, S., & Scott, W. (2008). Higher education and ESD in England: A critical commentary on recent
initiatives. Environmental Education Research, 14(4), 386–398.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 59 7.10.2019 11:46:45
60 ANDRAGOŠKA SPOZNANJA/STUDIES IN ADULT EDUCATION AND LEARNING 3/2019
Stromquist, N. P. (1997). Literacy for citizenship: Gender and grassroots dynamics in Brazil. New York:
SUNY Press.
Tran, L., & Le, T. (2018). Teacher professional learning is neglected in internationalisation. Uni-
versity World News, 5, 15th May. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.
php?story=20180515144632119.
UNESCO. (2005). UNESCO and Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2014a). Shaping the Future We Want: UN Decade for Sustainable Development (2005–2014)
Final Report. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2014b). UNESCO Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme on Education
for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2018). Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO.
UN General Assembly. (2015). Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015
– Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from http://
www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.
Velazquez, L., Munguia, N., & Sanchez, M. (2005). Deterring sustainability in higher education insti-
tutions: An appraisal of the factors which influence sustainability in higher education institutions.
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(4), 383–391.
Waas, T., Verbruggen, A., & Wright, T. (2010). University research for sustainable development: Defini-
tion and characteristics explored. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(7), 629–636.
Wihlborg, M., & Robson, S. (2018). Internationalisation of higher education: Drivers, rationales, priori-
ties, values and impacts. European Journal of Higher Education, 8(1), 8–18.
Wright, T. (2004). The Evolution of Sustainability Declarations in Higher Education. In P. B. Corcoran,
& A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability (pp. 7–19). Dordrecht:
Springer.
AS_2019_3_3.indd 60 7.10.2019 11:46:45
