Mainstreaming sustainability into pre-service teacher edcuation in Australia

There is a growing interest in and support for education for sustainability in Australian schools. Australian Government schemes such as the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative (AuSSI), along with strategies such as Educating for a Sustainable Future: A National Environmental Education Statement for Australian Schools(NEES(Australian Government and Curriculum Corporation (2005) and Living Sustainably: The Australian Government’s National Action Plan for Education for Sustainability (Australian Government 2009), recognise the need and offer support for education for sustainability in Australian schools. The number of schools that have engaged with AuSSI indicates that this interest also exists within Australian schools. Despite this, recent research indicates that pre-service teacher education institutions and programs are not doing all they can to prepare teachers for teaching education for sustainability or for working within sustainable schools. The education of school teachers plays a vital role in achieving changes in teaching and learning in schools. Indeed, the professional development of teachers in education for sustainability has been identified as ‘the priority of priorities’. Much has been written about the need to ‘reorient teacher education towards sustainability’. Teacher education is seen as a key strategy that is yet to be effectively utilised to embed education for sustainability in schools. Mainstreaming sustainability in Australian schools will not be achieved without the preparation of teachers for this task. The Mainstreaming Sustainability model piloted in this study seeks to engage a range of stakeholder organisations and key agents of change within a system to all work simultaneously to bring about a change, such as the mainstreaming of sustainability. The model is premised on the understanding that sustainability will be mainstreamed within teacher education if there is engagement with key agents of change across the wider teacher education system and if the key agents of change are ‘deeply’ involved in making the change. The model thus seeks to marry broad engagement across a system with the active participation of stakeholders within that system. Such a systemic approach is a way of bringing together diverse viewpoints to make sense of an issue and harness that shared interpretation to define boundaries, roles and relationships leading to a better defined problem that can be acted upon more effectively. Like action research, the systemic approach is also concerned with modelling change and seeking plausible solutions through collaboration between stakeholders. This is important in ensuring that outcomes are useful to the researchers/stakeholders and the system being researched as it creates partnerships and commitments to the outcomes by stakeholder participants. The study reported on here examines whether the ‘Mainstreaming Sustainability’ model might be effective as a means to mainstream sustainability in pre-service teacher education. This model, developed in an earlier study, was piloted in the Queensland teacher education system in order to examine its effectiveness in creating organisational and systemic change. The pilot project in Queensland achieved a number of outcomes. The project: • provided useful insights into the effectiveness of the Mainstreaming Sustainability model in bringing about change while also building research capacity within the system • developed capacities within the teacher education community: o developing competencies in education for sustainability o establishing more effective interactions between decision-makers and other stakeholders o establishing a community of inquiry • changed teaching and learning approaches used in participating teacher education institutions through: o curriculum and resource development o the adoption of education for sustainability teaching and learning processes o the development of institutional policies • improved networks within the teacher education system through: o identifying key agents of change within the system o developing new, and building on existing, partnerships between schools, teacher education institutions and government agencies • engaged relevant stakeholders such as government agencies and non-government organisations to understand and support the change Our findings indicate that the Mainstreaming Sustainability model is able to facilitate organisational and systemic change – over time – if: • the individuals involved have the conceptual and personal capacities needed to facilitate change, that is, to be a key agent of change • stakeholders are engaged as participants in the process of change, not simply as ‘interested parties’ • there is a good understanding of systemic change and the opportunities for leveraging change within systems. In particular, in seeking to mainstream sustainability in pre-service teacher education in Queensland it has become clear that one needs to build capacity for change within participants such as knowledge of education for sustainability, conceptual skills in systemic thinking, action research and organisational change, and leadership skills. It is also of vital importance that key agents of change – those individuals who are ‘hubs’ within a system and can leverage for change across a wide range of the system – are identified and engaged with as early as possible. Key agents of change can only be correctly identified, however, if the project leaders and known participants have clearly identified the boundary to their system as this enables the system, sub-system and environment of the system to be understood. Through mapping the system a range of key organisations and stakeholders will be identified, including government and nongovernment organisations, teacher education students, teacher education academics, and so on. On this basis, key agents of change within the system and sub-system can be identified and invited to assist in working for change. A final insight is that it is important to have time – and if necessary the funding to ‘buy time’ – in seeking to bring about system-wide change. Seeking to bring about system-wide change is an ambitious project, one that requires a great deal of effort and time. These insights provide some considerations for those seeking to utilise the Mainstreaming Sustainability model to bring about change within and across a pre-service teacher education system.

Mainstreaming climate change adaptation : An incremental approach to disaster risk management in Australia

In this paper we argue that rationalist ‘predict then act’ approaches to disaster risk management (DRM) policy promote unrealistic public expectations of DRM provisions, the avoidance of decision making by political elites, an over-reliance on technical expertise and engineering solutions to reducing exposure to natural events, and a reactive approach to DRM overall. We propose an alternative incrementalist approach that focuses on managing uncertainties rather than reducing them and building resilience not simply through the reduction of hazard exposure, but also through the ongoing reduction of community vulnerability, the explicit consideration of normative priorities, and more effective community engagement in climate risk debates.

Mainstreaming therapeutic jurisprudence and the adversarial paradigm—incommensurability and the possibility of a shared disciplinary matrix

Problem-solving courts appear to achieve outcomes that are not common in mainstream courts. There are increasing calls for the adoption of more therapeutic and problem-solving practices by mainstream judges in civil and criminal courts in a number of jurisdictions, most notably in the United States and Australia. Currently, a judge who sets out to exercise a significant therapeutic function is likely to be doing so in a specialist court or jurisdiction, outside the mainstream court system, and arguably, outside the adversarial paradigm itself. To some extent, this work is tolerated but marginalised. However, do therapeutic and problem-solving functions have the potential to help define, rather than simply complement, the role of judicial officers? The core question addressed in this thesis is whether the judicial role could evolve to be not just less adversarial, but fundamentally non-adversarial. In other words, could we see—or are we seeing—a juristic paradigm shift not just in the colloquial, casual sense of the word, but in the strong, worldview changing sense meant by Thomas Kuhn? This thesis examines the current relationship between adversarialism and therapeutic jurisprudence in the context of Kuhn’s conception of the transition from periods of ‘normal science’, through periods of anomaly and disciplinary crises to paradigm shifts. It considers whether therapeutic jurisprudence and adversarialism are incommensurable in the Kuhnian sense, and if so, what this means for the relationship between the two, and for the agenda to mainstream therapeutic jurisprudence. The thesis asserts that Kuhnian incommensurability is, in fact, a characteristic of the relationship between adversarialism and therapeutic jurisprudence, but that the possibility of a therapeutic paradigm shift in law can be reconciled with many adversarial and due process principles by relating this incommensurability to a broader disciplinary matrix.

Mainstreaming biophilic urbanism in Australian cities : a response to climate change, resource shortages and population pressures

This thesis explored how biophilic urbanism, or the integration of natural features into increasingly dense urban environments, has become mainstream in cities around the world. Fourteen factors uncovered through a case study investigation provide insight for decision makers and change agents in Australia to use biophilic urbanism to address impacts of population growth, climate change and resource shortages. The thesis uses an inductive research approach to explore how barriers to the integration of multi-functional vegetated and water design elements into the built environment, such that these become and standard inclusions in urban design and development processes.

Mainstreaming EESD: Elements of rapid curriculum renewal

This keynote paper provides an overview of opportunities to rapidly renew curriculum to EESD, to meet the scale and pace of change required, in order to address the issues of our time – in time. The authors outline the key arguments of the six papers that will comprise the March 2009 special issue of the International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, on a proposed preliminary framework for rapid curriculum renewal to EESD. The authors invite conference delegates to provide feedback on these papers, and to consider how other concepts and methodologies presented at EESD08 might also be rapidly mainstreamed, to contribute to systemic integration of sustainability content throughout engineering education, in every engineering department.

Mainstreaming gender in the BOBLME Project

The paper presented a gender audit of international and regional instruments in the eight BOBLME countries. Uneven progress in tackling gender inequalities was found. Entry points to mainstream gender in the Strategic Action Plan(SAP) were identified and key recommendations to BOBLME partner countries were made.

Gender mainstreaming and the Common Agricultural Policy

While there are many case studies looking at gender mainstreaming in national contexts, this article offers a pan-European perspective to examine how a stated commitment to gender equality at this meta-level works in practice. The European Union’s (EU) stated commitment to gender mainstreaming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is critically reviewed. The article reviews theoretical literature on gender mainstreaming, considers the position of women in agriculture across Europe, and examines efforts by the EU to gender mainstream the CAP. It argues that at best, gender mainstreaming focuses on the symptoms of gender inequality in agriculture rather than the causes. Because of this, gender mainstreaming cannot be transformative in this context. Little thought has been given to the practical difficulties of actually gender mainstreaming a policy such as the CAP. The EU’s priority for the CAP focuses on the mainstream business goal of a viable agricultural industry and does not pay any heed to gender inequalities in agriculture. In short, the stated commitment to gender mainstreaming is empty rhetoric