Teaching for Sustainability

Sign up now: LTH’s course on “Teaching for Sustainability” Fall 2025

“Teaching for Sustainability” is a course run at the Centre for Engineering Education at LTH. The goal is to provide teachers who want to develop their teaching on sustainability with the opportunity to discuss and collaborate with peers on the topic, and to document their shared reasoning. This could include developing whole courses, course modules or other ways to include aspects of sustainability in any course.

The main component of the course is a project carried out in a small group, addressing a teaching issue of relevance to the participants. The project is reported orally and in writing during the course and is to be of a quality that makes it suitable for reading by other teaching staff at Lund University. In addition to the project, the course consists of scheduled seminars intended to support the work on the report. Literature studies of relevance to the project are also included.

The course corresponds to 2 weeks full-time work, most of which happens self-organised outside of the scheduled course meetings below:

1 September 9:00 -16:00
2 September 9:00 -16:00
16 September 9:00 -16:00
4 December – Presentation at LTH Pedagogical Inspiration Conference, time slots will be set by conference committee later

This round of the course will be co-taught by me (Mirjam Glessmer) and Robert Kordts, with a cohort of participants at the University of Bergen (UiB), Norway. I have taught this course for the last 3 years and have shared many thoughts about the course itself and related reading on my personal blog. I have also just run an interview study with teachers at LTH about how they have implemented sustainability aspects in their teaching and what challenges they have overcome or are still facing. So I am hoping that this course will be useful both in terms of the theoretical foundation as well as the context-specific practicalities!

With Robert Kordts, we gain an excellent and inspiring co-teacher with a lot of experience in both educational development and climate activism, and with the UiB participants, we are bringing in an international perspective and opportunities for cross-Nordics cooperations. To make this setup work smoothly, we are doing most of the course meetings online, except for some additional meetings at agreed-upon dates and times if wished, and the last meeting, where you will present your projects in person in a special session at the LTH Pedagogical Inspiration Conference.

Look at blogposts about previous rounds of this course here and register for fall 2025 here! You are also welcome to contact me for any questions you might have.

23/04/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

The most important question to ask our students: What will you do with your freedom?

Educational researcher Gert Biesta discusses the purpose of education on the podcast Talking Teaching (youtube video embedded below).

In the episode, Biesta explains the three purposes of education: qualification (equipping students to function in the workforce and society; so understanding, skills, capabilities), socialisation (providing students with a sense of orientation in the world, and teaching cultural practices and traditions), and subjectification (encouraging students to be the subjects of their own lives, not objects of all the other players and forces; becoming autonomous and independent in thinking and acting).

These three purposes are not necessarily aligned with each other. Biesta uses an image to explain how the three play together: they are like three boards in a setup of 3D chess, where a move on one board also influence the games on the others. He gives an example from teaching history: if we focus on memorizing and reproducing facts (qualification), that implies that that is what we value and that that is our understanding of history (socialisation), and how we see the students’ role in the world — in this case to not engage with history and build a relationship with it (subjectification).

If we forget the subjectification role of education, if we don’t ask our students “what will you do with your freedom?”, it does not matter how well we do on the two other fronts. Biesta’s example is Nazi Germany: “they were brilliant at socialization. They were rather good at qualification, but they paid no attention to subjectification. And then you have systems that perform really highly, but if they forget to take care of the soul of the person, they become utterly dangerous.”

So, what will we do with our freedom? What will we use our academic freedom for? What will we teach our students?

04/04/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Uncategorized

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Join the course “Poetry, Sustainability, and Change”!

This coming September Barbara Barrow and myself (Ellen Turner) will be teaching the 3-credit interdisciplinary course, Poetry, Sustainability, and Change. This course is one of the university’s so-called X-courses which are aimed at students who are already studying but wish to add a little extra to their main studies (in fact, anyone who meets the general entry and English requirements can apply). In our course, we want to move both the analytic and creative approaches to studies of poetry out of the confines English literature classroom, to those who are concerned various sustainability issues and who might not other encounter or know how to grapple with poetry.

Barbara and myself are both associate professors here at the English Unit at the Centre of Languages and Literature at Lund University. Our underlying ethos is that we, as instructors, bring the tools for analyzing and creating poetry, and the participants bring with them the themes they are interested in, along with their discipline-specific content knowledge about sustainability. We designed our course, which consists of three workshops over the course of a month, with the idea of providing an entry into how the poetry might help participants make sense of some of the topics of sustainability that they might be exploring on personal, academic, or professional levels.

Inspired by Didham (2022), who highlights poetry’s potential to reframe dominant economic narratives of growth and exploitation,[1] we aim to harness poetry’s emotional impact to transform readers into “active agents of change” in the field of sustainability. Building on Illingworth and Jack’s (2024) advocacy for using poetry across disciplines in higher education,[2] this course extends poetry’s transformative potential beyond the literature classroom, encouraging participants to “see” differently. In particular, we invite readers to decenter human perspectives through poems, thinking about the world through the eyes of snails and jellyfish, for example, or through the protestations of an overworked piece of land.

Acknowledging the fact that many of our participants will be encountering poetry in an academic context for the first time, we approach poetry from the basics with as little jargon as possible. In the first workshop, participants will be introduced to accessible tools for analyzing poetry and they will begin to see how they can apply these tools to poems on sustainability topics of their choice. For instance, someone interested in biodiversity might explore poems about bees to see how poetic perspectives enhance understanding of ecological themes. The second workshop will focus on how poetry engages emotions, encouraging both individual and collaborative responses. Here dialogue is crucial as we explore how reading as a community of readers can inform the creation of meaning and reshape perceptions of sustainability issues and challenges.

We are excited also to trial a creative component in the final workshop of the course. Lead primarily by Barbara, who is herself a novelist and short fiction writer, we have piloted scaffolded creative writing exercises on others courses that we have co-taught and often students remark in course evaluations that this was their favourite part of the course. While some students have dabbled in poetry writing before, for many this is their first attempt at writing poetry, so we want to stress that this exercise is low-stakes and we aim to create a supportive and non-judgemental environment for this to take place in. Prospective students might also be relieved to hear that we won’t be assessing their actual poetry output, but are rather concerned with the reflection that goes on around the process. How has poetry-writing helped participants to explore their sustainability themes that matter to them? The goal is that this creative immersion allows participants to deepen their understanding of these challenges through self-expression.

Our hope is that this micro-course which runs at the start of the semester throughout September, will be transformative in for participants and help them approach their studies throughout the rest of the semester with fresh eyes and poetry in their hearts and minds. The deadline for application to the course is 15 April, and more details on how to apply can be found here: https://www.sol.lu.se/en/course/ENGC18/

[1] Didham, Robert J. 2022. Poetic Learning for a Sustainable Future: Transforming our Collective Story. In Poetry and Sustainability in Education, edited by Sandra Lee Kleppe and Angela Sorby, 121-145. Palgrave Macmillan.

[2] Jack, Kirsten, and Sam Illingworth. 2024. Poetry and Pedagogy in Higher Education: A Creative Approach to Teaching, Learning and Research. Bristol University Press.

01/04/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Ola Leifler’s demonstration of large-scale social simulations (“Megagames”) yesterday

27 curious teachers joined Ola Leifler‘s demonstration of large-scale social simulations (“Megagames”) yesterday. Can you imagine playing a game with 180 people in individual roles for a full day? Me not really, but at least a little bit more after yesterday’s demonstration.

On the image above you see part of the setup: There were three main areas on big tables where most of the discussion during game rounds happens, and where there are boardgame-like elements — a geography, cards that represent resources like fossil fuels or college graduated, plans of what to collect in order to be able to buy something, and much more. Facilitators organize the game in rounds and can intervene in the game in many ways, for example by closing down a stock exchange due to extreme weather, or just by ending the game a round before everybody expects it to end. Participants get individual role descriptions (1-2 pages long) with different pieces of background information and cues to how their role might act. Mine was a low-income senior citizen who had worked hard all their life to create the country we all live in, with a lot of time on their hands to attend meetings and let others know about the experiences they have collected. Another senior citizen had the superpower of rolling a dice once every round to make the choice between different options that the facilitator offers! Other roles included politicians or climate activists. Between rounds, participants can check in with their team mates (for example all the other low-income citizens) and discuss strategies for the next round.

The experience — even though it was just a demo and not the actual game, and even though we were way fewer people than can be engaged in the game — was chaotic. But that is also the point: This is not a game where we can understand the complexity and optimize strategy; the experience really drives home the need for conversation and collaboration. You definitely do experience complexity, even though the system is extremely simplified compared to the real world; for example international trade is just a mechanic in the game and not an active player, and there is only a handful of companies that work on non-overlapping products and services. The game is intentionally set up in the sweet spot between role playing, board games and simulations — not as overwhelming and complex as a full-on simulation, but more free than a classical boardgame, and with some of the creativity but much less of the performance aspect of role plays. And it is really engaging, even just in the demo version!

If you are interested to learn more, you can read more about the game here, and if you are really keen to experience it in full soon, you might consider to join a session in Stockholm on April 28: Megagame – Changing the Game of Consumption. Or to let us know — we are planning to invite Ola back to run the full game with us, so if you want to join (alone, or with a group of people) be in touch!

21/03/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Event summaries

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Invitation: Teaching Sustainability – a teacher-led grassroots initiative for course development

We are excited to invite you to the final presentations of projects in the Collegial project course “Teaching Sustainability for a Circular Built Environment”!

Day: 22/4 2025
Time: 8:30-12:00
Place: Pepparholm, Studiecentrum LTH, John Ericssons väg 4
Calendar event available here.

In this course, 9 teachers of a wide variety of courses in the Civil Engineering (V) programme at LTH took the grassroot initiative to improve teaching of circularity and sustainability throughout the programme, both in individual courses and in collaboration.

We will present 4 projects that have been/will very soon be implemented in existing courses, to share our experiences, learning, and potentially transferrable ideas, and to get your feedback. We hope to inspire more similar projects and collaborations!

So that we have enough coffee and fika for everyone, please register using the following link: https://forms.office.com/e/UrSMuN10Bf

We are looking forward to seeing you there!
Jonas Niklewski, Ivar Björnsson, and Mirjam Glessmer

21/03/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Looking Ahead: First Task Force-meeting of 2025

The beginning of a new year often sparks a sense of renewal and an opportunity to reenergise. One of the main outcomes from the first meeting of the Task Force of the year was to set as a common goal to be more visible at pedagogical conferences, while also being mindful of available time and resources.

On March 4, 2025, the Task Force on Education for Sustainability met for its 8^th meeting since its inception. This was also the first meeting without Steven Curtis, formerly at the Division of Higher Education Development, member of the Working Group, and a driving force behind many of the advancements in Education for Sustainability that we have seen in the past year. This means that the Working Group and Task Force need to find clever ways to work more effectively without adding even more work to long to-do-lists. One strategy that the Working Group currently makes use of is to open events and activities, that we are anyway undertaking, to additional participants. This way we can reach a larger audience without adding working hours.

For instance, the Teaching for Sustainability-initiative has launched two new formats that are open to everyone:

Transformation Thursday: once a month we meet for an informal lunch somewhere on the campus. Our next Transformation Thursday will take place on 20 March at Moroten & Piskan from 11:30, followed by our upcoming event with Ola Leifler from Linköping University on 20 March, 1-3 pm: Teaching for Sustainability: Megagames – Large Scale Social Simulations | Staff Pages
Book Club: We are reading “Becoming an Everyday Changemaker”- one part discussed each time over three times this semester. We discussed Part I on March 12, but you are most welcome to join the discussion about Part II on April 23 even if you missed the first gathering. We meet on Teams (see separate Teams-channel or contact thoni@cec.lu.se)

Do you have events such as final presentations in a course, departmental talks that could interest a broader audience, or other activities you would like to share within the Teaching for Sustainability-community for more cross-faculty inspiration and learning? Welcome to share your ideas on our Teams-channel open to all staff at Lund University interested in Education for Sustainability: Community of Practice (TfS) | General | Microsoft Teams

On the topic of outreach and visibility, the Task Force also discussed the possibility of getting more visibility for Education for Sustainability at an upcoming pedagogical conference, possibly even arranging a specific track on this topic. We decided to follow up with organisers of upcoming conferences, not least the Faculty of Engineering hosting the annual pedagogical conference on December 4. Regarding content of a potential track or activity, one idea is to arrange for teachers from different faculties to meet and discuss curricula design. We also agreed that regardless of content it will be important to communicate a save-the-date early on as the main reason that teacher do not attend pedagogical conferences seems to be that they are busy teaching.

Updates from faculties and departments

The IIIEE has just launched a new MOOC on 1.5-degree lifestyles “mainstreaming everyday sustainability”. The MOOC consists of 25 videos and is published on the Coursera-platform: https://www.coursera.org/learn/onepointfive-degree-lifestyles-mainstreaming-everyday-sustainability/
The Department of Design Sciences has launched a Sustainability seminar lunch series open to the whole department. So far, two seminars have been held. Contact Rhiannon Pugh for more information.
Faculty of Law has launched a workshop/seminar series with the teachers of the master’s programme in European Business Law. The teachers, with varying background and experience when it comes to education for sustainability, will meet three times to implement sustainability in the programme as a red thread.
The Faculty of Law has also published its new sustainability plan, running 2025-2026, with action items on education for sustainability.
The Division for Higher Education Development is currently in a transitioning phase with upcoming reorganisation and recruitment processes.
Department of Political Science: two smaller grant applications for post-doc funding in the field of education for sustainability have been submitted (LU internal + Crawford).
At the Department of Communication there are discussions around social sustainability and what this entails, not least considering recent international events and related to the new Centre for Preparedness and Resilience to be established | Internal Faculty of Social Sciences.
The Faculty of Medicine has continued its workshops with teachers about teaching for sustainability, and climate and (planetary) health. In the context of U21, Susanne Brokop is working on two international workshops – on to be held in Dublin and one digital. The Medical Programme now has mandatory parts on sustainability.

Next meeting

Will take place May 20, 2-4 pm, online. If you would like to join, please contact Terese: terese.thoni@cec.lu.se

If you are interested in looking closer at our faculties sustainable development plans, please contact Terese to set up a separate meeting.

As always: If you would like to get in touch, we would love to hear from you and for you to join our activities! 🙂 You are also welcome to contact us with suggestions on activities and resources that you think would make a difference to educators for sustainability. If you are interested in a tailor-made presentation or workshop about Education for Sustainability for your unit, team of educators, or other interested participants, please contact terese.thoni@cec.lu.se for more information and time-booking.

Those present:

Jessika Richter, The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics (IIIEE)
Marja-Liisa Öberg, Faculty of Law
Michael Bossetta, Department of Communication
Rhiannon Pugh, Department of Design Sciences
Sara Andersson, Division for Higher Education Development (AHU)/Department of Educational Sciences
Susanne Brokop, Department of Health Sciences
Terese Thoni, Sustainability Forum – meeting minutes
Thomas Hickmann, Department of Political Science

17/03/2025

terese

This entry was posted in

Task Force

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

New Sustainability MOOC! Guest post by Jessika Richter

At the end of February, IIIEE, together with partners from around the EU launched a new massive open online course (MOOC) 1.5° Lifestyles: everyday sustainability on the coursera platform. The course is based on the findings and insights from a 4 year research project funded by the European Union. The EU 1.5° Lifestyles project’s main aim was to foster the mainstreaming of lifestyles in accordance with the aspirational 1.5° climate target agreed by countries around the world through the Paris Agreement.

Throughout this course, we help learners explore many aspects of what we mean by 1.5° lifestyles – living sustainably, having low carbon impacts and being healthy and happy while living within planetary boundaries. We also emphasise that transitioning to 1.5° lifestyles requires not only individual changes, but also changes on a societal level – from the communities in which we live to changes to the fundamental structures and values of society.

The MOOC brings together many experts from academic institutions and non-governmental organizations around the EU to explore a range of relevant topics. This was a logistical challenge in terms of planning the curriculum and filming, but ultimately increased the diversity of academic and practitioner perspectives. From analyzing consumption patterns and behavioral drivers to considering policy implications and societal shifts, exploring 1.5° lifestyles requires a holistic perspective on the complex interplay between individuals, communities, and the environment. By critically examining real-world case studies and engaging in interactive discussions, we hope learners will acquire practical tools and strategies to foster sustainable practices in their own lives while also understanding the structural barriers that need to be addressed.

In Module 1, we first introduce the 1.5°target and how we can think about climate targets from a consumption-based approach.
In Module 2, we look more into the potential contributions of individuals and households in adopting lifestyle changes. In particular, we look at changes in the domains of nutrition, mobility, housing and leisure. We will also discuss the limitations and barriers for individuals and households to make the changes alone.
In Module 3, we explore the structural changes and policies needed for a transition to a low carbon society.

While the project is based on findings from EU countries, we also know that there are different contexts beyond this relevant to learning more about 1.5° lifestyles. If we think of 1.5° lifestyles as embedded in a context, then we also should expect that individuals will have different starting points, different pathways or journeys and different contexts in which they navigate those pathways. We are also interested in those differences and understanding what 1.5° lifestyles look like in all their varieties. To this end, the course also encourages sharing of experiences from all participants – through the course project and forum discussions – and this is another valuable source of learning in this course. The course project itself challenges learners to implement a lifestyle change for a couple of weeks and observe the enablers and challenges that make this change one they would implement permanently or not. The project asks them to reflect not only on their experience, but others’ experiences and the structures of society around them. Through this project design, we are experimenting with more transformative learning and hope in the future to have more to share about this!

05/03/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

“Deep learning through “values-thinking”” by Thomas Hickmann

When teaching my students about climate change, biodiversity loss, plastic pollution or other pressing global sustainability problems, I usually start with the notion of the Anthropocene highlighting that humans have become the main driver of change in the planet’s ecosystems. Then, I introduce the planetary boundaries concept to show that humans are crossing a safe operating space causing irreversible damage to the basic living conditions on Earth.

In this context, I often draw on insights from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services or refer to the Global Environment Outlook of the United Nations Environment Programme. In this way, I try to ensure that students learn about the current state of environmental degradation. While this approach feels appropriate, I cannot help but wonder: what are students actually taking away from such lessons? And more importantly, am I unintentionally leaving them overwhelmed or disheartened?

Through discussions and readings in the pedagogical course on “Integrating Sustainability Competencies in Curriculum” at the Division for Higher Education Development, I realized how crucial it is for a deeper learning process to more actively engage students and meet them where they are in the overall debate about ecological crisis and the over-exploitation of the planet’s life sustaining resources.

As a result, in a new Master’s level course on Environmental and Planetary Politics at the department of political science, I decided to place strong emphasis on “values-thinking” which I understand, following Redman and Wiek, as a crucial sustainability competence that entails the ability to identify, compare and apply concrete sustainability values and related principles and goals. My key idea was that students develop a deep understanding of their own values in relation to the debate on political responses to human-driven global environmental changes.

Moreover, I wanted students to realize that the policies of various political actors and institutions are shaped by underlying environmental worldviews. By encouraging students to critically examine different perspectives and position themselves within a renowned typology of worldviews of global environmental change, I aimed to foster a more nuanced understanding of how values influence decision-making processes in addressing sustainability problems.

PPT Slide: Typology of worldviews of global environmental change

So how did I do that? After students got familiar with the typology of worldviews distinguishing between market liberals, institutionalists, bioenvironmentalists and social greens, they engaged in partner discussions before positioning themselves in the typology, aligning their own values with the analytical categories of the typology. This exercise did not only deepen their conceptual understanding but also prompted students to critically evaluate their own belief systems and convictions in relation to dominant practices of dealing with environmental problems.

In a next step, students participated in a role-play activity. They were assigned to four groups, each representing one worldview in a “United Nations high-level expert panel”. The groups had the task to provide suggestions based on their respective worldviews how to best respond to pressing global environmental problems such as climate change, biodiversity loss and plastic pollution. That way, students experienced firsthand the strong differences and overlaps between the worldviews and the underlying values.

PPT Slide: United Nations high-level expert panel

After the role-play, students reflected on their experiences and shared insights how the role-play shaped their understanding of worldviews. Drawing on these experiences and insights, students used the typology of worldviews as a framework to critically evaluate real-world examples of political responses to sustainability problems, engaging in a debate how different worldviews on global environmental change influence political action.

To round this up, students created posters on their different worldviews emphasizing political response strategies for achieving sustainable development in the 21st century. The goal was to give students a chance to be creative and demonstrate their understanding of the connections between values and politics while applying their knowledge in an active environment. These posters were presented and discussed in a concluding exhibition.

In my own reflection, the emphasis on “values-thinking” proved to be highly effective in stimulating student engagement, participation and deep learning. Students actively engaged throughout the course, as they had a chance to connect the thematic input, readings and discussions to their personal beliefs, experiences and ways of thinking. This fostered not only intellectual engagement but also provided a space for students to bring their emotions and personal perspectives into the classroom, enriching the learning experience.

To support students’ deep learning processes, I employed a variety of tools to promote meaningful interactions among students: I started my sessions with “check-ins”, allowing students to express their current emotions and ensuring they felt heard and supported in their respective situations. I conducted a “socio-metric exercise” prior to the role-play to offer opportunities for students to get to know each other, enhancing their ability to work together. I gave students time to reason about critical questions by using the “think-pair-share-technique”, fostering active engagement and peer-to-peer learning. I asked students to compile a “learning journal”, with three guiding questions, encouraging students to document their learning progress.

The ability to identify, compare, and apply concrete sustainability values, principles, and goals is a crucial competence for advancing sustainable development. Combining this competence with future-thinking is particularly promising and essential for generating political and societal changes that disrupt the status quo. With a deep understanding of how values influence political decisions, one can recognize and develop alternative futures that help guide us towards sustainable pathways.

Acknowledgement

I am grateful for the pedagogical support that I received from Steven Curtis, Mirjam Glessmer and Terese Thoni in the pedagogical course Integrating Sustainability Competencies into Curriculum during the autumn term 2024 and greatly appreciated the exchange with all course participants.

References

Clapp, Jennifer, and Peter Dauvergne (2011). Paths to a green world: The political economy of the global environment. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Redman, Aaron, and Arnim Wiek (2021). Competencies for advancing transformations towards sustainability. Frontiers in Education 6, Article 785163.

Warburton, Kevin (2003). Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 4(1), 44-56.

20/02/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Experiences from the field

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Invitation: “Megagames – Large Scale Social Simulations” with Ola Leifler

As educators, how can we support students in developing skills to facilitate and engage in constructive conversations around social change? Large-scale social simulations (“megagames”) provide space and context needed to train these skills. At this seminar, Ola Leifler from Linköping University will present their leading research on large-scale social simulations, and demonstrate some of the games they use in their teaching.

Following our seminar series on Teaching for Sustainability – Serious Games, we will now take a closer look at megagames – a type of serious games that take the shape of large-scale social simulations. A serious game is any intervention or simulation that integrates educational content, skills development, and learning outcomes into a game-like environment that promotes student engagement, critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration. By combining game mechanics with pedagogical principles, serious games allow students to explore complex real-world issues, experience decision-making scenarios, and apply theoretical concepts in an interactive and inclusive learning environment.

Join our seminar to explore how megagames are being used as a pedagogical approach to advance student understanding of complex sustainability issues and in particular fosters constructive dialogue on social change. Ola Leifler at Linköping University has long experience with serious games and leads a research project on megagames, focused on energy transitions, regional transformation, and sustainable consumption.

During the seminar, we will:

Get an introduction to megagames as an educational activity
Hear about the latest research on megagames
Get a demonstration of megagames used at Linköping University
Explore the possible use of megagames in our own teaching

About the Speaker: Ola Leifler

Associate Professor Ola Leifler is lecturer at the Department of Computer and Information Science at Linköping University. His research focusses on creating good conditions for conversations about social change through large-scale social simulations (megagames). As a teacher, Ola has a strong interest in Education for Sustainability. Read more about Ola’s research here: Ola Leifler – Linköping University

The seminar will be held in English.

Registration

Registration is open until Tuesday 18 March. For late registration, contact terese.thoni@cec.lu.se.

Visit the registration page here.

Audience

This seminar is intended for programme directors, course coordinators, educators, and study administrators at Lund University. Others are welcome to register, but priority will be given to those from Lund University with existing educational assignments. You do not need previous experience with serious games to attend the seminar.

Venue, Date & Time

Venue: Department of Physics, Sölvegatan 14C, Lund. Room: H421

Upon entering, signage will be visible directing you to the room location.

Date & Time: Thursday 20 March from 13:00 – 15:00

13/02/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Events

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Studenter och lärare kräver en omställning av högre utbildning för en hållbar framtid

Publicerad av Aftonbladet 7/2 2025:

163 universitetsanställda ställer sig bakom studenters krav att påskynda förändringen av högre utbildning så att studenterna som medborgare och i sina framtida yrkesliv ska kunna bidra till en samhällsomställning för hållbarhet. Dessa krav har studenterna tidigare uttryckt i ett öppet brev till rektorerna vid samtliga svenska lärosäten och de inkluderar bland annat tvärdisciplinära utbildningar och ökat studentinflytande för att skapa en hållbar samhällsomställning.

Medan alltmer alarmerande forskningsresultat visar att mänskligheten står inför en existentiell kris på grund av klimatförändringar, förlust av biologisk mångfald och överskridandet av ytterligare planetära gränser så sker mycket arbete vid svenska universitet och högskolor fortfarande som om dessa kriser inte existerade. Det gäller inte minst undervisningen. I ett öppet brev skickar representanter för 13 olika studentkårer en uppmaning till landets rektorer att påskynda processen att göra utbildningen mer relevant, en uppmaning som vi forskare och lärare vid universitetet och högskolor ställer oss helhjärtat bakom.

Brevet är resultatet av en workshop som genomfördes i oktober 2024, där representanter för studentkårerna och Klimatnätverkets arbetsgrupp för lärande för hållbar utveckling diskuterade hur universitetens utbildningar behöver förändras för att bättre förbereda studenterna för att vara en aktiv och kunnig del av den samhällsomställning som krävs för en hållbar och rättvis framtid.

Klimatnätverket är ett nationellt nätverk av universitet och högskolor som bland annat syftar till att stärka samarbetet och utbytet mellan lärosätena inom klimatområdet och underlätta för lärosätena att uppfylla sin del av Parisavtalet. Klimatnätverkets arbete bedrivs i olika fokusgrupper varav en är lärande för hållbar utveckling.

De allvarliga och omfattande brister som studenterna identifierade i dagens utbildningssystem är:

att det saknas förståelse och acceptans för att utbildningarna behöver förändras i grunden om de ska kunna utbilda studenter att bidra till en hållbar värld. Därmed saknas också vilja och beslutsamhet till sådan förändring.
att akademin, som står som garant för mycket av kunskapen kring klimat- och miljöutmaningarna, inte fullt ut är med och driver samhällsomställningen.
att alla utbildningar inte lyfter frågor om hållbarhet och dess komplexitet eller karaktäriseras av lärande för hållbar utveckling, samt att det saknas progression i lärandet för hållbar utveckling.

Studenterna kräver att utbildningarna förändras på följande sätt:

att utbildningar designas, både med avseende på innehåll och pedagogik, med utgångspunkt i de hållbarhetsutmaningar som världen står inför, så att studenternas kompetenser därigenom är aktuella och relevanta för samhällets hållbarhetsutmaningar.
att utbildningar inkluderar tvärdisciplinära möten och kurser där studenter får arbeta med lösningar till verkliga uppdragsgivare och deras samhällsutmaningar.
att alla lärare och personer i ledande roller på våra lärosäten får kompetens om lärande för hållbar utveckling och om lärosätenas ansvar och möjligheter att bidra till samhällsomställning genom lärande för hållbar utveckling.

Studenterna anser att de har en central roll i det förändringsarbetet och att deras initiativ och engagemang måste tas på allvar. De uttrycker i brevet att deras röster ibland inte får gehör. De uttrycker att det är avgörande att:

lärosätena i större grad efterfrågar och tar tillvara studenternas kompetens i utformningen och genomförandet av de förändringar av kurser och utbildningsprogram som behövs,
studenternas röster tas på allvar i informella och formella sammanhang och att studentinflytande meriteras som en del av utbildningarna,
Sveriges lärosäten gemensamt etablerar ett Forum för transformation av högre utbildning för ett större ansvarstagande för framtiden där både studenter, lärare, utbildningsforskare och universitetsledningar finns representerade.

Vi håller med studenterna och tycker att det är viktigt att tillmötesgå deras krav. Vi uppmanar er som rektorer att påskynda denna förändringsprocess, så att de kunskaper och färdigheter som studenterna får med sig från våra lärosäten förbereder dem väl för deras framtida yrkesroller, inklusive att ge dem verktyg och möjlighet att aktivt bidra till en hållbar samhällsomställning. Ett nära samarbete mellan alla svenska högskolor och universitet, studenter och relevanta samhällsaktörer är avgörande för att lyckas med denna omställning. Vi som undertecknar denna text är beredda att bidra till denna förändring men behöver också ett helhjärtat stöd från ledningarna vid de högskolor och universitet där vi är verksamma för att lyckas.

Jeannette Eggers, forskare i skoglig planering, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Glenn Bark, universitetslektor i malmgeologi, Luleå tekniska universitet

Esther Hauer, universitetslektor i pedagogik i arbetslivet, Uppsala universitet

Karin Gerhardt, forskare i biologisk mångfald, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Anne-Kathrin Peters, docent i teknikvetenskapens lärande, KTH

Ben Kenward, universitetslektor i psykologi, Uppsala universitet

Isabelle Letellier, universitetslektor i barn och ungdomsvetenskap, Stockholm universitet

Sverker Molander, professor i miljösystem och risk, Chalmers Tekniska Högskola

Maria Hylberg, doktorand, Barn- och ungdomsvetenskapliga institutionen, Stockholms universitet

Cecilia Enberg, universitetslektor, Linköpings universitet

Malin Östman, kurssamordnare, CEMUS, Uppsala universitet

Ulrika Persson-Fischier, PhD, Excellent lärare, adjunkt, Uppsala universitet

Johanna Nygren Spanne, civ.ing, adjunkt, programansvarig för Miljövetarprogrammet – Människa, Miljö, Samhälle, Malmö universitet

Fredrika Mårtensson, Människa och samhälle, universitetslektor, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Hannu Larsson, universitetslektor i informatik, Örebro universitet

Diana Holmqvist, universitetslektor i pedagogik och vuxnas lärande, Linköpings universitet

Johanna Björklund, universitetslektor i miljövetenskap, Örebro universitet

Ewa Livmar, Kurssamordnare, CEMUS, Uppsala universitet

Helena Fornstedt, postdoktor med undervisningsansvar, Uppsala universitet

Carin Cuadra, professor i socialt arbete, Malmö universitet

Mirjam Glessmer, universitetslektor och pedagogisk utvecklare, Lunds Universitet

Felix-Sebastian Koch, docent, Linköpings Universitet

Emilia Åkesson, fil. dr pedagogik, postdoktor i genusvetenskap, Umeå Universitet

Max Koch, professor i socialpolitik och hållbarhet, Lunds universitet

Jayeon Lee, universitetslektor i socialt arbete, Göteborgs universitet

Naghmeh Nasiritousi, docent, Linköpings universitet

Lena Sawyer, docent i socialt arbete, Göteborgs universitet

Stephanie Rost, doktorand, Göteborgs universitet

Klara Bolander Laksov, professor, Stockholms universitet

Anders Rosén, universitetslektor i ingenjörsutbildning, KTH

Per Andersson, professor i pedagogik, Linköpings universitet

Cecilia Josefsson, doktorand och universitetslärare, Uppsala universitet

Marie Kvarnström, konsulent, SLU Centrum för biologisk mångfald

Charlotte Ponzelar, doktorand i didaktik, Uppsala universitet

Natalie Jellinek, pedagogisk utvecklare, Undervisning och Lärande, Karolinska Institutet

Rhiannon Pugh, universitetslektor i innovation, Lunds universitet

Matilda Karlsson, doktorand i socialt arbete, Göteborgs universitet

Christoffer S. Kanarp, forskare i miljökommunikation, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Anna-Lena Sahlberg, universitetslektor i fysik, Lunds universitet

Cecilia Lalander, docent i teknologi, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Charlotta Delin, pedagogisk utvecklare, KTH

Johanna Spångberg, forskare hållbar livsmedelsproduktion, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Martina Angela Caretta, universitetslektor och docent inom kulturgeografi, Lunds universitet

Iann Lundegård universitetslektor och docent i nv-ämnenas didaktik Stockholms universitet

Fredrik Björk, adjunkt i miljövetenskap och doktorand i miljöhistoria, Malmö universitet

Manuel Fernández Santana, doktorand, Linköpings universitet

Susanna Sternberg Lewerin, professor i epizootologi & smittskydd, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Kajsa Emilsson, forskare i socialpolitik och hållbarhet, Lunds universitet

Sara Gabrielsson, universitetslektor i hållbarhetsvetenskap, Lunds universitet

Helena Röcklinsberg, docent i etik, universitetslektor i djuretik, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Jana Weiss, docent i miljökemi, Stockholms universitet

Brita Sundelin, docent i miljövetenskap, Stockholms universitet

Nike Lindhe, doktorand i klinisk psykologi, Linköpings universitet

Hulda Karlsson-Larsson, doktorand i psykologi, Linköpings universitet

Ola Uhrqvist, universitetslektor, Linköpings universitet

Carole Chappuis, doktorand i naturvetenskapernas didaktik, Linköpings universitet

Joëlle Rüegg, professor i miljötoxikologi, Uppsala universitet

Johanna Lundström, forskare i skoglig planering, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Arthur Rohaert, doktorand i brandteknik, Lunds universitet

Susanne Antell, universitetsadjunkt i naturvetenskap, Högskolan Dalarna

Ingrid Strid, forskare och lärare vid Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, Uppsala

Tullia Jack, biträdande lektor, docent, Tjänstevetenskap, Lunds Universitet

Felicia Garcia, pedagogisk utvecklare, Högskolepedagogiskt centrum, Örebro universitet

Muriel Côte, universitetslektor och docent inom kulturgeografi, Lunds universitet

Katarina Andreasen, docent i biologi, Uppsala universitet

Agnes Hamberger, doktorand i utbildningssociologi, Uppsala universitet

Elenor Kaminsky, universitetslektor, docent i Folkhälsa vid Uppsala universitet

Eva Friman, forskare & programchef, Centrum för hälsa och hållbarhet, Uppsala universitet

Jessika Richter, biträdande universitetslektor i hållbar konsumtion, Lunds universitet

Yulia Vakulenko, universitetsadjunkt i förpackningslogistik, Lunds universitet

Åke Hestner, universitetsadjunkt i Matematikdidaktik, Högskolan Dalarna

Karin Steen, universitetslektor, Centrum för studier av uthållig samhällsutveckling/LUCSUS och pedagogisk utvecklare, Avdelningen för högskolepedagogisk utveckling, Lunds Universitet

Anton Grenholm, samordnare för miljö- och hållbarhetsfrågor, Högskolan Dalarna

Thomas Hickmann, biträdande universitetslektor i statsvetenskap, Lunds universitet

Rolf Larsson, professor i tillämpad matematik och statistik, Uppsala Universitet

Björn Victor, professor i datalogi, Uppsala universitet

Ronny Alexandersson, doktor i biologi, Uppsala universitet

Frederik Aagaard Hagemann, doktorand inom urban landskapsplanering, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Kathrin Zeller, docent och universitetslektor i immunteknologi, Lunds Universitet

Ida Wallin, forskare och lärare, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Kevin Noone, professor emeritus i kemisk meteorologi, Stockholms universitet

Magdalena Malm, forskare inom proteinvetenskap, KTH

Anna Malmquist, docent i psykologi, Linköpings universitet

Kristina Boréus, professor i statskunskap, Uppsala universitet

Romina Martin, forskare och lärare i hållbarhet, Stockholm Universitet

Stephanie Carleklev, universitetslektor i design, Linnéuniversitetet

Caroline Greiser, forskare och lärare i landskapsekologi, Stockholm universitet

Patrik Andersson, professor i miljökemi, Umeå universitet

Eva-Maria Nordström, universitetslektor i skoglig planering, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Veronica Flodin, universitetslektor i naturvetenskapernas didaktik, Stockholms universitet

Martin Hultman, docent i vetenskaps-, teknik och miljöstudier, Chalmers Tekniska Högskola

Sachiko Ishihara, doktorand i kulturgeografi, Uppsala universitet

Patrik Oskarsson, docent i landsbygdsutveckling, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, Uppsala

Johanna Lönngren, docent i teknikdidaktik, Umeå universitet

Per Adman, docent och universitetslektor, Uppsala universitet

Tomas Persson, docent i matematik, Lunds tekniska högskola, Lunds universitet

Marie Bengtsson, professor i kemi med inriktning mot kemisk ekologi, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Ebba Malmqvist, docent i miljömedicin, Lunds universitet

Anna Scaini, forskare och lärare i vattenresurser, Stockholms universitet

Cecilia Sundberg, universitetslektor i bioenergisystem, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Juan Samper, doktorand i hållbarhetsvetenskap, Lunds universitet

Stefano Manzoni, professor i ekohydrologi, Stockholms universitet

Göran Finnveden, professor i miljöstrategisk analys, KTH

Hanna Grauers Wiktorin, postdoktor, Uppsala Universitet

Göran Bolin, professor i medie- och kommunikationsvetenskap, Södertörns högskola

Michael Gilek, professor i miljövetenskap, Södertörns högskola

Kristina Riegert, professor i journalistik, Södertörns högskola

Maria Wolrath Söderberg, docent i retorik, Södertörns högskola

Daniel Pargman, docent i medieteknik med inriktning mot hållbarhet, KTH

Jonas Andersson, docent i medie- och kommunikationsvetenskap, Södertörns högskola

Maria Niemi, docent i folkhälsovetenskap, Karolinska Institutet

Isabel Löfgren, lektor i medie- och kommunikationsvetenskap, Södertörns högskola

Klas Ytterbrink Nordenskiöld, doktorand i medicin, Karolinska Institutet

Stina Bengtsson, professor i medie- och kommunikationsvetenskap, Södertörns högskola

Rikard Hjorth Warlenius, docent i samhällsvetenskapliga miljöstudier, Södertörns högskola

Peter Dobers, professor i företagsekonomi, dekan för fakultetsnämnden 2016-2022, Södertörns högskola

Tommy Jensen, professor i företagsekonomi, Stockholms Universitet

Birgitta Schwartz, professor i företagsekonomi, Stockholms Universitet

Marita Cronqvist, docent i pedagogiskt arbete, Högskolan i Borås

Ulf Bergström, docent i marin ekologi, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Hervé Corvellec, professor i företagsekonomi, Lunds Universitet

Erik Månsson, universitetslektor, Handelshögskolan vid Karlstads Universitet

Henrik Loodin, fil. dr. sociologi, Lunds universitet

Sara Persson, postdoc i företagsekonomi, Södertörns högskola

Matilda Dahl, docent i företagsekonomi Uppsala universitet

Matilda S. Watz, biträdande universitetslektor i strategisk hållbar utveckling, Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Åsa Cajander, professor i människa-datorinteraktion, Uppsala universitet

Herman Stål, docent företagsekonomi, Handelshögskolan vid Umeå universitet

Kristin Caravelli-Svärd, doktorand i företagsekonomi, Karlstads Universitet

Helén Williams, docent i miljö- och energisystem, Karlstads universitet

Henrietta Palmer, arkitekt och forskare, Göteborgs Universitet

Göran Broman, professor i maskinteknik, Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Fredrik Wikström, professor i Miljö- och energisystem, Karlstads universitet

Maria Berge, universitetslektor vid Institutionen för naturvetenskapernas och matematikens didaktik, Umeå universitet

Annette Risberg, gästprofessor i organisation, Malmö Universitet

Markus Schneider, universitetspedagogiska enheten, Karlstads universitet

Michael Håkansson, Lektor i didaktik, Stockholms universitet

Alexis Engström, pedagogisk utvecklare, Mittuniversitetet

Cecilia Åsberg, professor i genus, natur, kultur, The Posthumanities Hub, Linköpings universitet

Sven Borén, Lektor i Strategisk Hållbar Utveckling, Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Michael Johansson, Forskare Tjänstevetenskap, Lunds universitet

Per Knutsson, lektor i humanekologi, Göteborgs Universitet

Anette Strömberg, universitetslektor innovationsteknik, Mälardalens universitet

Kjell Vowles, postdoktor, Göteborgs universitet.

Cecilia Bratt, lektor i strategisk hållbar utveckling, Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Annika Olofsdotter Bergström, Lektor Medieteknik, Södertörns Högskola

Nina Wormbs, professor i teknikhistoria, KTH

Adam Wickberg, docent i historiska studier av teknik, vetenskap och miljö, KTH

Alexandra D’Urso, pedagogisk utvecklare på Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet och forskare i pedagogik

Merlina Missimer, docent i Strategisk Hållbar Utveckling, Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Jenny Helin, docent i företagsekonomi, Rektorsråd för Uppsala universitet Campus Gotland

Annie Gregory, doktorand, Uppsala Universitet

Pernilla Ouis, fil. dr. i humanekologi och professor i socialt arbete vid Högskolan i Halmstad

Lars Hedegård, universitetslektor i företagsekonomi, Högskolan i Borås

Hampus Holmström, analytiker, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet

Dana Bergman, universitetsadjunkt på institutionen för strategisk hållbar utveckling på Blekinge Tekniska Högskola

Birgit Penzenstadler, Associate Professor for Software Engineering, Chalmers Tekniska Högskola and University of Gothenburg

Carl-Gustaf Bornehag, professor i folkhälsovetenskap, Karlstads universitet, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, NY, USA

Malin Knutz, PhD folkhälsovetenskap, Karlstads universitet, programledare för “Hälsa, miljö och samhälle” samt Masterprogrammet i folkhälsovetenskap.

Helena Pedersen, docent i pedagogik, programledare för Masterprogrammet i Education for Sustainable Development, Göteborgs universitet

Carolina Jernbro, docent i folkhälsovetenskap, Karlstads universitet

Åsa Bringsén, lektor i folkhälsovetenskap och programområdesansvarig för Folkhälsovetenskapligt program med inriktning beteendevetenskap, Högskolan Kristianstad.

Ingemar Jönsson, professor i ekologi, Högskolan Kristianstad.

Samuel Petros Sebhatu, universitetslektor, Handelshögskolan vid Karlstads Universitet

Petra Nilsson Lindström, biträdande professor i hälsovetenskap, Högskolan Kristianstad

Lena Gumaelius, docent i teknikvetenskapens lärande, KTH

07/02/2025

Mirjam Glessmer

This entry was posted in

Uncategorized

Comments

0 Comments Leave a comment

Grand Seminar “Exploring the complexities and potentials of environmental communication”

Did you attend the Grand Seminar on “Exploring the complexities and potentials of environmental communication”, organised by LU Sustainability Forum, BECC and MERGE? If not, you definitely missed out on a lot of interesting input and a great opportunity to connect with passionate people that want to explore environmental communication!

All presentations were very interesting in their own right, but to give you a taste of what you missed, I am only writing about my personal highlight: Nina Wormbs speaking on

“Legitimising non-action”.

There are so many decisions we make every single day, regarding our carbon footprint, but also healthy eating habits, screen time, and many more, where we know the right thing to do, yet we manage to find ways to do something else that seem justified to us, so we can do things we know to be bad without feeling bad about them. So how does that work? That is where Nina Wormbs research comes in: She is investigating the different ways people argue for why they act against their own better judgement on questions of sustainability.

But let’s take a step back. Looking at all the examples mentioned above and many more (smoking? Social media? Exercising?), knowing better does not mean doing better. A lot of effort in science communication goes into trying to make people “listen to science”, but in that context “science” most often means STEM, and just telling people is clearly ineffective — the information deficit is not the problem. There are many reasons for non-acting, both in the biology of the brain AND in how people function as social beings in a culture. If we want people to change how people act, we, the researchers and communicators, need to ourselves listen to other disciplines. STEM might tell us that we need to act, but not how. And the how very easily becomes ideological and political. There are, of course, climate / science deniers, but while we need to understand what is going on with them, they are not the majority. The majority of people do accept science, want to act, but find themselves acting against their knowledge and intentions.

Wormbs presents a study where people self-report in survey, responding to the prompt “Describe an experience of doing what you know you shouldn’t do. How do you deal with the cognitive dissonance? How did you legitimise it in your head to make it “ok”?” They had about 400 respondents, and many respondents gave more than one reason. The most common reasons were

Account thinking. In this line of argumentation, people balance what they do against what they don’t do, for example “I want to fly. I know I should not, but I bike to work and don’t eat meat, so overall flying is ok”. The problem with that is that there cannot be a balance, since there isn’t a budget that is “ok” to use; everything we do emits CO2 that shouldn’t get into the atmosphere, so balancing isn’t a valid approach. Also, most often the proportions are off between actions that people are trying to balance, between the “good” and “less-good” deeds. If people put more effort into something, it tends to counts more in their imagined balance, even if the actual effect is minimal.
Comparison. There are always people who do worse than us and in comparison to them, what we do is really not so bad or maybe even pretty good; or if we are comparing with ourselves, we are at least doing a bit better than we did years ago. There is a lot of “what-about-ism” happening.
Limitations. People argue for example that they need to take the car to work, even thought the wouldn’t want to, there is no other possibility. There are a lot of goal conflicts in these kinds of arguments. For example, if we want women to be able to be bosses, maybe they need to dive a car to bring their kids to daycare and pick them up again (was the example she mentioned). Or if you live far away from your family, seeing them is valued very highly and emitting seems justified.
“I am only human”. Here, people say things like “I cannot save the planet by myself” or “I had a tough week, I needed and deserved to do this”.
“Tiny me”. This is when people argue that their contribution is so tiny, it shouldn’t count in comparison to Amazon or China. However, in democracy, we don’t argue that way, we argue that every vote counts.
Technology is going to solve it! This is a very common line of arguments in politics, but surprisingly only surfaced a handful of times from the 400 people!

In this survey, people were asked how they justify things to themselves. But there is always an audience, even for internal arguments, since we are social beings. Our arguments need to not only “work” on us, but they also need to work on people that matter to us (even if only in the conversations that we have about it in our own head). If someone who matters to us questions our arguments, we might rethink it and either find better arguments or potentially realize that the argument does not hold, and in order to find approval with the people who matter to us, change behaviour.

In a second study, Wormbs investigated how people argue that DO change stuff, e.g. stop flying. Typically they’ve known for a long time that they should change, but then suddenly had a realisation that they need to act, that they cannot escape. Typical triggers for this realisation are reported as

Fear! For example, all of Fridays for Future is built on fear. Fear can convert knowledge into action!
Having children or grandchildren or some other important child in their life. A child adds another 30 years or so of relevant timeline beyond our own projected lifetime, so suddenly the longer-term future matters more.
Children bring knowledge home from school, and take action like not eating meat any more. Parents or other carers need to relate to that, often leading to a change in behavior for them, too (even just because it is easier to just cook vegetarian for everybody than preparing two parallel meals)
Comparison (remember above? There is always someone who behaves worse than us) changes and now is not with a neighbour with a bigger house and more cars and frequent flying any more, but with other places in the world where emissions are much lower but the standard of living needs to be built up
Responsibility. Here, people think “If not me, then who?” They develop the will to act in accordance with convictions. “If it all goes down the drain, I want to be able to look my kid in the eye and say I did all I could”

But now the question remains: How do we reach people who want to change? How can we have the meaningful conversations? What we all have to go through is an emotional, painful change and potentially an existential crisis. How do we do it well?

In the discussion following the presentation, the point was brought up on whether we aren’t putting too much responsibility on the individual. What about the system? And here, Wormbs pointed out that there are not just those two levels. Individuals can affect a group (their family, a sports club, their neighbours), a municipality, an enterprise, …, all the way up to national and international governance. And I find that a very hopeful framing! We are going to disagree talking about sustainability, even with people who are generally on the same page as us, but we need to have the discussions. We need more, and better, conversations. As I wrote recently: The process is the point.

If you are interested in discussing Teaching for Sustainability, you are very welcome to get in touch with us!

P.S.: If you are interested, you can read my summary of some of the other presentations on my personal blog.