Education encourages people to adopt pro-environmental behaviors that promote sustainability. However, to successfully teach these behaviors, educators must have a strong comprehension of and commitment to sustainability. Yet, there has been little research into how teachers perceive and understand sustainability. The author of this study developed a definition of sustainability, which identified three interrelated aspects—environmental, socio-cultural, and economic—and stated how their interaction caused unpredictable changes and outcomes. The definition also stated that teachers should have an interdisciplinary approach to sustainability education because many factors influence sustainability. The purpose of this study was to determine how student teachers in New Zealand perceived sustainability and their knowledge of this topic.
The research occurred at a university in New Zealand. Students in their third and final year of a Bachelor's in Education program agreed to participate in the study. The author adapted a questionnaire designed by previous researchers that included open- and close-ended questions asking participants to define sustainability and rank their understanding of the term on a scale of 1 (no understanding) to 5 (very good understanding). The purpose of the questionnaire was to collect information about 1) participants' views of sustainability, 2) the complexity of their perceptions, and 3) participants' self-awareness of their understanding. The researchers received 77 responses to the survey.
The researcher implemented several analyses to answer the research questions. First, the researcher identified common categories of responses, including resources, economics, lifestyle choices, and future planning. Each of the categories was then classified according to whether it fit the environmental, socio-cultural, or economic component of the sustainability definition. For instance, if a response mentioned a resource, it was placed in the resources category and assigned to the environmental component of the definition. The author then designed two tools to address the research questions. The first tool allowed the researcher to gauge the complexity of each definition of sustainability provided by the respondents. The second tool was used to rank the participants' sustainability definitions according to how well they reflected the baseline definition. The definitions were graded as None, Little, Reasonable, Good, Very Good, Very Good Plus. For example, a Good rating indicated that the student participant's definition of sustainability included sophisticated concepts pertaining to resources and future planning. The author used tool 1 to indicate the concepts within each definition and then used tool 2 to assign a rank.
Results indicated that almost half (48.9%) of the respondents thought of the environment when asked to define sustainability. Primarily, respondents mentioned the sustainable use of resources, caring for the environment, and adopting pro-environmental behaviors. The author emphasized that none of the participants mentioned the socio-cultural component of sustainability, and only one participant mentioned economics. Some did not provide responses (13.8%) or gave definitions unrelated to the author's definition (22.4%).
In terms of complexity (tool 1), two-thirds of student teachers (67.5%) had a simple definition that only included one of the categories and some of the participants (17%) did not provide any ideas that coincided with the categories. In terms of the degree to which definitions matched the baseline definition of sustainability, most participants (57%) provided an average or above average definition. However, there was a wide range of results, indicating that students have varying perceptions of sustainability.
The author used statistics to conclude that there was a significant difference in how the participants rated their knowledge versus how the researcher rated their knowledge. Primarily, participants underestimated their understanding of sustainability compared to the researcher's ranking. For instance, among the 16 participants the author ranked in the highest 3 categories of sustainability knowledge (Good, Very Good, Very Good Plus), nearly all (14 participants) ranked themselves lower (Reasonable, Little, or None).
This study has some limitations. First, the tools were designed based on the definitions provided by the student participants. Therefore, if used for other studies they should be refined dependent upon existing knowledge. Second, this study focused on sustainability and cannot be generalized to other topics of environmental education. The findings pertained to students within the university and results should not be generalized to other institutions or contexts. Lastly, the author developed the definition of sustainability that may vary from other definitions.
The author recommends that institutions measure self-awareness of sustainability among student teachers. By acknowledging self-awareness, professors of student teachers can improve students' knowledge by filling in the gaps and familiarizing students with all the components of sustainability. The researcher recommends that sustainability education emphasize the economic and socio-cultural aspect of sustainability in addition to the environmental component. Lastly, these tools may be used to monitor improvements in student teachers' understanding of sustainability.
The Bottom Line
<p>This research explored how student teachers enrolled at a New Zealand university understood sustainability and perceived their knowledge of the topic. The author distributed a survey to 77 students that asked them to define sustainability and rank their understanding. Findings demonstrated that many respondents provided simple definitions and only considered the environmental component of sustainability, and not socio-cultural or economic aspects. The author recommends that sustainability education emphasize all aspects of sustainability, as well as measuring student teachers' self-awareness in order to improve sustainability knowledge among educators.</p>
Research Partner