Internationalization of Curriculum (loC) for Sustainability Education (SE)
SDG 4 Quality Education — Target 4.7
“By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development. ” (UNSDGs)
What is IoC ?
“IoC is the incorporation of an international and intercultural dimension into the content of the curriculum as well as the teaching and learning arrangements and support services of a program of study. “
(Leask, 2009)
What is IoC for SE?
“ The mission of SE in higher education is to empower future generations of citizens to
address sustainability problems and to educate students to make changes for a sustainable
world. The implementation of IoC for SE establishes platforms to share and apply knowledge,
driving influence and change that spans from local to global levels, while navigating diverse
cultural settings.
(Caniglia et al., 2018; Gregersen-Hermens, 2021)
Conceptual Framework of loC:
(Gregersen-Hermans, 2021)
To Learn More about the Framework of IoC:
Top Half: Curriculum Design
The top half of the framework focuses on creating an internationalized curriculum that prepares students for a globalized world. It includes three essential elements:
The Requirements of Professional Practice and Citizenship emphasize the importance of equipping students with the skills needed for professional roles and ethical citizenship in diverse environments.
The Assessment of Student Learning is crucial for measuring how well students achieve international and intercultural competencies, ensuring that learning outcomes align with global standards.
The Systematic Development Across the Program highlights the need for integrating international perspectives and skills throughout various courses, creating a cohesive educational experience.
Centre: Knowledge in and Across Disciplines
At the center of the framework is the idea of Knowledge in and Across Disciplines. This theme
underscores the significance of interdisciplinary approaches in education. It acknowledges that
different disciplines contribute uniquely to knowledge production and problem-solving. By
promoting collaboration among various fields, the curriculum encourages students to think
critically and engage with diverse perspectives, challenging dominant paradigms and fostering
innovation.
Bottom Half: Contextual Layers
The bottom half of the framework examines the various contexts influencing curriculum design:
The Institutional Context refers to the policies and priorities of the university, which shape
educational outcomes and align with local and global needs.
The Local Context emphasizes the importance of understanding community diversity and responding to local accreditation requirements, ensuring that the curriculum is relevant to the students’ immediate environment.
The National and Regional Context considers broader economic and educational factors that affect how institutions approach internationalization.
The Global Context acknowledges disparities in power and knowledge production, critiquing the dominance of Western educational models and promoting a more inclusive understanding of global education.
Reference Leask, B., & Bridge, C. (2013). Comparing internationalisation of the curriculum in action across disciplines: Theoretical and practical perspectives. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 43(1), 79-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2013.746566
Process of IoC:
Process of IoC derived from Participatory Action Research (PAR) (Leask, 2013)
To Learn More about the Process of IoC:
Phase
Focus Questions
Detailed Actions
1. Review and Reflect
To what extent is our curriculum internationalized?
Assess the current curriculum to understand its current state of internationalization.
2. Imagine
What other ways of thinking and doing are possible?
Engage academic staff in discussions about existing paradigms, question current practices and beliefs, and imagine new possibilities. Highlight the benefits such as team building, making connections, and identifying new opportunities for internationalization.
3. Revise and Plan
Given the above, what will you do differently in your programme?
Develop concrete plans to revise the curriculum based on insights from the imagination phase.
4. Act
How will we know if we have achieved our IoC goals?
Implement the planned changes and innovations in the curriculum.
5. Evaluate
To what extent have we achieved our IoC goals?
Assess the effectiveness of the implemented changes. Use the results to inform the Review and Reflect stage, creating a cyclical process.
(Leask, 2013)
Reminder : In reality, the occurrence of the phases might be overlapping chaotically. But, it is reminded that the most important phase is the “Imagine” phase. As it excites and engages teaching staffs the most. Yet, it is also the most challenging part for teaching staffs.
Reference Leask, B. (2013). Internationalizing the curriculum in the disciplines—Imagining new possibilities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315312475090
Why loC for SE?
“Education is prioritized by the UN as a mean to empower learners to commit to sustainable lifestyles.
The incorporation of loC elements facilitates the identification of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values for the survival of an inter-connected and changing world while also enhancing students’ global competence.”
(Jayne Drake, 2011)
Benefits of loC for SE to students, teachers, and the institution:
Benefits to students
global understanding
critical & systems thinking
inclusive awareness
intetrcultural communication
knowledge transfer
Workforce preparedness
(Brundiers & Wiek, 2017 & Leal Filho et al., 2023)
Benefits of loC for SE to students, teachers, and the institution:
Benefits to teachers
access to research collaboration
joint solutions
adaptation flexibility
Benefits to institution
expand overseas network
equitable education
institutional reputation
(Brundiers & Wiek, 2017 & Leal Filho et al., 2023)
Competencies of sustainability education
01
Knowing Which kinds of knowledge should students engage with?
02
Acting Which particular skills do students need to engage with and develop?
03
Being What kind of mind-set, attitudes, and sense of being do students need to cultivate and develop?
(Caniglia et al., 2018)
To Learn More about the competencies of IoC for SE:
Learning Areas
Description of Learning Areas
Knowing
Acting
Being
Subject learning
Engagement of existing knowledge
Critically addressing the epistemological and historical foundations of sustainability science
Learning how to use sustainability concepts, theories, and indicators to identify and analyze problems and solutions.
Reflecting on sustainability with respect to personal values and background as well as social, political, and cultural contexts
Research learning
Production of actionable knowledge on real-world issues
Learning about research methodologies in inter-and transdisciplinary settings in sustainability science.
Applying research methods and tools to address sustainability challenges.
Reflecting on one’s role as a researcher at the science-society interface.
Collaborative learning
Participation and facilitation in working with others
Learning about teamwork and intercultural communication.
Building and managing teams, using best practices for intercultural and interpersonal skills
Developing intercultural competence, adapting styles in diverse settings.
Professional learning
Involvement in diverse local and virtual work environments
Learning about working in international, local, and virtual environments.
Applying skills in real-world professional settings (project management, teamwork, etc.)
Developing personal capacities for effective participation in professional environments.
Personal learning
Growth as reflective and active citizens
Understanding theories of self and identity, personal values, normativity, and ethics.
Expanding personal capacities and applying practices of active citizenship.
Reflecting on one’s own development and impact on cultural contexts and people.
(Caniglia et al., 2018)
Reference Caniglia, G., John, B., Bellina, L., Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Cohmer, S., & Laubichler, M. D. (2018). The glocal curriculum: A model for transnational collaboration in higher education for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 368-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.207
References
Brundiers, K., & Wiek, A. (2017). Beyond interpersonal competence: Teaching and learning professional skills in sustainability. Education Sciences, 7(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010039
Caniglia, G., John, B., Bellina, L., Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Cohmer, S., & Laubichler, M. D. (2018). The glocal curriculum: A model for transnational collaboration in higher education for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 368-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.207
Gregersen-Hermans, J. (2021). Toward a curriculum for the future: Synthesizing education for sustainable development and internationalization of the curriculum. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(4), 461-481. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153211031033
Leal Filho, W., Viera Trevisan, L., Dinis, M. A., Sivapalan, S., Wahaj, Z., & Liakh, O. (2023). Ensuring sustainability in internationalisation efforts at higher education institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(7), 1416-1429. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijshe-10-2022-0333
Leask, B. (2013). Internationalizing the curriculum in the disciplines—Imagining new possibilities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315312475090
Leask, B., & Bridge, C. (2013). Comparing internationalisation of the curriculum in action across disciplines: Theoretical and practical perspectives. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 43(1), 79-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2013.746566
