PROMOTING LEARNING DURING 
UN DECADE OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
(Draft 1.12.05) 

Åhlberg Mauri K. University of Helsinki, Finland
homepage: http://www.helsinki.fi/people/mauri.ahlberg
email: mauri.ahlberg@helsinki.fi

United Nations (UN) has declared Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 – 2014) in 2002. UN is an organisation of all nations of the world and in this sense presents humankind better than any other organisation. There have been catastrophic changes in global climate, ecosystems, and societies e.g. terrorism. Probably, the biggest learning challenge of humankind is to learn to live sustainable ways of life. It means that not only individuals, but also organisations, regions, nations and the whole humankind ought to learn innovatively to promote sustainable development. In October 2 – 3, 2004, UN General Assembly accepted the Agenda document for the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 – 2014). Hundreds of experts took part in providing ideas for the document. However, only four persons edited the final document. 

In the final document importance of learning is highlighted, but nature of learning is left unspecified. In the document the following books are referred, which contain ideas of what learning is and what kind of learning is needed for sustainable development: Scott & Gough (Eds.) 2003a and 2003b, O’Sullivan & Taylor (Eds). 2003. None of them show understanding of relevant modern research on learning. According to the UN Agenda for Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 – 2014) (2004, 24), “universities must function as places of research and learning for sustainable development”. In this paper relevant learning theories will be compared in order to find out which or what kind of combination of them could be best promote Sustainable Development during Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 – 2014).

Analysis of and some comments to
Scott, W. & Gough, S. 2003. Sustainable development and learning. Framing the issues. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

•	p. XIV: “The emphasis of learning here (rather than on teaching, instruction, training or other input (sic!) processes) is deliberate for two reasons; firstly, the learning that will need to be done transcends schools, colleges and universities; it will be learning in, by and between institutions, organisations and communities –where most of our learning goes on anyway.” 
•	p XIV: “For Hamm and Muagi (1998) the goal of sustainability is:
a capacity of human being to continuously adapt to their non-human environments by means of social organisation.” (N.B. This source is not in the references. But it explains how Scott and Gough highlight importance of adaptation, not innovations.-M.Å.) 
•	p. XIV: “---sustainable development is, for us, inherently a learning process which we can if we choose, learn to build (sic!) capacity to live more sustainably.”  (The authors here use term ‘build’, but it seems to originate term ’capacity building’, which is a term used by the famous book ‘Our common future’ (WCED 1987, 358 – 367 and 370 – 374). Scott and Gough (2003)  do not refer to ‘knowledge building’, or ‘collaborative knowledge building’. The term ‘capacity building’ is used mainly by politicians. I have not seen any serious learning research on it. However the history of it is at least described in the following UN web site: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/capacity_building/capacity.htm .)
•	p. 8. People learn, organisations learn and, in a sense, the environment (sic!) learns as nature responds to the results of human learning and activity.
•	p. 9. Figure 1.2 Learning is connected with Society, Nature and Environmental and social change by dashed lines. 
•	p 37: Title: Towards a sustainable development learning model. 
•	p 38: The figure that is used, as a modified version, also at the end of Scott and Gough (2004, 254). In the figure, they have associated three concepts: learning, training and education. Learning is described using terms instruction, communication and mediation. The end result, the final aim, is “CAPACITY BUILDING. Leading to sustainable development”. Information is linked to ‘Instruction of learners’. Communication is linked to ‘Engagement of learners’. Mediation is linked to ‘Facilitation of learning’. This is clear, but when these links are described in more detail, it is difficult to follow the chain of reasoning. “Information One-way transmission; parameters and assumptions agreed. Instruction of learners”.  “Communication two-way exchange; main parameters and assumptions shared. Engagement of learners”. “Mediation two/multiple-way exchanges; important parameters and/or assumptions disputed. Facilitation of learning”.   
•	P 39: “Information: Learning by means of information provision occurs through a one way process of instruction. The learner acquire a new piece of information which if internalised, becomes a personal, and possibly also a social, resource.”
•	p 39: “Communication: Learning occurs by means of communication through a two-way process. There is more at stake than simply internalising externally provided information. …the knowledge itself may be open to question and dispute. Furthermore, the usefulness of the knowledge may be debatable.”
•	p. 40 “Mediation: Our use of this term has its origins in the work of Laurillard (2002), who uses the term ‘mediated learning’, specially in the context of higher education, to describe learning which enables the generalisation of insights from situated learning - - beyond the communities of practice which have generated them; but the notion that learning accrues from mediation processes is widespread in that the teacher role is to mediate children’s experience so that something (sic!)  can be learnt.”
•	p. 41: “…however useful information or communication strategies may be in particular, time-and-space limited situations, they do not equip learners with the skills which will enable them to learn adaptively (or to use Young’s or Engestrom’s terminology (MY_COMMENT#_), connectively, or in an expanded style)  in response to developing, feedback-modified circumstances. What is necessary instead is a process of exchange through which everyone involved may bring what they know to the table, and everyone involved should expect to learn (MY_COMMENT#_). In terms of our earlier terminology, the implications are

At the end of the book is also index, which is very revealing as usually. The following keywords are lacking: collaborative knowledge building,  expertise, innovations, knowledge building, proactive, systems thinking, systems theory, and wisdom, just a couple of those to mention which I regard important elements of Learning for Sustainable Development. There is collaborative learning and working, but it is not knowledge building. Expanded learning s described in a rudimentary way.

Scott, W. & Gough, S. (Eds.) 2004. Key issues in sustainable development and learning. A critical review. London: RoutledgeFalmer. 

The book contains 56 small parts of longer texts some of which are called ‘reading’s and some of them ‘vignette’s. At the end is “Editors’ vignette: The last word”. It is their own interpretation what is learning in connection to sustainable development. Their last words end with the same figure that was central in their earlier book. The central concepts are learning, training and education, connected to information, communication and mediation. Probably, there is a miswriting, when under the information column is expression ‘institution of learners. In the earlier version (Scott & Gough 2003, 38) the expression was easier to understand: ’instruction of learners’. The final aim is ‘capacity building, leading to human and ecological well-being’. In the earlier version the expression was ‘capacity building, leading to sustainable development’. It looks like the authors have come to second thought concerning theme of sustainable development and correspondingly UN Decade of Education for Sustainable development. I find it very strange is that the authors end their last chapter with a very individualistic quotation: “Sen (1999:74) has written of the importance of development of “The substantive freedoms – the capabilities – to choose a life one has reason to value”. Learning is a poor tool (sic!) for implementing the policy prescriptions of others, and such implementation is, in turn, a very questionable route to sustainable development. Rather, learning will contribute to sustainable development to the extent that  it enhances the things emphasised by Sen – freedom, capability, choice, reason and personal value – and to the extent that it informs society’’s discussion with itself (sic!) about how best these may be promoted.”

 At the end of the book is also index, which is very revealing as usually. The following keywords are lacking: collaborative knowledge building, expanded learning, expertise, innovations, knowledge building, proactive, systems thinking, systems theory, and wisdom, just to mention a couple of those which I regard important elements of Learning for Sustainable Development.

O’Sullivan, E. & Taylor, M.  (Eds). 2004. Learning toward an ecological consciousness. Selected transformative practices. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

There are fourteen chapters from different authors in this book. There are understandably many views and opinions what learning, in particular, ecological learning is. 

At the end of the book is also index, which is very revealing as usually. The following keywords are lacking: collaborative knowledge building, expanded learning, expertise, innovations, knowledge building, proactive, sustainability, sustainable development, systems thinking, and systems theory, just to mention a couple of those that I regard important elements of Learning for Sustainable Development.

This book is a continuation of the earlier book by O’Sullivan (1999): 
O’Sullivan, E. 1999. Transformative learning. Educational vision for the 21st century. London: Zed Books.

At the end of the book is also index, which is very revealing as usually. The following keywords are lacking: collaborative knowledge building, expanded learning, expertise, innovations, knowledge building, proactive, systems thinking, systems theory, and wisdom, just to mention a couple of those which I regard important elements of Learning for Sustainable Development.

Outline of an integrating theory of education (based on Åhlberg 1997, 2005a and 2005b)

I present the theory as a list of propositions. All of them have theoretical underpinnings and justifications, and empirical support. All the elements, building blocks, of this tentative theory  are selected because there are aspects of the same learning process(This integrating theory is coherent until somebody is able to show convincingly that it is not.)

1)	Learning is both individual and social knowledge building process. Learning is a concept that is used to explain change in thinking and actions of  individuals, teams, organisations, regions, nations and in humankind. Knowledge covers in this theory declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, tacit knowledge, value knowledge etc. The point is that in the learners’ minds mental models of the world and universe are created, tested and continually improved. It is of utmost importance is continually to test both constructed knowledge and its assumption, both theoretically and empirically. The best way to learn in this way is to join a group of knowledge builders, like research groups or learning groups. It is not wise to stick to dogmatic conceptions, but to be open-minded and to compare own theories with other theories. All human knowledge is tentative, at best approximately true, in ana case always improvable.
2)	Science (in broad sense of “Wissenschaft”) and technology are main tools for humankind to create, test and reconstruct knowledge, concepts, and theories of the world, including sustainable development. Science is the only known self-correcting way in knowledge creation. Technology is used to monitor and promote application of sciences to satisfy real needs of individuals, societies and humankind. Science and technology are biggest collaborative knowledge building projects of humankind.
3)	Poppers (1972) three (part) world theory as applied by Niiniluoto (1983 – 2003) makes understandable how knowledge can be built collaboratively. Learning itself, as brain/nervous processes, happens in the World 2. Shared cultural products of learning, theories etc. are in the World 3. Human beings and the biosphere they are part of, is in the part World 1.
4)	In high quality learning tentative theories of the world are constructed, values included. In high quality learning, learners take full responsibility for their own learning, thinking, feeling and acting. 
5)	Meaningful learning, in which learning is relevant, new knowledge is linked to earlier knowledge, structures of concepts and propositions are continually tested and reorganised.
6)	Also learning by heart can be meaningful in meaningful contexts, e.g. learning usernames and passwords.
7)	Deep learning in the sense that history and evidence for the knowledge is continually sought, and knowledge is tested if possible. Teachers can test their tentative personal educational theories by design experiments.
8)	When testing of learnt knowledge happens in a form that knowledge is applied to own life, in everyday life and practice, it can be called transfer aspect of high quality learning.
9)	Metalearning is included, and it covers at least monitoring and promotion of own knowledge.
10)	Creative, proactive learning, expanded learning in service of beforehand take actions to create better possibilities for optimal satisfaction of real human needs.
11)	Tacit learning is used and explicated by tools available, e. by concept mapping.
12)	Learning everywhere, life as learning, is in use. Both formal and informal learning are applied in life long learning as a part of high quality learning.
13)	In high quality learning both generalisations and their contextual irregularities are learnt.
14)	In high quality learning mental conceptual systems (tentative theories) are created of the real systems of the world. In the end the universe is the biggest known system, and all other systems are parts of it. Everything in the world is somehow connected. Also possibilities of creating conceptual systems of how the world might be improved or how to avoid catastrophes, risks, threats etc are created beforehand as a part of proactive learning.
15)	In high quality learning people are seeking as truthlike/truthful knowledge as possible, as wise as possible, as efficient as possible, as good and beautiful as possible. This  is axiological aspect of high quality learning. 
16)	 Human beings learn best as integrating whole person: thinking, feeling and acting at the same time. Directing attention is a form of acting required in intentional learning.
17)	In high quality learning there is continual integration and empowerment that are used to solve problems of both individuals and societies, and humankind. This happens if win-win strategy is used. It has been theoretically shown that in long run whole humankind benefits of right kinds of win-win thinking and decisions, in which all participants and stakeholders win in long run. Also flow experiences are often met in this aspect of high quality learning. Sternberg’s theory of wisdom as learning to  balance different types of interests s an essential part  high quality learning.
18)	Learning from the best of each field is an essential aspect of high quality learning. This is sometimes called bench-learning (from benchmarking). People can learn from anybody, but highest quality of learning results from learning the best available sources.
19)	High quality learning involves learning to network and learning in networks.
20)	Three essential indicators of high quality learning are: a) critical but at the same time constructive thinking, b) creative problem solving,  and c) constructive actions to promote sustainable development, integrating ecologically, economically and socially sustainable development.

References

Åhlberg, M. 2005a. Learning for Sustainable Development – the biggest challenge for humankind: Theories and methods for UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005 – 2014) [in Finnish]. Inaugural lecture at University of Helsinki. December 8, 2004. Didacta Varia 10(1), 5 - 20, retrievable: http://bulsa.helsinki.fi/~maahlber/Ahlberg_8.12.04.pdf 

Åhlberg, M. 2005b. Eheyttävän ympäristökasvatuksen teoriasta (1997 - 2004) kestävää kehitystä edistävän kasvatuksen teoriaan (2005 -2014). In Houtsonen, L. & Åhlberg, M. (Eds.) Kestävän kehityksen edistäminen oppilaitoksissa. Helsinki: National Board of Education, 158 - 175.

Engeström, Y. 1994. Training for change: A new approach to instruction and learning in working life. Geneva: ILO.

Laurillard, D. 2002. Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. London: Routledgefalmer.

O’Sullivan, E. 1999. Transformative learning. Educational vision for the 21st century. London: Zed Books.

O’Sullivan, E. & Taylor, M.  (Eds). 2004. Learning toward an ecological consciousness. Selected transformative practices. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Scott, W. & Gough, S. 2003. Sustainable development and learning. Framing the issues. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Scott, W. & Gough, S. (Eds.) 2004. Key issues in sustainable development and learning. A critical review. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
UNESCO 2004a. UNESCOs portal of Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=27234&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (Retrieved 20.
11. 2004)

UNESCO 2004b. Draft international implementation scheme for the UN decade of education
for sustainable development,
http://portal.unesco.org/education/admin/ev.php?URL_ID=36026&URL_D
O=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201&reload=1099410445 (Retrieved 20.11.2004.)

Young, M. 1998. The curriculum of future: From the ‘New Sociology of Education’ to a critical theory of learning. London: Methue.