東華大學圖書館 |

Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability./
作者:	Brockwell, Ashley Jay.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2019,
面頁冊數:	243 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-11A.
標題:	Grass roots movement. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28229782
ISBN:	9798597031453

Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability.
Brockwell, Ashley Jay.

Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2019 - 243 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Wageningen University and Research, 2019.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Evaluating the success or failure of educational initiatives, whether at the level of individual students, teachers and institutions or at national and global levels, relies on a shared understanding of what 'success' or 'failure' might look like in practice. This, in turn, cannot be defined in an objective way because it depends on the values, mindsets and priorities of diverse stakeholders - which may be very different from one another, or even mutually conflicting. In order to design assessment tools to 'measure what we treasure', as called for in the 2015 Millennium Development Report, we must first embark on the challenging task of creating appropriate indicators. Only then can data be collected and analysed, conclusions drawn, and policy priorities reviewed.The majority of educational indicators and evaluation systems are designed from the top down, and based on the priorities of a single stakeholder-usually a government or a donor organisation. This has perpetuated the use of indicators such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which effectively 'reward' governments for engaging in activities that are environmentally and socially destructive. Within the field of education for sustainability, the design of evaluations and assessments tends to be based on the accumulation of a large number of poorly-defined indicators, which are often difficult to measure.In this thesis, I have described four separate research studies conducted as part of the ESDinds project ('Creating Indicators and Assessment Tools for Civil Society Organizations Promoting Education for Sustainable Development'), which was led by a consortium of two universities and four civil society organizations from 2008-2011. The project aimed to explore inductive ways of developing indicators in the context of non-formal education for sustainability-drawing them out from participants' comments about what they find valuable, meaningful and worthwhile within a shared context of practical action, rather than deducing a framework from theory. These approaches were also intersubjective, in the sense of seeking to understand and empathise with each other's perspectives, identify a common core if applicable, and build consensus about how to represent what matters to the group as a whole within the specified context. The indicators created in this way can be described as 'values-based'. A key aspect of the approach described here (as an illustrative example) is the creation of resource materials to challenge people's preconceived assumptions, promote dialogue, and raise awareness of marginalised groups and world-views.In the first of the four studies presented here, I describe the organisational impacts of conducting field trials with a 'values-based evaluation' approach in eight different organisations. The observed impacts included an improved understanding of how values-related vocabulary can be linked to specific actions, feelings and behaviours (which I have termed 'values conceptualization') and incorporation of this newly acquired vocabulary, with its referents, into training, PR and other conversations within and beyond the respective organizations ('values mainstreaming'). The data analysis also indicates an increased awareness of evaluation methodologies and knowledge of how to apply specific assessment methods, and changes in self-perception, perceptions of others, and professional relationships within the organizations. These preliminary findings are discussed in relation to wider academic discourse on values communication in organisations.Having established the potential for organisational benefits of inductive / intersubjective evaluation design ('values-based evaluation') in practice, I proceed to investigate its theoretical validity in more depth. Specifically, I refute the theoretical argument which is often used to suggest that values enactment is impossible to measure, and replace it with a 'context-specific measurability' argument which suggests that intersubjective conceptualization of values can be achieved within clearly-defined practical contexts. This opens up new possibilities for the operationalization of what has been termed the 'missing pillar' of sustainability-the various intangible dimensions (cultural, aesthetic, political, spiritual, etc.) that are excluded from the traditional 'three-pillar' model comprising environmental, economic and social dimensions. The theoretical work is followed up with a short case study of the use of inductive/intersubjective approaches to evaluate an online course in sustainability leadership (Chapter 3), and subsequently a rigorous investigation of how such approaches might contribute to conversations around indicator design in relation to the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) target of the Sustainable Development Goals. I demonstrate that the 'values-based' (inductive and intersubjective) approach can be complementary to traditional United Nations indicator development processes, and is effective in operationalising intangible dimensions of ESD such as 'appreciation of cultural diversity'.As a contrast to the high-level policy dialogues surrounding the SDGs and their indicators, I then explore the applicability of inductive and intersubjective approaches to 'indicator' design at the level of individual schools or classes. I do not discuss them as evaluative interventions in this case, although they could be used as such, but as tools for stimulating reflection and learning about values and sustainability-related issues among students (and educators). I describe a process of 'Research through Design' to develop toolkits that can transform the way in which ESD / Education for Sustainable and Responsible Living (EfSRL) is approached in schools, from the provision of factual knowledge about environmental problems to a holistic strategy focusing on the development of competencies. I raise the possibility that this type of education could contribute to bridging the gaps between values, discourse and action, and discuss my findings in the light of recent explorations of transformative, transgressive and transdisciplinary (which I term 'triple-T') learning initiatives.

ISBN: 9798597031453Subjects--Topical Terms:

3681881
Grass roots movement.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Values-based indicators

Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability.
LDR:07417nmm a2200361 4500 001 2350250
005 20221020125218.5
008 241004s2019 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798597031453
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28229782
035 $a (MiAaPQ)Wageningen550925
035 $a AAI28229782
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Brockwell, Ashley Jay. $3 3689713
245 1 0 $a Measuring What Matters? Exploring the Use of Values-Based Indicators in Assessing Education for Sustainability.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2019
300 $a 243 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-11, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Wals, A. E. J.;Tamas, P.;Harder, M. K.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Wageningen University and Research, 2019.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Evaluating the success or failure of educational initiatives, whether at the level of individual students, teachers and institutions or at national and global levels, relies on a shared understanding of what 'success' or 'failure' might look like in practice. This, in turn, cannot be defined in an objective way because it depends on the values, mindsets and priorities of diverse stakeholders - which may be very different from one another, or even mutually conflicting. In order to design assessment tools to 'measure what we treasure', as called for in the 2015 Millennium Development Report, we must first embark on the challenging task of creating appropriate indicators. Only then can data be collected and analysed, conclusions drawn, and policy priorities reviewed.The majority of educational indicators and evaluation systems are designed from the top down, and based on the priorities of a single stakeholder-usually a government or a donor organisation. This has perpetuated the use of indicators such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which effectively 'reward' governments for engaging in activities that are environmentally and socially destructive. Within the field of education for sustainability, the design of evaluations and assessments tends to be based on the accumulation of a large number of poorly-defined indicators, which are often difficult to measure.In this thesis, I have described four separate research studies conducted as part of the ESDinds project ('Creating Indicators and Assessment Tools for Civil Society Organizations Promoting Education for Sustainable Development'), which was led by a consortium of two universities and four civil society organizations from 2008-2011. The project aimed to explore inductive ways of developing indicators in the context of non-formal education for sustainability-drawing them out from participants' comments about what they find valuable, meaningful and worthwhile within a shared context of practical action, rather than deducing a framework from theory. These approaches were also intersubjective, in the sense of seeking to understand and empathise with each other's perspectives, identify a common core if applicable, and build consensus about how to represent what matters to the group as a whole within the specified context. The indicators created in this way can be described as 'values-based'. A key aspect of the approach described here (as an illustrative example) is the creation of resource materials to challenge people's preconceived assumptions, promote dialogue, and raise awareness of marginalised groups and world-views.In the first of the four studies presented here, I describe the organisational impacts of conducting field trials with a 'values-based evaluation' approach in eight different organisations. The observed impacts included an improved understanding of how values-related vocabulary can be linked to specific actions, feelings and behaviours (which I have termed 'values conceptualization') and incorporation of this newly acquired vocabulary, with its referents, into training, PR and other conversations within and beyond the respective organizations ('values mainstreaming'). The data analysis also indicates an increased awareness of evaluation methodologies and knowledge of how to apply specific assessment methods, and changes in self-perception, perceptions of others, and professional relationships within the organizations. These preliminary findings are discussed in relation to wider academic discourse on values communication in organisations.Having established the potential for organisational benefits of inductive / intersubjective evaluation design ('values-based evaluation') in practice, I proceed to investigate its theoretical validity in more depth. Specifically, I refute the theoretical argument which is often used to suggest that values enactment is impossible to measure, and replace it with a 'context-specific measurability' argument which suggests that intersubjective conceptualization of values can be achieved within clearly-defined practical contexts. This opens up new possibilities for the operationalization of what has been termed the 'missing pillar' of sustainability-the various intangible dimensions (cultural, aesthetic, political, spiritual, etc.) that are excluded from the traditional 'three-pillar' model comprising environmental, economic and social dimensions. The theoretical work is followed up with a short case study of the use of inductive/intersubjective approaches to evaluate an online course in sustainability leadership (Chapter 3), and subsequently a rigorous investigation of how such approaches might contribute to conversations around indicator design in relation to the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) target of the Sustainable Development Goals. I demonstrate that the 'values-based' (inductive and intersubjective) approach can be complementary to traditional United Nations indicator development processes, and is effective in operationalising intangible dimensions of ESD such as 'appreciation of cultural diversity'.As a contrast to the high-level policy dialogues surrounding the SDGs and their indicators, I then explore the applicability of inductive and intersubjective approaches to 'indicator' design at the level of individual schools or classes. I do not discuss them as evaluative interventions in this case, although they could be used as such, but as tools for stimulating reflection and learning about values and sustainability-related issues among students (and educators). I describe a process of 'Research through Design' to develop toolkits that can transform the way in which ESD / Education for Sustainable and Responsible Living (EfSRL) is approached in schools, from the provision of factual knowledge about environmental problems to a holistic strategy focusing on the development of competencies. I raise the possibility that this type of education could contribute to bridging the gaps between values, discourse and action, and discuss my findings in the light of recent explorations of transformative, transgressive and transdisciplinary (which I term 'triple-T') learning initiatives.
590 $a School code: 2157.
650 4 $a Grass roots movement. $3 3681881
650 4 $a Environmental impact. $3 3564810
650 4 $a Multiculturalism & pluralism. $3 3558958
650 4 $a Civil society. $3 533446
650 4 $a Verbal communication. $3 3560678
650 4 $a Education. $3 516579
650 4 $a Educational evaluation. $3 526425
650 4 $a Sustainability. $3 1029978
653 $a Values-based indicators
653 $a Assessing education
653 $a Sustainability
690 $a 0640
690 $a 0443
690 $a 0515
710 2 $a Wageningen University and Research. $3 3557914
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-11A.
790 $a 2157
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2019
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28229782