Assessment of Sustainability Governance in Higher Education Institutions - a Systemic Tool using a Governance Equalizer

The paper aims to add to the discussion on sustainability governance in higher education institutions by examining the role of sustainability assessment and introducing an assessment tool inspired by systemic thinking and centered on a ‘governance equalizer’. It discusses recent research and argues that the complexity inherent in sustainability governance remains to be addressed adequately. While a number of models and frameworks have been proposed, most of them remain caught between narrow, management-oriented approaches on the one hand, and rather abstract approaches that provide little guidance for improving the field on the other. Sustainability assessment tools represent a potential way to bridge this gap. While there are existing tools which include issues of sustainability governance, these are often limited to aspects that are easily quantifiable and neglect more complex aspects. Against this background, the article proposes an alternative tool to assess sustainability governance in higher education institutions. The tool is based on a multi-case study in Germany and has been tested in a series of workshops. Drawing on the concept of a ‘governance equalizer’, it focuses on the functional requirements of sustainability governance in five dimensions - politics, profession, organization, knowledge, and the public—and how they are addressed by the HEI. The tool raises the level of abstraction in order to capture complexity, but at the same time keeps sight of governance structures, processes, instruments, and practices. It combines clearly defined criteria that are assessed using carefully developed maturity scales with a focus on stakeholder participation and knowledge

A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review

Trust is considered to be a crucial element of social cohesion. At the same time, as research has shown, education can be understood as an important precondition of trust. Furthermore, contextual conditions are important for the development of trust. In spite of this, the role of trust in the multi‐level education system has been scarcely investigated. This paper introduces a comprehensive model of trust in the education system, based on a systematic literature review of 183 recent peer‐reviewed articles following a thematic and interpretive review approach. The suggested model consists of four interconnected elements (generalised trust, educational governance, educational settings, educational attainment). By introducing a comprehensive model of trust in multi‐level education systems the paper aims at opening up perspectives for future theoretically driven, interdisciplinary comparative research that may shed further light on the role of trust in education systems. The paper proceeds as follows. First, trust is discussed as a complex subject in research, policy and practice in multi‐level education systems, and key research questions are derived from this. Second, the methodology of the systematic literature review is explained. Third, results from the literature review are presented, focusing on three domains of trust and their interrelations. Fourth, the comprehensive model of trust in multi‐level education systems is introduced. The fifth section discusses the findings and explores how future research could advance a comprehensive understanding of trust in education

Context and Implications Document for: A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review

In recent years, research has often focused on single areas of society in which trust is emerging. But the preconditions and consequences of trust in complex education systems have not yet been extensively considered. Based on a systematic literature review of 183 articles, this paper aims to provide insights into recent research on trust in different domains of education. Drawing on these findings, the paper introduces a comprehensive model of trust. It discusses what governance approaches and tools are associated with trust, what trends in generalised trust are found, and how they are linked with education. Moreover, the paper identifies context factors that influence the creation and maintenance of trust in different domains, as well as approaches used to measure and analyse trust in multi‐level (education) systems. Through the substantial synthesis of recent findings, the paper opens up perspectives for theoretically driven, interdisciplinary comparative research that may in the future shed light on the role of trust in education systems

Trust in Educational Settings—What It Is and Why It Matters. European Perspectives

This editorial paper introduces the relevance of trust in educational settings. It discusses interdisciplinary approaches to trust, reflects upon the relationships between trust and education and how trust has so far been studied in educational research. In addition, a comprehensive model of trust is introduced as a framework for the individual papers of this special issue that altogether, through different disciplinary and methodological lenses, investigate trust in various realms of education in five European countries

Trust in Educational Settings: Insights and Emerging Research Questions

The theoretical and empirical foundations of research on trust in education are still weak. To contribute to a better understanding of the role of trust in educational systems, this final article of the special issue “Trust in educational settings. European perspectives” highlights the findings from the contributions in this special issue and links them to insights and concepts from interdisciplinary trust research. Furthermore, it identifies and discusses seven avenues for future research on trust in educational settings. Thus, this paper and the special issue as a whole aim to highlight relevant avenues for future research, thereby strengthening research on trust in education

Interdependencies of Culture and Functions of Sustainability Governance at Higher Education Institutions

Sustainable development practices in higher education institutions are diverse, with regard not only to the types of challenges that have to be addressed, but also to the forms of sustainability governance adopted by individual higher education institutions. This paper aims to reflect on the aspects of organizational culture that are particularly crucial for the implementation of sustainable practices at higher education institutions. Specifically, it addresses the research question: how do different organizational cultures affect approaches to sustainability governance at higher education institutions (HEIs)? It reflects on data from multi-case studies at eleven German higher education institutions. Four of the cases are analyzed in this paper to draw out the insights they offer on how organizational culture shapes the institutions’ approach to sustainable development. A governance equalizer is used as a functional framework for evaluating and discussing the influence of different cultural orientations on sustainability governance. In addition to providing many insights and findings in relation to specific cases, comparison of the different institutions, their governance structures and their cultures of sustainable development helps to emphasize that there is no single cultural factor that can be identified as directly promoting particular governance structures. Rather, there is an active interplay between cultural orientations, which influence, and are also influenced by, the measures deployed. Such influence is not instantly apparent but needs time to develop, and it evolves in a variety of ways as illustrated by the case studies

Vorstudie zur Evaluation von Fördermaßnahmen für Jugendliche im SGB II und SGB III: Endbericht

Die Leistungen der arbeitsmarktpolitischen Förderung von jungen Menschen unter 25 Jahren im Bereich der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik wurden bislang nur ausschnittsweise, nicht systematisch und ohne die vorrangige Intention untersucht, einen Überblick über alle Maßnahmen sowie deren forschungsrelevante Implikationen zu gewinnen. Deshalb wird im Rahmen dieser Vorstudie der Forschungsstand erfasst und bewertet, um damit etwaige Forschungslücken und künftigen Forschungsbedarf zu identifizieren. Darauf aufbauend wird ein Forschungsdesign für eine eventuell folgende ganzheitliche Evaluation vorgestellt

Sex, Drugs, and Reckless Driving:Are Measures Biased Toward Identifying Risk-Taking in Men?

We investigated whether risk-taking measures inadvertently focus on behaviors that are more normative for men, resulting in the overestimation of gender differences. Using a popular measure of risk-taking (Domain-Specific Risk-Taking) in Study 1 (N = 99), we found that conventionally used behaviors were more normative for men, while, overall, newly developed behaviors were not. In Studies 2 (N = 114) and 3 (N = 124), we demonstrate that differences in normativity are reflected in gender differences in self-reported risk-taking, which are dependent on the specific items used. Study 3 further demonstrates that conventional, masculine risk behaviors are perceived as more risky than newly generated, more feminine items, even when risks are matched. We conclude that there is confirmation bias in risk-taking measurement