Search results

The purpose of this study is to determine what initiatives have been undertaken by universities across North America in implementing environmental management systems (EMS). Many universities have discovered that their activities can have significant impacts on the environment. As a result, some institutions have implemented systems to help them organize activities in order to recognize and reduce adverse environmental effects. This paper contributes to our understanding of these systems. A framework is developed that identifies important characteristics of effective EMS currently in use at some North American universities. The framework also provides guidance for those universities that have not yet developed effective EMS.

This paper analyzes recent efforts to measure sustainability in higher education across institutions. The benefits of cross‐institutional assessments include: identifying and benchmarking leaders and best practices; communicating common goals, experiences, and methods; and providing a directional tool to measure progress toward the concept of a “sustainable campus”. Ideal assessment tools identify the most important attributes of a sustainable campus, are calculable and comparable, measure more than eco‐efficiency, assess processes and motivations and are comprehensible to multiple stakeholders. The 11 cross‐institutional assessment tools reviewed in this paper vary in terms of stage of development and closeness to the “ideal tool”. These tools reveal (through their structure and content) the following critical parameters to achieving sustainability in higher education: decreasing throughput; pursuing incremental and systemic change simultaneously; including sustainability education as a central part of curricula; and engaging in cross‐functional and cross‐institutional efforts.

Research conducted on refugees and their learning abilities has generally been myopic in nature, highlighting only the challenges and barriers faced, and less focus has been given to the enormous work and achievements accomplished both by non-profit bodies, educational institutions, and refugees themselves. Research has been conducted in the past where learning has been studied from a psychological perspective, as opposed to drawing on the learner theory. Refugees and asylum seekers have been lumped together as a homogenous group, and studies of single language groups have made conclusions that may not apply to others. This chapter, which serves as the introductory chapter to the book, speaks about the inflow of refugees and the growing need of education for an entire generation displaced from their home countries. The chapter highlights educational access, policies, and the importance of language learning. The last section of this chapter is dedicated to present an overview of the chapters in this book which speaks about some exemplary work done by individuals and institutions from Africa to Germany.

This chapter briefly explores selected English and general education policy documents, curricula, and textbooks within the context of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) from a Critical Discourse Analysis perspective and examines how they have changed pre- and post-21st century. First, a policy document related to education in KSA in general (pre-21st century) is analyzed along with an English language teaching (ELT) policy document of the same period. Next, two general policy documents post-21st century are explored, followed by one related to ELT policy. Finally, one post-21st century document related to higher education is discussed. The “network of practices” within which these documents are situated are first detailed, as well as the structural order of the discourse, and some linguistic analysis of the choice of vocabulary and grammatical structures (Meyer, 2001). Issues which might be problematic to the learning and teaching identities of the students and teachers interpreting these documents are also highlighted. Finally, we consider whether the network of practices at this institution and KSA in general “needs” the problems identified in the analysis and critically reflect on the analysis.