Sustainability Education in the Spanish Higher Education System: Faculty Practice, Concerns and Needs

: This article presents the results of the EDINSOST project in relation to the university faculty’s practice concerns and the need to embed sustainability education in the Spanish Higher Education system. Four questions were devised to determine (1) which conceptions the university faculty has about sustainability in the context of the Spanish higher education (2) what sustainability competencies the university faculty holds (3) the ways in which sustainability teaching strategies are implemented and (4) the ways in which practical coursework related to sustainability is undertaken in a Spanish university context. The methodology that was applied was comprised of a discourse analysis of faculty focus groups. To that end, a category system and a focus group implementation protocol were designed and validated, as well as processes of construct elaboration based on the analysis of the focus groups’ discourses. Among the most relevant contributions stemming from the research questions regarding the faculty’s assumptions was the evidence that the holistic conception of sustainability is not addressed in all its dimensions and the environmental dimension is overemphasised. The need for training to teach sustainability competencies and the faculty’s lack of awareness were also identiﬁed. As far as sustainability teaching strategies are concerned, project-based learning prevails, with service-learning emerging as the most effective strategy, even though its application is hindered by faculty training gaps. Finally, the absence of sustainability in teaching guides and study plans and the scarce institutional support for establishing sustainability as a strategic subject in the university were signiﬁcant ﬁndings.


Introduction
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides a blueprint of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) with 169 integrated and undivided objectives involving the economic, social and environmental spheres.In addition to eradicating world poverty, the SDOs aim to eradicate hunger and achieve food safety; to ensure healthy lives, quality education, gender equality, and water and energy availability; to promote sustainable economic growth; to adopt urgent measures against climate change; and to promote peace and provide access to justice [1].
Both the 2030 Agenda and the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network regard higher education as fundamental in securing the sustainable development of our planet and achieving their objectives [2].
Target 4.7 of the SDG 4 regarding education specifically addresses education for sustainable development (ESD) and identifies it as key to reach sustainability [3].The 2030 Agenda shares the view that the solutions to the sustainability problems humanity faces do not depend as much on technology and its advancement, but on achieving change in behaviour.According to the Climate Change Synthesis Reports, the causes of the global atmosphere warming are of anthropogenic origin and the negative effects cannot be mitigated unless there is a change in human behaviour [4,5].Therefore, the future of humanity depends on ethical responsibility.The majority of the dilemmas that need to be solved are above all ethical, political and also educational [6].
The university, as an open space for thought, reflection and action, is called to be at the forefront in developing strategies and methods that will enable solutions to the multiple global and local level challenges [7] such as the SDGs, and in this regard UNESCO (2017) [8] considers education in sustainability as a key element.In order to be capable of contributing towards transforming society, universities need to transform themselves first [9].In this regard, in recent decades, universities have passed from trying to make the campuses greener [10,11] to trying to make education and research more sustainable [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22].When making universities more sustainable, teaching is revealed as a challenging process to address [11,19,[23][24][25][26], even though there is evidence suggesting that the true nature of the necessary changes are not being understood [27].
Higher education must contribute to the training of active graduates who are committed to sustainable development [28,29], who can act as catalysts in society and/or accelerators towards sustainability [8,30].This catalyst role relies mainly on faculty and their training [31].
The higher education model based on teaching-learning by competencies has proposed interesting changes, including focusing the process on the students, pushing the professor's role change towards that of a tutor/dynamism enabler/facilitator and promoting strengths and methods consistent with sustainability [22,[32][33][34][35][36].The key process to make the curricula sustainable involves introducing sustainability content and criteria in study plans, so that the students are provided with the knowledge, abilities, attitude and values that allow their professional development within the sustainable development framework [37].
Previous research publications have revealed that this integration has been carried out in a very uneven way depending on the analysed university.Instabilities have been observed in teaching on the different dimensions of sustainability.Universities develop their economic and environmental aspects more than their social and ethical ones, and in general, a holistic view of sustainability is not presented [38].
This research is realised in the framework of the EDINSOST Project: "Education and social innovation for sustainability.The training of professionals as agents of change to face society challenges" [39,40] financed by "I + D + i State Program aimed at Society Challenges", and the "Guidelines for the Introduction of Sustainability in the Curriculum", of the Executive Committee of the CRUE'S Environmental Quality and Sustainable Development Working Group [41].The project analyses 15 university degrees in the areas of engineering, the economy and education, by 60 researchers of 10 Spanish universities: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), University of Cádiz (UCA), University Camilo José Cela (UCJC), University of Córdoba (UCO), University of Girona (UdG), Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), University of Sevilla (US) and the University of Salamanca (USAL).

Objective
The general objective of the EDINSOST Project is to forward education innovation in Sustainable Development Education (SDE) in Spanish universities, in order to provide future graduates with the necessary competencies to catalyse change towards a more sustainable society.
It is indisputable that university faculty have a fundamental role in this process.Knowing their perceptions, difficulties and motivations is imperative to be able to fulfil university faculty needs.This research is part of the EDINSOST Project's Objective 3: A diagnosis of the state of SDE with university faculty as a previous step to elaborate a training proposal to the faculty.
The following research questions were posed: 1.
Which conceptions do the university faculty have about sustainability in the context of Spanish higher education?2.
What sustainability competencies do the university faculty hold? 3.
In which ways are sustainability teaching strategies implemented?

4.
In what ways is practical coursework related to sustainability undertaken in a Spanish university context?

Methodology
To answer these questions, the authors carried out qualitative research addressing them specifically and in an interrelated manner.The method applied (Figure 1) was comprised of a discourse and content analysis of university faculty focus groups, for which the authors designed a category system, a focus group implementation protocol and a process to elaborate constructs.

Objective
The general objective of the EDINSOST Project is to forward education innovation in Sustainable Development Education (SDE) in Spanish universities, in order to provide future graduates with the necessary competencies to catalyse change towards a more sustainable society.
It is indisputable that university faculty have a fundamental role in this process.Knowing their perceptions, difficulties and motivations is imperative to be able to fulfil university faculty needs.This research is part of the EDINSOST Project's Objective 3: A diagnosis of the state of SDE with university faculty as a previous step to elaborate a training proposal to the faculty.
The following research questions were posed: 1. Which conceptions do the university faculty have about sustainability in the context of Spanish higher education?2. What sustainability competencies do the university faculty hold? 3.In which ways are sustainability teaching strategies implemented?4. In what ways is practical coursework related to sustainability undertaken in a Spanish university context?

Methodology
To answer these questions, the authors carried out qualitative research addressing them specifically and in an interrelated manner.The method applied (Figure 1) was comprised of a discourse and content analysis of university faculty focus groups, for which the authors designed a category system, a focus group implementation protocol and a process to elaborate constructs.

Category System Development
The category system (see Table 1) was developed through a participatory approach involving all the researchers of the 10 universities participating in the project.This gave rise to the first self-validation process when devising the category system as an instrument.

Category System Development
The category system (see Table 1) was developed through a participatory approach involving all the researchers of the 10 universities participating in the project.This gave rise to the first self-validation process when devising the category system as an instrument.

Conception of Sustainability
This category gathered answers or statements regarding how sustainability was understood.Scores included: Level 0 (no relation among its dimensions), level 1 (knowledge), level 2 (know-how), level 3 (demonstrate + apply) [42].

CS
The Importance of Sustainability This category was selected for statements that mentioned somehow the importance of sustainability at any sphere (academic, personal, professional, social transformation . . .).

IS Participation
Statements referring to the participation in projects or programs (previously, currently, intended to or never participated) and those pointing out possible obstacles because of which participation was null.

PA Ethical Models
Statements selected when referring to personal and professional codes of conduct oriented towards generating sustainability awareness and values.

Courses
This category drew statements regarding which university courses faculty incorporated sustainability the most.AS

Pedagogical Strategies
Statements and observations on the use and effectiveness of several pedagogical strategies.ED

Sustainability competencies
Remarks about which competencies were considered the most important in the training of future professionals.CCS

Roles, relationships and class environment
This category filtered for statements referring to professor and student roles, which relationship and social environment within a class was considered to be best to encourage sustainability to be addressed, or those that aided the most in incorporating sustainability competencies.

Self -Evaluation
Statements regarding the degree of effectiveness and efficiency in the implementation of resources.AE The authors used the results of objective 1 on the EDINSOST competencies map, by Sánchez-Carracedo et al. [42], the SDE teaching strategies proposed by Tejedor et al. [43] and the results of objective 2 as references for the development of the category system.
A second validation process was carried out, generating a focus group with the University of Murcia's faculty as a pilot study, who did not participate in the project to avoid bias in the results.

Design and Conducting of the Focus Groups
A focus group is defined by Williams and Katz [44] as a small gathering of individuals who have a common interest or characteristic, assembled by a moderator, who uses the group and its interactions as a way to gain information about a particular issue.One of the most useful tools to plan focus groups for educators was conceived by Einsiedel et al. [45], and based on this, the authors designed the present focus group approach in 3 phases.
Phase 1: Participant recruitment.Before the formation of the focus groups, the EDINSOST project designed and executed a questionnaire to university faculty members on the degrees and universities involved, which yielded 858 responses.All faculty staff who responded to the questionnaire were invited to participate in the focus groups, taking into account gender and discipline balance.This selection process ended with 8 focus groups at six universities covering all areas of study.Each focus group was established to range from five to nine participants.
Phase 2: Conducting the Focus group.The focus groups were comprised of three stages, with a total duration of 90 min: introduction, development and conclusion.

Phase 2.1: Introduction (15 min)
The moderator presented the participants and briefly explained the focus group's objective.Participants were then asked to respond in a single phrase how they understood sustainability.
The moderator presented previous EDINSOST questionnaire results to obtain information regarding the university faculty's knowledge on sustainability in three aspects: competencies, pedagogical strategies and practical coursework in the classroom.The moderator did not intervene, except in cases when the discussion deviated from the topic.The moderator observed and took notes, making sure that all the objectives of the focus group were addressed.
To deepen the discourses on each aspect, the following questions were posed during the focus group: Competencies Section The moderator intervened to deepen and conclude on the ideas that emerged in the group.
Phase 3: Transcription The focus group sessions were recorded in audio and/or video formats and transcribed to the qualitative data analysis software.

Focus Groups Coding
A total of eight focus groups were conducted (see Table 2).A participant information table (see Table 3) was generated for each focus group, describing the participants' identity and background in order to characterise the sample, aiming for gender balance.

Triangulation and Construct Design
The authors designed Table 4 to gather the focus group field data.Subsequently, we followed an internal intramethod triangulation protocol by which the data gathered was first randomly interchanged among the researchers of each university, then the resear-chers analysed the other university's units of information and finally all the analysed results were shared in meetings as a means of consolidating the analysis procedures.
Each university was responsible for transcribing its focus group data, following Table 4's format, where the "sequence" column indicates the order of appearance in the focus group; the "timestamp" columns' "minute" and "duration" allow for easy location of the speech in the recording; the "participant" column list shows those who made a contribution to the focus group; the "information unit" is the smallest fragment chosen that retains relevant meaning in itself, which is finally sorted into the "category" column.The authors deemed it important to assign the information unit to a maximum of two categories because relating data to several categories would have decreased the rigor of the data and deterred the research process.

ME
Once the 8 focus groups were transcribed, the authors developed each category construct based on the transcript analysis.To do so, the most significant units of information were selected by associating them with the categories, in such a way that as it appears in Tables 4 and 5, a construct was generated as a result of the coincidence between units of information from at least three focus groups; we call this the triangulation process.It occurs between different focus groups and also between different people within the same focus group [46].Constructs enable the further development of a more abstract discourse closer to a theorical entity, with the objective of reaching global, structured and systematic knowledge [46,47].

Identification Key Construct content Sources
Co2:1 Sustainability is very important in all degrees, despite being more evident in some.I think of it in science and environmental sciences, but also for lawyers.Sustainability not only in environmental sciences, but in all.It must be present in all degrees.
Last-year Research Project in sustainability.There is awareness.There is interest.Sustainability is super important in our degrees.
It is necessary and important.More present in society, the University has a great task and responsibility.
The issue is on the streets, it is necessary to incorporate it in teaching.It is important to really apply it, I have been hearing about everyone incorporating it for 20 years.
Students ask for sustainability learning.It is important to be trained on sustainability and also on values.
Sustainability has to be ubiquitous in everything we do.Sustainability will show up everywhere, it is trendy.
Given its importance, taking sustainability into consideration has to be mandatory.
Unfortunately, it has to be by force, make it mandatory.It should be obligatory.It currently suffers from being voluntary.Most professors have not even considered it.GF1-UPC26S2; GF1-UPC48S5; GF1-UPC49S7; GF1-UMU33S2 Co2:4 Sustainability has to be implemented cross-wise through all curri-cula.
Sustainability as a general competency and in a cross-wise mode.Sustainability, in general, are cross-wise topics.
A dash in every course.

GF1-US10S3; GF1-UMU45S1; GF1-UMU46S2
Co2:5 Sustainability is not considered relevant in some areas.The professor responsible for the last-year research project does not even care about the environment.Sustainability in construction is almost incompatible.

GF1-UPC18S4; GF1-UPC3S4
Regarding the first research question about the conceptions professors have of sustainability in the context of the Spanish higher education system, there were statements about the concept, the importance of sustainability in university education and about ethical models (Table 6).
Most frequently, the professors' concept of sustainability did not include all its dimensions (Co1:3); the environmental dimension was the one that was always mentioned: "when I hear 'sustainability', I relate it to environment" (GF1-UMU1S1).Nevertheless, in six groups comprising all university degrees, there were statements that indeed reflected a sustainability concept that integrated the three basic dimensions (Co1:1): "Sustainability is the balance between economy, society and the environment" (GF1-UCO1S1).Constructs considering future generations (Co1:2) and correct resource use (Co1:4) appeared less frequently.
A construct that came forth in all the groups and with great frequency (14 information units) was the idea that decisions and measures related to sustainability are ethical rather technological questions (Co4:1).This is emphasised by the relevance of professors as role models: "from the moment we say we care about the future generations, it is an ethical question" (Co4:2), "[ . . .] education for professional responsibility, taking on as responsible for the impact on the environment, people, the economy that your decisions can cause" (Co4:3), "it is important that university faculty are aware of the educational impact of their behaviour" (Co4:5).
In all except one group, the importance of sustainability in university education was discussed.The most frequent information units considered it necessary and important to incorporate sustainability into the university (Co2:1): "Education in sustainability and values is important" (GF1-UPM8S3).Other constructs that arose were the importance of implementing sustainability in all the degrees (Co2:2), to make its inclusion mandatory (Co2:3) and a cross-wise approach among courses (Co2:4).
Regarding the second research question about the sustainability competencies university faculty in Spain have, Table 6 shows that the topic on faculty training is the one with the most information units.The category of faculty motivation and commitment was also relevant.
Information units with reference to the need for training to convey sustainability competencies in teaching were identified in all groups (Co11:1): "It is necessary to provide professors with the tools to enable teaching, to have pedagogical resources and develop sustainability in class" (Co11:2), "Practical training is missing" (Co11:2), "Specific training is missing, course specific and interdisciplinary, to present a holistic view of sustainability" (Co11:2).Comments on the need for training in sustainability competencies such as critical judgment, systemic views or ethical principles (Co11:3) were less frequent.
Responses on the university faculty's lack of awareness and responses about the importance of including sustainability in university education were also very frequent (in seven groups, spanning all degrees): "Many professors (especially engineers) have been trained in the paradigm of ruling projects, with no sensitivity towards environmental issues" (Co5:1).Education was considered an essential factor to promote greater awareness, motivation and commitment among professors ("Training leads to awareness" (Co5:3)).
Finally, it is worth highlighting that in three groups, carrying out the focus group was considered an educational experience in itself because of the effect of a "shared reflection" among participants.
In relation to the third research question, the way in which pedagogical strategies for sustainability are implemented, the category Pedagogical Strategies was the second in frequency and the one which had the greatest number of constructs.No construct was possible in the Exposition Teaching category (Table 6).
The construct with the greatest number of information units refers to those promoting the contact with reality and critical pondering, bringing forward a global and holistic view of sustainability, advocating student implication, and those attractive both to students and professors: "real situations deeply change people" (GF2-UIC61); "boost a critical attitude [ . . .] you have to make your students debrief, question themselves" (GF1-US33S1).This coincides with the work carried out by researchers that emphasised the importance of teacher training and teaching strategies for the implementation of sustainability [43,46,50].
As a concrete strategy, learning based on projects and on problems or cases was emphasised in all degrees.According to the participating faculty, by using learning methods based on projects, students can evaluate their impact on several scopes of sustainability and redirect project design based on impact, choosing the most sustainable alternative.Useful aspects to take into account are: pose questions that promote pondering; bolster collaborative work between students and professors; and, as much as possible, propose interdisciplinary projects and implement this work dynamic in projects throughout the years of the degree course, particularly in the last-year Research Project.Additionally, within project learning, service-learning was considered to be a particularly effective strategy for the development of sustainability competencies: "it not only requires student implication in the course, in the course subject, but also in the context itself they will engage in, to be able to address the issue and the previously detected needs" (GF1-US44S3).
On the other hand, learning based on problems, case analysis or debates about real situations were also deemed very appropriate to train individuals in sustainability competencies.These strategies bridge the gap of real situations with classroom work in a more feasible way than through projects.Respondents pointed out that conflicting complex situations should be chosen to develop decision making ability based on sustainability criteria.Taking cases and problems on which professors had worked or work at present was also regarded as a positive."It is very effective to put them in antagonist situations.Contrast, debate and moral dilemmas when facing a given situation" (GF2-UPC22); "the problem (strategy) has worked fine with me: to present a complex problem to students and see how they can solve it, within some established parameters, those given in the 2030 agenda, which they have to read ahead of time" (GF1-UMU73).
Moreover, it was also possible to identify constructs related to the barriers encountered when using appropriate pedagogical strategies and during evaluation.In all focus groups except one, difficulties using appropriate pedagogical strategies were mentioned.They coincide with the obstacles presented in other investigations [13,17,34,46].These difficulties included university faculty training deficiencies and students' lack of habit and motivation: "These pedagogical strategies are unknown" (GF1-UMU13); "They react as they are not used to face these types of questions [real global problems analysis]" (GF1-US26S5); "the energy problem is posed first, but they see it as a burden and want to get to the calculations and quantify, but they are not interested" (GF1-UPM54S1).Other factors from the academic context identified were the student ratio per classroom and the classroom structure, study plans with excessive work load and the lack of institutional support and recognition: "all these strategies that the Education Institutes, Bolonia process, boast, I think are appropriate, but neither the study plan is designed to integrate these initiatives, nor you get the support to implement them, because every time you try to do anything like this, it is very difficult" (GF1-UPC35).
With regard to the evaluation in terms of sustainability competencies learned, strategies alternative to exams were proposed in an Engineering and a Business Administration focus group.Essays presenting results or reflecting about what was learned were examples.The need for procedures and rubrics to ease evaluation was also noted.
The last research question addressed how the practical coursework in sustainability in the Spanish university context is related to categories such as curriculum organization, good practices and institutional support, to mention the ones which had the greater amount of information units.
As far as curriculum organization is concerned, the absence of teaching guides and study plans on sustainability was mentioned in focus groups of all degrees (Co11:1), although professors expressed their willingness to complete them (Co7:1).Several reasons were discerned: difficulty in incorporating them due to the type of the course, lack of practice in developing competencies cross-wise (which usually depends solely on the will of professors), the prevalence of technical content as opposed to social and environmental content (in the case of Engineering), or the fact that study plan design is based more on the faculty's capacity and interests rather than on social needs.The rigidity of the study plans was deemed a substantial deterrent, given that they are structured in courses, in lectures and practical coursework, and with a hierarchical model that makes interdisciplinarity unviable [42,46].To counter this, project-oriented work was proposed as an alternative (Co10:2) with a suggestion that professors bring forth in class "a wider view beyond their subject, conveying a more global and integral view of education" (GF1-UPM50S3).
Despite all previous hindrances, there were examples of courses in all kinds of degrees that explicitly work on sustainability competencies from a holistic perspective.This was most evident in Environmental Sciences, which includes core and optional courses including "Sustainability" in the 4th year.Sustainability competencies are addressed in the Engineering degrees in courses such as "Accessibility and sustainability," "Science, technology and Society" and in the last-year Research Project.In Business Administration, the projects on the course "Marketing" require sustainability objectives to be included.The course "City and Citizenship" in the Education degree of the US was also mentioned.
As regards the classroom environment and good practices that are considered most beneficial, (especially in the Education focus groups) the coherence of the habits of faculty in the classroom as regards the knowledge and messages transmitted were highlighted: "We need to first be aware, we need to reach the expertise, we need to get these habits" (GF2-UIC24).Environmental good practices appeared the most, although in relation to distinct aspects: the use of paper, heating, car or habits in the laboratory (Co16:5).In some groups, the importance of making explicit the reason for engaging in sustainable action and how to specify sustainable action (Co16:4) were highlighted.Some doubts were also made known as to which are the most adequate practices (in aspects such as inclusion and paper use) and infrastructure-prone difficulties (Co16:3).
Furthermore, it was regarded as relevant (in half of the focus groups and particularly in those of Education) that professors assume the role of facilitator of learning experiences that need to be built together.This involves the creation of a participatory environment and an environment of critical reflection and autonomy amongst the students, including the evaluation activities.
Finally, several constructs were identified regarding the importance of institutional support.In terms of embedding sustainability in the curriculum, institutional support was regarded as fundamental for sustainability work experiences to be no longer anecdotical, but to be instead incorporated throughout the degrees.Moreover, from the institution perspective, it was deemed necessary to increase the coordination among professors in relation to their awareness and training.The need for incentives for those willing to integrate sustainability in the study plan was additionally pressed, as had been completed, for instance, for teaching in other languages.Ultimately, respondents thought that sustainability should be established as a strategic matter in the university, related to the devising of integrative plans and making them visible.This would promote the coherence mentioned above, setting an example as an institution and advancing good practices in aspects such as attention to diversity and sustainable daily habits.

Conclusions
In the present research, the authors presented a methodological approach to analyse university faculty understanding, motivations and difficulties related to the inclusion of sustainability education in their teaching.Our approach included focus groups and the definition of a categorization system to analyse discourses in relation to sustainability education.
Most university faculty highlighted the importance of sustainability in higher education.Nevertheless, some faculty still mainly addressed the environmental dimension and did not consider the social or economic dimensions as much.
In addition, in the holistic conception of sustainability, it seems important to also make visible the ethical dimension that underpins it, integrating training in sustainability within the framework of professional responsibility in relation to the impacts of its activity.
Practical student-centred pedagogical strategies proved to be the most effective to train individuals in sustainability, such as service learning, project-based learning and challenge-based learning.However, professors need training on how to apply those strategies efficiently and effectively, especially when dealing with curricula already full with other competencies.
In addition to training in teaching methodologies, it is important for teachers to be more aware of the importance of integrating sustainability in university training and to commit to it.However, this commitment cannot be merely individual, it must be accompanied by a clear institutional commitment that could be implemented in the following directions:

•
Ensure curriculum schemes in which sustainability training is explicit in all degrees by means of compulsory competencies and specific courses on sustainability;

•
Provide training for university faculty in sustainability competencies and pedagogical approaches for sustainability; • Promote spaces for discussion, reflection and the joint work of teachers, in such a way that their awareness and motivation are enhanced.
The most essential and challenging catalyser for embedding sustainability in higher education is to include the requirement of sustainability learning outcomes in the accreditation of degrees, and of sustainability competencies in the university faculty's accreditation for their academic careers.

Limitations of This Work
The present work is not without limitations, which mainly come from the sample itself: eight focus groups, some of them with few (five) teachers.However, taking into account the range of disciplines covered (Education, Engineering, Environmental Sciences and Business Administration) which are closely related to the different dimensions (environmental, social and economic) of sustainability, we consider that the limitations that can be derived from the sample size are overcome by the diversity of points of view collected and their qualitative value.

Future Research Directions
The EDINSOST2 project: Integration of sustainable development goals into sustainability training in Spanish university degrees, in which the importance of teacher training is deepened, to facilitate and promote a more explicit and coherent integration of sustainability competencies in the study plans.

Table 3 .
Example of a focus group participant information table (* to protect respondents confidentiality, real names are not shown).

Table 5 .
Example of a construct in relation to the "Importance of Sustainability" category.Source: EDINSOST Project design.

Importance of Sustainability (2) Statements Regarding the Importance of Sustainability (Be It Little to Very Important) in All Its Spheres (Academic, Personal, Professional, Social
Transformation . . . )