Sustainability is now a key part of higher education, with many universities incorporating it into their strategies, reports, and student-facing communication. This language has not necessarily changed what students learn.
Quality Assurance and Learning for Sustainability
The recent ENQA-UNECE discussion on Quality Assurance and Learning for Sustainability highlighted the need for quality assurance agencies to determine whether sustainability is not only visible but also real, reviewable, and connected to learning.
Some countries have started national or thematic evaluations, while others have worked on indicators or prepared curriculum guidance. International networks are also creating space for discussion, but there is still no single common method for evaluating sustainability in higher education.
Definitions and expectations vary, and experts do not all have the same background. Universities are also at different stages, making it challenging for them to develop a practical and reliable approach.
The Challenge of Evaluating Sustainability
The first challenge is to separate visibility from evidence. Many universities are good at making sustainability visible, but this does not necessarily prove learning. A university may have a strong sustainability strategy, but a student may still complete a program without clearly understanding how sustainability relates to their field.
For example, a business student may hear about sustainability in general terms but not be asked to analyze responsible finance or supply chain transparency. An engineering student may learn technical design but not be asked to consider long-term resource use or environmental impact.
These examples show that sustainability cannot remain only in institutional statements. It must be connected to study programs, learning outcomes, curriculum design, assessment, stakeholder engagement, and continuous improvement.
Related: Sixth Graders Showcase Science Fair Projects
This is already the normal logic of quality assurance, which asks whether a program does what it says it does. The same logic should apply to sustainability, with a focus on whether a program’s aims, learning outcomes, courses, teaching methods, assessment, resources, and improvement are all connected.
Different Countries, Different Paths
Sweden, and Andorra, and Aragon are examples of countries or regions that have approached sustainability in quality assurance in different ways. Sweden carried out a national thematic evaluation of sustainable development, while Andorra and Aragon worked on indicators to connect the Sustainable Development Goals with institutional quality assessment.
These examples are not the same, but they all try to answer the question of how sustainability can become something that can be taught, reviewed, and improved.
A single formula will not work, as sustainability does not mean exactly the same thing in every discipline.
Building a Practical and Reliable Approach
The next step is to build a more practical and reliable approach to evaluating sustainability in higher education. This requires a focus on capacity building for common understanding, rather than immediate standardization.
Quality assurance agencies can provide guidance without forcing one model, support reviewer training, collect and share good examples, and help universities understand the difference between public visibility and educational evidence.
Reviewer training should help experts understand key concepts, differences between disciplines, and common risks. It should include examples of strong and weak evidence and discuss greenwashing and symbolic compliance.
Related: Exit Ticket Ideas Provide Teachers Fast Feedback
The aim is not to make every reviewer a sustainability specialist but to ensure that every review panel can ask the right questions, such as what sustainability means in a program, where it is visible in learning outcomes, and how it is supported by courses, projects, and assessments.
Quality assurance agencies have an important role to play in supporting the development of sustainability in higher education. They can help connect fragmented efforts, make sustainability less dependent on a few motivated people, and protect the sector from symbolic compliance.
A program should not be judged only by the presence of sustainability terminology but by the quality of its educational design and evidence. If sustainability is in the learning outcomes, it should also be visible in teaching, learning activities, and assessment.
The best approach is developmental and step-by-step, asking whether a program has a clear and evidence-based approach to Learning for Sustainability, rather than whether it meets a fixed sustainability standard.
This approach supports progress without pretending that the sector already has one common method, and it fits better with the idea of quality enhancement, where quality assurance should not only control but also help institutions learn.
They can support institutions in developing their math resources for students and teachers, which can help in evaluating sustainability in higher education.
