Search results

The growing awareness of climate change, biodiversity loss and the wider global environmental emergency has led to calls for decisive and immediate action from all sections of society. This paper aims to consider the question of how universities should respond and what role they might best adopt in current circumstances.

This paper presents a conceptual framework, the paradox model, which places sustainability within the contradictory, messy and uncertain terrain that characterises higher education (HE). This is derived from the own experience of leading sustainability within one UK university, as well as the continued engagement with educational theory and philosophy.

This paper identifies two fundamental contradictions or paradoxes facing those seeking to engage in sustainability in HE, namely, how to develop authentic sustainability responses within the context of existing HE structures and processes and how to reconcile the demand for immediate action with the much more gradual processes of education. This paper represents these two paradoxes as intersecting axes on a diagram, which creates four quadrants in which a diverse range of responses can be located. The point where these two axes intersect is particularly significant and provides a place from which to navigate responses both individually, collectively and institutionally.

This paper argues that wisdom provides a guiding principle for discerning which type of response might be appropriate in any given context. It may also indicate a route towards institutional change and underpin the vision of the ecological university of the future based on principles of civic responsibility and social justice.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the question of parents’ rights to make choices regarding the education and upbringing of their children.

Article 26(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: ‘Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children’. However, authors including Joel Feinberg also argue children have a right to an ‘open future’, implying parents and the state have obligations to ensure certain elements are present in a child’s care and education. Commodifying education and early childhood care where it occurs in many developed societies, ostensibly provides parents with greater choice regarding the education and upbringing of their children. However, following the work of Brenda Almond, I argue that parents do have some rights to make choices about the care and education of their children. But just having the freedom to choose from alternative schooling or caring options may be insufficient to provide a choice in any significant sense, if one is only choosing between service providers all offering essentially the same service.

It would seem then, that responsible leadership and ethical decision-making by the state and by service providers requires them to engage in consultation with parents and facilitate their participation in determining the nature and content of educational and developmental programmes for children.

Leaders in these roles will also need to have a strong sense of the competing demands on content coming from this array of ethical requirements.

The purpose of this chapter is to examine how the paid care of children, and assisting with their development, is increasingly coming to resemble a professional activity in Australia. The commodification of child care has tended to create a profession of carers of children, not only by virtue of more formalized qualifications and role descriptions for carers, but also by establishing a potential framework within which a profession may be practiced. I examine how paid child caring in Australia increasingly conforms in many respects with various criteria commonly associated with a professional activity. This evolution within the child care field however is creating tension between the traditional nurturing role of child care and the more formal requirements of a “professional” carer. This process of professionalisation also has significant implications, not only for the care providers, but also for those who are receiving care – the children and their families. It also has important implications for society itself.

Most libraries in higher education are facing the challenge of providing valued and improved services with the same or fewer resources. Focussing on the library learning service at one university, the purpose of this paper is to consider how libraries can find new service models with contracting resources while aligning with institutional and professional values and providing value-in-use for end users and key stakeholders.

Following a discussion of sustainability as relevant to library services, the paper presents a case study of one library’s approach to sustaining its library learning service.

The sustainability of library services is aided by developing a service blueprint that provides direction and structure yet is dynamic and responsive. To be successful the approach should be grounded in resource realities, encourage scalability where possible and address the values and needs of key stakeholders.

The paper presents a workable, integrated approach to managing a library learning service so that it delivers value and is sustainable.