The document provides a sustainability plan for education at the University of Melbourne with 3 recommendations. Secondary research found MOOCs increased accessibility but sustainability classes improved knowledge. Primary research surveyed stakeholders, finding MOOCs were preferred due to low cost. The 3 recommendations are: 1) Create new sustainability classes to improve knowledge and credibility, 2) Integrate sustainability curriculums and tools into existing classes to balance cost, knowledge and credibility, 3) Implement more sustainability courses through MOOCs due to their low cost and convenience. Detailed action plans are provided for each recommendation.

1. 1 | P a g e
Subject Code: MKTG30012 Subject Name: Business Ethics
Student ID Number: 803699 Student Name: Maxwell V Pederson
Tutorial Day/Time: Tuesdays/9am Tutor name: Dr. Andrew Zur
Assignment Name or Number: Assignment Option 1 - Sustainability Plan for Education (Parts 1 &
2)

2. 2 | P a g e
Education for Sustainable Development –
Part 1: Research

3. 3 | P a g e
Table of Contents:
Background………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Secondary Research…………………………………………………………………………….... 6
Primary Research………………………………………………………………………………… 8
Overview of Recommendations………………………………………………………………… 12
Recommendation 1…………………………………………………………………………...… 14
Recommendation 2……………………………………………………………………………... 17
Recommendation 3…………………………………………………………………………...… 20
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………… 23
References………………………………………………………………………………………. 24
Appendix……………...………………………………………………………………………… 26

4. 4 | P a g e
Background:
The University of Melbourne has requested upon students to help develop
recommendations with action plans to help further the development of sustainability. The focus
for these recommendations fall on the education and learning side of sustainable development.
It’s important to note the difference between sustainability and sustainable development.
“Sustainability is the goal of sustainable development – an unending quest to improve the quality
of people’s lives and surroundings, and to prosper without destroying the life-supporting systems
on which current and future generations of humans depend” (Parliamentary Comm., 2004).
Many people simply look at sustainability as being environmentally sensitive instead of thinking
of other sustainable development aspects, such as gender equality and eradication of HIV/AIDS.
Sustainable development takes in many facets such as conservation, global justice & equality,
human rights, and so on (UNDESD, 2005-2014). The University of Melbourne has chosen to
focus on aligning sustainability with broad strategies such as integrating education for
sustainable development in curricula, considering courses that help build skills in sustainability,
measuring awareness about impact achieved through MOOCs, and so on (ACCSR, 2015). It is
vital to be able to list the key stakeholders within education for sustainable development, which
can be shown in table 1 below.

5. 5 | P a g e
Type of
Stakeholder Stakeholder Characteristics Reasoning and description
Primary
Stakeholder
Faculty, staff, and students at
the University of Melbourne.
These stakeholders gain
knowledge in sustainable
development, which in turn
affects the secondary
stakeholders, being the
communities in which the
primary stakeholders are
involved in.
Secondary
Stakeholder
Include but not limited to: The
city of Melbourne, family
members, friends, and anyone
the primary stakeholders
interact with.
These stakeholders gain indirect
knowledge of sustainable
development from the primary
stakeholders, and hopefully are
helped out by the knowledge
primary stakeholders have.
Tertiary
Stakeholder
Less Developed Countries
(LDCs), the environment,
global warming, and ectetera.
Hopefully these are the
stakeholders that the teachings
from the primary stakeholders
are ultimatly able to affect.
Table 1: Stakeholders
In the following two sections, secondary and primary research will be shown, so proper
recommendations can be made.

6. 6 | P a g e
Secondary Research:
A big step towards opening up education for sustainable development has been through
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). A MOOC is “an online phenomenon… [That is] a
collection of freely accessible online resources… ‘Students’ who self-organize their participation
according to learning goals, prior knowledge and skills, and common interests” (McAuley,
Stewart, Siemens, Cormier, 2010). Many of the top institutions have accepted and subscribed to
this phenomenon. Harvard and MIT helped create EdX, which now hosts more than 70
institutions, that together, offer over 650 subjects (“Schools and Partners”, 2016). EdX is a
“non-profit” and because of this, it does not give credit. However, one can gain verified
certificates of completed courses. On the “for-profit side”, there is Coursera and Udacity. Both of
these companies also host reputable Universities that offer courses. The difference is that these
courses can count for credit, and some courses, when combined together, can offer a certificate
of degree (Hollands & Tirthali, 2014). The downside to Universities creating MOOCs is the cost
associated with them, which can range anywhere from $40,000 to $320,000 (USD). The general
upside to MOOCs is that the average cost of completing one MOOC for real credit varies
between $74 - $272 (USD), which is substantially cheaper than completing a subject at an
institution (Hollands & Tirthali, 2014). EdX and Harvard have decided to partner with Facebook
to extend its academia program to students in Rwanda (Rothberg, 2014). By using a social media
platform, new initiatives have been formed that not only help people around the world, but also
raise awareness about what can be achieved by MOOCs.
Apart from offering massive online open courses, leading institutions are creating more
courses within their own universities that are geared specifically towards education for
sustainable development. Monash University offers a course called “Sustainability: Learning and

7. 7 | P a g e
Living It” that helps broaden each student’s potential as a member of the world community
(ACCSR, 2015). On the other hand, some universities require some sort of sustainable
development subject or subjects to be taken. At the University of Virginia, the undergraduate
engineering program requires all students to take a select number of “Science, Technology, &
Society” subjects. The aim of these subjects is “to empower and motivate the next generation of
engineering professionals so that they are capable of making creative, ethical, and inspired
contributions to the design of our socio-technical future” (“STS” , 2016). The fact that UVA is
integrating education for sustainability into the current curriculum, is something that should be
highly considered in other academic institutions.
Lastly, universities are beginning to offer courses in sustainable development geared for
the working world, such as leaders in companies, new graduates, and people from all sectors.
Harvard University is one of the leaders, offering “executive education for sustainability
leadership” to people not considered primary stakeholders. This empowers people who take
these classes to use these newly developed sustainable development tools in the real or academic
world (“chgeharvard”, 2016). Along with secondary research – primary research was conducted
to help form recommendations for the University of Melbourne.

8. 8 | P a g e
Primary Research:
A systems engineering approach was taken when taking in data for the primary research.
Data was collected from a survey of primary stakeholders, students and professionals, to help
come up with recommendations that align with the secondary research. After conducting
secondary research, the main objectives for this problem were clear: To make students and
faculty more aware of sustainable development and to make education more accessible to all
socioeconomic types. Metrics used for the first objective are the first two columns in Table 2 and
for the second objective, the last three columns in Table 2. Using multi-attribute decision
analysis, the three major alternatives shown in Table 2 below - were able to be ranked based on
stakeholder preferences. From a business ethics point of view, stakeholder preferences refers to
utilitarianism, and is the main ethical basis of this report. Stakeholder preferences are decided
upon by the marginal rate of substitution (MRS) values that came from survey results, or better
put, the extra utility gained from spending an extra (marginal) dollar on a metric. MRS is
explained further in the appendix.
Table 2: Survey results and primary search
The close numbers between each major alternative in a metric besides cost in Table 2, eventually
show that in Figure 1 (below), cost has the biggest weight. Cost in Figure 1 was based on several
different primary research points that can be explored further in the appendix.
Potentiality for student/teacher
to enrich the community (out of
10, higher is better)
Knowledge gained in sustainable
development (out of 10, higher is
better)
Convenience
(out of 10,
higher is
better)
Cost (lower is
better)
Credibility
(Out of 10,
higher is
better)
Sustainability
Classes 7.12 7.48 5.77 5,868 7.38
MOOCs 5.44 4.56 6.85 173 5.08
Sustainability
tools for
faculty 6.48 6.59 5.51 4,396 6.54

9. 9 | P a g e
Based on the data from the survey, MOOCs had the highest rating. Since cost had the
highest weight, it came out to be that MOOCs were preferred first (see Figure 1). Sensitivity
analysis can be conducted to see if changing preference values of people change overall weights
of certain metrics. This will be further explored when making recommendations in part 2, but for
now, all secondary and primary research has been conducted, with conclusive evidence to give
proper recommendations.

10. 10 | P a g e
Figure 1: Weighted Scores for the Major Alternatives

11. 11 | P a g e
Education for Sustainable Development –
Part 2: Recommendations

12. 12 | P a g e
Overview of Recommendations:
Based on the secondary research, objectives were created with major alternatives. Each
objective had metrics for evaluation, the weight of these metrics were then decided through a
survey given to fifty primary and secondary stakeholders. Table 3 below outlines each objective
with the given three recommendations, main metrics associated with them, and the timeframe
these recommendations should be completed in. These recommendations will be discussed in
detail later in the report. The “if, then” parts of the recommendations were crafted with
sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis is, “a process of creating new information about
alternative strategies … the investigation of potential changes and errors and their impacts on
conclusions drawn from the model” (Pannell, 1997). A change in stakeholder preferences and the
effects on the Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis (MADA) conducted in the primary research is
another way to phrase sensitivity analysis. This will be discussed further within each individual
recommendation.

13. 13 | P a g e
Table 3: Overview of Recommendations

14. 14 | P a g e
Recommendation 1:
By placing more weight to credibility and knowledge gained in sustainability within
stakeholder preferences, Figure 1, can be shifted to show that creating sustainability subjects are
the most important. This can be seen below in Figure 2. Changing how much stakeholders care
about these specific metrics lead to a new alternative solution.
Figure 2: Major Alternatives based more on Credibility & Knowledge Gained
With the recommendation for making new sustainability classes being justified in Figure
2, it is now time to look into the action plan for implementation of recommendation one. Table 4
below shows the step by step process of implementing this recommendation, showing each step,
metrics, and timeframes for completing each task.

15. 15 | P a g e
Table 4: Action Plan for Recommendation 1

16. 16 | P a g e
It is important to note other institutions that have already been trying parts of this action
plan. It is a fair assumption after research, that most universities follow some sort of process for
Steps 1 & 2 for developing new subjects and curriculum. However, it will be interesting to see if
universities test these subjects before releasing them. At the University of Cambridge, they came
up with new subject and course ideas and release it via the school newspaper. They gather
information on whether people would like the subject through surveys, and even offer “Taster
courses”, which is similar to step 3 in Table 4. The main difference is that step 3 in Table 4
offers a preview of the subject for free, while Cambridge doesn’t (“New Courses”, 2016).

17. 17 | P a g e
Recommendation 2:
By placing more weight on cost with a mix of credibility and knowledge gained in
sustainability from the stakeholder preferences, Figure 1 can be shifted to show that creating
sustainability curriculums and implementing them into current curriculums through a variety of
tools is more important than sustainability classes. This can be seen below in Figure 3. The same
sensitivity analysis as recommendation 1 was used to come up with this figure.
Figure 3: Major Alternatives based more on Cost, Credibility, & Knowledge Gained
It is important to note that under just about any situation, sustainability tools will not be the
outright winner. However, Recommendation 2 proves to have use for the University of
Melbourne. Below, Table 5 shows the step by step process to implementing this
recommendation, showing each step, metrics, and timeframes for completing each task.

18. 18 | P a g e
Table 5: Action Plan for Recommendation 2

19. 19 | P a g e
Designing new curriculums to be integrated into current curriculums is already being
achieved at other institutions and has been talked about previously in the secondary research.
The University of Melbourne should model their curricula integration approach like the
University of Virginia has done with their STS courses (“STS”, 2016). Outside sustainability
courses and subjects have also been talked about in the secondary research, and Harvard is
leading the way with multiple courses offered in sustainability to the public (“chgeharvard”,
2016). Many organizations go through the CSR Training Institute such as Barclays Bank, British
Petroleum, and the government of Ghana for training sessions. The CSR training institute offers
a wide array of training sessions that the University of Melbourne could either test or adopt as
training strategies for Step 2 in Table 5 ("Services and Programs Upcoming Programs", 2014).

20. 20 | P a g e
Recommendation 3:
The third and final recommendation comes without needing to change stakeholder
preferences and perform sensitivity analysis. Using the original data from the fifty stakeholders
who answered the survey, Figure 1 proves a point to show that most stakeholders put their
weight on cost and convenience. Although courses in sustainability are nice, stakeholders like
that MOOCs are cheap and convenient to use. Because of this, the third recommendation is to
implement courses and subjects in sustainability more through MOOCs. Below, Table 6 shows
the step by step process to implementing this recommendation, showing each step, metrics, and
timeframes for completing each task.

21. 21 | P a g e
Table 6: Action Plan for Recommendation 3

22. 22 | P a g e
Designing curriculums for Massive Open Online Courses is being achieved by
institutions around the world and has already been discussed in the secondary research. In fact,
the University of Melbourne at the moment, has teamed up with Coursera. Institutions around the
world have been researching and promoting subjects and courses through media and social
media. For instance, the University of Virginia has a snapchat that informs students about
extracurricular activities and facts (Wojdylo, 2016).

23. 23 | P a g e
Conclusion:
The University of Melbourne has allowed students to help come up with new plans for
promoting sustainability. Within the education sector and following the strategic implications set
out by the benchmarking report, three recommendations were made based on primary and
secondary research. An overview of the recommendations can be seen in Table 3 and specifics
on each recommendation can be seen in Tables 4, 5, and 6. This concludes the education for
sustainability report.

24. 24 | P a g e
References:
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, New Zealand (2004). See Change: Learning
and Education for Sustainability, New Zealand Government, Wellington. Retrieved April, 7
2016, from: http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/Reports/pdf/See_ change_report.pdf
United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (UNDESD). (2005-2014).
Education for Sustainable Development Lens: A Policy and Practice Review Tool, UNESCO,
Paris. Retrieved April, 7 2016, from:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001908/190898e.pdf
ACCSR. 2015. Sustainability benchmarking report, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Retrieved April, 7 2016, from: https://app.lms.unimelb.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-5270372-dt-
content-rid-
19588162_2/courses/MKTG30012_2016_SM1/UoM%20Benchmarking%20Report%20_sent22
0915.pdf
McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., Cormier, D. (2010). Massive Open Online Courses:
Digital ways of knowing and learning, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown.
Retrieved April, 7 2016, from: http://www.davecormier.com/edblog/wp-
content/uploads/MOOC_Final.pdf
edX (2016). Schools and Partners. Retrieved April, 7 2016. https://www.edx.org/schools-
partners
Hollands, M., Tirthali, D. (2014). Resource Requirements and Costs of Developing and
Delivering MOOCs. Columbia & Brown University. Retrieved April, 7 2016.
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1901/3069

25. 25 | P a g e
Rothberg, M. (2014). EdX Partners with Facebook to Provide Open Online Education to
Rwanda. The Harvard Crimson, Inc. Retrieved April, 7 2016.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/2/26/edx-partners-with-facebook/
STS (2016). STS for the 21st
Century. University of Virginia. Retrieved April, 7 2016.
http://www.eands.virginia.edu/STS/
Chgeharvard (2012-2016). Executive Education for Sustainability Leadership. Center for Health
and the Global Environment. Retrieved April, 7 2016.
http://www.chgeharvard.org/category/executive-education-sustainability-leadership
Pannell, D. (2016). Sensitivity analysis: strategies, methods, concepts, examples.
Dpannell.fnas.uwa.edu.au. Retrieved 30 April 2016, from
http://dpannell.fnas.uwa.edu.au/dpap971f.htm
New Courses - University of Cambridge Institute of Continuing Education. (2016).Ice.cam.ac.uk.
Retrieved 30 April 2016, from http://www.ice.cam.ac.uk/news-and-events/new-course-news
Corporate Social Responsibility | Social Enterprise | Programs - HBS Executive Education.
(2016). HBS Executive Education. Retrieved 1 May 2016, from
http://www.exed.hbs.edu/programs/csr/Pages/default.aspx
Services and Programs Upcoming Programs. (2014). CSR Training Institute. Retrieved 1 May
2016, from http://www.csrtraininginstitute.com/programs-and-services/
Wojdylo, J. (2016). UVA Snapchat QR Code | Wojdylo Social Media. Wojdylosocialmedia.com.
Retrieved 1 May 2016, from http://wojdylosocialmedia.com/uva-snapchat-qr-code/

26. 26 | P a g e
Appendix:
To enrich the University of Melbourne academic community into contributing to a functioning
economy and just society.
Objectives:
- To make students and faculty more aware of sustainable development
o Metric: Potential for student/teacher to enrich the community (Ordinal Scale) ,
Knowledge gained in sustainable development (Ordinal Scale)
- To make education more accessible to all socioeconomic types
o Metric: Convenience (Ordinal Scale) , Cost (Cardinal Scale) , Credibility (Ordinal
Scale)
Major Alternatives:
- Sustainability classes
- Online courses free to all
- Sustainability tools for faculty
MRS: Marginal Rate of Substitution. Given questions 5 – 8 in the survey, users say how much
they are willing to spend extra to gain a higher score in a certain metric. Doing this makes a
marginal rate of substitution, how much extra per dollar they are willing to substitute towards
something. With MRS values, you can create weights for each metric. A copy of the excel file
can be given out if needed to show the math behind creating weights with MRS values.
Survey can be accessed from this link. Please note this survey is now open again, but only for
reading it. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BRG5MXR

27. 27 | P a g e
MRS values for recommendation 1:
MRS values for recommendation 2:
MRS for original and recommendation 3:

28. 28 | P a g e

29. 29 | P a g e
Example of final weights:
Example of normalized and weighted version of table 2:

30. 30 | P a g e

31. 31 | P a g e