The higher education literature reveals the highly subjective nature of thinking about the roles of higher education and its teachers with respect to ‘education for sustainability’. We used Q methodology to help to clarify and categorise commonly held viewpoints about this complex issue held by teachers in one university in New Zealand. We developed 50 statements about the issue and asked 43 participants to rank them and to record their responses to written questions. Our analysis confirms four significantly and qualitatively different viewpoints, one of which advocates for sustainability and for education for sustainability. The other three viewpoints do not, and each has distinct characteristics that prevent those who own them from using their position within the university to encourage students to act sustainably. Our article interprets these viewpoints and discusses their implications to higher education.

This article shares and extends research-based developments at the University of Otago, New Zealand, that seek to explore how students’ worldviews change as they experience higher education with us. We emphasise that sustainability attributes may be described in terms of knowledge, skills and competencies but that these are underpinned by affective attributes such as values, attitudes and dispositions; so that ‘education for sustainable development’ is substantially a quest for affective change. We describe approaches to categorise affective outcomes and conclude that ‘education for sustainable development’ objectives comprise higher order affective outcomes (leading to behavioural change) that are challenging for higher education to address. Our own work emphasises the need for student anonymity as these higher order outcomes are assessed, evaluated, monitored, researched or otherwise measured using research instruments that focus on worldview. A longitudinal mixed-effects repeat-measures statistical model is described that enables higher education institutions to answer the question of whether or not ‘education for sustainable development’ objectives are being achieved. Discussion links affect to critical reasoning and addresses the possibility of documenting and assessing the development of lower and mid-order affective outcomes. We conclude that ‘education for sustainable development’ objectives need to be clearly articulated if higher education is to be able to assess, or evaluate, their achievement.

Educational outcomes related to sustainability often include affective attributes such as values, attitudes and behaviours. Educators in higher education who attempt to research, monitor, assess or evaluate learning of affective attributes can face a bewildering array of methodologies and approaches and a research literature that spans several fields of enquiry. This article provides an overview of affective learning in the broad area of education for sustainable development, guidance for university teachers and researchers contemplating measuring affective attributes and a frame-work of affective attribute measurement based on the Krathwohl et al. (1964) taxonomy.

Education for sustainable development (ESD) and higher education for sustainable development (HESD) are complex, multidisciplinary fields of enquiry, drawing on concepts and terms from different disciplines and languages. Although the fields are advancing in their acceptability within educational systems worldwide, they are currently struggling to achieve sought-after graduate and societal outcomes such as environmentally-responsible or sustainability-focussed-citizenship. The research described in this article explores the possibility that miscommunication or misunderstanding of basic concepts within these fields is contributing to slow progress towards their objectives. We used a philosophical hermeneutic analysis to explore how the terms ‘competence’ and ‘capability’ are used within selected ESD/HESD papers. We identify substantial internal contradictions and inconsistencies with respect to differences between learners’ abilities and their willingness to perform these abilities, and to the educational context in which these outcomes are sought. We emphasise the importance of linking educational objectives with pedagogical approaches to teaching and assessment.

How much do teachers in tertiary education know about the sustainability characteristics of their incoming students and, if this knowledge were to be available, how could their educational approaches be influenced by this knowledge? In New Zealand, Otago Polytechnic has committed itself to the goal that every graduate may think and act as a sustainable practitioner, and staff are changing their approach to teaching to achieve this. This research sought to benchmark the environmental worldview attributes of an incoming cohort of Otago Polytechnic students to support academic staff who need to know more about the sustainability interests and characteristics of their students, so that they may provide appropriate educational programmes. The research was also designed as the first stage of longer‐term research to evaluate the impact of these institutional changes on how students transform during the period of their tertiary education experience. The data and analysis presented here suggest that even before students start to study in the institution different groups have substantially different sustainability values‐sets. The authors anticipate that the research instruments and approaches used in the present study will contribute to a substantial national exploration of the sustainability value‐sets of tertiary students.