GREENING ASSESSMENT METHODS FOR SUSTAINABILITY IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: PRACTICES, CHALLENGES, AND THE WAY FORWARD IN THE HIGHER INSTITUTIONS IN GWERU, ZIMBABWE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v11i1.6655Keywords:
green assessment, sustainability, higher learning, sustainable assessment theory, institutional theory, digital assessment practicesAbstract
The global sustainability agenda has heightened expectations for Institutions of Higher Learning (IHLs) to integrate environmentally responsible practices across teaching, learning, and assessment. While considerable attention has been paid to greening curricula and campus operations, assessment practices remain largely under explored despite their significant environmental footprint. This study examined the extent to which assessment methods were being “greened” in selected higher education institutions in Gweru, Zimbabwe, focusing on existing practices, institutional challenges, and opportunities for sustainable transformation. Guided by Sustainable Assessment Theory and Institutional Theory, the study adopted a mixed-methods approach to gather data from academic staff on assessment practices, perceptions, and institutional support structures. Findings revealed a persistent reliance on paper-based assessments, driven by technological constraints, inadequate training, policy–practice gaps, and entrenched institutional cultures, despite high awareness of sustainability goals and strong support for digital assessment methods. The study identified a critical disconnect between normative commitments to sustainability and the institutional capacity to operationalise green assessment practices. It concluded that effective greening of assessment required coordinated policy reform, targeted capacity building, and strategic investment in technological infrastructure. The study contributes empirical evidence from an urban Zimbabwean context and offers practical recommendations to align assessment practices with sustainable development goals in higher education.References
Alshuwaikhat, H. M., & Abubakar, I. (2008). An integrated approach to achieving campus sustainability: Assessment of the current campus environmental management practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(16), 1777–1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.12.002
Al-Jadiry, B. (2020). Technological barriers to e-learning implementation in higher education: A literature review.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215915395_Teaching_for_Quality_Learning_at_University
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167. Retrieved from https://dro.deakin.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/Sustainable_assessment_rethinking_assessment_for_the_learning_society/20910652
Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133
Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education. Open University Press. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED423743.pdf
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications. Retrieved from https://collegepublishing.sagepub.com/products/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research-3-241842
David, M. (2014). Doing research in education with children and young people (2nd ed.) SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Doing_Research_with_Children_and_Young_P.html?id=rOmRAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2095101
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and teaching in higher education, 1(1), 3-31. Retrieved from https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/3609/1/LATHE%201.%20Conditions%20Under%20Which%20Assessment%20Supports%20Students%27%20Learning%20Gibbs_Simpson.pdf
Government of Zimbabwe. (2021). National Development Strategy 1 (NDS1): 2021-2025.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391. Retrieved from https://tguskey.com/wp-content/uploads/TT-02-Prof-Dev-Tchr-Change.pdf
Lozano, R., Ceulemans, K., & D’hondt, D. (2015). The concept of assessment for sustainable development in higher education: a conceptual model and a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 16–29.
Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Qualitative_Researching.html?id=gW5su96QHL0C&redir_esc=y
Shriberg, M. (2002). Institutional assessment tools for sustainability in higher education: Strengths, weaknesses, and implications for practice and theory. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(3), 254–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0952-8733(02)00006-5
UNESCO. (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Retrieved from https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/education-sustainable-development-goals-learning-objectives
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
