Hawaiian Destiny Final

The Education of Sustainable Development Laboratory:

Leadership in Education

Envisioned Through a Hawaiian Community Collaborative Project

Robert Don Peel, P.Geo., M.Sc., FEC (Hon.), FGC

Plan B Project

Submitted to the Department of Educational Foundations,

College of Education, University Of Hawaiʿi Mānoa

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Masters of Education

April 2014

Approved by

_______Original Signed by______

Dr. B. Jeannie Lum

______Original Signed by_______

Dr. Deane Neubauer

The University Laboratory School, the Seedbed For an Age of Equality, Peace, and Prosperity

April 2014 R. Don Peel 2

Table of Contents Chapter 1: The University Laboratory School Redevelopment Project

Introduction............................................................................................................ 4

Statement of Purpose.............................................................................................. 6

Research Questions................................................................................................. 6

Significance of Study............................................................................................... 7

Structure and Organization of Dissertation..................................................................... 7

Chapter 2: The Call for a New Educational Paradigm

Education and World Development....................................................................... 9

International Paradigm Shift Due to World War II................................................ 10

United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development..................................... 12

Agenda 21................................................................................................... 12

Millennium Development Goals................................................................. 16

Decade of Education for Sustainable Development................................... 17

United Nations Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform................ 19

Call for Civil Society Engagement.............................................................. 25

Youth Movements.................................................................................................... 26

Participatory Research and Program Development for ESD................................... 28

Chapter 3: The Culture of Learning and Rationality

The Culture of Learning and Rationality................................................................. 33

Knowledge Development Frameworks........................................................ 34

Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches….. 37

Social Work Research Methods: Four alternative paradigms…….. 41

Experience Research Social Change: Methods beyond the mainstream.... 43

Nature’s Way: Native Wisdom for Living in Balance With the Earth..... 44

Research Methodology Influence on Knowledge Development for ESD………… 44

Cognitive Development and Meditation.............................................................. .... 47

Research Paradigm of the ULS.................................................................................. 47

Chapter 4: The Sustainability Movement

The Green School Movement.................................................................................... 49

Laboratory Schools as a Catalyst to ESD.................................................................. 53

University Laboratory School: A Built Reputation in Educational Reform............ 55

Curriculum Research & Development Group............................................... 58

ULS Campus Rejuvenation Project: Research for Program Development for ESD. 60

Environmental Audit of the ULS Facilities.................................................. 68

University of Hawaiʻi Sustainability Movement...................................................... 72

Office of Sustainability.................................................................................. 74

The Charter of Sustainability: Stewardship Based on Island Values............ 74

Sustainability Retreat..................................................................................... 75

Sustainable Saunders..................................................................................... 77

Mānoa Sustainability Council........................................................................ 78

East West Center............................................................................................ 79

Chapter 5: Hawaiian Traditional Resource Management

Hawaiʿi, the Hub of Aloha, Seedbed of Sustainability............................................. 81



Chapter 6: Applicability of a Public Participatory Process

Inspiring Education........................................................................................ 89

Research Project on Inspiring Education....................................................... 90

School Experiences............................................................................ 90

Vision of Dream Education............................................................... 91

Chapter 7: The ULS Opportunity

Discussion.................................................................................................................. 97

Conclusions................................................................................................................ 101

References............................................................................................................................. 106

List of Tables

Table 1: Number of Registered Voluntary Top 20 Sustainable Development Initiatives.... 22

Table 2: Top 10 Funded Commitments by Category........................................................... 23

Table 3: Distribution of Deliverables of Completion by Year............................................. 23

Table 4: Framework Comparison of Research Methodologies for Knowledge.............................. 36

List of Photos

Photo 1: Energy Consumption & Sustainable Constructed Facilities.................................. 50

Photo 2: Energy Consumption & Sustainable Constructed Facilities.................................. 51

Photo 3: Hawaiʻi Preparatory Academy Energy Lab............................................................ 52

Photo 4: University Laboratory School Chicago Early Childhood Building....................... 54

Photo 5: University Laboratory School Chicago Early Childhood Building....................... 55

Photo 6: ULS Campus 2004................................................................................................. 61

Photo 7: ULS Campus 2007................................................................................................. 62

Photo 8: ULS Campus 2013.................................................................................................. 62

Photo 9: Castle Memorial Hall.............................................................................................. 63

Photo 10: Central Hallway Castle Memorial Hall................................................................. 64

Photo 11: Castle Memorial Hall Lanai.................................................................................. 65

Photo 12: High School (Building 3)...................................................................................... 65

Photo 13: High School Classroom Building 3...................................................................... 66

Photo 14: High School Lanai................................................................................................. 66

Photo 15: Multi-Purpose Building......................................................................................... 67



List of Figures

Figure 1: Steps in Research Process...................................................................................... 39

Figure 2: ULS Campus including the College of Education................................................. 58

Figure 3: Policy Shift............................................................................................................. 93

Figure 4: Governance Shift.................................................................................................... 93

Appendix A: Photographs of ULS Status during Environmental Audit

Appendix B: Environmental Audit Data

Appendix C: Message to UH Chancellor: Student Participation towards Sustainability



Chapter 1: The University Laboratory School Redevelopment Project

“Helping people to experience themselves as living bodies on a living earth . . . is necessary in

achieving any solution to the problems we all face . . . Only with the bodily experience of power

and compassion will people have the courage and the desire and the ability to undertake what

must be done to heal the planet.” Dr. Paul Linden

Introduction

Three distinct periods of human evolution have altered the capacity of humans to

“develop” and “experience” the world in which they live. First, the longest period of human

existence was transcended when the hunter-gatherer nomadic tribes learned to settle in one

location by propagating local food sources through the domestication of plants and animals

(practice of agriculture). Secondly, through scientific discoveries and technological advances,

production increased to usher in a more intensive economic growth paradigm (Industrial Age).

Thirdly, education became a wide spread activity leading to a growing, diverse, highly-educated

work force, which stimulated a greater degree of individual and intellectual freedom

(Information Age). At the heart of these shortening evolutional eras has been an expansion of

humans’ intellectual ability to manipulate materials of the Earth to enhance human

“development” and “experience”. These evolutionary periods have also been accompanied by

human population growth, now at a level exceeding the Earth’s resource supply capacity if every

human is to attain the standard of living enjoyed by an average American.

Such a scenario has challenging implications for attaining global equality and democracy,

tenants of the overall mission of United Nations (UN) to achieve world peace. However, the UN

has become a recognized medium for uniting the international community to work together on

global issues. An example is Agenda 21 (1992), a pivotal agreement ratified by 178 nations,

which charts a path to a new paradigm labelled “sustainable development”.



When there was less than anticipated evidence of a shift from the existing economic-

driven paradigm towards a sustainable paradigm after 12 years of Agenda 21’s implementation,

the international community agreed to increase the focus on the educational component. The UN

declared 2005 to 2014 as the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. This is in

recognition of the capacity of human intellect in manifesting new strategies when threats to

survival appear. The discoveries of cures for diseases reaching epidemic levels are examples of

human intellect enhancing human survival.

The Decade is an international response to heighten the level of global intellectual

capacity to find strategies to deal with burgeoning issues related to population expansion and

resource exploitation. Fortunately technological advances, associated with the Information Age,

in communication and data analyses have increased the participatory level within the global

community. Internet access to the exponential growing multi-perspective data accumulation

makes all learning institutions and their community, potential breeding grounds for creating local

solutions to global issues by consciously designing, implementing, and performing daily

sustainable practices. In addition to this intellectual focus, I point out there is a possibility that

the knowledge development framework used by the institutions may influence the values

adopted or mindset produced.

The University Laboratory School (ULS), a preK (pre-kindergarten) -12th grade

educational research facility operating under the Curriculum & Research Development Group of

the College of Education of the University of Hawai’i, Manoa, is a convenient institution to

assess the knowledge development practices being implemented and how they are affecting the

level of sustainable action. If the ULS displays as an exemplary sustainability educational model,

it can be thus flagged to increase its influence on education programs nationally and



internationally. Secondly, the ULS is in the planning stages to upgrade its aging facilities and

renovate the campus. This presents an opportunity to apply sustainable development practices in

the process of researching, designing, and constructing a model sustainable campus. Thirdly, the

ULS is associated and shares facilities with the University of Hawaiʻi Mānoa, a community

displaying a rising level of activity related to sustainability initiatives.

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this project is to document the current status of the ULS’s influence on

inducing a “sustainability mindset” across the spectrum of preK - Grade 12 students and

determine if additional sustainable development parameters can be implemented to strengthen

that objective. The project will assess the feasibility of using the ULS campus redevelopment

program as an opportunity to engage the ULS and UH communities in aligning curriculum with

practical application of sustainable development methodologies to create a “green” campus and a

locally tailored learning environment.

Research Questions

What knowledge development framework does the ULS employ? Does “education for

sustainable development” offer strategies that the ULS can implement in the School’s campus

redevelopment and curriculum development processes? Can the ULS redevelopment initiative

interact with the UHM sustainability initiatives to strengthen the evolution of both initiatives?

Can the Hawaiian cultural component and the UHM Hawaiian strategy be applied to the ULS’s

development plans? Does the knowledge development framework have any influence on

students’ mindset programming? Does a public participatory process offer any guidance to the

campus redevelopment process?



Significance of Study

The world is facing unprecedented environmental and resource depletion issues as the

economic gap between the wealthy and poor widens. In an environment of increased military

deployment and global financial crisis, there is an urgency to shift from the conflict-provoking

modus operandi to a sustainable development paradigm (Worldwatch Institute 2012). According

to a consensus from the international community (UN representatives), education is recognized

as an “engine” to achieve a sustainable development paradigm.

The ULS’s traditional role of researching and designing educational programs can be

applied towards determining curricula most effective in inducing sustainable (systems) thinking

and collaborative participatory actions. The urgent need for a paradigm shift identified by the

global network (Agenda 21), in conjunction with the escalating debate on education, leads one to

consider that the ULS is a manageable model to research and assess programs that heighten

student participation in contributing towards “education for sustainable development” (ESD).

The redevelopment planning challenge faced by the ULS, along with the function of developing

programs for ESD, offer a significant opportunity to create a Made in Hawaiʻi campus designed

by the ULS and University of Hawaiʻi communities, maximizing local climatic and cultural

attributes. This has the potential to position the ULS and UH as leaders in the design of a

sustainable learning environment.

Structure and Organization of the Paper

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the evolution of human development and its

relationship to the global conflicts being currently experienced along with an international

designed strategy plan to address the associated global issues. The chapter also identifies the

University Laboratory School as a research institution in a unique position to advance “education



for sustainable development” towards the goals of the international strategy. Chapter 2

documents the foundational origin and significance of the concept of sustainable development.

Chapter 3 compares four research methodologies to assess if there is any advantage of one over

the other to induce a sustainable mindset. The green school movement, a product of the

sustainability movement, is outlined in Chapter 4 as well as the Laboratory Schools’ role in the

evolution of education. This qualifies the importance of the University Laboratory School’s

(ULS) role as a research and program developer, building a case that the ULS campus

redevelopment project is an opportunity to engage student participation in conjunction with ESD

program development. This role is further amplified by the sustainability movement at the UH,

also outlined in the chapter. The chapter outlines the advantages of establishing a dedicated

partnership between the UH and ULS to address the sustainability challenges of both campuses,

with the potential of positioning the ULS to become an international program developer of

education for sustainable development (ESD). Chapter 5 looks at the significance of Hawaiʿi’s

position culturally and geographically, which further builds on the case of ULS as a potential

leader in the ESD movement. Chapter 6 is a profile of a Canadian participatory process designed

for creating policies specific to educational reform. The model may offer insights for designing a

participatory process best suited to apply to strengthening the ULS’s educational strategy.

Chapter 7 answers the research questions, concluding that the ULS campus redevelopment

challenge has the potential to be an opportunity for building on the research components of both

the ULS and UH. In turn this opportunity has the potential to elevate the capacity of both

institutions to identify and address potential obstacles of their sustainability efforts.



Chapter 2: The Call for a New Educational Paradigm

“Despite unprecedented economic growth in the 20th century, persistent poverty and inequality

still affect too many people, especially those who are most vulnerable. Conflicts continue to draw

attention to the need for building a culture of peace. The global financial and economic

crises highlight the risks of unsustainable economic development models and practices based on

short-term gains. The food crisis and world hunger are an increasingly serious issue.

Unsustainable production and consumption patterns are creating ecological impacts that

compromise the options of current and future generations and the sustainability of life on

Earth.” (Opening Statement, Bonn Declaration, generated by the participants of the UNESCO

World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development) (UNESCO, 2009) Education and World Development

Education appears to be a catalyst for human evolution, which is likely the reason the

United Nations declared 2005 -2014 as the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development in

an effort to intensify the actions dealing with pending global issues. The urgency of adopting a

sustainable development paradigm is captured in the 2013 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC) report, where research reconfirms human activity is the primary cause of changes

in planetary weather systems, which are affecting the balance of the global ecosystems. The

consequence of these changes is viewed as life-threatening for all inhabitants of Earth.

They peg a significant contributor for climate alteration as being the use of fossil fuels

that are escalating carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Fossil fuels revolutionized humans’

ability to harness energy that has given rise and driven the Industrial Age, a product of the

scientific revolution (Al-Khalili 2012). The scientific revolution resulted from humans’ capacity

to learn how to tap into and manipulate the natural world. Critics of the IPCC’s findings cannot

deny this human capacity has altered the face of the Earth, with a trend that has the potential to

exceed the carrying capacity of the Earth. It has been determined that to support the total human

population at the resource consumption rate of the developed countries, five Planet Earths are



required (Thompson 2010). Underlying this learning capacity used to manipulate the natural

resources is knowledge development and transfer of knowledge through an organized

educational system. However, this evidence then suggests that the educational system could be

an influence behind productivity advancements that accelerate environmental destruction.

The evidence of global climate change is being documented by IPCC research, a research

initiative commissioned by the United Nations, involving over 800 scientists from 195 countries.

They study the causes and impacts of climate change. IPCC is one of thousands of initiatives that

have been instigated by the United Nations (UN), since 1945, to facilitate an international

collaborative to address world issues. The UN is an international organization consisting of

virtually all of the nation states, giving it a capacity to initiate and support such global problem-

solving projects. The international community-building capacity of the UN gives validity to the

data being collected and published under such initiatives; therefore can act as a credible source

of information for the guidance in sustainable strategies for the ULS and UH. To understand the

application of the UN’s sustainable development directives to the ULS educational development

process, it is beneficial to briefly review the history behind the directives.

International Paradigm Shift Due to World War II

Although World War I was deemed “the war to end all wars” and triggered the formation

of the “League of Nations”, it appears World War II created a major shift in consciousness about

the survival of humanity. The scale of casualties of war could no longer be ignored by a

“civilized” society. Triggered by the state of the world due to WWII, international collaboration

became reality through the transformation of the League of Nations into a global unity movement

labelled the United Nations (UN). The UN began to articulate international standards which



stimulated global equality. One of the first international standards, the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights (1948), triggered a global movement towards manifesting Article 26:

(1) “Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the

elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory.

Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher

education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.”

(2) “Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to

the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote

understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups,

and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.”

(3) “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their

children” (United Nations 2010).

With education evolving in the Industrial Age, education became an economic

investment for nations to compete in a global economy based on international trade. With the

industrialized nations gaining power, they began to dominate in shaping global policy through

the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank

(Spring 1998). Education is seen as a way to cultivate human capital (Sadovnik et al. 2001)

towards a world of endless opportunities, based on economic principles. A disciple of the

influential economist Friedrich Von Hayek, Milton Friedman, echoes the Hayekian free market

principles by arguing that an individualist and a prosperous society can only “be achieved in a

liberal order in which government activity is limited primarily to establishing the framework

within which individuals are free to pursue their own objectives. The free market is the only

mechanism that has ever been discovered for achieving participatory democracy” (Hayek 2009).



This approach appears to be the foundation of neoliberalism that essentially transfers the

power of the vote to the power of choice in the free market (Spring 1998 p. 124). This approach

does not appear to be aiding the less fortunate, who have little bargaining power in the market

place which equates to between 5 billion and 8,800,000 people when the poverty line is drawn at

$1.00 or $10.00 (USD)/day respectively. Approximately half the population of the world (3.15

billion) earn below $2.50/day (WBD 2005). In these poor families, children are used as a

survival mechanism to find resources to keep the family fed, making the option of sending the

children to school more of a hardship on the family.

To address these concerns along with the growing environmental issues associated with

resource development by the free market, the UN gathered world leaders together at the first

Earth Summit in 1992.

United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD)

Through an international consensus that human activity was degrading the environmental

conditions of the Earth, the United Nations reacted by conducting the 1992 Earth Summit in

which “Agenda 21” was tabled and ratified by 178 nations.

Agenda 21

Agenda 21 became the blueprint for the concept of “sustainable development”, stemming

from the framework outlined in “Our Common Future” also known as the “Brundtland Report”

(World Commission on Environment and Development 1987). This triggered many

organizations, both government and non-government, to use the tenets of sustainable

development as a guide in operations and policy development. Many corporations also began to

incorporate sustainable practices into their operations while finding new markets for more



environmentally friendly products. However, this approach is still operating in the traditional

economic-driven paradigm, placing the highest priority on maximizing profit.

To shift to a sustainable development paradigm, there is a growing recognition that a new

mindset or consciousness is required. Under the new paradigm, all development decisions are

made giving equal consideration to the economic, social, and environmental values. Therefore,

large money-making development ventures would require a thorough investigation of how the

associated environmental and social impacts can be avoided or mitigated. This is evident in

government policies and laws of the developed countries that now require developers to conduct

detailed environmental impact assessments to gain approvals for major projects. Such

assessments are also subject to public scrutiny. However, large corporations can sidestep such

approval requirements by relocating operations to countries with less development restrictions or

effectively lobby government decision makers to allow their development to be exempt from

restrictive regulations. In order to adequately address threatening global trends such as climate

change, population growth, or acidification of the oceans, development policy has to be applied

and regulated consistently across the planet.

Since Agenda 21 is a worldwide ratified strategy framework, its strategies can be the

basis of a consistent global policy framework. The agreement is divided into four sections: 1)

Social and Economic Dimensions,2) Conservation and Management of Resources for

Development, 3) Strengthening the Roles of Major Groups, and 4) Means of Implementation. The

importance of education in the implementation of the framework can be applied to each chapter

under the Means of Implementation section. Chapter 36 in Means of Implementation,

“Promoting education, public awareness and training”, specifically identifies a strategy for

education, to be implemented with the other areas relevant to the knowledge development



through the empowerment of women, children and youth, and indigenous peoples (Strengthening

the Roles of Major Groups-Chapters 24, 25, 26). These are the populations who have had little

direct voice on establishing societal rules, and the international community envisions that

through the increased participation in policy development, by these major groups, human

existence has the potential to be transformed into a paradigm of worldwide sustainability.

These pertinent sections of Section III are as follows:

24.1. The international community has endorsed several plans of action and conventions for the full,

equal and beneficial integration of women in all development activities... Effective implementation of these programmes will depend on the active involvement of women in economic and political

decision-making and will be critical to the successful implementation of Agenda 21.

25.1. Youth comprise nearly 30 per cent of the world's population. The involvement of today's youth

in environment and development decision-making and in the implementation of programmes is

critical to the long-term success of Agenda 21.

26.1. Indigenous people and their communities have an historical relationship with their lands and

are generally descendants of the original inhabitants of such lands. In the context of this chapter the

term "lands" is understood to include the environment of the areas which the people concerned traditionally occupy. Indigenous people and their communities represent a significant percentage of

the global population. They have developed over many generations a holistic traditional scientific

knowledge of their lands, natural resources and environment. Indigenous people and their communities shall enjoy the full measure of human rights and fundamental freedoms without

hindrance or discrimination. Their ability to participate fully in sustainable development practices

on their lands has tended to be limited as a result of factors of an economic, social and historical

nature. In view of the interrelationship between the natural environment and its sustainable development and the cultural, social, economic and physical well-being of indigenous people,

national and international efforts to implement environmentally sound and sustainable development

should recognize, accommodate, promote and strengthen the role of indigenous people and their communities. (UNDSD 1992).

One of the “activities” recommended in Chapter 36 is that “Governments should strive to

update or prepare strategies aimed at integrating environment and development as a

crosscutting issue into education at all levels within the next three years” (1992-1995). “This

should be done in cooperation with all sectors of society. The strategies should set out policies

and activities, and identify needs, cost, means and schedules for their implementation, evaluation

and review. A thorough review of curricula should be undertaken to ensure a multidisciplinary



approach, with environment and development issues and their socio-cultural and demographic

aspects and linkages. Due respect should be given to community-defined needs and diverse

knowledge systems, including science, cultural and social sensitivities” (UNDSD 1992, 36.5b,

Meyers 2007).

To accomplish the strategies of Chapter 26 (indigenous peoples’ empowerment) in

conjunction with Chapter 36 (education), the “state” could initiate programs to empower the

indigenous people populations, who possess the traditional knowledge of environmental

consciousness (e.g. Hawaiians), by engaging them to formulate their own education processes.

To build on this strategy, the inclusion of women in the process fulfils the objective of Chapter

24, which can be further extended to children and youth, the objective of Chapter 25. Overall, the

process becomes an all inclusive community-building participatory process (e.g. the Alberta

public input process outlined in Chapter 7).

Article 14 of the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), another UN

initiative, also supports the educational empowerment agenda by stating:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and

institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their

cultural methods of teaching and learning.

2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of

education of the State without discrimination.

3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for

indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their

communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and

provided in their own language.

Unlike the curriculum development process of the typical school system, which is

primarily engineered by top-down educational administration procedures, with little to no direct

student involvement, this Declaration builds on democratic principles to include the all voices.



Millennium Development Goals

To add urgency to the call for action of Agenda 21, world leaders met at the Millennium

Summit in 2000 to adopt the United Nations Millennium Declaration which was based on a

decade of UN conferences and summits including some core strategies of Agenda 21. Eight

Millennium Development Goals (MDG) were targeted, including 1) “achieve universal primary

education”, 2) “promote gender equality and empower women”, 3) “ensure environmental

sustainability”, and 4) “global partnership for development”, which are most relevant to the

education agenda.

The objective of Millennium Development Goal 2 (UNESCO 2013) is to make education

increasingly available to everyone to create change. A factor that assists in achieving this goal is

the shift of population growth to urban centers where now over 50% of the world population

resides (WHO 2013). Despite the slum developments associated with urban growth, the overall

urban population tends to have more free time and the best access to schooling. The data related

to the rate of shift from rural to urban dwellers shows that 100 years ago 2 out of 10 people were

urban dwellers and by 2010, 5 of 10 were urban dwellers, and it is predicted 7 of 10 will be

urban dwellers by 2050 (WHO 2013).

Three international Summits for the MDGs (held in 2005, 2008, and 2010) all contributed

toward moving closer to the goals. However, increasing conflict, world financial stress, and

global ecological degradation appear to outweigh the gains toward the MDGs. Increasing access

to education (Goal 2), is viewed as being more attainable through the trend of rising urban

populations. The combination of these factors could be an impetus behind the UN shifting the

focus to the education sector.



Decade of Education for Sustainable Development

Ten years after the release of Agenda 21, the UN convened the World Summit on

Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, Africa. The Johannesburg Declaration on

Sustainable Development (2002) recommitted to Agenda 21and is supported by the Plan of

Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002). At this time there was

little evidence there had been any shift away from the global economic driven paradigm. The

global financial issues that started to dominate the news in 2008, continues to be evidence of the

persisting economic focus. In an effort to address the lack of progress towards a sustainable

development paradigm through the conference and summit venues, the UN recognized

“education is a motor of change” (UNESCO 2005) and declared 2005-2014 as the “Decade of

Education for Sustainable Development”.

UNESCO reinforced that education is the path to a new vision for the world by adding

the goal of meeting “the learning needs of all children, youth and adults by 2015” (UNESCO

2008a). The approach is to instill sustainable values across the school system from early

childhood through the primary, secondary, and higher learning education processes. For

example, the publication The Contribution of Early Childhood Education to a Sustainable

Society (Samuelsson & Kaga 2008) outlines “early childhood education is about laying a sound

intellectual, psychological, emotional, social and physical foundation, it has an enormous

potential in fostering values, attitudes and skills that support sustainable development (UNESCO

2008b).

In a report entitled “Shaping the Education of Tomorrow” (2012), UNESCO published its

findings on the progress that has been made in the first eight years of the “Decade of Education

for Sustainable Development”. This report focuses on analyzing the degree of shift to a



sustainable development mindset that has been instigated by the UN and associated programs.

The report documents a number of educational models that complement education for

sustainable development. In addition, complementary themes for education for sustainable

development are found in the growing body of literature resurrecting the educational philosophy

of John Dewey, founder of the Laboratory schools (Jackson 1998, Edmondson III 2001, Hohr

2013), the recognition for the need to empower the oppressed (Freire 1970), and understand how

education prepares students to function effectively in a multicultural democratic society (Kelly

1995; Pearl and Knight 1999). The approach is to propagate a democratic process in policy

development that includes the “major groups” who historically have had little involvement. This

approach is acknowledged in Agenda 21 as a cornerstone to achieving sustainable development

(UNESCO 1992).

Key findings included, education for sustainable development (ESD) 1) “is emerging as

the unifying theme for many types of education that focus on different aspects of sustainability”;

2) “is increasingly perceived as a catalyst for innovation in education”; 3) “is often at the heart

of new, creative multi-stakeholder configurations involving these ESD stakeholders (schools,

universities, communities, and the private sector)”; 4) “a co-evolution of pedagogy is occurring

(‘as sustainability content of the curriculum evolves, pedagogy is evolving simultaneously’)”.

More research is needed to establish the link between ESD and “academic gains” and “boosting

people’s capacity to support sustainable development” (UNESCO 2012). The report also has a

cautionary note stating “ESD ....is not evenly implemented across the board” and “countries of

the world need to identify new goals and internally agreed upon processes for moving forward to

confront the educational and sustainability challenges of this century” (UNESCO 2012a).



Continual growth in the number of UN and worldwide sustainability initiatives has made

researching the concept of sustainable development a full-time endeavor. Such reports as

“Shaping The Education of Tomorrow” (UNESCO 2012a) are supplemented with many other

initiatives instigated under the UN agenda. The 2012 Earth Summit is being tagged as the largest

conference in the history of the UN where governments “renewed their strong political

commitment to sustainable development and to promote integration and coherence of policies

and the implementation of actions in the social, economic and environmental areas” (DESA nd).

Ongoing initiatives such as the UN Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform provide a

wealth of data on the sustainability movement.

UN Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform

An example of the richness of data accessible on one website, the UN Sustainable

Development Knowledge Platform, is a Goggle “Hangout” conference (Feb 12, 2013) discussing

the 2012 Conference of SD Rio + 20 (UNCSD) and follow up initiatives. The “Hangout” is a

live global online broadcast that is accessible to all interested parties. Nikhil Seth, Director of the

UN’s Division for Sustainable Development and Head of the Rio+20 Secretariat started the

“hangout” discussion by describing the 2012 Rio conference as the largest the UN has ever had.

The conference was attended by over 50,000 representatives from government, media, academia,

civil society organizations, and scientists concerned with the economic, social, and

environmental crises facing humanity. The biggest outcome (political) of the conference was an

overall consensus that avoiding the pending global crisis will be accomplished by rethinking

“development”. This message signals that “everyone” in civil society has to engage in rethinking

what development is. The first key message is, people are important, but equally important is the

Planet of which the prosperity of these people depends. Secondly, “young people are the



architects of the future we want.” The conference assisted in addressing the issues promoting

engagement in every aspect of following up on Rio +20. Key outcomes of the conference were

the need to formulate “sustainable development goals”, which reflect our concerns for the Planet

and the people, and for the UN to work on and find ways to increase youth engagement to bring

them into the dialogue right from the beginning.

Over 1700 voluntary initiatives were also launched in Rio at a congregate cost of over

half a trillion dollars (US). This reflects the depth of the engagement and commitment triggered

by the conference. The “Green Economy” in the context of sustainable development was one of

the tools developed at the conference. The Green Economy means people have to focus on

efficiency, decarbonising the economy, and they need to be inclusive. Therefore the message of

engagement, inclusion and integration in decision making came out very strong giving the UN

direction for follow up. The UN will be giving meaning to these words by how working to focus

on implementing the future we want.

Kimo Goree, Vice-President of the International Institute for Sustainable Development

Reporting Services (IISD) highlighted Dilma Vana Rousseff, Brazil’s President’s observation of

the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) as it being a

demonstration of multilateralism, a legitimate path to build solutions to global problems. Mr.

Goree outlined the history of inclusion of civil society in the UN forums, through allowing non-

government organizations to be involved for the first time in the 1990 preparatory meeting for

the 1992 Earth Summit. As a result, the 2012 conference now builds on 20 years of NGO

involvement. These NGOs are now recognized as key participants involved with the sustainable

development movement. The 2012 conference included over 12,000 registered participants who

attended over 500 official conference events. Over 50,000 people attended over 3000 unofficial



parallel events associated with the conference. One such event was the World Youth Congress

attended by a delegation (hui) of youth from Hawaiʻi.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) played an important role

in the Rio +20 conference, providing real-time information of the conference discussions through

the “Earth Negotiations Bulletin”. Side events included Sustainable Development Dialogue

Days, The Rio Convention’s Pavilion, and the UN Environmental Law Conference. The IISD’s

Community Announcement List was distributed to over 6 million recipients, representing

organizations and individuals. This was to inform them of the conference’s proceedings. IISD

tracked reports on the negotiations of the General Assembly and the Open Working Group for the

Sustainable Development Goals as well as the Secondary Committee related to Rio follow up

matters. IISD publishes twice weekly the UNCSD Update which goes to 10,000 readers and is

tracking the follow up of the development of the SDGs.

Jacob Scherr, Director of global strategy and advocacy for the Natural Resources

Defense Council (NRDC), spoke on a number of “game changing” initiatives such as the

worldwide multi-level development banks who committed $175 billion towards urban

transportation. Forty of the largest manufacturers and retailers would make their supply chains

deforestation free in 8 years. Microsoft will make their facilities carbon free by 2014. The

government of Australia will double the size of their marine reserves. There are hundreds of

promises from industries and governments to become more sustainable. NRDC will be tracking

them to hold them accountable. Following their progress will allow assessment, create dialogue,

and discover possible gaps. NRDC is also asking individuals to make commitments and help

hold the movement accountable. Their website and Facebook page are open to all. This will

facilitate holding the promise makers accountable and engaging everyone to help create a new



architecture for a new world where there is a rapid transition to a sustainable future. The UN

Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform has a full registry list of the promises made at

Rio +20 (DESA 2013). The Special Report of the SD in Action Newsletter (DESA 2013b)

documents the commitments made prior to the newsletter’s release (July 2013-see following

table). A UN Press Release documents 1,382 “pledges” (initiatives) with a value estimated at

$636 Billion (UN 2013).

Table 1 Number of Registered Voluntary Top 20 Sustainable Development Initiatives

(Source: DESA 2013b)

As shown in Table 1, the category labelled “Education” has the highest number of

commitments with most prevalent representation by NGO’s or “Major Groups”. The



commitment to funding indicates a different picture (Table 2) and Table 3 charts the number of

deliverables that will result from the commitments by the year they are scheduled to be

completed.

Table 2 Top 10 Funded Commitments by Category (Source: DESA 2013b)

Table 3 Distribution of Deliverables of Completion by Year (Source: DESA 2013b)



An example of a commitment related to “education” is the Aalto University (Finland)

initiative captured by the Institute’s mission that “sets an obligation to promote sustainable

development. Sustainable development is connected to both the university's own work and the

contents of research and teaching. Our intention is to integrate sustainability and responsibility

into all teaching and research by 2015 and be Finland's leading sustainable university campus

in 2020”. They are targeting “research and education for sustainable development”, which

includes sustainability and responsibility in teaching and research; “sustainable campus”. They

intend to be Finland’s leader in having a sustainable campus; and maintain “outreach”, through

disseminating high quality research and instruction via networks, memberships, and partners

(Aalto University 2013). The University claims to be the first Finnish university to join the

International Sustainable Campus Network. This could be a model from which the ULS can

learn.

The commitment registry also is an option for the ULS to submit a commitment and join

the movement (DESA 2013c). The expanding network is also bolstering MDG Goal 8 “Global

Partnership for Development”. The MDG timeline ends in 2015, triggering Member States to

agree to initiate sustainable development goals (SDG) “to pursue focused and coherent action on

sustainable development” (UN General Assembly 2012). According to Dr. Seth, the formulation

of the SDGs is to adopt a bottom up process by including a larger segment of civil society,

shifting away from the top-down procedure used in the development of the MDGs. The SDG

project is steered by the Open Working Group, consisting of 30 members from different nations.

Transparency of the workings of the Group is achieved through the Sustainable Development

Knowledge Platform, where all the activities are posted and accessible to anyone with internet

access (UNSDKP 2014).



Call for Civil Society Engagement

The UN is presently reaching out to the global society through the initiatives labelled

“The World We Want” (http://www.worldwewant2015.org/post2015-about) and “The Future We

Want” (http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/futurewewant.html). The UN Sustainable

Development Knowledge Platform’s website

(http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=9502&menu=1565&nr=5)

solicits contributions of ideas towards different categories which are tied to the formulation of

the SDGs.

The UN Major Group for Children and Youth website

(http://uncsdchildrenyouth.org/index.html) is open, to individuals and groups consisting of

children and youth under 30 years of age, to submit their input on world issues. It is intended to

attract and capture a wealth of ideas from this “major group”. “The World Children Want” is a

separate website (http://www.worldwewant2015.org/children), catering to girls and boys

between 8 and 18 years of age.

There is the “Women’s Major Group: Creating a just and sustainable future” website

(http://www.womenrio20.org/) dedicated to soliciting input from women. The Girl Effect (Nike

2013) is an example of the corporate world engaging in the UN process as Nike, Inc., the athletic

equipment manufacturer, is working in collaboration with NoVo Foundation, the United Nations

Foundation, and Coalition for Adolescent Girls.

For the indigenous people major group there is not an equivalent website soliciting input,

only websites such as (http://www.tebtebba.org/) that relate different developments in indigenous

interactions.

http://www.worldwewant2015.org/post2015-about

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/futurewewant.html

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=9502&menu=1565&nr=5

http://uncsdchildrenyouth.org/index.html

http://www.worldwewant2015.org/children

http://www.womenrio20.org/

http://www.tebtebba.org/



Input captured by these incentives, however, is likely to be dominated by the global

population that is faring well in the present economically driven paradigm, as they have internet

access. To capture the outlier demographics of the “major groups”, more specifically youth,

women, and indigenous populations, input has to be stimulated and weighted accordingly to

create equity.

The “neophyte” (King and Brownell 1966) perspective of youth provides society a

vibrant resource to stimulate new knowledge when interacting with “experts”, “leaders”,

“teachers”, “authorities”, or policy developers”. In my teaching experience, the questions or

observations interjected by children and youth have had a profound effect on creating new

perspectives in my area of “expertise”. With the exponential explosion of information, the notion

that teachers continue to stay current with the developments in any discipline of knowledge can

now only be achieved by facilitating a two-way learning environment, where each student acts as

a conduit to the data explosion. Therefore it is important to note where youth movements have

been occurring.

All these websites are loaded with international data and input. These initiatives are

perfect platforms for all schools to align their relevance to the curriculum and engage students to

develop responses to be part of the civil input.

Youth Movements

The other area providing a strengthening of the major group for Children and Youth is

the growing number of organizations that are engaging youth in discussing world issues and

providing venues where youth are attracted from different parts of the world to gather and add

their voice to the dialogue. Since 2001, the UN has been convening the Annual Youth Assembly.

This Assembly spawned the biennial Global Youth Assembly (2007) in Canada. PeaceJam, a



NGO that facilitates the mentoring of youth by Noble Peace Prize Laureates, is working with

Google to conduct the “One Billion Acts of Peace Campaign” (Engle and Suvanjieff 2013). The

story behind the organization Kids for Saving Earth is an example of the wisdom children

display towards our connection to the welfare of nature. This organization was started by 10

year-old Clinton Hill at the Sunny Hollow Elementary School, a Minnesota Montessori school.

The club was dedicated to peaceful Earth-saving actions; and when Clinton died of cancer at the

age of 11 years, his parents initiated Kids for Saving Earth as a non-profit to carry Clinton’s

dream for a healthy planet into the future (KSE 2013).

Hawaiʻi was the founding host of the first World Youth Congress (1999), an international

forum of youth, held biennially. The World Youth Congress is an example of an international

mix of youth discussing and acting on world issues. A delegation of youth from Hawaiʻi has

attended each subsequent Congress, including the Rio World Youth Congress held in

conjunction with the UNCSD Rio +20 conference. According to two delegates that I have

interviewed, the experience was a life-altering event and has expanded their awareness and

network internationally. However, there is little evidence that the input of their discussions or

ideas have had any influence in policy development at any level. Another Hawaiian youth

organization worth tracking is the Aloha Movement Project (AMP) that is behind initiating

“Education Energy” (e2). E

2’s website provides access to a database interconnecting students and

teachers with businesses and organizations, where students can apply school assignments to real-

world research projects working with organizations the students hold an interest (e2 2013). This

program holds promise for youth empowerment through community development.

To further capitalize on this children/youth resource in stimulating new thought, a highly

effective outreach platform for enhancing their participation could be accomplished through the



present school system. Due to the global scope and implications of the ESD initiative,

educational development can be enhanced by including an ESD agenda in its process. The

Laboratory Schools could provide a complementary network for the formulation and evaluation

of ESD programs, simply by tapping into its representative population of youth. This network

could operate as an outreach program for engaging children and youth in policy development for

sustainability. Such a role matches the participatory and research roles of the Laboratory

Schools, while building on the UN’s objective to include youth in formulating their own destiny.

Although the curriculum for the ULS stems from a broad spectrum of the community of

disciplines and induces student practical participation to a degree, the first conclusive evidence

of engaging the youth directly into education for sustainable development came in 2009, with the

introduction of “Project Pono”.

“Project Pono students learn about and engage in practices that promote environmental

awareness and cultural and environmental sustainability. Project Pono students teach

themselves and their peers about these topics through identifying their own

environmental interests grounded in Hawaiian values and places, finding or founding

community events that foster environmental and cultural sustainability, and participating

in educational outreach aimed at multiple levels of their school, home, and peer

communities” (ULS 2013).

Participatory Research and Program Development for ESD

New thought paradigms can be created when children and youth express perspectives,

based on their less biased judgement, which in turn alter the thinking pattern of adults. I

experienced this shift of thought pattern whenever Grade 3 students voiced their perspectives

during lessons I taught, as a guest speaker, on the basics of rocks and minerals. Walt Disney,

who was intimately connected with children and youth, stated “our greatest natural resource is

the minds of our children.” Research confirms the genius levels associated with the learning

abilities of children (Robinson 2010) and is recognized as equating them to the “research and



development department of humanity” (Gopnik 2011). Unfortunately, with age our genius level

drops (Robinson 2010) and on maturity our thought pattern is set, with a tendency to resist new

perspectives. It is this resistance that may be a source of “cognitive dissonance” that could be

acting as an underlying resistance to shift to the envisioned paradigm.

Another factor worth considering is how the dominant education system tends to treat

children and youth as developing individuals, who require knowledge development before they

attain enough credibility to participate in designing their own destiny. This top-down approach is

reversed in the sustainable development agenda, which treats children and youth as equal

participants in developing a sustainable development paradigm. Therefore such participation

could be enlisted in schools by shifting to a bottom-up model by educational institutes. Inclusion

of the ULS children and youth in the ULS campus planning process appears to be a strategy that

would increase student involvement and ownership of their school community development.

Based on my interactions with some of the ULS students, there is little knowledge that the ULS

is embarking on a redevelopment project. I contend that the inclusion of this “major group”

would complement the ULS’s strategy to arrive at a more compatible redevelopment plan for its

major stakeholders and presents an opportunity to test a sustainable development approach.

Starting immediately ULS teachers can establish ways of aligning curriculum with real-

world initiatives under development by directing students to research and reflect on the data

accumulating daily on the vast array of sustainable initiatives. The websites mentioned in this

chapter are good starting points to find links between the daily lessons plans and practical

application, the objective of Education Energy. This approach can be applied to stimulating ideas

that will aid in the construction of sustainable development policies and initiatives for the ULS

itself.



Along the lines of inducing greater participatory levels of a student body, an earlier study

I conducted suggested different knowledge/research methodologies (described in the following

chapter), have the potential of influencing the development of attitudinal values. From my

observations extending over decades, it appears that the students’ mindset being developed under

the mainstream framework becomes focused on participating at a level where the educational

standards are met primarily to pass into the next grade level or graduate. There was evidence in

the many of the students in a recent undergrad class I assisted with, who expressed a concern on

what material they had to know to pass the course, rather than wanting to know how they could

make the syllabus relate best to their learning objectives. In contrast, a sustainable mindset is

attuned to the application of curricula to real-world situations, along with attaining an

understanding of social-cultural and demographic sensitivities and linkages.

The learning methodology prescribed by the ULS that influences the students’ ability to

participate, appears to be still guided by the philosophy laid out by King and Brownell (1966).

Reflecting on Kuhn’s cautionary advice of questioning assumptions (Chapter 3) when applied to

the present educational paradigm, there could be underlying factors that influence the

development of students’ attitudinal relationships with each other, teachers, administration staff,

family, community, and the environment. Therefore, the knowledge development framework

used in the systematic construction of thought could be a factor as suggested by my earlier study.

The established role of the ULS as a research center makes such an assessment a routine

procedure that may already be under constant surveillance by the Curriculum & Research

Development Group (CRDG). In the scope of my study of the ULS, I did not find any evidence

to suggest such research has been conducted. However, if the knowledge development

methodology is being factored under the CRDG research agenda, a framework specially tailored



to design programs to induce education for sustainable development (ESD) may take on a

different structure, as suggested in the following chapter.



Chapter 3: The Culture of Learning and Rationality

"But to tear down a factory or to revolt against a government ...because it is a system is

to attack effects rather than causes; and as long as the attack is upon effects only, no

change is possible. The true system, the real system, is our present construction of

systematic thought itself, rationality itself, and if a factory is torn down but the rationality

which produced it is left standing, then that rationality will simply produce another

factory. If a revolution destroys a systematic government, but the systematic patterns of

thought that produced that government are left intact, then those patterns will repeat

themselves in the succeeding government. There's so much talk about the system. And so

little understanding" - Robert M. Pirsig (my emphasis).

Albert Einstein’s statement “we can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking

we used when we created them” echoes Pirsig’s quote from his book “Zen and the Art of

Motorcycle Maintenance” (1974). Both authors suggest that creating any paradigm for reform,

such as educational reform, requires a new way of thinking. Kuhn (1962) directs us to question

the assumptions behind the theories if problems can no longer be solved under the operating

scientific paradigm. Therefore this chapter conveys an attempt to explore for possible

assumptions underlying our educational policies that may influence the learning outcome. Since

learning is guided by a knowledge development framework, perhaps different frameworks may

influence different outcomes. To test this theory, a comparison is made between four various

frameworks of knowledge development to examine the “construction of systematic thought” and

determine if there is any difference between the “causes” or outcomes in supporting the notion of

sustainability.

In relationship to the ULS’s redevelopment process, the most beneficial framework

would be one that motivates students to become engaged with the planning process at high

participatory and ownership levels. The framework could also encourage systems thinking and

intuitive abilities.



The Culture of Learning and Rationality

Mr. Pirsig hypothesizes that there is a prevailing thought pattern behind human rationale

created by the “systematic method of thinking”. As a standardized public education system is

the major influence that shapes the rationality of the citizens it produces (Domhaus 2010,

Fogelin 2001, Feinberg & Soltis 2009, Fresco 2011, Cherry 2013, Gallup 2013) many questions

related to education come to mind in light of globalization and the increasing global issues facing

humanity:

Could the dominant economic rationality originate with the mainstream learning

practices, therefore continue to resist progress towards achieving the objectives of

Agenda 21? (e.g. USA’s boycott of 2002 World Summit on Sustainable

Development)

As education spreads into undeveloped countries, will these societies shift their

cultural values to replicate the values associated with the unsustainable

(industrial) paradigm? (e.g. Hawaiian traditional sustainable resource practices

replaced by the western development approach has created an unsustainable

dependency on importing resources)

Does the dominant educational model lead students to question the underlying

assumptions or do people learn to merely become the receptors of information

that causes them to replicate or perpetuate an unsustainable paradigm?

Are standardized tests measuring cognitive development that has the ability to

induce the shift to a sustainable development paradigm or merely reinforcing the

practices that perpetuate the present paradigm?



To what degree are children influenced to function as responsive, caring, and

cooperative citizens in a democratic society when educated in the competitive

authoritarian environment of the schooling system?

Is the dominant systematic approach to research generating ‘truth’ for everyone’s

reality, or could the knowledge perpetuate a falsehood or an illusion of truth?

Are people educated in an unsustainable or artificial environment less responsive

to conflict-free and sustainable practices?

Which research methodology or knowledge development approach provides the

best framework to design educational reform to transform the global society into a

united, ecological conscious, benevolent, and collaborative community

(sustainable paradigm)?

Knowledge Development Frameworks

Most of the former questions appear to be addressed under a global shift to a sustainable

development paradigm. Addressing the last question may provide clues to assist in guiding the

redevelopment process of the ULS, which in turn would offer a research model to address the

question of understanding the effects of the environment on learning. This section of the paper

reviews four contemporary knowledge development or research methodology frameworks (Table

4) to examine how they relate to Agenda 21 prescriptions for strengthening the role of three

“major groups” (women, children and youth, and indigenous peoples). One aspect conveyed by

the international community related to “strengthening the major groups” is increasing their level

of participation in policy development. The low participation rate of these groups could relate

back to the paradigm shift that occurred in the Neolithic Age where the male’s physical strength



became a preferred asset to the survival of a community (Eisler 1987). This may be a “cause”

underlying the persisting male-dominated “globalization” rationality.

Therefore, inclusion of these three major groups, at an equitable level, offers an approach

to alter the present rationality. Women possess birthing and nurturing traits (social strength)

(Eisler 1987), indigenous people are recognized to be more attuned with an environmental

sensitivity (environmental strength) (Geertz 1973, Gegeo 1994, Young 1998, Snively &

Corsiglia 2001) and children and youth offer innovativeness from their higher level of genius and

less judgemental perspectives (social strength) (Peel 2013).

The school system offers an effective mode of leverage to engage these three groups to

influence a shift toward a sustainable paradigm. Therefore testing the method of construction of

systematic thought of the education system has a potential to shed light on its influence

associated with participatory levels of these major groups, which in turn can be tested towards

the ULS redevelopment process.



Neuman (359 p.) Morris (283p.) Kirby et al (257p.) McGaa (274p.)

Foundations: Doing Social Research Positivist paradigm: engagement-entree to the research setting

Why do research? Wisdom through observation Lesson of Eagle

Foundations: Theory and Social research

Positivist paradigm: assessment-development of understanding of the research focus

Where do you stand? Locating the research and the researcher

Find and preserve the medicine Lesson of Bear

Foundations: Ethics in social research Positivist paradigm: planning-rationales for carrying out the research project

Working together Balance in all things Lesson of Lion

Foundations: Reviewing the scholarly literature and planning a study

Positivist paradigm: implementation-gathering the data

Planning the project: developing a research design

One among many Lesson of Wolf

Foundations: Qualitative and Quantitative measurement

Positivist paradigm: evaluation-developing an understanding of the data and its meaning

Planning the project: research ethics and preparing the proposal

Develop intuition Lesson of Orca

Foundations: Qualitative and Quantitative sampling

Positivist paradigm: termination and follow up-reporting on findings and exiting the research setting

Searching the literature Seek truth Lesson of Owl

Conducting Quantitative Research: Survey research

Post Positivist paradigm: assessment and engagement-development of understanding of the research focus and entree to the research setting

Operationalizing the research question

Strive for freedom Lesson of Tiger

Conducting Quantitative Research: Experimental research

Post Positivist paradigm: planning, implementation, evaluation-rationales for gathering data, data gathering, and developing an understanding of the data and its meaning

Developing skills as a data gatherer Heat Lesson of Cottonwood tree – seeking wisdom to deal with global warming

Conducting Quantitative Research: nonreactive research and secondary analysis

Post Positivist paradigm: termination and follow up-reporting on findings and exiting the research and communicating and distributing the findings

Gathering data and data management Thin Lesson of Deer – seeking wisdom to deal with the thinning ozone layer

Conducting Quantitative Research: Analysis of quantitative data

Critical theory: Assessment, engagement, and planning-development of understanding of the research focus, entree to the research setting, rationales for carrying out the research

Analyzing data and reporting Gone Lesson of Buffalo – seeking wisdom to deal with species extinction

Conducting Qualitative Research: Field research

Critical theory: Implementation-gathering data

Conclusions Too many

Lesson of Rat – seeking wisdom to

deal with overpopulation Conducting Qualitative Research: Historical – comparative research

Critical theory: Evaluation-developing an understanding of the data and its meaning

Conducting Qualitative Research: Analysis of qualitative data

Critical theory: Termination and follow up-reporting findings, exiting the research setting, and communication and distribution of research findings

Writing a Research Report Constructivism: Engagement, assessment and planning-entree to the research setting, development of understanding of the research focus, rationales for gathering data Constructivism: Implementation and evaluation-gathering the data and developing an understanding of the data and its meaning

Constructivism: Termination and follow up-reporting on findings, exiting the research setting, communication, and distribution of findings

Cross-Cutting Themes: Ethics, Diversity, and Technology: The ethics and politics of research

Cross-Cutting Themes: Ethics, Diversity, and Technology: the researcher’s responsibility to diversity

Cross-Cutting Themes: Ethics, Diversity, and Technology: the function of technology at each step of the way

Table 4: Framework Comparison of Research Methodologies for Knowledge



Table 4 provides a simple comparison of four different frameworks of knowledge

development by using the table of contents of each publication. From this comparison,

similarities can be detected between 3 of the frameworks, whereas McGaa’s framework deviates

the most dramatically. The descriptions below assess each framework in more detail.

Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Neuman 2007).

Accepting that Neuman is defining a mainstream approach to knowledge development, this

review will offer a baseline to compare it to other frameworks. His influences have been his

American education and a background in Asian studies.

To frame the basics of social research, Neuman states:

“..Social research is a process in which people combine a set of principles, outlooks,

and ideas (i.e,, methodology) with a collection of specific practices, techniques, and

strategies (i.e., a method of inquiry) to produce knowledge. It is an exciting process of

discovery, but it requires persistence, personal integrity, tolerance for ambiguity,

interaction with others, and pride in doing quality work.”

Under the heading of “The Three Major Approaches to Social Science”, Neuman also

introduces the concept of multiple or competing paradigms in several fields of social science,

which he claims some researchers find a hindrance to the growth of knowledge. He points out

there is a difference of opinion among social scientists over multiple paradigms and describes

three major paradigms or approaches to social science which affect “how people do social

research studies.” He also indicates there are variations (internal divisions, offshoots, and

extensions) within each of these paradigms.

Neuman states that “positivism” is the method most used in North America. This

originated with the physical sciences. The method assumes “reality is made up of objective facts

that value-free researchers can precisely measure and use statistics to test causal theories”

(Neuman 2007 p.42 my emphasis). Replicating results by collecting quantitative data is the



focus in the positivist approach. The “interpretative” paradigm is a qualitative assessment of

what is believed to be real. These beliefs can change over time, making social reality “fluid”.

The interpretative researchers “favour interpretative over casual forms of theory” (Neuman 2007

p.43) and “inductive reasoning not bound by laws” (positivism is explained by law-like

principles or nomothetic statements). The objective is to understand how a person views, feels,

and acts (empathetic understanding or verstehen). The “critical” approach assumes that there is

an illusionary surface that is not reality and calls for action to advance social change through

theory and deeper analyses (Neuman 2007 p.44).

Neuman refers to Thomas Kuhn’s (1962) criticism on science:

“that the way science develops in a specific field across time is based on researchers

sharing a general approach or paradigm. A paradigm is an integrated set of

assumptions, beliefs, models of doing good research, and techniques for gathering and

analyzing data. It organizes core ideas, theoretical frameworks, and research methods.

Kuhn observed that scientific fields tend to be held together around a paradigm for a

long period of time. Very few researchers question the paradigm, and most focus on

operating within its general boundaries to accumulate new knowledge.” On rare

occasions in history, intellectual difficulties increase, unexpected issues grow, and

troubling concerns over proper methods multiply. Slowly, the members of a scientific

field shift in how they see things and switch to a new paradigm. Once the new paradigm

becomes fully established and widely adopted, the process of accumulating knowledge

begins anew.” (my emphasis)

Kuhn’s idea also reflects Einstein’s and Pirsig’s descriptions of change (paradigm=rationality)

which only happens if there is a need to shift to a new perspective (effect to cause), such as the

conscious paradigm shift Agenda 21 calls for.

Neuman delineates a seven step research process. Each step is tied to theory as shown in

Figure 1. Neuman defines social theory “as a system of interconnected abstractions or ideas that

condenses and organizes knowledge about the social world.” He lists Durkheim, Weber, Marx,

and Tonnies as examples of classical social theorists that “laid the foundation for subsequent



generations of social thinkers”. He also states these classical theorists are “rare” innovative

“geniuses”. Neuman states true “serious social theory” takes many years of empirical tests,

conducted and debated by “dozens of researchers” to be considered theory.

Figure 1 – Steps in Research Process (Neuman 2007)

As Figure 1 suggests, Neuman contends that “almost all research involves some theory”... and it

comes down to the matter of “how you should use it”.

To explain theory, Neuman follows the traditional scientific path of breaking down a

system into components. He explains that “all theories contain concepts, and concepts are the

building blocks of theory”. He directs readers to refer to Chafetz, Hage, Kaplan, Mullins,

Reynolds, and Stinhcombe for further information. He also states “social theory requires well-

defined concepts” and “a valuable goal of exploratory research, and most good research, is to



clarify and refine concepts.” He describes concepts under the categories of “concept clusters”,

“classification concepts”, “scope”, “assumptions”, and “relationships”.

Neuman then describes the “aspects of theory” as “baffling” since theory comes in many

forms (not conducive to linear thought processes). To simplify the understanding of theory

Neuman constructs a linear and hierarchical description under the following categories:

1) The direction of its reasoning,

2) The level of social reality that it explains,

3) The forms of explanation it employs, and

4) The overall framework of assumptions and concepts in which it is embedded.

Under the direction of reasoning, deductive and inductive are the two basic directions of

reasoning.

Neuman’s categorizing theory, then divides the levels of social reality into micro, meso,

and macro levels of theory depending on the size of the system being studied (Neuman 2007

p.33-34). To add another layer of complexity of theory, it is divided into forms of explanation

differentiated as “prediction and explanation”, “casual explanation”, “structural explanation”,

and “interpretative explanation” (Neuman 2007 p.34-40). Although Neuman does not mention

or qualify interpretative explanation when it comes to language translation, which is considered a

major factor (Young 1998 p.16), he does expose the effect on interpretation that occurs due to

differing disciplinary or functionality perspectives (corporate managers converting legal ideas,

terms, and concepts to fit their organizational setting - p.41).

The overview of this mainstream framework, besides being “baffling”, does not appear to

be applicable for a society seeking transition given Neuman’s qualification that “serious social

theory” takes many years of empirical tests confined to “dozens of researchers” to be considered



theory, especially when he qualifies the very nature of society as “fluid”. Without any reference

to include the missing cultural and demographics identified by Agenda 21 in the research body

(“dozens of researchers”), or elsewhere in the publication, this framework does not appear to

offer measures to broaden participatory parameters. In addition, an assessment of the referenced

material of this publication indicates a predominant male influenced construction.

Social Work Research Methods: Four alternative paradigms (Morris 2006) This

publication has been included in the review as it appears to meet the objective of “strengthening

the role of major groups” of Agenda 21 (Chapters 24 and 25) by including American feminine

and youth perspectives (reflected by her reference material). Morris’s exposure to Hawaiian

culture through her years at the University of Hawaiʻi may have influenced her research

methods.

Teresa Morris (2006) departs from Neuman’s “three major approaches” as she borrows

Guba’s (1990) (education researcher) “positivism”, “post-positivism”, “critical theory”, and

“constructivism” paradigm categorization to compare the processes of each paradigm. She

contends that research methods evolve with time and emphasizes there is a need to include

alternative approaches to the common (positivist) approach. This is to expand to a world-wide

perspective.

She emphasizes “that studies addressing social work practice confront ethical problems

regarding withholding service to control groups, practical problems associated with random

assignment of human beings to experimental and control groups, and methodological problems

concerning the application of findings derived from a controlled experiment to the hurly burly

world of social work practice” (Morris p. xiv). She also points out variations in the literature of



determining causality, emphasizing that “we will never be able to accurately address causality

with people in real world setting” (Lincoln and Guba 1985).

Morris (2006) points out that the education system does not emphasize the importance of

developing penetrating questions. Polluck concurs with this view that illiteracy begins with the

inadequacies of the educational system in the U.S.A, where the natural curiosity of a child is

replaced by “a recitation of accomplishment. Science is presented as answers rather than

questions”. In other words, the pedagogy of primarily information transfer, filling students with

facts to answer questions (standardized tests), causes the production of scholars who lack the

ability to ask questions sparked by an inquisitive mind. At the university level, science students

“learn a lot about how, but little about why” (Polluck 2003). This approach definitely restricts

students’ participation level as they become more receptors of knowledge rather than engaged as

interactive learners.

Morris also indicates that a great deal of research has been ineffective due to the tendency

to spend inadequate time developing critical questions. She attributes this flaw to how the

techniques of research are taught. She also views that social work research requires much more

innovative approaches in view of the diversity social science faces. By detailing each paradigm,

she believes that her book will offer “the conceptual clarity to link different worldviews with

different research questions requiring methodologies, achieving different goals when

researching social work practice at the micro and macro levels of human organization.”

Morris also justifies her approach by explaining the need to evolve research practice to

take on a worldwide perspective and adapt with time. As she explains “positivism can test

causal and correlational theories, but post-positivism can build theory and critical theory can

promote action to address social injustice...constructivism offers the tools to comprehend and act



on subjective knowledge and understanding” (Morris p. xi). She also relates the fact that most

social work texts convey the positivist paradigm for doing scientific research, even though the

assumptions of the methodology are not proven. This echoes Kuhn’s observation that few

researchers question the assumptions a paradigm operates on.

Morris’s framework does appear to be fashioned from a wider perspective when

comparing her referenced authors to Neuman’s. The participatory parameters are expanded

through the objective of the framework to take on worldwide and alternative perspectives. Her

claim that more time is needed to develop more critical questions places more of a demand to

heighten the participatory level.

Experience Research Social Change: Methods beyond the mainstream (Kirby et al

2006). Sandra Kirby, Chair of the Department of Sociology, University of Winnipeg; Lorraine

Greaves, Director, British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health; and Colleen

Reid, postdoctoral fellow at Simon Fraser University and research associate at the BC Centre of

Excellence for Women’s Health describe a research methodology “beyond the mainstream” and

deviate from the other mainstream scholarly publications by specifying the need to question “the

monopoly that certain powerful groups hold over information” (Kirby p. 15). In addition, the

bibliography is mainly made up of indigenous knowledge and feminine references. These

aspects meet the objective of “strengthening the role of major groups” of Agenda 21 (Chapters

24, 25, and 26).

The publication highlights the transformation happening in social structures that are

being reflected in the shift in the choices of research areas, methodologies, processes, and modes

of knowledge transfer. It brings forth the notion that most people “have been excluded from

participating in, describing and analyzing our own understanding of realty”.... “research that



does not reflect on and analyze the social context from which it springs serves only the status

quo and does not enable us to interact with and change society” (Kirby 1989 p. 16)

......“research and knowledge are produced in a manner which represents the political and social

interests of a particular group....research has often been a tool of domination which has helped

perpetuate and maintain current power relations of inequality. Too often the experts who do the

research have been well trained in patterns of thinking which not only conflict with their

understanding, but explain and justify a world many are actually interested in changing” (Kirby

1989 p. 17).

Kirby et al concur with the “critical theorist” and “constructivist” approaches described

by Morris, detailing the need to establish the worldwide view by empowering the oppressed and

challenging the underlying assumptions. This approach “attacks” the “cause” in the Pirsigian

view and is the key objective of Agenda 21’s “strengthening the role of majority groups”

(women, children and youth, and indigenous peoples).

Kirby et al. frame two interrelated research processes. One which requires “an authentic

dialogue between all participants in the research process in which all are respected as equally

knowing subjects.” The other process is a critical reflection on the participants’ social reality

(Kirby et. al. 2006 p. 7).

This framework is specific to broadening the participation parameters, specifically to

those outside of the influential segments of society.

Nature’s Way: Native Wisdom for Living in Balance With the Earth (McGaa 2004)

McGaa’s publication has been included as a perspective well-grounded in traditional

indigenous knowledge. It should therefore relate to strengthening the indigenous orientated

perspective of Agenda 21, referenced in Chapter 26. Even though McGaa has been educated on



a regular schooling path, he has stayed involved in traditional cultural ceremonies. His research

methodology framework may present a unique perspective in comparison to the mainstream and

the other “western” alternative approaches.

McGaa’s framework reflects the development of intertwined knowledge from detailed

observation of the natural world by the senses, intuitive powers, and understanding the inter-

connectiveness of nature, as the source of truth.

The phenomenon of cognitive dissonance is addressed by McGaa’s approach through

reconnection to the natural laws and the development of intuitive abilities. He criticises

international economic competitiveness, where nations strive to compete through the educational

process. The “lesson of wolf”, “one among many”, addresses the need of all nations to work

together as equals, toward collectively finding ways for global survival. This lesson is strongly

reflected in the formulation of Agenda 21, which is the result of intensive international

rationality and collaboration. McGaa’s approach also addresses the four key international issues

(climate change, ozone depletion leading to increased radiation levels, species extinction, and

over population), which ultimately impact human survival.

This framework also expands the participatory parameters to a worldwide process

addressing inclusivity, a consideration not highlighted in Neuman’s mainstream approach.

Research Methodology Influence on Knowledge Development for ESD

This comparison of the four research methodologies supports my hypothesis that there is

a potential that the knowledge development framework has an influence on the educational

paradigm. The level of participation appears to be a dependent variable. Neuman also supports

this notion by elaborating on how social science theory poses challenges in providing a clear

path to establish sound rationality. One of the problematic areas he mentions is that the



mainstream approach has borrowed much from the physical sciences framework. His description

of the varying opinions within the field by “geniuses”, who he refers to and are all male, does not

address a need to broaden the participatory level as a strategy to adjust the framework. Taking

into consideration the “fluid” aspect of social parameters and the call for a paradigm shift by the

international community, it becomes questionable if the mainstream framework will “cause”

learning outcomes required to shift to a new paradigm.

The apparent dominant male perspective of the mainstream framework could be a reason

that the frameworks described by the two publications, authored by females, bring out different

perspectives. These perspectives highlight the importance of establishing a broader participatory

approach for knowledge development. Morris emphasizes the need to establish a critical

approach to understand the “why”, while Kirby et al. emphasize the need to establish inclusive

equity in knowledge development as it is now based on the power structure that, dictates the

research agendas. Kirby also echoes Pirsig’s view of experts tending to resist progressive change

through their fixed thought patterns. In comparison to Neuman, it becomes apparent that the

Morris and Kirby et al. frameworks are more conducive towards an ESD through inducing

higher levels of participation.

McGaa’s framework is a radical divergence from the other three frameworks,

emphasizing knowledge development’s connection with nature and offering direct ways for

knowledge development to respond to four global issues (climate change, ozone depletion,

species extinction, and overpopulation). He offers the only framework that recognizes the role of

intuition in knowledge development, which has a link to the rising popularity of “mindfulness”

training for teachers. As his influence stems from traditional indigenous values, this framework

does appear to stimulate a sustainable mindset. The well-known Hawaiian navigator Nainoa



Thompson (2014) captures the relevance of intuition in his experience of open-ocean navigating

when there is no intellectual guidance. This appears to be a traditional Hawaiian value that is

diminished in the mainstream framework that is strictly focused on intellectual development.

The intuitive aspect triggers a need to briefly mention the influence of “mindfulness” training as

a method to usher in the sustainable development paradigm (Siegel 2012). Such an approach has

the potential to induce higher levels of participation due to the increased amount of reflection

(assessment related to self-actualization) involved.

Cognitive Development and Meditation

An area related to cognitive development that has been researched for decades is now

becoming a recognized practice to increase levels of concentration and comprehension. This is

the art of meditation. UCLA’s Mindful Awareness Research Center is one of the university

departments offering training in “Mindfulness Awareness Practices (MAPs)” (Siegel 2012). The

research associated with the meditation practice is extensive and is mentioned here because of

McGaa’s reference on intuitiveness, an attribute associated with meditation. In addition, one of

the ULS teachers has been trained to incorporate the mindfulness practice into the ULS’s

curriculum (Faure 2013). Assessment of the mindfulness approach is also a facet that can be

studied under the ULS research scrutiny.

Knowledge Development Implications for the ULS

This examination of four frameworks suggests that different frameworks can influence

learning outcomes. It appears that the King/Brownell framework (1966) still guides the ULS

curricula. Their 1966 publication also recognized that the fluid state of society will place shifting

and competing demands on the educational process. Due to these factors they stated that

curriculum development should be guided by the core disciplines, free from influential interest



groups. Engaging students in developing the curriculum while they learn in an environment of

“liberal education” is an approach to counter such external influences (King & Brownell 1966).

This approach echoes Dewey’s education model of allowing children and youth to learn from

their interactions as a community while providing an avenue to express and share their vision

with the community. This is the basic approach being followed by the UN to create a sustainable

development paradigm; a deliberate move to replace the dominant influence with a more

equitable approach in formulating a vision of a future global community.

This cursory analysis on research methodologies does suggest that the outcomes of

knowledge development can be influenced by the framework guiding it. Therefore one

framework maybe better suited for creating a sustainable mindset. This would be an important

aspect if there is a concerted effort to include the ULS students in the redevelopment process. In

addition, the ULS’s scope of research could be expanded to assess frameworks, employed at

various levels of child development from the early stage to preparing teenagers for the work

force or higher education, which induce a sustainable mindset to prepare the students and

teachers to effectively engage in the redevelopment process and the community beyond.



Chapter 4: The Sustainability Movement

“While we can draw upon experiences of the past to solve the problems of today and tomorrow,

the reality is that citizens of the world will have the task of learning their way towards

sustainability. Education is therefore central to learning and to a more sustainable future.”

(UNESCO, 2012b)

The Green School Movement

Another factor effecting knowledge development is the learning environment. The trend

of society becoming increasingly insensitive to the environment through living in urban settings

is being countered by increasing the interaction of children and youth with nature. Schools are

reconnecting students and nature through field trips. More ambitious efforts are made by

designing schools to adopt settings that mimic the natural environment. There appears to be a

correlation between the timing and intensity of UN sustainability programs and the beginning of

and the number of schools that are adopting green agendas. This has cultivated a “green school

movement” (U.S. Department of Education 2012). Part of the motivation is to reduce energy

costs associated with aging schools, but more importantly it is to enhance the overall learning

environment. The ULS’s redevelopment project can capitalize on learning from the burgeoning

school projects that have employed technological advances and designs to reduce the carbon

footprint, while making the school environment conducive to high learning performance. In

addition, the Federal Government, down to individuals, are supporting the movement in a variety

of ways.

Arne Duncan, U.S. Secretary of Education has emphasized the importance of the

inclusion of environmental literacy as part of the 21st Century school curriculum (U.S.

Department of Education 2012). To add an incentive for adopting a green school agenda, the

Department has instigated the “Green Ribbon Schools” award “to identify and disseminate



knowledge about practices that are proven to result in improved student engagement, higher

academic achievement and graduation rates, and workforce preparedness, as well as a

government wide goal of increasing energy independence and economic security” (U.S.

Department of Education 2013).

As an illustration, the Green School in Bali that I visited in 2009 has received an award as

“the greenest school on Earth” by USGBC (2012). The Green School’s vision “is of a natural,

holistic, student-centered learning environment that empowers and inspires our students to be

creative, innovative, green leaders” (Green School 2013), while operating with the lowest

carbon footprint possible.

Photo 1 Energy Consumption & Sustainable Constructed Facilities – Green School Bali



Photos 2 Low Energy Consumption & Sustainable Constructed Facilities – Green School Bali

Hawaiʻi has made some progress towards integrating sustainability practices into

educational institutions. On the Big Island, the Hawaii Preparatory Academy (recipient of 2012

U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools Award) constructed the “Energy Lab” and

West Hawaii Explorations Academy (WHEA) is an outdoor experiential school that is graduating

motivated students focused on real world issues. Their motto is “no child left indoors”.

On Oahu, many schools are adopting a green agenda in different forms by working with

various NGOs (e.g. Forward Foundation nd, The Green House (FS) – Oahu Resource &

Conservation Development Council nd) to growing gardens (Kōhua Hawaiʻi Foundation 2013).

Punahou School, Ewa Makai Middle School (recipient of 2012 U.S. Department of Education

Green Ribbon Schools Award), and Hawaii Baptist Academy Middle School have moved

towards increased sustainability by constructing campus facilities that meet the LEED



(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards. The latest Oahu addition, “The

School for Examining the Essential Questions on Sustainability” (SEEQS), opened August 2013

with a learning agenda reflecting Dewey’s participatory experiential learning style.

Photo 3 Hawaiʻi Preparatory Academy Energy Lab

These developments are being monitored by the Green School Advocacy Committee of

the USGBC, Hawaiʻi Chapter, which held the First Green School Symposium in 2009. The

movement has also been fueled by the Sustainable Endowments Institute (2005) which has been

assessing and rating (College Sustainability Report Card) the progress of colleges and

universities towards operating sustainable campus operations. The US Federal Government has

initiated the Green Ribbon Schools program (Ed.gov 2013) to promote the importance of the

green school movement to educational reform. This is reflected in Arne Duncan’s, US Secretary

of Education, remarks at a conference in 2012 (Duncan 2012).

In addition, there is growing support in the green school movement through programs

such as the Kokua Hawaii Foundation’s ʻAina in Schools Program (2006), the Hawaiʻi

Environmental Education Alliance‘s Hawaiʻi Environmental Literacy Plan (HELP).



Laboratory Schools as a Catalyst toward Education for Sustainable Development

(ESD)

To add a strong scientific foundation to the green school movement, I contend that the

Laboratory Schools can be an essential catalyst in developing and employing the most effective

sustainability curriculum through their research and participatory functions. “Laboratory

Schools” have an extensive history of creating educational reform starting with the Dewey’s

Laboratory School established at the University of Chicago. Lab schools have evolved to

develop and assess educational tools and methodologies geared to improve education and teacher

training (Hunter 1970, IALS 2012, Provenzoi Jr. 1979). According to the National Association

of Laboratory Schools (NALS) publication “Laboratory Schools: An Educational Resource”

(1991) there were 98 laboratory schools operating within the US in the year of publication. This

was a drop from the over 200 operating in 1964. The publication makes the argument that for the

lab schools to survive in an environment of diminishing resources, they have been advised to

adopt “concentrations on experimentation, research and development, or other emerging areas

of service” (NALS 1991 p.ix). Arthur King Jr., is one of the contributing authors who in his

chapter outlines the advantages of lab schools being associated with a university, while

continuing to have “flexibility, immunity from rule setting boards and bureaucracies, and the

encouragement to take unusual risks” (NALS 1991 p.167). King, along with 7 other

representatives from different lab schools, predicted that “the innovative and competent among

university-based schools will succeed to the degree that they respond creatively to the

nationwide demand for educational improvement” (NALS 1991 p. xi).

The NALS transformed into the International Association of Laboratory and University

Affiliated Schools (IALS) to include an international membership of “campus-based schools, and



others with diverse university affiliations, such as charter schools, professional development

schools, child study institutes, research and development schools, etc” (IALS 2013). According

to IALS’s website in 2013 there were 35 member schools, with a notable absences of the ULS

and University of Chicago Laboratory School.

The Chicago Laboratory School has influenced the learning environment through

structural design. They opened the doors of their newly constructed early childhood facility (Earl

Shapiro Hall-Photos 4/5) for the 2013 fall school session; a facility that has been specifically

designed to facilitate a Dewey educational model of “emphasizing children’s ability to teach

themselves through flexible interactions with their classmates, teachers, and environment”

(Alessio 2013). The only other reference to a sustainability design factor of the facility in

Alessio’s article refers to all the nursery classrooms having “direct outdoor access”.

Photos 4 University Laboratory School Chicago Early Childhood Building



Photos 5 University Laboratory School Chicago Early Childhood Building

ESD offers a new function to focus the ULS research agenda. This also offers an unprecedented

opportunity to develop a learning designed environment for the University Laboratory School

(ULS) whose aging structures are deteriorating and ready for renovations. The strong reputation

that the ULS has built as an educational research center merits a campus renovation equal to that

reputation. In consideration of the research needs being called for to develop ESD programs, its

reputation can be used as leverage to construct the most sustainable designed campus possible.

University Laboratory School: A Built Reputation of Leadership in Education Reform

To gain an appreciation of the uniqueness of the ULS and its importance in becoming an

ESD research institution, it is beneficial to review the school’s history. The beginnings of the

ULS date back to 1895 as a teacher training department in the Honolulu High School (Central

Intermediate High), until it moved and was called the Honolulu Normal and Training School in

1896. Another move and name change occurred in 1905 after Hawaiʻi was annexed as a territory

of the US and became the Territorial Normal and Training School. In 1930, the School moved to

its present campus location adjoining the UHM campus. Wist Hall and Wist Hall Annex 1 were



the first structures on the 15 acres of land (once a pig farm). These facilities were built in 1939.

Construction of Castle Memorial Hall, a training center for kindergarten and nursery teachers,

occurred in 1941. The Castle Memorial Hall is named after the Castle family which contributed

toward introducing John Dewey’s educational philosophy to Hawaiʻi. The family worked with

Dr. Dewey to build the Hall modeled from the University of Chicago Laboratory School. Castle

Memorial Hall, even though built in the 1940s, is the only building on the UHM campus, besides

the Energy House, that actually employs an architectural design using natural air flow to cool the

building (Meder 2013). The high school component was housed in the University High School

Building 1 (UHS1 built 1943). Upon completion of ULB 2 in 1948, the school offered a

complete K-12 curriculum. The later addition of UHB 3 (1957) and the Multipurpose Building

(1963) modernized the campus to a degree.

The fact of three separate laboratory schools operating as teacher training facilities came

under question in the early 1960s, as they appeared to duplicate the training role occurring in the

public schools. Acting on the recommendation of a 1965 study on the training schools, headed

by Lindley Stiles, a national leader in educational research, the role of the schools shifted to

educational research. Under this organizational change, the three laboratory schools

(preschool/primary, elementary, and secondary) were placed under one principal, with a single

budget, and the student population was reduced from 900 students to 365 as new staff were

recruited to take on teacher-researcher roles. Arthur R. King, Jr. became the founding Director of

the University Laboratory School (ULS). This role shift proved to be an action that perpetuated

the existence of the ULS when many Laboratory Schools found themselves obsolete as public

schools took on the teacher training role.



In 1966, the final “permanent” building was added to the campus (see Figure 1) with the

completion of Wist Hall Annex 2 (University Ave. Annexes, Figure 1). Annex 2 served as the

Hawaiʻi Curriculum Center in partnership with the Hawaiʻi Department of Education and the

University of Hawaiʻi. This partnership was triggered by “a large continuing grant from the Title

III (education innovation) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act” (NALS 1991 p. 73).

The partnership led to the ULS becoming an organizational success story. The role of the

Center evolved into developing curriculum and materials for schools of the State, based on

research data generated by using the ULS p – 12 students as a control group. While modelling

itself on the Dewey education paradigm, King employed the “theory that each of the disciplines

of knowledge had its own mode of inquiry, specialized language, heritage of literature and

artifacts, and traditions, and that the community of scholars these domains created should be the

basis for liberal and general education” (COE 2012). This conversion to a research and

curriculum development facility occurred at a time to take advantage of the Federal

Government’s supplemental funding towards creating a new paradigm in education, a component

of President Johnson’s “Great Society” program, ‘as well as “big project” development

programs in science, mathematics, and social sciences were in full swing’ (NALS 1991 p.73). In

1969, the Curriculum Research & Development Group (CRDG) was formed to become a unit of

the College of Education (Sanborn and O’Harrow nd).



Figure 2 ULS Campus including the College of Education (Everly and Wist Halls)

Curriculum Research & Development Group (CRDG)

The research methodology proposed by King and Brownell (1966) allows an unbiased

scholarly approach to curriculum development that is normally subjected to political, religious,

special interests, and corporate influences. The ULS’s affiliation with the University provided a

conduit for all the disciplines to aid in curricula development. It was estimated that by 2000 over

600 university faculty across all the disciplines had contributed to developing curricula in a

variety of CRDG projects. Working relationships with the ULS extend internationally. Over

7000 schools in 44 states participated in using CRDG programs along with establishing

partnerships with 16 mainland universities “who serve as centers disseminating and adapting

CRDG programs in their service areas” (King 2000). The conditions that are associated with the

success of the ULS are:



“The CRDG has received predictable, long-term support.”

“The CRDG has benefited from its allocation of permanent university positions,

enabling it to build a core staff of career professionals.”

“The CRDG’s endeavors benefit from its affiliation with the university.”

“The CRDG’s work is grounded in a sound and internally consistent theory for

guiding curriculum development.”

“The CRDG began small, developing curriculum for the state’s schools.”

“The CRDG has allowed ample time for development, trials, and revisions.”

“The CRDG has found its dedicated laboratory school vital to its mission.”

“The CRDG has been able to learn from the mistakes of other curriculum

pioneers.”

“The CRDG has a number of independent projects.”

“The CRDG has the capacity to adapt to changing standards and conditions,

adding new tasks and adapting existing ones to achieve its goals” (King 2000).

Missing from King’s 2000 assessment of success is the link to the community, which he

attributed as a key element in his 1967 article describing the new multifaceted role of teacher-

researcher that was spawned from the creation of the CRDG (King 1967). In the article he stated,

“The strength of the Center lies in a structure which bridges the University, the schools, and the

community.”

Despite this success story built on the combination of Dewey’s educational model with

“an experiment based on the curriculum theory of King and Brownell (1966) and dedicated to

the research and development of disciplinary curriculum that provides a rich liberal arts

education for all students K–12”, poor native Hawaiian’s educational performance in the State



persists. This aspect contradicts history which reflects that the Hawaiians were a highly

intelligent society; especially in how fast they attained a high rate of literacy when English was

introduced (Chun 2006). Therefore, the previously mentioned role of researching knowledge

development frameworks to design programs for ESD is pertinent here. Developing educational

supplements required by native Hawaiians to boost their performance to that of a ULS student

may prove to be a required element of ESD to address the international indigenous peoples’

education performance issue. A more obvious missing requirement of the ULS, an ESD program

developer, is the need to house the students in sustainable buildings that induce high learning

productivity and reflect the indigenous culture.

ULS Campus Rejuvenation Project: Research and Program Development for ESD

On my first observation of the ULS campus, I discovered that it consisted of aging

buildings whose design was incompatible with taking advantage of the Hawaiian environment.

There is therefore great potential for transforming it to a “green” infrastructure, which can

magnetize eager students into interactive classrooms, designed to take advantage of the natural

environment by using natural air flow and lighting. These aging structures, including the Castle

Memorial Hall, have been in need of renovations dating back to the 1990s. A new building was

to be erected, until it the discovery of an accounting error wiped out the means of financing the

project (Young 2009).



Photo 6 ULS Campus 2004 (prior to fire-view is 900 counter clockwise from Figure 2).



Photo 7 ULS Campus 2007 (after fire)

Photo 8 ULS Campus 2013



There is a growing consensus that learning in an environment of sustainability will have a

higher success of cultivating a sustainable mindset (Hardy, 2010) when a total campus redesign

and retrofit is undertaken. The transformation can address Hawaiʻi’s statewide need to replace its

costly and unsustainable dependency on imported oil and coal with energy generation.

Considerations of options for operating a green school “off grid”, along with all the latest

developments in sustainable options would be an obvious agenda for any renovation design

process for a research facility such as the ULS. (A ULS redevelopment assessment included

connecting the ULS to the UH Manoa power grid at a cost of $150,000, Young 2009).

Photo 9 Castle Memorial Hall (north side – fake chimney – western influence?)



Photo 10 Central Hallway Castle Memorial Hall (looking south)



Photo 11 Castle Memorial Hall Lanai (notice lights on in well lit area-unnecessary energy consumption)

Photo 12 High School (ULS Building 3)



Photo 13 High School Classroom Building 3

Photo 14 High School Lanai



Photo 15 Multi-Purpose Building (looking west)

Photo 16 Multi-Purpose Building (see Appendix B for additional photos)



The preceding pictures taken October, 2013 capture many unsustainable practices and

features that can be addressed in operational and redesign applications to the campus. An

example of an unsustainable practice is the noticeable unnecessary use of electricity (lights) in

the face of the rising energy bills, which the Mānoa Chancellor, Dr. Apple, has stated he loses

sleep over (Apple 2013). The buildings are not constructed to take full advantage of air flows or

to bring natural light into the structures. UHM is pushing to construct off grid buildings

(Kuykendell Building is to be the first) (Meder 2013). The ULS is a research institution which

can lead by example. Therefore such considerations at the ULS are elementary to any

redevelopment scheme for this campus. To further evaluate the facilities, ULS students

conducted and environmental audit.

Environmental Audit of the ULS Facilities

An environmental audit of some of the ULS facilities was conducted with the

involvement of Project Pono students. Based on the objectives of this elective course, the

students mainly consist of seniors who are interested in the subject of environmental science.

Due to this factor these students make good candidates to carry out such an audit.

The audit was carried out during their daily Project Pono class session, 11:20 am until

noon, between February 3rd

and 24th

, 2014. Measurements using the PYLE PSPL41 Multi-

Function Environment Meter recorded the levels of light, sound, temperature, and relative

humidity within the classrooms and offices in the various buildings (Building 3, Castle Memorial

Hall, and the portables). Each of the 15 students took turns in operating the instrument and

recording data. The status of the facilities was also captured by photographs of each space during

the audit measurement sessions. The data results and photographs of the audit are in Appendix

B. The students and teacher are also designing surveys to be sent to all the ULS students and



faculty, to gauge the satisfaction level with the ULS learning environment and solicit ideas for

redeveloping a sustainable campus.

According to ULS students and staff we talked to during the audit period, the conditions

we measured were not indicative of the higher temperature conditions, which tend to be

uncomfortably hot. Overall, classrooms in east-west orientated wings, with north and south walls

consisting of windows, have good air circulation that keeps the temperature factor at a

comfortable level. The classrooms having windows on the east side, in the wings orientated

north-south, have less air flow, but felt comfortable at the time of the audit. In Building 3, the

administration offices are in the wing that has less airflow. Any cross airflow is reduced by a row

of tall bushes spanning across the east wall (Photo 12). A staff person indicated that the General

Office gets extremely hot even if there are strong breezes, due to the orientation of the windows

in relationship to the prevailing outside airflow. Castle Memorial Hall’s east-west orientated

wings (windows on north and south facing walls) also offer better lighting and air circulation

than the portions of the Hall that had windows on the east or west facing walls in the north-south

orientated wing. One staff indicated her office, located in the middle of the Hall, becomes

“unbearable” in hot spells, even with the use of a portable air conditioner. The portables were the

least effective in taking advantage of the natural climatic and lighting factors, with limited

windows and ventilation. As a result, the portables have to be air-conditioned and lit whenever

sessions are conducted in them. The portable having a restroom had a strong unpleasant odor

during our audit. One of the students indicated the smell may be due to the air conditioning not

operating, since no class was in session at the time of our audit.

This elementary audit indicated which structural design takes advantage of the local

attributes to facilitate a comfortable learning environment and captured some practices that are



adding unnecessary energy consumption. A prime example of a building design that does not

maximize the use of the prevailing northerly airflow for cooling the interior is the Multi-purpose

Building that has a row of doors (usually open for air circulation) orientated to open to the east.

Changing habits can lead to significant costs savings. It appears lights in classrooms and offices

were in use habitually, as they remained on even when there was sufficient natural light or when

the room was vacated (C&RDG offices were vacant for lengthy periods of time). Some of the

over lit rooms could be de-lamped to bring the light intensity levels down to the standard set by

the State regulator. This will save money without any added operational costs.

Photo 17 Over-lit room in Multipurpose Building

The energy draw created by air conditioners is limited in Building 3 and Castle Memorial

Hall as only a few offices and the conference room had window units, but are likely only needed

in times of high outside air temperatures due to the lack of ventilation. Ways of increasing

natural air flow in the north-south orientated wing of Building 3 could be achieved by replacing

the bushes with trees with branches that provide shade over the window while deflecting the



airflow into the windows. The portables, the most modern structures (2006), are the heaviest

energy consumers as during the audit of a class in session, a large air-condition unit was on, even

though the outside temperature was moderate to being on the cool side. The few windows in the

portables make it necessary to have the lights on during class sessions.

The campus spaces surrounding the buildings provide another opportunity to have garden

plots for teaching science and peace education. Project Pono class maintains a hydroponics

system in Building 3’s courtyard. A private organization has offered funding to create and

maintain a peace garden on ULS campus (Tomita 2014). The planning process should include

such considerations thus be reflected in the designing process to include such things like water

catchment systems for irrigation purposes in the dry periods.

Interjecting additional practices and designing features that could be adopted by the ULS

redevelopment plan could be achieved through a ULS stakeholder process. The ULS students,

teachers, administrators, and facility maintenance staff are the best sources of ideas for designing

a dream school. The students can be exposed too many disciplines where the direction can be

guided by sustainable practices. If the Green School of Bali, located in a similar but hotter zone

than the Hawaiian climate, is any indicator of local influences, facility design is a precursor to

sustainable practices.

Transformation of the ULS campus has the potential to affect the whole community. The

redevelopment process also presents a unique research model to engage students in a

sustainability movement. It can also provide curriculum researchers an educational model that

fits the tenet of Arthur King Jr., who stated that “the classroom as a community of scholars and

cast each student into the role of authentic practitioner” (COE 2012). This echoes John Dewey’s

approach, which appears to be recognized as a highly appropriate approach in our present times



(Campbell 1995, Ehrenfeld 1996, Morse 2011, Ryan 1995, Seigfried 2001, Talisee 2007). The

ULS has the students, teachers, staff, and a research team as well as the neighboring UHM

community to provide input for becoming more sustainable. The latter includes the

Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge and the East West Center, consisting of a

“diversity of responses” (Tan 2011) that could assist in guiding the transitional process towards

participatory, sustainable, Hawaiian and cultural diversity perspectives. The role also is an

opportunity to give the ULS children and youth a boost towards empowerment through the kind

of participation envisioned by Agenda 21. It presents a new partnership objective with UHM that

can aid both campuses advancement towards sustainability.

Such a role appears to align with role the ULS is already engaged in towards designing

effective learning programs. ESD simply means a shift in focus to design curriculum and

facilities that support such an agenda. This opportunity is amplified by the UH sustainability

movement already underway, which would in turn be boosted by joining forces with the ULS,

which can be the sustainability research arm of both campuses. This role also addresses the

challenges faced by higher education institutions, which would be recipients of learners

advanced under this program (Neubauer et al 2012). Receiving a culture of learners versus a

culture of well taught students of past knowledge has the potential to transform the universities

into innovative centers evolving with each graduating class.

University of Hawaiʻi Sustainability Movement

ULS’s affiliation with UHM is a unique opportunity for both campuses to work together

in their resolve to achieve sustainability. UHM is a fully accredited research university of

international standing, guided by a strategic plan emphasizing the uniqueness of being grounded

in Native Hawaiian knowledge and values, including the tradition of reciprocity. The UHM has



been recognized as a leader in reaching out to communities in Hawai‘i and the Pacific (UH

2011). UHM appears to be taking an early lead in the sustainability movement, which has

become highly active.

One of the first steps by UHM, which indicates a move towards sustainability, was the

founding of the 1968 Sea Grant College Program to promote a better understanding and

conservation of coastal resources. In 1970 the Environmental Center was formed dedicated to the

advancement of environmental management through education, research, and service. 1974

marked the formation of the Hawaii Energy Institute which performs research, conducts testing

and evaluation, and manages public-private partnerships across a broad range of renewable and

enabling technologies to reduce Hawaiʻi’s dependence on fossil fuels (UH 2013a). A noticeable

campus outcome was the “Energy House”, a model of a residential house that employed a design

specific to the Hawaiian environment and 1970s technology to reduce energy consumption

(SOEST 2013). In 1987 the UHM commissioned a Long Range Development Plan that has been

revised in 1994 and 2007. 1996 is marked by the formation of the Landscape Advisory

Committee (worth noting as a resource for the ULS campus design). The Long Range

Development Plan includes the University Laboratory School as part of the “Main Campus”, but

there is no reference to any developments for the School in the Plan. The 2007 plan revision may

have excluded the ULS campus as a result of the ULS becoming a charter public school in 2001.

However, the ULS is run by the CRDG under contract with the Hawaiʻi State Department of

Education. In combination of the CRDG being a branch of the UHM and the ULS facilities used

by UHM College of Education, the affiliation of the ULS to the UHM remains a symbiotic

relationship. This relationship could be further enhanced through the “community of disciplines”

consisting of the long-established Sea Grant College, the Environmental Center, and the Hawaii



Energy Institute, which has the expertise to also guide the ULS campus redevelopment

challenge.

Office of Sustainability

UHM’s sustainability movement gained momentum with the formation of the Office of

Sustainability, which was located in the Energy House. This breathed new life into the Energy

House which had lost attention and become an aged relic of the progressive thinking behind it.

From this headquarters, which remained in need of much repair, Bruce Miller, Director of the

Office of Sustainability, and Linda Day, initiated many projects which engaged students. They

coordinated the draft of the “Charter of Sustainability” (2003) which was an outcome of two

strategic planning sessions. The planning sessions involved over 1000 faculty and administration

personnel, students, and individuals from the community. The sessions were instigated by the

UH President’s Office and Manoa Chancellor’s Office in early 2002.

The Charter of Sustainability: Stewardship Based on Island Values

The Charter labelled Hawaiʻi as “the endangered species capital of the world”, “the

extinction capitol of the US”. The University, as a research university dedicated to educating

future leaders, therefore has the ultimate responsibility to lead society onto a path of sustainable

development. The Charter’s mission became the guiding principle:

“The University of Hawai`i will apply the principles of sustainable design and

environmental stewardship to all of its activities. It will become a leader in Hawai`i

and the Pacific region in education, research, extension, and community

collaboration related to sustainability.”

The Charter became the UH’s version of Agenda 21 as it laid out a framework outlining

the issues, opportunities, and action plans divided into strategic goals:

Strategic Goal 1 – Use Energy Wisely

Strategic Goal 2 – Practice Sustainable Water Use



Strategic Goal 3 – Minimize Negative Impact on the Land

Strategic Goal 4 – Create Sustainable Buildings

Strategic Goal 5 – Promote Alternative Transportation

Strategic Goal 6 – Minimize Material Waste

Strategic Goal 7 – Adopt Green Purchasing Policies

Strategic Goal 8 – Enhance the Quality of the Campus Experience

Strategic Goal 9 - Teach the Principles of Sustainability

Under this plan the following statement went into effect:

“From this day forward, the University of Hawai`i, acting through its statewide campus

network, is committed to the conservation, sustainable use, and enhancement of the local,

regional and global environment for the present and for the future. We will meet our

commitment through leadership by example in education, research and environmentally

responsible operations. We will engage in equitable and participatory partnerships with the

community to enhance our unique culture. We will ensure social and environmental equity

and justice while supporting a diversified and sustainable path of economic development.

Ultimately, we will design, build and administer our campuses sustainably, in order to

preserve and restore our unique and delicate ecosystems.”

Nine Committees, with a membership consisting of faculty and administrators from many

departments, students, and community members, were formed with each committee working on

one of the strategic goals (University of Hawaiʻi 2003). These goals apply to the ULS redesign.

Sustainability Retreat

A Retreat was conducted in 2005 involving over 40 participants keeping the

sustainability initiative alive. The list of sustainability activities related to the UHM campus,

exposed the wealth of leaders within Hawaiʻi that are all striving towards the same vision of

making UH, and Hawaiʻi, as a world leader in sustainability. Paul “Doc” Berry is one leading

example as he was producing a series of documentaries for a televised course entitled “A

Sustainable Hawaiʻi”. Another is John Harrison, Environmental Coordinator, University of

Hawaiʻi Environmental Center, who articulated the need to start the sustainability process as an

example to educate to our children and to overcome competing priorities, which tend to outpace

motivation for sustainability as evidenced in the lack of alternative energy innovation in newly



constructed UH buildings. Mary Tiles, Department of Philosophy recommended enlisting

students, training them, and build it into research/practice part of learning (UH 2005).

The retreat included some of the members of the nine committees set up under the

Charter, but rather than reviewing progress towards goals, the activities listed on the agenda

came from attendees invited through a survey conducted in 2005 by the UH Sea Grant College

Program and the Office of Sustainability. Although no representation came from Hawaiian

Studies (three members were invited), one concluding requirement for a UH sustainable

development program is to “incorporate indigenous knowledge into our sustainability

approaches” (University of Hawaiʻi 2005). This indicates the necessity to engage all the

stakeholders, making other input options available over an extended time period to achieve

inclusivity, a challenge with such a large community. The need to engage a wider student

population was still evident in the 2013 “Campus Wide Conversations” that promoted me to send

a message to Chancellor Apple (Appendix C).

The document summarizing the proceedings of the 2005 retreat concluded with a website

address to track “Events”; however, the address prompted a SOEST website indicating “Page not

found”.

The loss of continuity of these two initiatives was possibly related to the daily demands

of regular duties for those involved. Professors and students are constantly under ever increasing

demands as they attempt to keep pace with the exponential rise of data and service learning

opportunities, in addition to the regular course requirements. Other than the construction of the

Sustainability Court Yard, no visible campus outcomes were noted until 2007 when the

Sustainable Saunders Initiative started engaging students.



Sustainable Saunders

This project was instigated by the Chancellor’s Office in a partnership with HECO. It

was directed by a steering Committee, consisting of two professors from Public Administration

and one from the College of Social Sciences. Their goal was to make Saunders Hall, a 1970s

constructed building, in collaboration with students and faculty “a model of workplace

sustainability” (University of Hawaiʻi 2010). Shanah Trevenna, a foreign student in Political

Science, used her studies in direct application to her immediate learning environment which were

the classrooms in the unsustainable facilities of Saunders Hall. Progress was made in her

persistent leadership of the student body.

Two common student complaints were over lit, cold classrooms (Sustainable Saunders

2008). Using this feedback, she found the Saunders Building air-conditioning operation was

calibrated to accommodate business attire (full length pants and suit coats) and the lighting

“exceeded the IES recommendations and legal limits set by City and County of Honolulu

ordinance” (Wolfe 2008). That information led to adjusting the air conditioning setting along

with reducing the number of fluorescent lamps, without adding an operational cost, resulting in

an annual energy savings of over 500,000 kwh, and retrofitting water saving devices amounts to

over 100.000 gallons of water/year with a payback period of 10 years (Trevenna 2009, Public

Policy Center 2010). This is an example of “education energy” (e2), a concept of student

empowerment that will be referred to later.

The success of this Initiative, along with Ms. Trevanna’s passionate leadership style,

earned her the “UH President’s Making the Elephant Dance Award” (2008), an award given to

“students who find innovative ways to improve the University’s service to students and the

community” (UH 2013b), and also spawned a student group, Sustainable Saunders HUB. The



HUB became a motivating force for other cross-campus student-led initiatives (e.g. East West

Center Participants Association’s Sustainability Program). This student-led participation is the

biggest boost towards the UH sustainability movement, a demonstration of the potential of youth

given a chance. Sustainable Saunders is a testimony of what can be achieved when youth are

channelled into areas normally carried out by consultants and experts. Engaging the students in

the project escalated the innovation and energy levels as well as building community capacity.

The ideas spawning from the Saunders initiative spread to similar aging buildings

constructed to “mainland” standards that do not take advantage of the characteristics that the

natural Hawaiian environment has to offer. More importantly, such a student-led initiative has an

equal opportunity at the ULS by engaging the students into designing a vision of their dream

school.

Manoa Sustainability Council

The student-led campus-wide movement expanded into the UH Sustainability Corp

which later became the Manoa Sustainability Council and may have been the impetus behind

motivating the former Chancellor Hinshaw to initiate a hiring process to employ five faculty

members towards the first phase of a strategic interdisciplinary initiative, involving student input

(Hinshaw 2011). This “cluster hire” was deemed an innovative strategy, first for the UH, and

possibly the country to form a “multidisciplinary cluster in shaping a core direction of

sustainable research, teaching and outreach on our campus for the next 25 years.” Students

were involved in the candidate selection process (Gilbert 2012). This Council is another body of

resources that may assist the ULS project.

Behind all these initiatives, the UHM is emphasising the Hawaiian component, “Malama

Honua” as part of the educational strategy process (Hinshaw & Meder 2011). This component



supports the inclusion of the indigenous epistemology which has ties to the sustainability aspect

(Kauahipaula et al 2009, Meyers 2007). This is an aspect that could be highlighted more in the

ULS and provides important guidance towards sustainability in the local context.

East West Center

A similar story is found at the East West Center where a student body, working with the

dormitory facility maintenance staff, instigated a sustainability program for that independent

campus (EWCPA 2009). Energy consumption was reduced by retrofitting the dormitory

common areas with activated lighting and encouraging students to be conscious of their energy

consuming habits. Acting on the recommendation of one student, the annual telephone book

exchange requirement was reduced from over 400 telephone books (one per room) to less than

100 (one per unit). This is a prime example of mindful savings instigated by the sustainable

mindset. A common ingredient for the success of these programs is student-led participation. The

student-led projects are an option for administration to reverse the projected rise of tuition fees

(Board of Regents 2012) through cost savings achieved by directing professors to focus their

lessons towards applicability on campus sustainability (e2 2013). Building leadership at the

primary school level (Spillane 2005) would carry over into the University environment. The ULS

could use the same approach to engage the students to address their campus sustainability

challenges. This fortifies the strategy of implementing the empowerment of the major group,

children and youth (ULS student body).

The UHM’s sustainability score (College Sustainability Report Card), which rose from a

C (2009 and 2010) to a B (2011)1, appears to be in part a consequence of the student-led UHM

1 College Sustainability Report Card, a ranking system promoting the use of educational

institutions as community catalysts towards sustainability.



sustainability movement. This movement traces back to the Sustainable Saunders Initiative,

when that initiative created the spark that spread to other initiatives across campus. According to

the Report Card, the lowest score (C) for the UHM is in “Stakeholder Priorities”. This area of

weakness builds the case for Hawaiʻi, the UHM, and the ULS to cultivate and coordinate all local

resources with the objective of bringing more continuity to the movement in its bid to become a

global leader in the sustainability movement.



Chapter 5: Hawaiian Traditional Resource Management

“Aloha is our intelligence.” Manulani Aluli Meyer

Hawaiʻi, the Hub of Aloha, Seedbed of Sustainability

Another unique asset within the greater Hawaiian community for the ULS redevelopment

project is that there are people who still retain the Hawaiian epistemology, a knowledge

grounded in sustainable values. This attribute is highlighted in the University of Hawaiʻi’s

strategic plan (2011-2015), as a measure to establish a unique quality not available to all other

non-Hawaiian universities. The University recognizes the need for the campus community to be

guided by Hawaiian values to achieve a more sustainable campus. In support of this approach,

indigenous wisdom has been recognized to be as important as western science, especially when

related to environmental practices (Snively & Corsiglia 2001, Grinde & Johansen 1995, UN

1992).

In the pre-contact period before the European and Asian influx, Hawaiians had a complex

social order that appeared highly sustainable. Information transfer was an intergenerational

process that cultivated knowledge and spiritual awareness (Young 1998). The Hawaiians had a

deep connection to the land as evidenced by their resource management practices that are now

being recognised as highly sustainable. Western contact altered the social order dislocating

Hawaiians from their land and traditional practices. After 1820, the missionaries replaced family

and occupational teachings by holding classroom assemblies where English and Western

acculturation were the focus. The effort was viewed as a mechanism of converting the heathen

and savages into civilized Christians (Daws 1968, Young 1998, Osorio 2001).

In 1840, public education was formerly recognized by Kauikeaouli Kamehameha III. The

literacy rate in the English language was between 80 and 99% that year. By 1896 the Hawaiian



language was no longer allowed to be used in the school system. This marked the beginning of

an erosion of the high literacy rating (Kamehameha Schools 2005). When the language ban was

discontinued in 1986, fewer than 50 youth under the age of 18 could speak Hawaiian fluently

(Wilson 1998).

The Native Hawaiian population does not presently exhibit the same level of achievement

as do non-native populations in terms of educational success. Three educational assessments

have been conducted, published in the years 1983, 1993, and 2005. The achievement gap was not

reducted from one assessment to the next. Hawaiians exceed the state averages in substance

abuse, incarceration, suicide, and deviance (Kamehameha Schools 2005).

Native Hawaiians are the largest cultural group in the Hawaiʻi public school system at

over 25% of the student population. The Native Hawaiian Educational Act (1988) designated

funds to 1) address the needs of gifted and talented students; 2) develop educational and

vocational curricula that incorporate Hawaiian knowledge; 3) develop community-based learning

centers to serve pre-schoolers and after-school students; 4) and research and evaluate educational

status and needs of Native Hawaiians. The Act was reauthorized in 2001 for another 5 years to

address the continued disparity between the Hawaiians and state average levels.

Kanalu G. Terry Young’s Rethinking the Native Hawaiian Past (1998) also indicates

there is much to learn from a deeper study of the Hawaiian social structure. The understanding

gained through expanding the focus beyond the Ali'i Nui to other levels of society, such as the

Kaukau Ali'i, could trigger a more enlightened methodology to advance civilization into an

increased collaborative structure. It appears more innovation and new leadership has to be

generated into field of education to address the Hawaiian youth situation.



The evolution of Hawaiʻi’s epistemology is well captured in the writings of Osorio,

Yamauchi, Menton, Meyers, and Chun. Chun captures the Hawaiian educational values before

western influences, Osorio and Menton capture the transitional period, Meyer emphasises the

importance of revitalizing the Hawaiian epistemology to address the declining state of Hawaiʻi,

and Yamauchi draws our attention to a ray of hope of keeping Hawaiian culture alive through

education. To begin with, Osorio gives us a snapshot of ancient Hawaiian cultural development,

referring back to Polynesian origins and jumping to Hawaiian unification under King

Kamehameha I. He enlightens us about the social structure that developed to survive, given the

limited resources of the islands. He highlights the cultural belief, referred to as Malama ʻAina

(cherished land), that persisted throughout this period of time, likely over 2000 years, which tied

the agricultural communities dependence to the health of the environment. Land was held as a

common resource which the chiefs selected through heritage, and through which led the

community activities for survival (Osario 2005).

Chun (2006) draws from a credible source, Nānā I Ke Kumu (Pukui 1983), to give us a

view of the pre-westernized Hawaiian tenets of knowledge development, which include

observation (nānā or ʻike), listening (hoʻolohe), reflection (paʻa ka waha), and questioning

(nīnau) (Chun 2006). Returning to Osario’s (2005) description of the “Beginnings”, one can

assume it was the role of the chief to establish the framework of the education system for the

community. One can also assume that much knowledge was transmitted as in most ancient

cultures where it is passed down from the elders to the children through oral stories and

demonstration of practices of agriculture, hunting, home economics, etc. These principles of

learning are also reflected in the knowledge development practices of the North American Native

Indians described by McGaa (2004) and the emerging discoveries in neuroscience (Siegel 2012).



Under this epistemology, social practices used the laws demonstrated by nature to

integrate into their life-style, in compliance with those laws. Both Hawaiians and Native

Americans observed whole systems of nature in designing their activities. This is becoming

evident as a superior methodology in comparison to the reductionist approach used in the modern

scientific method, with its emerging side effects

The holistic approach appears to have less impact on social and environmental values

when compared to the reductionist approach (mainstream framework) displaying associated

harmful side effects. An example is the superiority of the ancient water management system

(ahupuaʻa) developed by the Hawaiians, when compared to present day systems, which

developed under scientific advances. Parts of the USA and Canada, which employ modern

management systems, are beginning to face water management challenges. A reasonable

question is whether we might come to a similar conclusion of the superiority of the more holistic

ancient pedagogy over the westernized system that divides learning into a reductionist approach

by separating knowledge into subject areas? Some advancement in pedagogy show the

advantages of interrelating knowledge area subjects. High school teachers of each grade level

can collaborate with each other to ensure that each subject meshes with the material being

presented in the other courses their students are learning during the semester. This is an approach

prescribed in Agenda 21 (Chapter 36).

Menton (1992) enlightens us about the infusion of American missionaries into Hawaiʻi

and their role creating a schooling system to establish the tenets of Christianity and civilization

(p.218). She also mentions the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign

Missions (ABCFM) was similarly focused on civilizing the Native American Indians. According

to her sources, it was when Hawaiian adults lost interest in learning that the missionaries turned



to teaching the children. Menton’s description of the pedagogy of the Cookes gives us a detailed

view of the teaching method used on the children of the Aliʻi at the Royal School. Menton

conveys that the teaching results were futile. The Cookes encountered the same resistance that

the Hawaiian adults developed after their exposure to the teachings. The young royalty’s

behaviour to the teaching style appeared to echo the teaching challenges in today’s society,

where the parents and grandparents roles have been replaced by teachers. I recall in my

schooling experience I became opposed to my family elders’ views, thinking they were old

fashioned, lacking any credibility in contrast to the progressive ideas being conveyed in the

school lessons. In addition, the description mirrors the “residential schools” established in

Canada to civilize the “First Nation” (Indian) children. The word “genocide” has been used in

many references describing these residential schools. The Canadian government is doling out

over $2.6 billion in compensation for the negative effects that these schools had on their

attendees (Pemberton 2011). The “First Nation” peoples of Canada (and Alberta) share a similar

history to that of the Hawaiians, starting out as a thriving society under their own cultural beliefs

only to end up in the same low socioeconomic position while attempting to survive under a

foreign socioeconomic structure.

To cast a ray of hope on these dismal historical reviews, Yamauchi et al. (1999) describes

the formation of the Hawaiian immersion schools to prevent the “genocide” of the Hawaiian

culture. This article portrays the resilience of a people who will not allow history to bury their

culture, and links the importance of educating in the Hawaiian language to achieve preservation.

The “residential schools” of Canada and the USA, that assimilated the indigenous

peoples into the western culture, are a prime example of using education not to benefit the

individual, but to achieve politically driven agendas. The residential schools should be used as a



model to assess educational processes as a brainwashing or empowerment pedagogy. Education

for sustainable development epitomizes Einstein’s statement “we cannot solve our problems with

the same level of thinking that created them”. Much literature recommends a new way of

thinking that requires a shift from linear or reductionist thinking to “systems thinking” (Sterling

2001), a process for a sustainable paradigm.

Meyer (2007) details the 7 categories of “intelligence” related to the Hawaiian culture.

One of the principal ones is “ania” or land, “the one which feeds”. The concept of our

relationship with the land has a significant impact on how we interact with the land. Viewing

land as property or real estate makes it an expendable commodity which deviates from the

traditional Hawaiian notion that land was the source of life that had to be managed by the

community in accordance with that value. Another category of intelligence is “ʻike” or

knowledge and traditions. This principle is captured in the Worldwide voyage of the Hōkūlea

and Hikianalia (2012-2017), resurrecting the Hawaiian mastery of navigation and discovery. The

mission of these voyages “is to navigate towards a healthy and sustainable future for ourselves –

the Hawaiian Islands – and our island Earth through voyaging and new ways of learning.” The

forthcoming voyage is facilitating the “Hawaiʻi Challenge”, a collaborative joining of the forces

of all those working towards a sustainable future (PVS 2012). These Hawaiian values strike to

the core of sustainable development.

These values in some way can come to frame many and perhaps most of the ULS

programs but certainly to frame the activities of ULS students participating in programs that are

grounded in Hawaiian values such as the “Worldwide voyage” and Project Pono. These are

elective programs at the ULS which reflect Meyer’s call to re-establish a strong relationship with

the land by introducing environmental stewardship, grounded in Hawaiian values. However, a



substantial opportunity lies in the challenge that faces the ULS as they contemplate their options

for the land, subject to the pending campus renovation project. Engaging ULS students, teachers,

and staff in the planning process has the potential to emanate the epitome of sustainable

development and experiential learning. The normal planning pattern of employing “experts” to

design and construct a campus misses out on empowering the ULS students and its community.

Ultimately the campus revitalizing challenge can offer an opportunity to integrate

Hawaiian values as a foundation for building an exemplary “Made in Hawaiʻi” learning

environment. The UHM affiliation is a key asset as the Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian

Knowledge would be a worthy partner in laying the foundations of Hawaiian values and has the

potential to compensate for the unjust historical actions imposed by the influx of foreigners.

In this partnership, the ULS can research the applicability of Hawaiian epistemology

towards program designs to address the low graduation rate of native Hawaiians. This has the

potential to be applied on an international level to other indigenous peoples struggling in the

present education format. I contend this approach would address the shortcomings of all students

who struggle in school.



Chapter 6: Applicability of a Public Participatory Process

“Our greatest natural resource is the minds of our children.” Walt Disney

A ULS’s asset to aid in the success of its redevelopment project is its student body of

children and youth. Society in general has a tendency to overlook or silence its children and

youth, while being led by “experts”. In its broad framing the UN global model of sustainability

is dependent in expanding the participatory parameters to children and youth, recognizing the

historical absence of including them and youth in policy development processes. The inclusion

of this major group is also a path to attain equality. Establishing an equitable human rights

system is most likely to occur under education development theories framed under the lens of

“capability-building” (Blagescu & Young 2006). A major example of a “capacity-building”

model involving children and youth that could have salience for the ULS appeared in Canada in

2008, when the Alberta Government (Ministry of Education) initiated Inspiring Education: A

Dialogue With Albertans. This program appeared to give all Albertans the opportunity to

liberate themselves by contributing to create policy towards an education system designed by the

public for the public. Enlisting the theory that the strength of society can be boosted by

education (Felson and Sotis 2005), the Alberta initiative also has become a research model that

could be used to assess the degree of engagement it produced. Building on strengths of the

process, a modified program could be designed to fully engage the ULS student body and the

larger community as a resource to assist the redevelopment planning and implementation. This

can be achieved in part by aligning its curriculum to practical real-life challenges. This is the

foundational workings of “Education Energy” (e2 2013).



Inspiring Education

Since 2008, the Alberta Government has been engaging in a public dialogue towards

visioning an education system to meet the demands of the future. Province-wide public forums

have been conducted, and youth (secondary school level) were solicited through the “Speak Out”

website, along with a student advisory committee to the Minister of Education. The objective of

the initiative is to engage the people of Alberta to create a “Made in Alberta vision” of their

dream education program for Albertans.

The Program engaged youth in the following ways:

Nov. 26, 2008 “Speak Out” website launched aimed at students from grade 9-12,

Included a Youth Advisory Council to the Minister of Education – comprised of

24 youth across Alberta 14-19 years old with a one year term

Youth Advisory Council member duties:

ambassadors for Speak Out!

active on the Speak Out website discussion boards and blogs.

hosted a Speak Out Forum using the DVD Toolkit in their school

met with the Minister of Education a few times each year to share

their perspectives on education.

received media training, public speaking and facilitation training

and leadership opportunities.

October 2009 the Speak Out team launched the DVD toolkit. This award winning

educational program was created in response to the overwhelming requests for

Speak Out forums to be delivered across the province.



2009-2010 The Speak Out program was conducted to 70 Speak Out forums during the

school year to approx. 2,300 students

2009 – 10 public forums conducted which included some youth participants

In June 2010 the Steering Committee released a report of its findings and further solicited

online conversations/discussion/dialogue/blogging to captured comments of this release. The

Education Act was passed in 2012, and online feedback was again solicited on the Act itself.

The Government of Alberta (GOA) claims the process included every type of learner – urban,

rural, Aboriginal, disabled, gifted, or of a minority culture. It appears all input was treated as

equal without any weight being given to the input of any of those groups.

Research Project on Inspiring Education

To qualify the perspective of youth, the 2009 Global Youth Assembly in Edmonton gave

researchers (myself and Dian Mitrayani – Northern Illinois University) an opportunity to design

and conduct a workshop to increase the scope of youth in visioning participation for Inspiring

Education, to a national and international level. We made a special effort to invite “First Nation”

(FN) youth; however, no FN representatives attended. Our workshop, which attracted 19

national and 1 international (Ukraine) participants, was facilitated by 6 skilled facilitators, and

followed the IE workshop format by having the participants discuss their experience of the

education system and what education means to them. The last exercise was to build a dream

school. The proceedings of the workshop captured the following information. It was recorded

and submitted in a report to the government in the fall of 2009.

School experiences

Education serves as opportunity to careers, as a compass, global connection, and

key to possibilities



School acts as a disconnected institution with little bonding between students and

teachers

Schooling = memorization, fast food curriculum, grade oriented

Students = receivers of information

School environment in unsustainable structures felt much like being in prison

Vision of Dream Education

Holistic education

Nurture creativity

Democratic

Interdisciplinary

Connect with nature

Humanity aspect of learning - care curriculum, culture of peace, spirituality

Constructive thinking

Equal access in education

Teachers as facilitator, students as co-teacher

Collaboration between students, teachers, and community (ensuring inclusion of elders)

for education development

School is flexible - Freedom to learn what the student passionate about, students as

partners in curriculum development

Sustainable and natural environment schools (green schools)

This involvement also allowed the researchers to observe and assess the government

initiative from an academic perspective. This was achieved by attending a public forum (June

2009), dialoguing with administrators, and following the progress that was posted on dedicated



websites. It would be interesting to conduct a similar exercise with the ULS students for a

comparison. I suggest that this is a valid procedure for the ULS in their project agenda.

The Initiative’s steering committee released the findings in the spring of 2010.

The report constructed the type of learner the input was describing:

“Engaged thinker

thinks critically and makes discoveries; uses technology to learn, innovate, communicate,

and discover; works with multiple perspectives and disciplines to identify problems and find best

solutions; communicates the ideas to others; adapts to change with an attitude of optimism and

hope for the future.

Ethical citizen

builds relationships based on humility, fairness, and open-mindedness; demonstrates

respect, empathy and compassion; through team work, collaboration, and communication

contributes fully to the community and the world.

Entrepreneurial spirit

creates opportunities and achieves goals through hard work, perseverance and

discipline; strives for excellence ad earns success, explores ideas and challenges the status quo;

is competitive, adaptable and resilient; has the confidence to take risks and make bold decisions

in the face of adversity.”

The report also recommended policy and governance shifts.



Figure 3 Policy Shift

Figure 4 Governance Shift

The “Guiding Principles” for policy development were conveyed as:

Learner-centered

Shared responsibility and accountability

Engaged community

Inclusive, equitable access

Responsive, flexible approach

Sustainable and efficient resources

Innovation to promote and strive for excellence

The report allowed the researchers to compare the findings with the ideas captured at the

GYA workshop. This assessment triggered an opportunity to interject feedback on the report’s

“guiding principles” towards policy development, based on the workshop input.



Framed in the context of the input of the youth participants, the following

recommendations are proposed as rewording for the Guiding Principles:

Learner-centered

Stated in report: "Decision makers should consider the needs of children and youth first

and foremost when making decisions."

Assessment: Does not express the importance of engaging children and youth to co-create

their destiny

Recommended wording: “To assess the needs of children and youth, decision makers

must include the voices of children and youth through participatory dialogue

Shared responsibility and accountability

Stated: "Acknowledging that parents are the primary guide and decision makers for

children, all partners in education should share responsibility and accountability for

educational outcomes."

Assessment: same as previous

Recommend: Acknowledging that children and youth are one of the primary

stakeholders, their participation should be stimulated and reflected in education

development. This process will create ownership for the stakeholders by increasing

equitable responsibility and accountability.

Engaged communities

Stated: “Community resources should be fully engaged to support learners, including

expertise, facilities, services, and learning opportunities. Community resources – where

local, provincial, national or global – should actively participate in the education of

learners.”



Recommend: Special efforts should be given to create an environment for

intergenerational interactions. The interaction would provide a two-way learning

opportunity for both elders and children/young people to stimulate the evolution of

education development.

Sustainable and Efficient Use of Resources

Stated: “Decision-makers should identify and adopt strategies and structures that

optimize resources (financial and human) and minimize duplication.”

Recommend: New schools must be leading models of sustainable design and

consideration should be given for assessing and retrofitting or replacing existing school to

house the learners in the optimum sustainable learning environment.

These recommendations received favorable feedback when Ms Mitrayani and myself

presented our research project at Mount Royal University’s Symposium on the Scholarship of

Teaching and Learning (2010) and the annual Comparative International Education Society’s

conference in Montreal (2011).

The IE process produced guiding principles that are applicable to the ULS.Our research

displayed how the principles could be worded to increase the engagement and empowerment of

children and youth, also an objective that can be applied to the ULS redevelopment process.

Therefore the IE process would be well-adapted to a community capacity building instrument

towards guiding the upgrade transition for the ULS campus. This is also an opportunity to reflect

on the learning environment as proposed by Dewey wherein students are directly engaged in

capacity building inclusive of parents, teachers, ULS administration, and the surrounding

community (including the UHM and Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge).



Lessons learned from the IE process are improving ways to engage marginalized and youth

populations. Since they are prime stakeholders, it is recommended their input be given a higher

weight factor towards policy development. This also stimulates their involvement in the real

world which will follow them into university, where they become change agents to address the

challenges facing the higher education sector (Taylor 2009).

The process presents ULS a significant opportunity to collaborate with government, public,

and the Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge to address the highly important situation

of training indigenous students. This will contribute towards improving the indigenous rights of

Hawaiians. Such a process can empower the community in creating a collaborated destiny of

education. Finally, such a process can be evaluated in alignment with the research objectives of

ULS for adoption worldwide.



Chapter 7

Discussion

The strategy of Agenda 21 is to “attack the causes” of distorted social and economic

development by shifting the economic rationality program of industrialized societies to a

sustainable development paradigm by utilizing perspectives that have had little influence in

centuries of policy development. According to historical and archeology records, policy

development has been dominated by adult males for millenniums (Eisler 1987). Agenda 21

directs nations to change this dynamic by empowering and engaging the qualities inherent in

women (nurturing), youth (innovation), and the indigenous peoples (environmental stewardship).

It appears that the King and Brownell knowledge development framework is predominantly a

male designed model, which offers little choice on electives and options for students to follow

their learning interests. Such a framework can be categorized into Neuman’s “mainstream”

structure. According to my conclusion on knowledge development frameworks (Chapter 3), such

a learning model is not based on the best suited framework to induce a sustainable mindset. In

contrast, the elective Project Pono, appears to be an exception to the overall ULS program by

allowing the student more freedom in developing a self-directed syllabus. Based on “major

groups” assets available to the ULS through the Hawaiian community, outlined in the previous

chapters, the answer to the second question of this research query is “education for sustainable

development” does offer a framework that the ULS can employ in the School’s campus

redevelopment and curriculum development processes. In fact, many schools and universities

that are not as well endowed as the ULS are well into “greening” up their campuses, while others

have a vision of leading the way to sustainability through teaching and campus sustainability

initiatives (e.g. Aalto University, Finland). The UH has intensified the sustainability movement,



which offers the ULS available resources to advance the School towards sustainability. The

traditional ULS teacher-researcher role (King 1966) would in turn facilitate researching and

designing programs specific to education for sustainable development.

Can the ULS redevelopment initiative interact with the UHM sustainability initiatives to

strengthen the evolution of both? As the UHM is striving to become a world class research

university and to advance Hawaiʻi as a national leader in sustainability (Hinshaw & Meder

2011), the sustainability goals can be applied to the campus transformation of the ULS. This in

turn can act as a more manageable microcosm to achieve the goals of UHM’s strategic plan

(UHM 2011). According to the “Report Card”, the lowest score (C) for the UHM is in

“Stakeholder Priorities”. This area of weakness presents significant opportunities for Hawaiʻi,

the UHM and its feeder school and educational research center, the University Laboratory

School (ULS) to cultivate and coordinate all the local resources with the objective of becoming a

global leader in the sustainability movement. The ULS already has an established working

relationship with the leading experts associated with the UHM. As suggested earlier at the 2005

Sustainability Retreat, Mary Tiles, Department of Philosophy recommended “enlisting students,

train them and build it into research/practice part of learning” (University of Hawaiʻi 2005). In

fact, this idea with all the recommendations made at the 2005 retreat could be more easily

managed when scaled down to the ULS campus.

This applies directly to the other Retreat recommendations to 1) “develop courses

through an experimental college series that would cover sustainability practices for the home”;

2) ‘sponsor “Smart Practices” competitions that focus on unit efforts to conserve energy,

conserve water, or efficient use of land/space for multiple purposes’; 3) “incorporate indigenous

knowledge into our sustainability approaches”; 4) “create an urban garden on campus”; 5)



“increase the knowledge base for low maintenance gardening, composting, recycling, etc.”; 6)

“work with state and county planners to make sustainability efforts permissible under the

building and health codes”; 7) “develop a set of sustainability indicators that would serve as

benchmarks for improvement of the University of Hawaiʻi’s sustainability practices”; and 8)

“develop classroom case studies that initiate research on the effect of sustainable practices on our

campus ecosystem.” Ultimately the goals of becoming 1) “a transformative teaching and learning

environment”, 2) “a global leading research university”, 3) “and engaged university”, and 4)

“facilitating excellence”, as stated in the UHM’s 2001-2015 Strategic Plan, might be easier to

achieve through the recommendations of the Retreat, at the ULS scale. This would in turn be a

testing ground for the most effective approach for application at the UHM level.

Can the Hawaiian cultural component and the UHM Hawaiian strategy be applied to the

ULS’s development plans? The UHM’s strategic plan conveys the “significance of Mānoa as a

campus physically and conceptually grounded in Native Hawaiian knowledge and values. This

cuts across each of our strategic goals. Hawai‘i’s unique location and strength in indigenous

scholarship sets us apart from other universities” (UHM 2011)" Such a strategic plan appears it

could act as a guide for the ULS. The recent formation of the Hawai‘inuiākea School of

Hawaiian Knowledge (2007), making it “one of the largest school of indigenous knowledge in

the US” (Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge 2011), has potential of strengthening

the cultural component of the ULS. The Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (2007)

has also heightened the recognition for inclusion of these marginalized people to policy

development. In the Hawaiian context, the Hawaiian epistemology, which aligns with the

McGaa framework, appears to have much to offer when considering alternative knowledge



development frameworks (Chun 2006, Kauahipaula et al 2009, Kimura & Wilson 1983, Osario

2005, Meyer 2007).

Which knowledge development approach best suits education for sustainable

development? The knowledge development process that equally engages all “groups” of its

population is the most appropriate. Of the four frameworks assessed, the most empowering

frameworks are Morris and Kirby, which recognize the need to establish equality free from any

dominating influence. The MaGaa framework does have a more nature-orientated format which

aligns best with the Hawaiian epistemology. The research component of the ULS could be used

to determine the best knowledge development framework for stimulating a sustainable mindset.

Carrying out a renovation project on a functioning school has obvious disruptive

implications. If the campus is embarking upon a complete transformation to achieve the highest

sustainable attributes available, then this is the only option that the ULS should consider, as such

the renovations are costly and would take years to complete. Bureaucratic challenges are

experienced when any process is initiated at UHM. Being designated as a charter public school

adds to the complexity of process alterations. The risk-taking, rule free environment once

enjoyed by the ULS has added to the challenge in proceeding as a visionary institution. The

Department of Education (DOE) has to answer to the needs of the Hawaiian school system with

limited resources. The ULS has already drawn political criticism because many of the students

attending the school were from families of UH faculty, giving the School an elitist status. Any

favoritism towards a school will draw political criticism, so any consideration to such a

transformational plan would have to be well justified. Under a political and economically-driven

agenda the process will be challenging. Achieving sustainability is up against the same obstacles.

However, with the smaller community size of the ULS, employing a scaled-down community



participatory process similar to the one used in Alberta, makes such a task transparent and more

attainable.

Conclusion

The conflicts between nations, that triggered the formation of the United Nations, have

escalated to a conflict between nations and the Earth. The mission of the United Nations is to

prevent another occurrence of the tragedies witnessed in WWII. Unprecedented threats to the

existence of humanity, however, such as climate change, plasticification and acidification of the

oceans, contamination, economic collapses, and population growth are inducing new stresses

between nations and the Planet itself. The precepts of Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(1948), the UN’s first international agreement, have now escalated to include protecting the

Earth. This trend has triggered an international movement to adopt a sustainable development

paradigm. Governments, non-government organizations, scientists, schools, universities, and

individuals are joining the movement with the goal of inducing world-wide cooperation to find

solutions to growing issues. The University of Hawaiʻi appears to be aggressively taking

measures to change its modus operandi with a vision of becoming a leader in sustainable

development. Within the campus is the ULS, a microcosm needing infrastructure retrofitting to

advance the campus into the 21st Century.

Human resource consumption, driven by an economically-driven system of the free

market, is escalating “development” at levels that is altering the Planet’s ecosystems to the point

of threatening a global mass extinction (Thompson 2010). Hawaiʻi itself is a microcosm within

the Planet that is being impacted by culminating world “development”. The rise of the

reactionary movement to the impacts of industrial processes can be attributed to people pursuing

their own research interests in contrast to the research agenda most graduate students are bound,



due to the parameters set by funding agencies. An example is Rachael Carson who reached a

wide public audience to convey her findings on the detrimental effects of DDT to natural

systems. Her publication Silent Spring (Carson 1962) has been cited as igniting the

environmental movement (Griswold 2012). The movement gained international footing with Our

Common Future (Brundtland 1987), which articulated a need for a global change. This initiated

the international agenda leading up to the formulation of a new world development paradigm.

The path to the paradigm is captured in the objectives of Agenda 21 (1992). Under a sustainable

development paradigm all development is conducted without neglecting that the social,

economic, and social values are in balance. Building on global human rights, Agenda 21

recognized the important need to include the demographics of people who have historically had

little direct input to policy development. Inclusion of the historically oppressed groups (women,

children and youth, and indigenous people) has the potential to add new dimensions to

manifesting an awakened global consciousness. The UN international collaborative to formulate

a sustainable development paradigm, by addressing threats to humanity, is gathering the

perspectives of these groups through their multifaceted programs and websites. As this

movement grows exponentially in the number of participants and the volumes of data that are

accessible to all, the movement is manifesting the education that is spelled out by the Declaration

which states: “Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and

to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote

understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall

further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.” (Article 26(2)). This

notion of individual empowerment manifesting a different reality is articulated from educational

leaders, as the likes of UH’s own Dr. Meyer (2007) to being portrayed in documentaries such as



“What the Bleep do We Know” (Arntz et al. 2004). Another way to frame this notion is the

consideration that history would not have been so dominated by conflict and wars if women had

equally been involved as policy makers and leaders.

Based on the assumption that our education system has been mostly influenced by the

paradigm it has been formulated under (the male-dominated Industrial Age), the analyses of

knowledge development frameworks offer an understanding of the “cause” of intellectual

direction. The need to analyze the basis of our knowledge development is also reflected in the

writings of scholars such as Ray Kuzweil (2001) and Dan Siegel (2012). Inducing a sustainable

development paradigm, intelligence comes from a community collective that understands its

relationship to the Planet. The first step therefore is to reconnect our learning populations to

nature. The second step is to nurture and give equal value to the talents each person brings to a

community. This is a cornerstone to achieving sustainable development by world consensus

(UNESCO 1992). The process to design the ULS campus redevelopment offers a unique

opportunity to establish a democratic process to include the “major groups”, which could be

accomplished through a transparent community participatory process.

Children and youth, who are viewed as the hope of the future, would be given a higher

priority through such a process. Their future should be further nurtured by educating them in

sustainable environments. The Finnish School system, ranked top in the world, accomplishes

this by engaging students in a relaxed learning environment (Wagner 2012). This is a “Guiding

Principle” of the Alberta education policy development (Chapter 7). “Mindfulness” learning is

another strategy that blends well with a reconnection to nature and allowing individuals to

discover their intelligence (talents) (Atthayanun 2008). The MaGaa framework rooted in nature



and reflection, influenced by local (Hawaiian) values, in combination with King/Brownell liberal

education approach form a strong foundation to build a sustainable development paradigm.

This combination of parameters indicates that the ULS is in a unique position to be a

prime candidate to join the global movement as a research facility in testing and developing

education for sustainable development programs. Further, to test the programs effectively, the

students’ reconnection with nature could be accomplished by housing them in a complimentary

sustainable environment that capitalizes on the uniqueness of the Hawaiian ecosystem.

Employing an architectural design that induces exceptional academic performance should aid the

overall learning experience.

An effective way to arrive at such an innovative, locally appropriate campus design, that

has the potential to surpass accolades of the Green School Bali, is by using a modified Alberta

public engagement, community capacity building model. This model would employ all available

resources from 1) the ULS (faculty, parents and students), 2) the University of Hawaiʻi (faculty

and student populations, 3) the East West Center’s faculty and student populations, 3) the faculty

and students of the Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge), and 4) the local community

of interested stakeholders (including interested contractors, engineers, architects, politicians,

retired educators, etc.). This is the UHM’s approach of their capacity building exercise to

confront their sustainability challenges. Success is occurring to a degree. At the Sustainability

Retreat the scale of the challenge was daunting with a noted tendency to slip back into business

as usual. Even with the creation of the Energy House and the Hawaiʻi Nature Energy Institute

over 40 years ago, little evidence is seen in the Hawaiian development scene that the forward

thinking of these initiatives has much influence. To address this tendency and make

sustainability a potential game changing process, the ULS should become the central focus of the



University of Hawaiʻi system. It could become a manageable model of a sustainable campus

emphasizing its importance as a UH feeder school producing top scholars, whose innovative

traits continue to evolve humanity towards a prosperous future.

This exercise has the potential of catapulting the ULS and the University of Hawaiʻi into

a top global prodigious educational institute. Hawaiian students would no longer gravitate to

“mainland” universities, as their elementary and secondary education would be transformed by

the adoption of ULS “Made in Hawaiʻi” programs by State public schools. Treated as a top

priority, the ULS has the potential to become a generator of youth leaders who have honed their

talents to their full potential through a democratic, sustainable, experiential learning

environment. These students have the potential to become engaged mindful scholars

characterised by innovation, to move the University of Hawaiʻi towards being a world class

university.

The students graduating from this educational environment, built on local values, not

only have the potential to become catalysts of sustainability; but also the potential to be seeds for

an Age of Equality, Peace, and Prosperity! This builds on the case Stile’s presented (1965) to

transform the ULS into an educational research center. His idea saved the School from

extinction; this study builds a case there is a role for the ULS to strengthen the trend towards

saving humanity!



References

Aalto University. 2013. Sustainability at Aalto. About Us.

http://www.aalto.fi/en/about/sustainability/#sustainability_and_responsibility_in_teachin

g_research

Al-Khalili, J. 2012. Order and Disorder. BBC Horizon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVqWqi_eoZk

Sadovnik, A.R., Cookson, Jr., P.W., Semel, S.F. 2001. Exploring education : an introduction to

the foundations of education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Alessio, L.M. 2013. Earl Shapiro Hall opens doors to a new world for Laboratory Schools’

youngest learners. UChicago News. The University of Chicago. Ill. October 7, 2013.

http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2013/10/07/earl-shapiro-hall-opens-doors-new-world-

laboratory-schools-youngest-learners

Arntz, W., Chasse, B., Vicente, M. (Producers and Directors). 2004. What the Bleep Do We

Know. (Documentary). USA. Roadside Attractions.

*Atthayanun, S. 2008. Cultivation for Good Habit; Discipline, Respect and Patience by Using

Self-Development Exercise:"3-To-1 Wonderful we can do" of students under Ang Thong

Educational Service Area Office Region. Follow up and evaluate group of Administrative

Education (Thai*).

Bárcena, A. (1994), ‘An Overview of Follow-up of Agenda 21 at the National Level’, in Helge

Ole Bergesen and Georg Parmann (eds.), Green Globe Yearbook of International Co-

operation on Environment and Development 1994 (Oxford: Oxford University Press),

127–136.

Barr, S.K. 2011. Green Schools That Teach: Identifying Attributes of Whole-School

Sustainability. Thesis. Master of Science. Colorado State University. Ft. Collins, CO.

Summer 2011.

Blagescu, M. Young, J. Capacity Development for Policy Advocacy: Current Thinking and

Approaches Among Agencies Supporting Civil Society Organizations. Working Paper

260, London, Overseas Development Institute, 2006, 56p.

Board of Regents. 2012. Tuition Schedules, 2012-2013 through 2016-2017. Executive Policy –

Administration. August, 2012, E6.201.

Campbell, James. 1995. Understanding John Dewey: nature and cooperative

intelligence, Chicago, IL: Open Court, 1995.

Castleden, R. 1993. Minoan Life in Bronze Age Crete. Routledge: New York, NY.

http://www.aalto.fi/en/about/sustainability/#sustainability_and_responsibility_in_teaching_research

http://www.aalto.fi/en/about/sustainability/#sustainability_and_responsibility_in_teaching_research

http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2013/10/07/earl-shapiro-hall-opens-doors-new-world-laboratory-schools-youngest-learners

http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2013/10/07/earl-shapiro-hall-opens-doors-new-world-laboratory-schools-youngest-learners



Chaniotis, A. 2010. Ancient Crete. Oxford Bibliographies.

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195389661/obo-

9780195389661-0071.xml;jsessionid=CF21A00986B44F228798C388A748BF29

Cherry, K. 2013. Theories of Intelligence. About.com. Education Psychology.

http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/intelligence.htm

Chun, M.N. 2006. Aʻo Educational Traditions. Curriculum Research & Development Group,

University of Hawaiʻi, HI.

COSEPUP (Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy). 2004. Facilitating

Interdisciplinary Research. The National Academies Press. Washington DC.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11153&page=R1

Cockett, P. 2001. Ahupuaʿa: sustainability. ʿĀinakumuwai: Ahupuaʿa of Nawiliwili Bay.

http://www.hawaii.edu/environment/ainakumuwai/html/sustainability.htm

COE (College of Education). 2012. Arthur R. King Jr. Faculty We’ve Lost.

https://coe.hawaii.edu/about/getting-know-us/faculty-student-profiles/2012/06/arthur-r-

king-jr

Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. John Murray: London, England.

Davaras, C. 1989. Guide to Cretan Antiquities. 2 ed. Athens, Greece: Eptalofos.

DESA (Department of Economic and Social Affairs-United Nations). Nd. About the Division for

Sustainable Development. http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/about.html

______. 2013a. Sustainable Development in action. UN Sustainable Development Knowledge

Platform. http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1348

_______ . 2013b. Special Report of the SD in Action Newsletter. Outreach and Communications

Branch, Division for Sustainable Development. United Nations Department of Economic

and Social Affairs. Special edition of the Sustainable Development in Action Newsletter,

July 2013.

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/930Report%20on%20Voluntary

%20Commitments%20and%20Partnerships.pdf

_______ . 2013c. Sustainable Development in Action: Register here. UN Sustainable

Development Knowledge Platform.

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/account.php?page=view&type=12&nr=457&menu

=1457&add=1006

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195389661/obo-9780195389661-0071.xml;jsessionid=CF21A00986B44F228798C388A748BF29

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195389661/obo-9780195389661-0071.xml;jsessionid=CF21A00986B44F228798C388A748BF29

http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/intelligence.htm

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11153&page=R1

http://www.hawaii.edu/environment/ainakumuwai/html/sustainability.htm

https://coe.hawaii.edu/about/getting-know-us/faculty-student-profiles/2012/06/arthur-r-king-jr

https://coe.hawaii.edu/about/getting-know-us/faculty-student-profiles/2012/06/arthur-r-king-jr

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/about.html

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1348

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/930Report%20on%20Voluntary%20Commitments%20and%20Partnerships.pdf

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/930Report%20on%20Voluntary%20Commitments%20and%20Partnerships.pdf

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/account.php?page=view&type=12&nr=457&menu=1457&add=1006

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/account.php?page=view&type=12&nr=457&menu=1457&add=1006



Discovery. 2010. The Brain: Our Universe Within. Discovery Channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wX2ppkiCp0

Domhaus, A. 2010. Evolution of Mind and Brian. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Lecture

March 9, 2010 at University of Arizona.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_jODjsFt6w

Duncan. A. 2012. Greening Our Schools. US Secretary of Education addressing Green School

National Network Conference, Denver, Co. Feb. 28, 2012.

e2. 2013. No Project Left Behind. Education Energy. http://educationenergy.net/welcome/

Ed.gov. 2013. US Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools.

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/green-ribbon-schools/index.html

Edmondson III, H.T. 2001. John Dewey Revisited. The Political Science Reviewer.

http://www.mmisi.org/pr/28_01/edmondson.pdf

Education Week. 2011. No Child Left Behind. http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/no-child-left-

behind/

Ehrenfeld, D. 1996. Foreword. Greening the College Curriculum. Collett, J.(ed.). Washington,

D.C: Island Press.

Eisler, R. 1987. The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future. Harper Collins: San

Francisco, CA.

EWC (East West Center). 2012. 2012 Education 2020 Leadership Institute.

http://www.eastwestcenter.org/education/international-forum-education-2020/education-

leadership-institute/2012-institute

EWCPA (East-West Center Participants Association). 2009. Sustainable EWC: Recap of 2008-

2009. http://ewcpa.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/sustainable-ewc-newsletter-08-092.pdf

Feinberg, W. and Soltis, J.F. 2009. School and Society. Fifth Edition. Teachers College Press:

Columbia University.

Fogelin, R. 2001. Berkeley and the Principles of Human Knowledge. Routledge, 2001.

Fox, R. L. 1980. The Search for Alexander. Little Brown & Co. Boston

Freire, P. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed.

Fresco, A. 2011. The Venus Project. http://www.thevenusproject.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wX2ppkiCp0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_jODjsFt6w

http://educationenergy.net/welcome/


http://www.mmisi.org/pr/28_01/edmondson.pdf

http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/no-child-left-behind/

http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/no-child-left-behind/

http://www.eastwestcenter.org/education/international-forum-education-2020/education-leadership-institute/2012-institute

http://www.eastwestcenter.org/education/international-forum-education-2020/education-leadership-institute/2012-institute

http://ewcpa.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/sustainable-ewc-newsletter-08-092.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routledge



Friedman, T. 2011. That Used to Be Us: How America Lost Its Way in the World It Invented and

How We Come Back: presentation at the Aspen Ideas Festival 2011.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1elTmUO_-8&feature=relmfu

Frier, B.W. and McGinn, T.A.J. A Casebook on Roman Family Law. Oxford University Press.

Gallup, Inc. 2013. 21st Century Skills and the Workplace: A 2013 Microsoft Partners in Learning

and Pearson Foundations Study. May 28, 2013.

Gilbert, M. 2012. MSC Students: Help Us Select Faculty Focused on Sustainability! Email dated

January 20, 2012 sent to members of UH Sustainability Corps.

Gopnik, A. 2011. What Do Babies Think? TED Talk:

http://www.ted.com/talks/alison_gopnik_what_do_babies_think.html?source

Gray, P. 2008. Freedom to Learn: the roles of play and curiosity as foundations in learning.

Psychology Today. August 20, 2008.

Green School. 2013. Vision, Mission and Values. http://www.greenschool.org/general/vision-

mission-and-values/

Griswold, E. 2012. How “Silent Spring” Ignited the Environmental Movement. New York Times

Magazine. September 21, 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/magazine/how-

silent-spring-ignited-the-environmental-movement.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Group 70 International. 2013. About Us: Creating Relationships by Design.

http://www.group70int.com/main/aboutus/default.aspx

Gwynn, A.S.J. 1926. Roman Education from Cicero to Quintilian. New York: Teachers College

Press.

Hardy, J. 2010. My Green School Dream. TED Talk

http://www.ted.com/talks/john_hardy_my_green_school_dream.html

Hartman, H. 2014. Milestones in Environmental Protection.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/earthdaytimeline.html

Hayek, F.A. 2009. Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press.

History (History Channel). 2013. Atlantis: Lost World.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERDlIW0rw9g

History.com. 2012. The History of the World in Two Hours.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFbc7nVhI0c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1elTmUO_-8&feature=relmfu

http://www.greenschool.org/general/vision-mission-and-values/

http://www.greenschool.org/general/vision-mission-and-values/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/magazine/how-silent-spring-ignited-the-environmental-movement.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/magazine/how-silent-spring-ignited-the-environmental-movement.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.group70int.com/main/aboutus/default.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_Gwynn

http://www.ted.com/talks/john_hardy_my_green_school_dream.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERDlIW0rw9g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFbc7nVhI0c



Hohr, H. 2013. The Concept of Experience by John Dewey Revisited: Conceiving, Feeling and

“Enliving”. Studies in Philosophy and Education. January 2013, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp.

25-38. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11217-012-9330-7?LI=true

Hume, D. 1740. A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental

Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects.

Hunt, T.C., Carper, J., Lasley, T.J., Raisch C.D. (Eds.). 2010. Introduction. Encyclopedia of

Educational Reform and Dissent. Sage Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, California.

IASL (International Association of Laboratory Schools). 2013. IALS was formerly NALS.

http://www.laboratoryschools.org/

Jackson. P. 1998. John Dewey’s School and Society Revisited. The Elementary School Journal.

Vol. 98. No. 5, May 1998. The University of Chicago, IL.

Kelly, A.V. 1995. Education and Democracy: Principles and Practices. Paul Chapman

Publishing Ltd: London, England.

Kim, D. Aymeric M. & Changkun, Contributing to a Transition towards a Sustainable Society:

Education Matters. Thesis on Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.

King, A.R. Jr. 1967. The Modern Educational Developer: Member of the World’s Youngest

Profession. Educational Perspectives: Journal of the College of Education:University of

Hawaii. Volume 6, Number 3, October 1967.

King, A.R. Jr. 1991. A Laboratory School as a Center for Developmental Research. Laboratory

Schools: An Educational Resource. National Association of Laboratory Schools.

Curriculum Research & Development Group, University of Hawaiʻi. 1991.

King, A.R. Jr. 2000. The Shaping of the Curriculum Research & Development Group and Its

Laboratory School: A Response to Events of the 1960s. Educational Perspectives:

Journal of the College of Education/University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa. Volume 33,

Number 2. p. 19- 24.

King, A.R. Jr., & Brownell, J.A. 1966. The Curriculum and the Disciplines of Knowledge: A

Theory of Curriculum Practice. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Kimmons, R. 2013. Land Bridge Theory. Migration Theories. University of Texas.

http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/hight-kreitman/land-bridge-theory

Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolution. University of Chicago Press.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11217-012-9330-7?LI=true

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Treatise_of_Human_Nature

http://www.laboratoryschools.org/

http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/hight-kreitman/land-bridge-theory



King, A.R.Jr. & Brownell,J.A. 1966.The Curriculum and the Disciplines of Knowledge: A

Theory of Curriculum Practice: New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Kōkua Hawaiʻi Foundation. 2013. ’ĀINA IS: Actively Integrating Nutrition & Agriculture In

Schools. http://kokuahawaiifoundation.org/schoolprograms/ainainschools/

Kurzweil, R. 2001. Accelerating Intelligence. http://kurzweilai.net.

KSE (Kids for Saving Earth). 2013. From Clinton’s Mom.

http://kidsforsavingearth.org/fromclintsmom.htm

Lindsay, R. 2009. Modern Hunter-Gatherers In Africa and Elsewhere.

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/modern-hunter-gatherers-in-africa-and-

elsewhere/

Locke, J. 1693. Some Thoughts Concerning Education.

Luke, A., Freebody, P. Shuan, L. & Gopinathan. 2005. Towards Research-based Innovation and

Reform: Singapore schooling in transition. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. Volume

25, Issue 1, 2005. 5-28.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02188790500032467

Mann, C.C, 2011. Every Now and Then the Dawn of Civilization is Reenacted on a Remote

Hilltop in Southern Turkey. National Geographic. June 2011. 39-59.

Mayell, H. 2005. Oldest Human Fossils Identified. National Geographic News. Daily News

February 16, 2005.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0216_050216_omo.html

Marsh, G.P. 1865. Nature and Man; or, Physical Geography as modified by Human Action. New

York: Charles Scribner.

McGaa, E. 2004. Nature’s Way: Native Wisdom for Living in Balance With the Earth. San

Francisco: Harper.

Media Tutor. 2002. Energy Flow In the Life of a Cell. 5.1 Energy and Chemical Reaction,

Chapter 5 http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/786/805726/Lab20.pdf

Menton, L.K. 1992. A Christian and “Civilized” Education: The Hawaiian Chiefs’ Children’s

School, 1839-50. History of Education Quarterly Vol. 32 No.2 Summer 1992.

Merriam-Webster. 2003. Anno Domini. Merriam Webster Online Dictionary.

http://kokuahawaiifoundation.org/schoolprograms/ainainschools/

http://kurzweilai.net/

http://kidsforsavingearth.org/fromclintsmom.htm

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/modern-hunter-gatherers-in-africa-and-elsewhere/

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/modern-hunter-gatherers-in-africa-and-elsewhere/

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02188790500032467

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0216_050216_omo.html

http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/786/805726/Lab20.pdf



Meyer, M.A. 2010. Manu Aluli Meyer on Epistemology.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmJJi1iBdzc

Meyer, M. A. 2007. Aloha is Our Intelligence – A Visit With Manu Aluli Meyer. The Voices of

Truth. Retrieved http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xNBxVGBEF0

*Ministry of Education. 2008. The Evaluation Report of Development in Students' Moral

Project: Belong to World Morality Revival Project. Kalasin Educational Service Area

Office Region 1. Office of the Basic Education Commission (Thai*).

Morse, D.J. 2011. Faith in Life: John Dewey's Early Philosophy. Fordham University Press.

NCSA (National Center for Supercomputing Applications). 1995. Expanding Universe. The

Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois.

http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html

Neubauer, D. (Ed.) 2012. The Emergent Knowledge Society and Future of Higher Education:

Asian Perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge.

Neubauer, D. & Lee, M. 2012. Redefining Public and Private in Asia Pacific Higher Education.

Chapter 3. Education Program. IFE 2020.

https://www.eastwestcenter.org/sites/all/modules/filemanager/files/Education_Program/I

FE2020/2012_Institute/e_Lee-Neubauer_Redefining_public_and_private.pdf

Nike. 2013. The Girl Effect. http://www.girleffect.org/

Nixon. D. 2007. Sustainable Saunders Survey: Preliminary Overview, June 2007, College of

Social Sciences, Public Policy Center, University of Hawaiʿi at Mānoa.

Nixon, T.J.E. nd. The North American Fur Trade and its Effects on the Native American

Population and the Environment in North America. Regis University.

http://adr.coalliance.org/codr/fez/eserv/codr:745/RUGFM018.pdf.

Ong, W.J. 1988. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New Accents. Ed.

Terence Hawkes. New York, NY: Methuen, 1988.

Orr, D. 1996. Reinventing Higher Education. Chapter 1. Greening the College Curriculum.

Collett, J.(ed.). Washington, D.C: Island Press

O’Sullivan, E. 1999. Transformative Learning: Educational Visio for the 21st Century, London,

England: OISE/UT/Zed Books,

Osario, J. K. 2001. “What Kine Hawaiian Are You?” A Moʿolelo about Nationhood, Race,

History, and Contemporary Sovereignty Movement in Hawaiʿi. The Contemporary

Pacific, Volume 13, Number 2, Fall 2001, 359-379. University of Hawaiʿi Press.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmJJi1iBdzc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xNBxVGBEF0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordham_University_Press

http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html

https://www.eastwestcenter.org/sites/all/modules/filemanager/files/Education_Program/IFE2020/2012_Institute/e_Lee-Neubauer_Redefining_public_and_private.pdf

https://www.eastwestcenter.org/sites/all/modules/filemanager/files/Education_Program/IFE2020/2012_Institute/e_Lee-Neubauer_Redefining_public_and_private.pdf

http://www.girleffect.org/

http://adr.coalliance.org/codr/fez/eserv/codr:745/RUGFM018.pdf



Osario, J. 2005. Hawaiian Historical Overview. Sovereign Stories.

Ozman, H. And Craver, S. 1999. Philosophical Foundations of Education. Merryl Publishing

Co.

Pain, E. 2003. Multidisciplinary Research: Today’s Hottest Buzzword? Science Careers. Science.

January 03, 2003.

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2003_01_

03/nodoi.16570029665485298080

Payne, C. 2008. So Much Reform, so Little Change : the persistance of failure in urban schools.

Harvard Education Press.

PBS (Public Broadcasting Station). 2012. Islam – Empire of Faith.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s59LfXGMyjY

Pearl, A. and T. Knight. 1999. The Democratic Classroom: Theory to Inform Practice. Hampton

Press, New Jersey, USA.

Peel, R.D. 2013. Personal observations from lifelong experiences.

Pemberton, K. Payout for residential-school abuse victims could climb to $2.6 billion. The

Vancouver Sun. November 23, 2011.

Pirsig, R. M. 1974. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. William Morrow & Company.

Potts, R. 2013. Introduction to Human Evolution. Smithsonian Museum of Natural History. http://humanorigins.si.edu/resources/intro-human-evolution.

Pringle, Heather. 2011. "THE 1ST AMERICANS. (Cover Story." Scientific American 305.5

(2011): 36-45. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.

Public Policy Center. 2010.Sustainable Saunders Highlights. College of Social Sciences, Public

Policy Center, University of Hawaiʿi at Mānoa

http://www.publicpolicycenter.hawaii.edu/sustainablesaunders.html#Reports

PVS (Polynesian Voyaging Society). 2012. Worldwide Voyage. http://hokulea.org/world-wide-

voyage/

Ribe, N. and Steinle. F. 2002. Exploratory Experimentation: Goethe, Land, and Color Theory.

Physics Today, July, Vol. 55, Issue 7, 2002, p.43. (http://www.physicstoday.com/pt/vol-

55/iss-7/p43.html).

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2003_01_03/nodoi.16570029665485298080

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2003_01_03/nodoi.16570029665485298080

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s59LfXGMyjY

http://humanorigins.si.edu/resources/intro-human-evolution

http://www.publicpolicycenter.hawaii.edu/sustainablesaunders.html#Reports

http://hokulea.org/world-wide-voyage/

http://hokulea.org/world-wide-voyage/

http://www.physicstoday.com/pt/vol-55/iss-7/p43.html

http://www.physicstoday.com/pt/vol-55/iss-7/p43.html



Robinson, K. 2010. Changing Education Paradigms. RSA Animate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Rousseau, J-J. 1750. The Discourse on the Moral Effects of the Arts and Sciences. Geneva,

France: Barillot & fils.

Ryan, A. 1995. John Dewey and the high tide of American liberalism, New York: W.W. Norton.

Sanborn, D. and O’Harrow, S. nd. University Laboratory School: A Brief History.

http://www.hawaii.edu/labschool/uhshist.html

Scleicher, A. 2012. Use data to build better schools. TED Talk

http://www.ted.com/talks/andreas_schleicher_use_data_to_build_better_schools.html

Schumacher, E.F. 1973. Small is Beautiful. Blond and Briggs, London. SIPRI (Stockholm

International Peace Research Institute). 2012. World Military Spending.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending#WorldMilitarySpending

Shor, I. & Freire, P. 1986. A Pedagogy for Liberation. Boston, MA: Bergin and Garvey

Publishers.

Seigfried, C.H. (ed.). 2001. Feminist Interpretations of John Dewey. Pennsylvania State

University Press.

Seth, N. 2013. “Sustainable Development in Action” Post Rio +20. Google Hangout


Shapiro, S, Walsh. R., Britton, W.B. 2003. An Analysis of Recent Meditation Research and

Suggestions for Future Directions. Journal for Meditation and Meditation Research,

2003, Vol. 3, 69-90.

Shrewry, P.R. 2009. Wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 60, No. 6, 1537–1553, 2009.

Sly, C. Dale, J. Stone, M. 2013. When the Building Becomes the Teacher. Center for Ecoliteracy

http://www.ecoliteracy.org/essays/when-building-teacher

Smithsonian. 2013a. Humans Change The World. What does it mean to be human? Smithsonian

Museum of Natural History. http://humanorigins.si.edu/human-characteristics/change

_________. 2013b. Introduction to Human Evolution. Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.


_________. 2013c. Human Evolution Timeline Interactive. Smithsonian Museum of Natural

History. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-evolution-timeline-interactive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

http://www.hawaii.edu/labschool/uhshist.html

http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending#WorldMilitarySpending

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_University_Press

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_State_University_Press


http://www.ecoliteracy.org/essays/when-building-teacher

http://humanorigins.si.edu/human-characteristics/change


http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-evolution-timeline-interactive



_________. 2013d. Introduction to Human Evolution. Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/resources/intro-human-evolution.

SOEST. 2013. The Energy House.

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/UHMEnergy/Campus%20Energy%20Projects/Energy%20H

ouse.html

Spillane, J. 2005. Primary school leadership practices: how the subjects matters. School of

Leadership and Management. Vol. 25 No.4, September 2005, pp. 383-397.

Stein, J., Bjerklie, D., Par, A., Van Biema, D., Cullotta, K.A., McDowell, J. 2003. Just Say Om.

Time. August 4, 2003. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1005349-

2,00.html

Sterling, S. 2001. Sustainable Education: Re-visioning Learning and Change. Schumacher

Briefing No. 6. Green Books for the Schumacher Society. United Kingdom.

Strong, M. 1996. A Global View. Canada and the State of the Planet: the social, economic, and

environmental trends that are shaping our lives. Keating M. (Ed) and the Canadian

Global Change Program. Oxford University Press. Toronto.

*Suriyakulphanich, W. 2007. Cultivating People, Cultivating Morality/ethics in youth by using

practicing good deeds evaluation forms, Report of Research, M.A.: Faculty of

Humanities and Social Science, Burapha University, Thailand. (Thai*)

Sustainable Saunders. 2008. Taking Action: Energy Team

http://sustainablesaunders.hawaii.edu/#accomplishments

Swimme, B. 1996. Introduction. The Mayan Factor: Path Beyond Technology. José Argüelles.

Bear & Company. USA.

Talisse, R. B. 2007. A Pragmatist Philosophy of Democracy. Routledge

Taylor, M. 2009. The End of the University as We Know It. New York Times, 26 April 2009.

Tan Eng Chye. 2011. Paper Presented to the 2011 APEC Conference on Higher Education

Quality in APEC Economies, Honolulu, Hawaii August 4-6, 2011. Taken from Neubauer.

2012. The Changing Social Ecology of Higher Education in the Asia Pacific Region.

Presentation to EWC-NENU IFE 2020 Leadership Institute September 4-15, 2012.

The Green House (FS) – Oahu Resource & Conservation Development Council. Nd. Proposal:

Growing Green School Program. https://s3.amazonaws.com/iif-

dev/app/public/The_Green_House.pdf

The Literature Network. 2013. Homer: Bibliography. http://www.online-literature.com/homer/

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/UHMEnergy/Campus%20Energy%20Projects/Energy%20House.html

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/UHMEnergy/Campus%20Energy%20Projects/Energy%20House.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1005349-2,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1005349-2,00.html

http://sustainablesaunders.hawaii.edu/#accomplishments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_B._Talisse

https://s3.amazonaws.com/iif-dev/app/public/The_Green_House.pdf

https://s3.amazonaws.com/iif-dev/app/public/The_Green_House.pdf

http://www.online-literature.com/homer/



Thompson, M. 2010. Call of Life. Documentary.

Thompson, N. 2014. Wayfinding: Intellect and Instinct. Hawaiian Voyaging Traditions.

http://pvs.kcc.hawaii.edu/ike/hookele/intellect_and_instinct.html

Thoreau, H. D. 1854. Walden; or, Life in the Woods. Boston, MA: Ticknor and Fields.

TRCC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada). 2012. Our Mandate: Introduction.

http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=7

Trevenna, S. 2009. Water-Saving Bathroom Retrofits. College of Social Sciences, Public Policy

Center, University of Hawaiʿi at Mānoa. Policy Brief. Number 005 February 2009.

Tullis, P. 2011. The Death of Preschool. Scientific American Mind. November/December 2011.

37-41.

ULS. 2013a. Project Pono. http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/student-life/project-pono

ULS. 2013b. Admission Policy. http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/admissions-

50/admissions-policy

ULS. 2013c. Academic Overview: Strategies for Academic Learning.

http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/academic/academics-overview

UN (United Nations). 2013. New United Nations Report Urges Accountability Framework as

Voluntary Commitments Galvanize Action for Sustainability. UN Press Release

ENV/DEV/1370. July 16, 2013. Department of Public Iinformation. News and Media

Division, New York.

UNDSD (United Nations Division for Sustainable Development). 1992. Agenda 21.

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). 2009. Bonn

Declaration UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development. 31

March – 2 April 2009. Bonn, UNESCO.

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001887/188799e.pdf

_____ . 2012a. “Shaping the Education of Tomorrow”. UN Report on advancement of Education

for sustainable development based on an international survey.

UNESCO. 2012b. ESD Sourcebook. Learning & Training Tools, No. 4. Paris, UNESCO.


http://pvs.kcc.hawaii.edu/ike/hookele/intellect_and_instinct.html

http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=7

http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/student-life/project-pono

http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/admissions-50/admissions-policy

http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/admissions-50/admissions-policy

http://www.universitylaboratoryschool.org/academic/academics-overview

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf





_____ . 2013. Education for All Movement. Education.

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-

agenda/education-for-all/

United Nations General Assembly. 2012. Initial Input of the Secretary-General to the Open

Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals. December 17, 2012. A/67/634.

UNSDKP (United Nations Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform). 2013.


_______. 2014. Open Working Group On Sustainable Development Goals.


University of Hawaiʻi. 2003. Charter of Sustainability: Stewardship Based on Island Values.

Office of Sustainability. July 2003.

http://www.hawaii.edu/envctr/ecotourism/docs/UHM_Sust_Charter.pdf

___________. 2005. University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa: Sustainability Retreat. December 1, 2005.

___________. 2010. Sustainable Saunders Initiative. College of Social Sciences. Public Policy

Center. http://www.publicpolicycenter.hawaii.edu/sustainablesaunders.html

___________. 2011. Achieving Our Destiny. The University f Hawaiʻi at Mānoa 2011-2015

Strategic Plan.

___________. 2013a. Timeline. Sustainability at UH Manoa.

http://manoa.hawaii.edu/sustainability/

University of Hawaiʻi. 2013b. Making the Elephant Dance Award.

http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/op/elephant.php?award=trevenna

University of the Nations. 2012. Hawaiian History.

http://www.uofnkona.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemi

d=240

U.S. Department of Education. 2012. Greening of Our Schools. Remarks of U.S. Secretary of

Education Arne Duncan to the Green School National Network Conference, Denver,

Colorado, February 28, 2012. http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/greening-our-schools

U.S. Department of Education. 2013. U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools.


Voices of Youth. 2011. Child soldiers: a battle we should win.

http://www.voicesofyouth.org/posts/child-soldiers-a-battle-we-should-win

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-all/

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-all/



http://www.hawaii.edu/envctr/ecotourism/docs/UHM_Sust_Charter.pdf

http://www.publicpolicycenter.hawaii.edu/sustainablesaunders.html

http://manoa.hawaii.edu/sustainability/

http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/op/elephant.php?award=trevenna

http://www.uofnkona.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemid=240

http://www.uofnkona.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemid=240

http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/greening-our-schools


http://www.voicesofyouth.org/posts/child-soldiers-a-battle-we-should-win



Wagner, T. 2012. The Finland Phenomenon: Inside the Most Surprising School System.

(Documentary). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70AlyhEGWf4

Warburton, N. 2011. "Rose-tinted reality: Immanuel Kant". A little history of philosophy. Yale

University Press. pp. 111

Wiemer, H. 1962. Concise History of Education: From Solon to Pestalozzi. Philosophical

Library, New York.

Wolfe, M. 2008. Workplace De lamping. College of Social Sciences, Public Policy Center,

University of Hawaiʿi at Mānoa. Policy Brief. Number 004 May 2008.

WHO (World Health Organization). 2013. Urban population growth. Global Health

Observatory. Programmes and projects.

http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/

index.html

Wong, K. 2012. Oldest Cave Paintings May Be Creations of Neandertals, Not Modern Humans.

Scientific American. Observations. June 14, 2012.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/06/14/oldest-cave-paintings-may-

be-creations-of-neandertals-not-modern-humans/

World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Wurtele S. 2009. Learning Styles. Retrieved Dec. 9, 2009

http://www.trentu.ca/academic/geography/swurtele/slr/learningstyles.html

WWI (Worldwatch Institute). 2012. State of the World Moving Towards Sustainable Prosperity:

A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. Island Press.

Washington.

Yamauchi, L.A., A.K.Ceppi, and J.L. Smith. 1999. Sociohistorical Influences on the

Development of Papahana Kaiapuni, the Hawaiian Language Immersion Program.

Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk. 4(1), 27-46: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Inc.

Young, D. and Jeremiah, K. nd. Welcome: History and Foundations: Curriculum Research &

Development Group, University Laboratory School.

Significant Influences On This Paper

Berg, L. Hawaii State Representative. 2007. Workshop on community empowerment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70AlyhEGWf4

http://books.google.com/books?id=X2uIzqoT-ncC&pg=PA110

http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/index.html

http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/index.html

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/06/14/oldest-cave-paintings-may-be-creations-of-neandertals-not-modern-humans/

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/06/14/oldest-cave-paintings-may-be-creations-of-neandertals-not-modern-humans/

http://www.trentu.ca/academic/geography/swurtele/slr/learningstyles.html



Coleman, S. 2006-2007. East West Center Leadership Certificate. Assisted in the co-creation of

the course syllabus to include sustainability teachings.

Edmonton Public School System. 1950-1964. Formulation of learning abilities.

[EWC] East West Center. 2006-2009. EWCPA representative co-creating the EWC

sustainability movement.

[EWC]. 2006-2010. Intercultural, multidisciplinary communal cooperative.

Foley, D. 2007-8. Various social empowerment initiatives.

Good Striker, D. 2005-2012. Cross-cultural trainer for Aboriginal values and practices

(Blackfoot).

[GYC] Global Youth Center. 2008. My involvement with the inception of the GYC is a

significant influence behind the rationale of the paper. http://www.globalyouthcenterhawaii.org/index.html

Hamaguchi, N. 2008. Intergeneration mentoring.

Koun, S. 2008. World Youth Congress participant to stimulate interdisciplinary dialogue and

insights.

Kriangkam, D. 1999-2012. Sustainable resource development.

Leblanc, H. 2000-2013. Intergenerational dialogue to stimulate creativity.

Lloyd, S. 1989-2008. Intergenerational interaction.

Lum, Jeannie. 2008-2013. Peace studies.

Osorio. J. 2008. Hawaiian Studies HWST601. Research methodologies.

Peace Learning Circles. 2010. http://peacelearningcircles.cfsites.org/

Peel, L., Peel, S., Peel, R., & Peel, R.M. 1978-2008. Development of family values.

Peel-Hodgson, H. 2007-11. First granddaughter enlightening my view of intergenerational

knowledge transfer and the concept of the ‘seven generation’ thinking paradigm.

Peel, P. & Pavlenko, O. 1946-2014, 2004-2014 resp. Interdisciplinary (psychology) perspective

and family value development. Social Emotional Learning Presentation on “Gratitude” to

Project Pono April 10, 2014.

http://www.globalyouthcenterhawaii.org/index.html

http://peacelearningcircles.cfsites.org/



Phrabhavanaviriyakhun (Phra Phadet Dattajeevo). 2008. Family Day by Day. A “Dhama talk”

translated by The Dhammakaya Foundation English Translations Team. Published for the World

Peace Ethics Contest by the Dhammakaya Foundation, Thailand.

Prukpakdeewong, P. 2007-2012. Intergenerational education and spiritual beliefs.

McCandless-Reford, S. 2008-2011. Hawaiian state legislation process and educational

alternatives. Global Youth Center Hawaiʻi promoter.

Mitranyani. D. 2006-20011. Intergenerational education and westernized eastern perspective.

Minerbi, L. 2006-2008. Sustainability and indigenous knowledge teachings.

Neubauer, D. 2007-8. EWC International Forum for Education 2020.

Reed, G.G. 2010. EDEF 683 course.

Richards, J. 2000-2008. Research methodology towards a Masters degree.

Rambold, T. 2000-2013. Spiritual growth and enlightenment.

Shapiro, S, Walsh. R., Britton, W.B. 2003. An Analysis of Recent Meditation Research and

Suggestions for Future Directions. Journal for Meditation and Meditation Research, 2003, Vol.

3, pp.69-90.

Sivaraksa, S. 2005. Conflict, Culture, Change: engaged Buddhism in a globalizing world. MA:

Wisdom Publications.

Sootannah. 2008-12. Sweat-lodge ceremonies.

Sustainable Saunders. 2007-2008. University of Hawai’i. Active involvement in this youth-led

initiative.

Tachibana, J. 2006-2013. United Nations Association’s operations.

Torstensen, V. 1969-2010. Interdisciplinary resource development and business practices.

Umemoto, K. 2007. Ke Ola Hou PLAN751 Practicum.

[UNA] United Nations Association. 2006-2008. Board member assisting in many UNA

sponsored events guided by United Nations “Millennium Development Goals”.

Wong T. & A. 2006-2011. Hawaiian host family sharing cultural and spiritual values. Friends of

the East West Center Host Family Program. Al Wong was designated “Happiest Man in

America” by the New York Times.



[WYC] World Youth Conference. 2008. ReGeneration 2008. Interacting with the youth

attending this conference contributed significantly to the stimulation and rationale of this

paper. 4th World Youth Congress, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada. Aug. 10-21, 2008.

http://www.wyc2008.qc.ca/index.php

And the list goes on........

http://www.wyc2008.qc.ca/index.php



Appendix A



Portable 2 Classroom B – high humidity measurements of 80% (looking northwest)



Portable 2 Office – unattended with lights on

Portable 2 (above - looking east, southeast; below – looking east)



Portable 3 Classroom A (above - looking east; below – looking west northwest)



Portable 3 Classroom A Office space (looking south)



Portable 3 Classroom B - bad odor in room during the audit (looking west)

Portable 3 Classroom B – room measures high in humidity (83%), broken shades (looking north east)



Portable 3 Classroom B - washroom behind closed door likely source of bad odor (looking southeast)



Castle Memorial Hall Lanai north east wing – unnecessary use of lights (looking east)



Castle Memorial Hall Rm 120 – good natural ventilation and light (looking northeast)



Castle Memorial Rm 120 (looking southeast)

Castle Memorial Rm 125 (looking south)



Castle Memorial Rm 125 (looking north)



Castle Memorial Rm 137 CRDG office – occupant indicates office is “unbearable” in hot weather – portable a/c is no help

Castle Memorial Choir room – good natural air ventilation and light (looking west)



Castle Memorial Lanai south west wing – unnecessary use of lights



Castle Memorial Rm 117 – lights on and unoccupied during length of audit in the building

Castle Memorial Courtyard east wing – former pond mosquito breeding habitat after rain



Castle Memorial Hall courtyard between northwest and southwest wings



Castle Memorial Hall middle wing – good natural light but air flow limited due to the orientation

Courtyard Building 3



West lanai on east wing of Building 3



Building 3 entrance from University Avenue (looking west)

Building 3 south wing (right) and Multipurpose Building (looking west from University Avenue)



Multipurpose Building’s east facing doors

Multipurpose Building’s inner hall adjoining kitchen facilities (behind closed metal panels)



Building 3 south wing and Multipurpose Building (looking east)

Building 3 courtyard (looking west from parking lot)



Building 3 south wing (looking south at the west end of courtyard)



Building 3 north and east wings (looking east from west side of courtyard)



Building 3 south wing (looking southeast in the courtyard)

Building 3 south wing (looking southwest in courtyard – same location as photo about)



West end of Multipurpose Building – back of kitchen (looking south from parking lot) The preceding pictures were taken October 2013. The following were taken on the dates listed in Appendix B related to the time and follows the order of the environmental audit.



Project Pono Students in Rm 101 Building 3 south wing

One of two entries to Rm 101 Building 3 south wing



Rm 101 Well ventilated by prevailing air flow and well lit naturally (looking northwest)



Rm 101 south (looking southeast to entry) Audit indicates lights not needed as natural light meets recommended levels 200~700 lux.



Rm 104 Building 3 south wing (looking northeast). Similar conditions as Rm 101. Good learning environment except for noise emanating from children playing in adjacent field.

Distracting noise levels for Building 3 south wing classrooms from adjacent play field



Rm 104 (looking north) Areas of clutter common in many rooms.



Rm 103 Building 3 south wing Storage – between Rm 101 and 104 (looking south)

Multipurpose Building – Bandroom (a/c running – looking southwest from entry)



no natural light or air ventilation (looking south east)

Multipurpose Building kitchen area (looking west)



Multipurpose Building kitchen area (looking south west)



Multipurpose Building auditorium (looking north)

Multipurpose Building - all lights on, some lighting high intensity (looking south)



Multipurpose Building east facing ventilation design not maximizing on prevailing northerly air flow a more energy efficient design would have rotated the building 90° clockwise to have the doors and vents facing south.

Over lit room in Multipurpose building



Typical Washroom – old high water consumptive fixtures (above view looking north)



Toilet Stalls in various states of maintenance



Choice of drying hands (electric and/or paper)

Staff Washrooms – no natural light, requires lights



Rm 133 Building 3 north wing (looking northeast)



Rm 133 slightly less natural air flow or light as south wing due to sheltering effect of building – class light intensity still exceeds recommended levels at time of audit

Rm 136 Building 3 north wing - lights off due to a movie being shown but natural light at adequate level for reading (looking northwest)



General Office Building 3 east wing vegetation outside windows block natural air and light (looking east)

General Office Building 3 entry (looking west)



Small office in General Office



General Office - over lighting can be lessened by delamping to save energy and still maintain recommended levels

Adjoining office area to General Office – staff indicates is very hot during hot periods due to lack of ventilation from prevailing airflows – windows are aligned to natural airflow and blocked by vegetation



Rm 130 Building 3 north wing (above view looking east, below view looking west)



Rm 201 Building 3 south wing – over lit (above - looking northwest, below – looking southwest)



Rm 217 Building 3 east wing – teacher has turn off lights appropriately (looking north)

Rm 217 note use of fans for airflow as the orientation of windows do not utilize prevailing outside flow



Rm 217 an example of some obsolete fixtures



Rm 217 east facing windows source of street noise a more efficient design would have the windows located on south wall to catch prevailing air flow.

Rm 220 Building 3 north wing (above - looking north, below – looking south)



Rm 220 an example of electrical wiring clutter in ULS

Rm 220 broken fan



Rm 206 Building 3 south wing (above - looking northeast, below – looking southeast)



Rm 233 Building 3 north wing – use of lights unnecessarily (above – looking northwest; below – southeast)



Rm 227 Building 3 north wing second floor – teacher has turned lights out a energy saving practice that could reduce power costs if this became a conscious practice (above - looking north east; below southwest)



Rm 225 south adjoining to Rm 227 blocks prevailing air flow to Rm 225 where power consuming fan below attempts to create ventilation



Rm 235 Building 3 north wing Teachers office – cool day but audit notes indicate this space “stuff and hot” (looking north)



Rm 135 Science teachers’ office Building 3 first floor – unoccupied at time of audit with lights on and plugged in electronics (looking south)



Rm 230 Building 3 second floor (above - looking northeast; below southwest)



Portable 2 Classroom A (looking southwest)



Portable 2 Classroom A – note limited natural lighting and unit is sealed from outside air flow air conditioning running at time of audit even with cool outside temperature



Portable 2 Classroom A – door propped with a/c operating (looking southwest)

Portable 2 Classroom B (looking east)



Appendix B

Environmental Audit University Laboratory School, February 2014: Data Capture Using Pyle PSPL41 Environment Meter by Project Pono students

Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

1/31/20

14

13:14:2

4

UHS

Building

3

Rm 101

Yes 12 students and 3

teachers in the

classroom. Students and

teachers are all on

computers at the tables.

There are two tables

joining together with

four chairs, 7 total. 3

joining tables in the

front row and 4 joining

tables in the back row.

The windows are closed,

and one door open. The

projector was on the

first 25 minutes of class,

the cords aren't easy to

use; very confusing set

up. Two lights out of the

three were on.

The highest

reading was

1148 Lux.

The lowest

reading was

488 Lux.

The teacher

counter

reading was

422 Lux.

The counter

top reading

was 1412

Lux.

The highest

reading 83

dB(outside).

The lowest

reading was

69.2 dB

The

highest

reading

was 77.3.

The

lowest

reading

was 77.

The highest

reading was

76.9%

(outside).

The lowest

reading was

75%

(inside).

1/31/20

14

13:30:0

1

Building

3

Rm 104

Yes 2 teachers and 20

students. There are

students in class doing

science work. (Ms.

Seki's Science Room)

There is also middle

school and high school.

One table in back., and

then 3 rows of 2. 2 side

lights on and middles

light off. No movie

playing. Projector not

on. Nope the windows

are closed. The

projector is covering the

white board, located on

the side of the room.

And the cords are very

messy.

highest for

student :

1130

Lowest for

student :

432

Teacher

Area : 482

Countertop/

Working

area : 1472

Highest

noise : 66.9

Lowest

noise : 56.9

Highest :

82.6

Lowest :

82.6

Highest :

69.2

Lowest :

68.8

2/3/201

4

11:55:1

Multi-

purpose

Building

No There is one teacher and

no students. There are

only instruments on the

max: 91

Lux. Min: 2

Lux. center

Max: 57.8

dB Min:

57.6 dB

avg: 75.5.

(AC)

Max: 64.2%

Min: 63.6%



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

4

Band-

room

sides of the classroom

and a big open space in

the middle of the

classroom. There is no

music being played, no

projector. There are no

windows in the

bandroom. Only three

doors, but none are

open. One main door

gets opened when

someone walks in.

There is two lights on in

the classroom out of

four lights. The AC is

on.

of room: 11

Lux.

2/3/201

4

12:02:35

Multi-

purpose

Building

No Bright lights and no

students/teachers.

Doors and windows open, projector off.

Relatively quiet except

for bandroom noise.

Room: 194

- 392;

Stage: 4 - 115

57.8 - 78.8

~76.9

~70.3

2/3/201

4

12:15:5

0

Down-

stairs

bathroom

No Girls bathroom: There is

no one in the bathroom.

There is a broken door,

unusable stall. There is a door that won't close,

unusable stall. Two

operating stalls only. The lights are off. One

sink leaks water.

Boys bathroom: There is no one in the bathroom.

There is one door that

doesn't lock. The lights

are on. Both: The water

pressure in flushing the

toilet is very low. The windows are closed in

both bathrooms, both

the girls and boys

bathroom doors are open.

Boys: 1195

Lux

(window). 6

Lux (toilet). 11 Lux

(sink). 36

(mirror). Girls: 610

Lux (sinks).

63 Lux (toilet). 107

Lux

(counter).

Boys: avg

73.3 dB.

Girls: avg

58.1 dB

Boys: avg

77.5 degC

Girls: avg

77.2 degC

Boys: 75%

Girls: avg

72.1%



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

2/4/201

4

11:51:08

Building

3

Rm 133

Yes 13 students

tables are too close

together all lights are on

windows are closed

the floors are dirty

shelves are unorganized we like the drawings on

the wall

bags are everywhere the two doors are open

the cover for the lights

are broken cluttered in the back of

the room

not using the Elmo or

the white board

max 2000+

LUX ,

middle of the room

637 LUX,

teacher 885

LUX, back of the room

294 LUX

max- 73 dB,

low- 57.9 db

78 deg F

85.8

2/4/201

4

11:59:53

Building

3

Rm 136

Yes The tables are spaced

out as far as they can be

with four students per group, the teachers desk

is in the front middle of

the classroom. It is easy

to move around and between the desks and

all of the lights were off

at the time but the projector was being

used. Majority of the

windows were closed but they still allowed in

light. Also, both

classroom doors were

open.

Highest

reading:

2049, middle, 111,

front 280,

back 186

front,

63.4dB,

back 57.9dB,

middle

79.2

86

2/4/201

4

12:08:09

Building

3

Administration

Office

School

office south of

General

Office

Yes windows closed

all lights on ( one dim

light) storage room messy

fans off

lots of space

the highest

reading was

318 Lux. The lowest

144 front

desk. Ms.

Holly desk 264 lux.

Ms. dayna

4-5 Lux Ms.Tracy

303 Lux

highest 69.5

lowest 54.8

79.8 81



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

2/5/201

4

11:59:39

Building

3

Rm 130

No 1 teacher, 5 students

empty13 desks in curved

rowsall lights are offfew windows are openbreezy

weather is

overcastcluttered

bookshelves pictures on the walldrapes are

brokenone fan damaged

white boardno smartboard but there is a

projector a pull down

screen randomly on the side of the class

The highest

reading was

974 Lux. The lowest

reading was

82 Lux.

The highest

reading was

92 dB. The lowest

reading was

58.6 dB.

The

highest

reading was 82.

The highest

reading was

80.3%.

2/6/201

4

11:47:24

Building

3

Rm 201

Yes 8 students (each with

computers) 1 teachers

photography class going on

LOTS of younger

kids/outside noise going on

cool temp, all lights on,

windows closed, large tv

in use

752 Lux

675 Lux

back 560 Lux front

432 Lux

68dB 65dB

81.5 74.6%

74.1%

2/6/201

4

11:58:34

Building

3

Rm 217

No 17 student and 1 teacher

all lights off

Projector not in use 3 windows open

Curtains partially drawn

Working on computers

2 fans on desks spread out evenly,

easy to walk through

room both doors open

weather is overcast

298 lux 11

lux teacher

5 lux

70.4 dB

67.1 dB

83.8 deg F

83.6 deg F

73.3%

72.6%

2/7/201

4 11:23:4

1

Building

3 Rm 220

No no teachers or students.

the seats are facing each other. theres two rows

facing the opposite

side(window) of the classroom, and three

rows facing the opposite

side(wall). teachers desk is at the front, to the side

of the students. lights

highest-488

lux, lowest-80.8 lux,

teachers

desk-75.1 lux, back of

the room-

148.5 (lights off)

highest- 898

highest-

68.2 dB, lowest- 59.6

dB (lights

on)

highest-

83.1 dgfF lowest-

82.7 degF

(lights on)

constant-

72.5 (lights on)



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

were off. windows are

open some were closed.

fans off. cloudy, temperature outside is

83.4 degF.

lux, lowest

410 lux,

teachers desk-735

lux,

2/7/2014

11:33:0

6

Building 3

upstairs

boys bathroom

No lights were off. no one inside

top three windows

opened; bottom three closed

a lot of light coming in

door opened

inside first stall 46 lux.

by the

window 1639 lux. In

front of

mirror

115.8

highest:72.2db lowest:

47.4db

highest: 83.4 degf

lowest:

83.3degf

highest:77.8% lowest:

51.8%

2/7/201

4

11:49:53

Building

3

Rm 206

No the lights were off.

light off

1883lux

teacher 310lux

lowest

145lux

lights on 1904lux by

the teacher

is 673 lux and lowest

610

highest

73.6dB

lowest 43.3dB

highest

83.1degF

lowest 82.9degF

highest

72.4%

lowest 72.2%

2/10/20

14 11:42:0

9

Building

3 Rm 233

Yes There is one teacher and

18 students in the classroom. They are all

on computers and sitting

at their desks. There are 2 out of the 3 lights on

in the room. There are

many chairs in the room and they block the walk

path between the tables

which can cause it to be

hard to walk through. The projector isn't being

used. Some of the

windows are open and both doors are open.

There are two fans being

operated. There are power cords on the

ground that could cause

1155 Lux:

highest. 220 Lux: lowest.

43.5 dB:

lowest. 64.1 dB: highest.

80.9 degF:

avg

72.7%: avg



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

people to trip.

2/10/20

14 11:51:0

2

Building

3 Rm 227

Yes 1 teacher, 25 students.

Many computers (computer lab) in use.

All students are middle

schoolers (1st lunch

break) and are very talkative. Desks are

arranged in a square of 4

placed together. Good air flow from south side

of room (right side when

facing teacher desk).

Room is nicely lit without lights and is

cool in temperature. No

movie was playing, projector was off.

Windows were open,

but only lower portion of of jalousie.

153.8 Lux,

Max; 82.3 Lux, Low

71.9 dB

max; 63.8 dB low

82.8°F

average

71.8%

average

2/10/20

14

11:58: 47

Building

3

Rm 235

Yes There is one teacher in

the room. It's very quiet

in the room. All the windows

are open and the one

door is open. All the lights are

off, there is no projector

and

no movie playing. The room is stuffy and hot.

798 Lux:

max. 32

Lux: min

59.9 dB:

high. 32

dB: low

83.4: avg 71.2%: avg

2/12/20

14 11:54:

19

Building

3 Rm 135

Science

Teacher offices

No no one in it.

Lights on with no one in it

microwave and other

electronics plugged in.

high:873

Low: 325 ( with

light on)

Low 62

High 565 (lights off)

low: 40.2

High: 55.6

82.3

Everywhere

70.8

Everywhere

2/12/20

14 11:57:

11

Building

3 Rm 230

No Class not in session, no

lights on 7 groups of 4 desks, windows open,

sunny day

Highest

946Lux Lowest

93Lux

Highest

60dB Lowest

39.9dB

Highest

81.7 degC Lowest

81.7degC

Highest

69.1% Lowest

68.8%

2/18/20

14 11:43:

Portable

LSP 2 (Orchestr

Yes Air conditioner on, Tv

screen in use, Watching Movie,

433 lux 5

lux teachers desk 33 lux

73 dB 58dB 80 70



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

12 a

room)

lights off, windows

closed but no shades,

Desks easy to move around,

2/18/20

14

11:50: 09

Portable

3A

Yes Damp stink smell

5 fans on along with the

AC No windows open

All the lights in the

room on Chairs up and tables in

the back

2 whiteboards

Teacher 343

Lux,

Darkest 549 Lux,

Brightest

720 Lux

Highest 86

dB

Lowest 65

81 80

2/18/2014

11:57:

20

Portable 3B

No "Smells like toe jams!" - Kailee Russell

No open windows

Lights are off Tables are pushed off to

the side away from the

middle

Blinds for windows are broken

Restroom with door

open 2 whiteboards

trashcans not emptied

cabinets are off to the side

1 broken light

AC is on slightly

Door is closed after entry automatically

Highest 734Lux,

Teachers

18 Lux, Lowest 18

Lux

(lights off)

Highest 601,

Teachers

360 Lux, Lowest 147

Lux (Lights

on)

Highest 72 dB,

Lowest 57

dB

80 83

2/20/20

14 11:45:

34

Castle

Memorial Hall

Mrs.

Franklin's

lanai

No 2 Desks outside

Open lanai Shady on most parts of

table

Shades that are never

used (still in working condition)

Sun comes in more as

the day goes on Still hot

120

Not in Session/Empty

Highest:131

6 Lux, Lowest: 947

Lux

Highest:

81.8 dB Lowest:

62.3 dB

85.2

degrees

60.1%

2/20/20 Castle No 6 people inside the Highest: Highest: Lowest 63.7



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

14

11:53:

34

Memorial

Hall

Rm 120

room. 2 rows of lights

on. 1 fan

on. 8 windows are closed, but usually

opened during

class(blinds on the

window that are not used). 2

rows of tables. Only 1

door open. (Most doors closed.) Crammed

space. Sink is located in

another room on the side. Carpet

on the ground. Electrical

wiring is messy.

581 Lowest:

505

Teacher: 633

65.5

Lowest:

57.6

85.3

Highest

85.6

2/21/2014

11:15:

44

Castle Memorial

Hall

Rm 125

No Lights are off Half of the windows are

open

pretty good lighting fairly organized

doors are open

lanai ceiling lights are

on when they dont need to be

fan is off

all desks in the middle of the room with chairs

surrounding them

The highest reading was

1410 Lux.

The lowest reading was

285 Lux.

The highest reading was

66.4

dB. The lowest

reading was

50.7

dB.

81.7 constant

67.6 constant

2/21/20

14 11:30:

07

Castle

Memorial Hall

CRDG

office Rm 132

(across

from the girls

bathroom

)

Yes One staff

fairly small 3 fans

cluttered

All windows and doors are open

all lights are on

mosquitoes/bug problem because of the fountain

outside

located by both

bathrooms and water fountain

3 desks

usually very hot

The highest

reading was 395 Lux.

The lowest

reading was 401 Lux.

The highest

reading was 70

dB. The

lowest reading was

65

dB.

81.3 69.9

2/21/20

14

Castle

Memorial

Yes Hawaiian Studies is in

session instead of choir

The highest

reading is

The highest

reading was

82.8

constant

68 constant



Date Location In

Session?

Description Light

(lux)

Sound

(decibels)

Temperatu

re (F°)

Relative

Humidity (%)

11:37:

02

Hall

Choir

room

both doors are open

all windows on mauka

side are closed ceiling fans are on

recess?.... kids are

playing outside

tv not in use chairs in a rainbow

formation

good lighting slight breeze

rotating fan is on

maximum

Lux. The

lowest reading was

404 Lux.

77.5

dB. The

lowest reading was

73

dB.

2/24/20

14 11:41:

00

Building

3 Rm 101

Yes Project Pono students

watching “Call for Life” documentary...much

noise from neighboring

kids outdoors

250 78.4 78.7 55.3



Appendix C



Two Emails dated January 29, 2013 to Chancellor Tom Apple; Subject Heading: UH Campus-wide Conversations Mahalo Dr. Apple on allowing us students to be given a voice. To make these sessions [UH Campus-wide Conversations] truly empowering they should be conducted in a forum that is conducive for everyone to be heard. Likely everyone in that forum wants to add to the movement towards a sustainable campus; however, the environment is far from inviting for many to speak up. Is there a way you can make yourself available to smaller groups and individuals or have this as an online conservation? I realize that maybe daunting, but i have attended similar UH conversation exercises in the past but again the formats never allowed us to give true expression to some of the problems, we as students encounter, that are deeply rooted in the UH structure and present education model. Therefore, if you opened the dialogue down to one-on-one for people really wanting such an opportunity, this likely would produce radical results. I was not able to adequately convey how the subject i attempted to voice (UH Lab School) at the January 28 Campus-wide Conservation, is so important to the UH and the reform required towards "education for sustainable development". The UH lab school is not only a feeder school to the UH, it is the source of educational research and reform. This should be a primary starting point of the sustainability movement. The school happens to be in a very important time as their future is being discussed, but again, the top down process has limited amount a student involvement. This is truly an opportunity to use the UH lab school as a model for community building and education reform. As a researcher, I am encountering challenges in connecting with the teachers and Director who are too busy in their regular routines to even to comment on my research proposal. Nobody has the time to step back and grasp the bigger picture here. As a product of the present public education model, and a researcher of the concept of sustainable development, i see the need to empower our youth through the Hawaiian values, as Agenda 21 (blueprint of sustainable development) spells out. The UH lab school is such a ripe fruit to be given a shot of fertility by the UH sustainability movement by channeling this energy down to the primary schooling of the children of the UH lab school. What an opportunity to create a community of such a depth. Einstein stated "The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education" and "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

The path to Sustainability will come from our youth; it is our role to empower them to find that new way of thinking. The UH Lab school offers that if they rebuild that campus and educational reform from the students up, as you are doing with your Campus-wide Conversations!

Mahalo again for taking the initiative to build the community spirit into the UH Manoa. R. Don Peel



Follow up email also dated Jan. 29, 2013: In addition to my previous comments on the Jan 28 Campus-wide Conversation, i joined this session since it was specific to the topic of sustainability; however, this topic was diminished in this forum to address other issues raised by the audience, consuming half the session. This only demonstrates the importance of such discussions, which should be a regular monthly if not weekly occurrences so students can plan to attend as their busy schedule allows. For the record, Shanah Trevenna is a prime example of student leadership in the area of sustainability even in the face of limited opportunity. This is the type of scholar that is required to transform the educational system. Therefore the system should be engineered to give such individuals more opportunities to transform the campus. Shanah should be given ultimate recognition for her efforts on campus and beyond. Linda Day, former Office of Sustainability, is an example of an unrecognized catalyst for the initial sustainability movement; whose service will likely never be recognized. She was dismissed just when her work was beginning to blossom. Her unknown reason for dismissal resulted in immeasurable costs to the UH community and the sustainability movement. As Dr. Minerby indicated, the sustainability initiative has to be given a priority status by administrators and academics to be sustainable. He has been an energetic soul promoting sustainable development studies. The initiative to hire cross disciplinary faculty dedicated to sustainability may have merit; however, again our campus has a wealth of talented professors and more emphasis to involve the Native Hawaiian community is required in such a venture. To make the sustainable movement more engaging there has to be options students can be awarded credit for their involvement with any sustainability initiatives (one program instigated by Shanah, however likely needs more effective administration support). The UH community is gifted with talented students and faculty, hopefully under your tutelage we become an empowered, interactive community. R. Don Peel

Hawaiian Destiny Final

Documents

Transcript of Hawaiian Destiny Final