| Overall Rating | Gold |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 66.51 |
| Liaison | Jennifer Lamy |
| Submission Date | July 14, 2022 |
Emerson College
AC-6: Sustainability Literacy Assessment
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
4.00 / 4.00 |
Jennifer
Lamy Campus Sustainability Manager Campus Services |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
Does the institution conduct an assessment of the sustainability literacy of its students?:
Yes
Which of the following best describes the literacy assessment? The assessment is administered to::
The entire (or predominate) student body, directly or by representative sample
Which of the following best describes the structure of the assessment? The assessment is administered as a::
Pre- and post-assessment to the same cohort or to representative samples in both a pre- and post-test
A copy of the questions included in the sustainability literacy assessment(s):
A list or sample of the questions included in the sustainability literacy assessment or the website URL where the assessment tool may be found:
Full assessment here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MKaoBUGJKsbQPa8Z7CzIatqEqWq6QczU/view?usp=sharing
A brief description of how the literacy assessment was developed and/or when it was adopted:
The Campus Sustainability Manager and the Office of Institutional Research crafted the literacy assessment, incorporating feedback from faculty and staff on the campus-wide Sustainability Committee.
A similar, but not identical, survey was run in fall, 2019. The surveys are different enough not to provide significant comparisons but the identical questions were compared between 2019 and 2022.
A similar, but not identical, survey was run in fall, 2019. The surveys are different enough not to provide significant comparisons but the identical questions were compared between 2019 and 2022.
A brief description of how a representative sample was reached (if applicable) and how the assessment(s) were administered :
Emerson's Office of Institutional Research distributed the survey via email over the course of three weeks. They sent an initial email at the start of the survey period and a follow-up email two days before the survey closed. Three copies of the book All We Can Save were raffled off to survey respondents as an incentive for responses.
The next round of this assessment (using all of the same questions) is scheduled for fall, 2023. After that, the assessment will be conducted every two years in the fall.
The next round of this assessment (using all of the same questions) is scheduled for fall, 2023. After that, the assessment will be conducted every two years in the fall.
A brief summary of results from the literacy assessment(s):
The assessment has only been administered once so there are no longitudinal findings yet.
This initial literacy assessment, which included questions ranging in difficulty level, demonstrated that there is a wide range of knowledge levels on sustainability. Students performed particularly well (more than 60% of answers were correct) on questions about food waste, environmental racism, the city of Boston's climate planning efforts, and the carbon sequestration potential of plants. The questions with the fewest right answers (under 20% of answers were correct) were about the history of climate science, energy savings from recycling, and the proportion of total greenhouse gas emissions for which the United States is responsible.
This initial literacy assessment, which included questions ranging in difficulty level, demonstrated that there is a wide range of knowledge levels on sustainability. Students performed particularly well (more than 60% of answers were correct) on questions about food waste, environmental racism, the city of Boston's climate planning efforts, and the carbon sequestration potential of plants. The questions with the fewest right answers (under 20% of answers were correct) were about the history of climate science, energy savings from recycling, and the proportion of total greenhouse gas emissions for which the United States is responsible.
Optional Fields
---
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
---
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.