Overall Rating Gold - expired
Overall Score 71.58
Liaison James Gordon
Submission Date March 3, 2015
Executive Letter Download

STARS v2.0

Thompson Rivers University
AC-6: Sustainability Literacy Assessment

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 4.00 / 4.00 James Gordon
Environmental Programs and Research Coordinator
TRU Office of Environment and Sustainability
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

The percentage of students assessed for sustainability literacy (directly or by representative sample) and for whom a follow-up assessment is conducted:
100

The percentage of students assessed for sustainability literacy (directly or by representative sample) without a follow-up assessment:
0

A copy of the questions included in the sustainability literacy assessment(s):
The questions included in the sustainability literacy assessment(s) :

The link in the box above is for the questions for the 2014-2015 TRU Sustainability Literacy Assessment. This is a follow-up assessment for other sustainability literacy assessment-type surveys that preceded it, such as the one below (Attitudes and Knowledge of TRU Stakeholders Regarding Sustainability - focus group interviews). Other similar sustainability literacy assessment-type surveys that have already taken place are listed in the Notes box at the end of this section.

Attitudes and Knowledge of TRU Stakeholders Regarding Sustainability - focus group Interviews
The objective of this research is to determine TRU students’ knowledge, awareness and behaviour regarding the topic of sustainability. The focus group study started with pre-determined questions but allowed for open discussions in order to explore each of the questions in-depth. The questions identified to what extent students expect sustainability to be embedded in curricula across a wide range of disciplines, to what extent sustainability has been embedded in participants’ programs and courses to date, if sustainability factored into deciding on which university to attend and what students expect of TRU in terms of sustainable operations (campus recycling, composting, transportation, energy efficiency, water conservation etc.).
Questions
• Define sustainability
• Do you view sustainability through social or environmental lens (do social injustices, poverty, homelessness or impoverished nations resonate more than climate change related issues)?
• When did you first become aware of sustainability related issues? Was it an issue related to social, environmental or economic concerns? How much have peer groups/ student activism/course content or the media influenced your awareness and understanding?
• Did your awareness and understanding of sustainability increase once you started attending TRU? (causes, influences)
• Should sustainability be a priority for society in the 21 century? Why? What are the implications; economically, environmentally and socially? On a scale of 0-5 how much do you care? (0= you don’t care at all, 5 = you care a great deal)
• Do you consider sustainability and environmental stewardship a priority in your daily life? (Do your actions reflect your concerns - if not, why not? Identify barriers)
If yes, then please provide examples:
Do you recycle?
Do you try to minimize the environmental impact when commuting to school?
Do you compost?
Do you turn out the lights when you leave a room at home?
Do you conserve water at home?
• Do you think there is a disconnect between what you hear in the media and what you are learning in your classrooms regarding sustainability-related issues (social injustices or climate change etc.)?
• Are you involved with green activism on the TRU campus (or in the greater community), or are you a member of any environmental groups/clubs on campus? If yes, please list all, If no, why not? Identify motivations and barriers.
• Do you feel as a student you are an important stakeholder and can make a meaningful contribution to advancing sustainability? In what ways?
• Did you consider sustainability and environmental stewardship a priority when deciding on a career path?
If yes, please describe why? If no, please describe why not?
• Did you research to what extent the topics of sustainability, corporate social responsibility, or environmental stewardship were incorporated in the various courses in your area of study? If Yes did it factor in to your decision on attending TRU?
• Is sustainability addressed in any of your courses? Do you think it is relevant?
Engage the group in discussion on the amount of sustainability-related content and if their program and courses are meeting their expectations, is the content matching what they perceive as important for the work or business place?
• Do you agree that universities should be exemplary sustainable role models in their daily operations? For example: promoting energy, water and paper conservation; green waste management, recycling and green purchasing policies)
Does TRU walk the walk (or even talk the talk)? Are you aware of TRU’s sustainability or environmental track record?
What other universities come to mind when they think of green universities? Why?
• Would you pay a ‘green levy’ in addition to tuition fees if the money was put towards sustainability and environmental initiatives on campus?
Discuss student levy versus increased parking fees (parking fees relate to those who drive and therefore contribute to GHG emissions, also cost is spread across campus community) Discuss local food options in cafeteria. Would they pay more for supporting local food growers? How much?
• Any further ideas or points you would like to share?

Survey Questions

1) While no single definition of sustainability exists, most definitions contain social, environmental and economic elements. Please rank the three elements from the most important (1) to the least important (3). Two or more elements can receive the same rank, for example; a score of one, one, one means you view all three elements equally important).
Social ___________________________________
Environmental ___________________________________
Economic ___________________________________

2) I consider sustainability a priority in my daily life.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

3) I conserve water as much as possible (by taking short showers, using minimal water while brushing teeth etc.).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

4) I compost regularly.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

5) I recycle regularly.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

6) I buy locally grown food when possible ( buy at farmers market, support shops/restaurants that support local growers etc.).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

7) I consider minimizing my environmental impact when commuting to school? (carpool, walk, bicycle, or take public transportation as often as possible).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

8) How many days a week do you use the following modes of transportation to get to TRU?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Walk        
Bicycle        
Automobile (gas/diesel)      
Automobile (Hybrid/electric)      
Car pool        
Public transport       
Scooter        
Other           
9) Please comment on any barriers that impede you from carpooling, taking public transport, walking or bicycling to campus (no public transport, lack of time, safety concerns and other tasks such as taking kids to day care or running errands etc).

10) I participate in sustainable initiatives or green activism on campus (or in Kamloops).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

11) Please list any sustainability related clubs or initiatives that you are (or have been) involved with.
____________________________________________________________

12) My understanding and awareness of sustainability related issues has increased since I have become a student at TRU.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

13) From the following list please indicate what or who has influenced your awareness and understanding of sustainability (0 = no influence) (4 = a great deal of influence).
0 1 2 3 4
Peers     
Student Activism     
Instructors     
Course content     
Initiatives around campus (recycling, Earth Day etc.)   
Parents/family     
Media     
Highschool teachers/courses     
Other     

14) I would support an increase in parking fees if the money was put towards sustainability and environmental initiatives on campus.
 Yes
 No

15) How much of an increase per day would you support? (Daily rate is currently $3)
 0 - 25 cents
 25 - 50 cents
 50 cents - $1
 $1 - $1.50
 More than $1.50

16) Please select why you would not support in increase in parking fees.
 Financial constraints
 I think parking fees are already too high
 Would rather see money spent elsewhere
 I use other means of transport
 Other (please specify)

• If you selected other, please specify ______________________________________________________________________

17) While choosing a university, I researched the sustainability and environmental track record of the various institutions I was considering attending.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

• Additional comments ______________________________________________________________________

18) If you did research the environment and sustainability track record of the various institutions, did this factor into your decision to attend TRU?
 Yes
 No
 Not sure

19) I considered sustainability a priority when deciding on an area of study/career path.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

• Additional comments ______________________________________________________________________

20) I researched to what extent the topic of sustainability was addressed in the various courses in my area of study/career path.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

21) If you did research the extent of sustainability related content in the courses in your area of study/career path, did this factor into your decision to attend TRU?
 Yes
 No
 Not Sure

22) Please indicate to what extent the topic of sustainability is addressed in your courses this semester (0 = no sustainability related content) (4 = a course that is directly related to sustainability/environmental studies).

0 1 2 3 4
Course 1     
Course 2     
Course 3     
Course 4     
Course 5     
Course 6     

23) I would prefer more sustainability-related content in my courses.
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

24) I think that universities should be sustainability role models in their daily operations (for example, water and energy conservation, exemplary recycling program, environmental and social issues awareness).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

25) I feel that TRU is doing a good job of modeling sustainability in its daily operations ( for example, water and energy conservation, exemplary recycling program, environmental and social related issues awareness).
 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree

26) When you think of Canada's greenest universities, which ones come to mind? Why? (please rank up to 3)
• ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

27) What is your age?
___________________________________________________________

28) What is your sex?
 Male
 Female

29) From where in Kamloops or the surrounding area do you live and commute?
 Valleyview/Barnhartvale
 Aberdeen/Sahali
 North Kamloops
 South Kamloops
 Westsyde
 Other (please specify)

• If you selected other, please specify ______________________________________________________________________

30) In what school or faculty are you enrolled?
 Faculty of Arts
 School of Business & Economics
 Faculty of Human, Social & Educational Development
 Faculty of Law
 School of Nursing
 Faculty of Science
 School of Tourism
 School of Trades & Technology
 Other (please specify)

• If you selected other, please specify ______________________________________________________________________

31) In what type of program are you enrolled?
 Diploma
 Certificate
 Undergrad Degree
 Graduate Degree
 Other (please specify)

• If you selected other, please specify ______________________________________________________________________

32) Please list your major.
____________________________________________________________

33) Are you currently employed?
 No
 Part time
 Full time


A brief description of how the assessment(s) were developed:

The TRU Sustainability Literacy Assessment was developed to gauge students' level of knowledge and attitudes regarding sustainability. It will act both as a follow-up assessment tool to determine the progress of TRU students regarding sustainbility literacy based on other assessment tools used in the past (surveys, focus groups, etc.), and, moving forward, used to compare the results it generates year after year.
The focus group assessments, online surveys and hard copy surveys were developed to determine students' level of knowledge and attitudes regarding sustainability and if that was reflected in their behaviours (for example, if students thought alternate/sustainable transportation was important but did not use sustainable transportation, then what were the barriers?). The assessments were also developed to determine if TRU was meeting student needs, both in terms of providing relevant sustainability-related courses/programming in their area of study, and in terms of leading by example through sustainable operations.


A brief description of how the assessment(s) were administered:

Assessments were administered through online surveys, surveys at student orientations and focus group interviews.


A brief summary of results from the assessment(s):

Partial Results from the 2014-2015 TRU Sustainability Literacy Assessment can be found at http://www.tru.ca/sustain/people/reporting.html. A representative sample of 10% of the general student population is being targeted in order to complete it.

Findings from Attitudes and Knowledge of TRU Stakeholders Regarding Sustainability - focus group surveys:
The age of the online survey respondents ranged from 18-44 years with an average age of 22. The sample population was comprised of 70 percent females and 30 percent males. The following table illustrates what percentage of students from each of TRU’s faculties and schools completed the online survey.
Table 1 Percentage Breakdown of online Survey Respondents
School or Faculty Percentage of Population Sample
Faculty of Arts 24.3
School of Business and Economics 21.6
Faculty of Human, Social and Education Sciences 2.7
Faculty of Law 8.1
School of Nursing 2.7
Faculty of Science 16.2
School of Tourism 13.5
School of Trades and Technology 0
Other 10.8

The majority of students were not employed (67.6 percent); 29.7 percent were employed part time, and 2.7 percent were employed full time.
Student Perceptions, Attitudes and Behaviours Related to Sustainability
In order to engage students in discussion on sustainability, understanding students’ conceptions and attitudes were considered key components of this research project. Initial questions in the online survey asked students to rank the three elements of sustainability (social, environmental and economic) with the option to rank two or more as equally important. All survey respondents completed the ranking and none of the students indicated (in the additional comments box) that they were unfamiliar with the general concept or definition of sustainability. The focus group participants also ranked the three elements, and showed a great deal of awareness and knowledge on the topic of sustainability
The results of the online survey indicated that students rank (on a scale of one to three) the environment as the most important element of sustainability (mean = 1.61), with the social element second (mean = 1.75), and the economic element third (mean = 1.89). These findings support recent discourse that social and economic systems rely, ultimately, on the carrying capacity of the earth’s natural systems (Bosselmann, 2001). Parris and Kates (2003, p.560) add that beyond utilitarian purposes, a significant amount of literature values nature for its intrinsic qualities and biodiversity. One focus group participant stated, “the world cannot support life if we destroy it; therefore protecting the environment comes first.” Adding to this sentiment, three of the focus group participants also viewed sustainability through an environmental lens. One participant stressed the importance of “dealing with the threats of climate change, due to the potential for greater negative impacts on developing, poor nations, leading to more social problems at a global level.” Bosselmann (2001) suggests this shift from Brundtland-type anthropocentric concepts and definitions towards eco-centric concepts and definitions could form the new philosophical basis for sustainability (2001).
Five out of the eight focus group participants, however, viewed sustainability through a social lens, maintaining that the protection of the environment can only come about after social changes at individual and societal levels. The following comments reflect their attitudes:
“I view sustainability through a social lens. Short-comings in our social structure have allowed environmental problems to continue to manifest.”
“I think you have to have a societal change first that will lead to a different way of thinking about the environment. It all starts with teaching and a change of attitude.”
“The level of intrinsic value one has for his/her self manifests itself first in inter-personal relationships and second in the manner they treat the environment; to improve environmental health and sustainability, the individuals’ emotional, physical, mental health must first be addressed.”
The majority of focus group participants, whether they placed social or environmental concerns first, also commented on the interconnectedness of the two elements, and, in fact, the end goal or ideal vision of a sustainable future was very similar. The economic element of sustainability was not ignored by the focus group study, although it was viewed more as means to an end. One participant cited the importance that “have nations” share resources and wealth with the “have-not nations” to allow the poorer nations to address social issues and manage their own natural resources. Online survey participants also ranked the economic element third with only 13 percent of respondents listing the economic element of sustainability as the most important of the three pillars, while 19% of students viewed all three as equally important. The discussions indicated that even the students with a limited understanding of sustainability were aware of the basic concepts and definitions.
Sustainability as a Priority
All of the students in the focus group study agreed that sustainability is a priority for society in the 21st century (on a scale of 0-5, mean = 4.3). Seven out of the eight focus group participants and 84 percent of survey respondents indicated that sustainability is a priority in their daily lives. Only ten percent of students do not conserve water as much as possible (while showering, brushing teeth etc.). Over 60 percent of students buy locally grown food when possible, while only 16.7 percent do not.
Although the findings clearly indicate that the majority of students view sustainability as a growing imperative for society and a priority in their daily lives, many students admit that their behaviour does not reflect their attitudes towards sustainability. The following comments allude to the gap between attitude and behaviour:
“I care but my life does not reflect that.”
“It should be a huge priority. If we do nothing what will we have left—I am guilty of not always doing what I should.”
“It should be huge priority. The planet cannot take much more. However it is easy to live in your bubble.”
“Not like I should,” “Not as much as I could,” “not really” (referring to their actions regarding water conservation).
The online survey and the focus group study asked a series of questions to determine to what extent students’ behaviours reflect their concerns and attitudes regarding sustainability. The focus group study discussed some of the reasons that explain the gap between attitudes and behaviours. The online survey concluded that over 93 percent of students actively recycle, while 100 percent of the focus group participants indicated that they recycle. The one person in the focus group study that did not indicate that sustainability was a priority in their daily life still recycled due to it being easy and “the right thing to do.” He did point out, however, that he could be more diligent about separating some recyclable materials from the garbage. The online survey and focus group study, however, uncovered that only 56 percent and 50 percent, respectively, of students compost regularly. This supports the literature that suggests removing barriers (making recycling convenient) and creating social norms to support pro-environmental behaviour are important. Focus group participants pointed to a lack of composting containers on campus (and in some cases, where they live) as a primary reason for not composting. Many students admonished TRU for lagging in this area. According to Tom Owen, the Director of Environment and Sustainability at TRU, yard waste and a high percentage of preparation food waste from the Culinary Arts Program and various cafeterias are composted. The focus group participants, however, verbalized a keen interest on behalf of the student body to expand the composting program across the campus. One participant, who recently transferred from another university, expressed his disbelief that there was no composting at TRU. The same participant also claimed that the culture of sustainability at his past university was well established and as a student there “you couldn’t get away with anything—everyone was encouraged, almost demanded, to act in pro-environmental ways.” The student referred to “a culture of intolerance” throughout all levels of the institution, inside and outside of the classroom, even in the surrounding community.
The majority of students also consider the environment when commuting to the campus (65 percent of survey respondents do versus 19 percent that do not). The focus group participants (7 of 8) also consider their environmental impact while commuting, but point to a number of barriers and factors that lead to their actions contradicting their attitudes. The demographic results of the survey indicate that 56.8 percent of students live in areas close enough to walk to campus, but only 40 percent of students do so regularly. Of students that walk to school, 28 percent walk more than five times a week (between classes). Of the 56.8 percent that live in adjacent neighbourhoods, only 6. 8 percent of students regularly bicycle to TRU. Over half of students intermittently car pool, while 15 percent of students regularly carpool. While 86.5 percent of students live in areas that have public transportation services, only 37.6 regularly use public transportation (four or more days a week), with 34 percent not using public transportation at all. Over 60 percent of students surveyed use gas or diesel automobiles to commute to school (without carpooling) at least once a week. A relatively small number of students use vehicles with relatively low environmental impact (scooters = 3.4 percent, electric or hybrid vehicle = 3.4 percent).
Students in the focus group study described TRU as a “commuter college” with 33 percent of survey respondents pointing out that they live too far from the campus to walk or bike, and their neighbourhood does not have any, or infrequent, bus service. Many students who do not car pool indicated that they would if they could connect with other students in their area. There are many barriers that deter students from walking and cycling: weather, other errands to run, time constraints, no cycle lanes, no trails, and a lack of pedestrian overpasses. Students in the focus group study also pointed to a lack of space on campus to study between classes. One participant suggested “over-crowded common areas cause students to go home between classes and the infrequent bus service, in addition to other factors such as being in a rush, or laziness, results in students using their car to do so.” Roughly half of the survey respondents commented that the public transportation system does not provide adequate services for their needs: ‘‘too few buses in my area”; “no buses in my area”; “no space on buses during peaks times”; “no buses at night”; “no buses on Sundays”; “too many transfers to my area”; “takes too long to get home”; “the system is unreliable”; “the bus is really full in the morning, so I just take my car.”
Parking Fees
The majority of students (65 percent) would not support a parking increase even if the money was allocated for sustainable and environmental initiatives on campus. Of those students, 43 percent indicated financial constraints as the reason they would not support an increase, 40.5 percent think parking fees are already too high, 8 percent would rather see the money spent elsewhere, and 13.5 percent do not use the parking lots (but were still against the increase.) Of the 16 percent of students that listed other reasons: one student suggested that fundraisers would be a better way to generate revenue; and the majority indicated that students are already facing increased tuition and living expenses and another increase would put too much financial pressure on students.
Of the 35 percent that would support a parking increase, 31 percent agreed on a 25 to 50 cent hike, and 46 percent agreed on a 50 cents to 1 dollar increase. Since only eight percent of students indicated that they would rather see the revenue from an increase go to supporting other causes; the majority of students would then seem to support sustainable and environmental initiatives—as long as the money comes from other, or existing, fees. The focus group study was divided on the issue with half supporting the increase if there was full transparency (what projects the money was supporting) and student involvement. Most students against the fee increase thought the idea of a green levy was good, but would rather see a portion of existing fees allocated to green initiatives rather than another fee. Students on both sides expressed a lack of trust that the administration, during times of financial constraint, would instead put the money into general revenue. One student summed up the general sentiment of the group with, “I would prefer a relocation of funds, but appreciate the idea of a green levy if kept reasonable, transparent and within the context of building student identity and ownership.”
Factors and Influences that have Increased Students’ Awareness and Understanding of Sustainability
Students completing the online survey pointed to a variety of factors and influences that have increased their awareness and understanding of sustainability. Instructors had the greatest influence on students’ awareness, while the media, peer groups, and parents and family also contributed significantly. Initiatives around the TRU campus (Earth Hour, Trash Bash etc.), student activism and course content factored in, although to a lesser extent. Students in the focus group study alluded to a variety of experiences while growing up that made them aware of sustainability-related issues such as climate change, poverty, homelessness and environmental degradation. Most students, however, expressed that sustainability issues did not resonate with them until they matured and started attending university. The majority of respondents claimed that their awareness and understanding of sustainability-related issues had increased since attending TRU. One of the focus group students reflected on how his awareness and knowledge increased while attending university, citing “at some point I realized that sustainability was much more than just recycling.” This student went on to claim that there are a lot of misconceptions around the concepts of sustainability within his peer groups.
The entire focus group agreed there is a disconnect between the media and what they are learning in the classroom, with the exception of those that have no sustainability-related content in their program. Those students then suggested they rely heavily on the media for information. The group also pointed out the different types and quality of media. One student gave the example of the “Canadian Broadcasting Corporation versus. Entertainment Tonight,” and the need to filter out “good from bad” information. The focus group also highlighted the influence of instructors on increasing students’ awareness and understanding of sustainability. Students suggested that what they learn about sustainability in the classroom is more a reflection of each instructor’s personal attitude towards sustainability than it being part of the curriculum.
The Extent that Students Research Sustainability Prior to Attending University
Approximately one in ten students research the environmental and sustainability track record of universities that they are considering attending (which at TRU, based on 11 percent is 1200 students), and 70 percent of them chose TRU as a result. Students highlighted cost, convenience (proximity to their home and parents), and program availability as higher priorities. The majority of focus group participants (seven out of eight) did, however, emphasize that “all things being equal,” that is, if they had the option of attending two universities, both offering their desired program and with similar logistics and costs, that they would choose the university with a better sustainability track record and relevant course content. Students in the focus group study also pointed out that although other priorities trumped sustainability when deciding on which university to attend, sustainability does now factor into which courses they take.
Of the 19 percent of students that researched the level of sustainability-related content in their various courses, 18 percent of students are attending TRU based on that research. The level of sustainability-related content varies from virtually none in some courses to programs that are directly related to sustainability and environmental studies. The majority of students throughout all of the faculties and programs did, however, indicate that they would prefer more sustainability-related content (only 11 percent did not).
An equal number of students (39 percent) considered sustainability a priority when deciding on a career path versus those that indicated higher priorities (such as income or supporting a family). The majority of focus group participants (six out of eight) hope that their careers will have direct, positive impacts on society and sustainability-related issues. For half of those 6 focus group participants, their increased awareness and knowledge of sustainability-related issues while attending university has changed the focus of their studies and career goals.
All of the students in the online survey, as well as the focus group study, agree that universities should be sustainability role models in their daily operations. Students in the focus group study articulated that “universities should be hubs of innovation, advanced education and creativity”; “it is critical that universities are leaders on this front.” The majority of online respondents (81 percent) agreed that TRU is doing a good job of modeling sustainability in its daily operations. The focus group, however, was evenly divided with four of the eight participants suggesting TRU could do more, with two of those four completely unaware of any of TRU’s initiatives. Some students that agreed that TRU is doing a good job did, however, suggest that TRU lags far behind other universities.
Numerous discussions during the focus group study pointed to one of the major issues impeding sustainability gaining traction at TRU: the “absence of community” amongst the student body. While one participant suggested that the lack of space on campus led to students commuting more often than they should, the student also felt that this was part of a much larger issue, that is, the majority of students “go to class, then go home”—no one is interested in becoming involved in “what community there is.” Another participant suggested that community-based clubs, such as the student-lead environmental club (TRU ECO) have a small membership and meetings are often under-attended. The student went on to claim that the general apathy on campus has led to frustration for many, and in fact, was the reason she quit TRU ECO. The focus group emphasized that the current successes on campus (and at other universities) are due to collaborative efforts incorporating course content and involving students, faculty and staff.


The website URL where information about the literacy assessment(s) is available:

Besides the assessment included above, four other sustainability literacy assessment-type surveys have been conducted during the last 3 years in order to gauge students' awareness and opinions on the subject of sustainability. The results of these surveys affected the direction TRU took regarding action on sustainability-related initiatives. Future assessments will also be used in the same way.
These four surveys include the following (along with corresponding web links):
1). TRU Marketing and Communication Research Project (pages 7 (Focus Groups Results Summary), and page 8 (Survey Results): http://www.tru.ca/sustain/about/reporting.html
2). TRU Orientation Survey Results:
http://www.tru.ca/sustain/about/reporting.html
3).TRU Strategic Sustainability Plan Survey:
http://www.tru.ca/sustain/about/reporting.html
4). TRU Workplace Conservation Awareness Survey: http://www.tru.ca/sustain/about/reporting.html

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 and complete the Data Inquiry Form.