We are starting to receive questions from the AASHE community about a new Carnegie Elective Classification for Sustainability currently under development by the American Council on Education (ACE) in partnership with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. As little information about the sustainability classification is available online, we thought it would be helpful to share what we have learned from our engagement in the process so far, which has included individual conversations with ACE staff as well as participation in several group meetings that ACE has organized over the past year. These group meetings have included nonprofits like AASHE and Second Nature as well as a mix of faculty, sustainability staff, and administrators.
Here is our understanding of ACE’s current plans for the sustainability classification (keep in mind that things may change as they work on it):
- Overall, the Elective Classification for Sustainability is likely to be similar in structure to the existing Elective Classification for Community Engagement but with significantly fewer questions (approximately 25-35 questions in total).
- The assessment methodology is likely to rely primarily on qualitative and narrative questions rather than performance metrics.
- The assessment methodology is likely to emphasize institutional commitment, academics, and public engagement. It is not expected to focus substantially on campus operations.
- The sustainability classification is likely to be binary in nature – institutions will either receive the classification or not.
- All applicants will receive a feedback report from ACE (regardless of whether they receive the classification).
- Institutions that receive the classification will be listed publicly. Data from their applications will not be made publicly available.
- The cost to apply has not yet been determined.
In our engagement with ACE, AASHE shared common member concerns about the many challenges created by the proliferation of higher education sustainability ranking and recognition programs, particularly the time required to collect and report related but unique data to each program. In an attempt to address these concerns, we proposed basing the elective classification, at least in part, on STARS, which, as a tool developed and refined by the higher education sustainability community over many years and already in use at hundreds of institutions, could alleviate the need to create a whole new assessment framework.
ACE staff have indicated to us that they prefer to develop their own assessment methodology. We appreciate ACE’s attention to sustainability and remain hopeful that, as plans for the sustainability classification continue to develop and impacted parties weigh in, it will determine that using or aligning with STARS would facilitate participation and strengthen the classification. We will also be exploring other opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration with ACE.