Activating Critical Thinking to Advance the Sustainable Development Goals in Tourism Systems

Page 1

A pedagogical framework for the development of the critical

tourism citizen

Karla A. Boluk, Christina T. Cavaliere and Lauren N. Duffy

ABSTRACT

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an international frame-

work to improve global wellbeing, and SDG 4 Quality Education serves

as a substructure to achieve sustainability. However, absent from the

SDGs is explicit reference to critical thinking which is needed to con-

tend with structures of power. Similarly, tertiary education systems glo-

bally are facing challenges due to appropriation by neoliberal agendas

favouring capitalism over cogitation. Accordingly, the aim of this paper

is to propose a framework for bringing criticality to sustainable tourism

education to strengthen SDG 4 and empower future decision- makers

as Critical Tourism Citizens (CTC). A definition of a CTC is presented to

further critical citizenship scholarship in tourism. This paper examines

the role of criticality in advancing sustainability in tourism. Supported

by empirical qualitative data, we propose a pedagogical framework that

aids critical examination of tourism systems to advance sustainability in

relation to the SDGs. The framework is positioned within current schol-

arship on global citizenship and critical citizenship education to propel

theory into praxis.

Introduction

Universities have long been associated with cultivating spaces for critical thought, dialogue and

debate, and introspection. Neoliberalism within higher education is now increasingly elevating

the priorities of research metrics, external funding and job-readiness (Giroux, 2016). Current man-

agerial, business-oriented foci in recreation, events, tourism and hospitality programs tend to

overshadow criticality. This compromises the development of students who can contribute to

the critique of the tourism phenomenon (Ayikoru, Tribe, & Airey, 2009; Dredge et al., 2012;

Fullagar & Wilson, 2012; McLaren & Jaramillo, 2013; Tribe, 2005, 2008). The emphasis on prioritiz-

ing economic growth and acquisition of wealth has superseded socio-cultural and environmental

interests in local communities, which lie at the heart of the sustainable tourism agenda

(Assadourian, 2012).

Building on the Millennium Development Goals, the United Nations’ (UN) Transforming our

World 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development outlines 17 Sustainable Development Goals

(SDGs). The SDGs present recommendations centered on achieving social and environmental

Page 2

justice and offer direction for addressing complex sustainability challenges. The preamble notes

the importance of the SDGs embedded into everyday discourse if they are to be realized (UN,

2015). Yet surveys indicate that knowledge of the SDGs is poor; an international study investigat-

ing awareness of the SDGs in 24 countries (over 56,000 people) discovered that only 1% of

informants were ‘very’ familiar and 36% did ‘not know them at all’ (Lampert & Papadongonas,

2016, p. 10).

The ability to think critically through complex issues of sustainability is also needed

(Holdsworth & Thomas, 2015; Kearins & Springett, 2003). This notion is reflective of the evolution

from education about sustainability that implied content coverage, to education for sustainability

(EfS), requiring individuals to develop “skills in critical inquiry and systematic thinking to explore

the complexity and implications of sustainable development” (Holdsworth & Thomas, 2015, p.

138). Researchers within EfS have presented the importance of values and morality in their pro-

grams (Sibbel, 2009; Springett, 2005).

Critical tourism studies focus on under explored issues of power, justice, equity, representa-

tion and access (Ateljevic, Morgan, & Pritchard, 2013). Within tourism education, growing interest

in critical tourism scholarship has translated into calls for more critical, and transformative

approaches across curricula and classrooms (see Belhassen & Caton, 2011; Boluk & Carnicelli,

2019; Cotterell, Arcodia, & Ferreira, 2017; Crossley, 2017; Farber Canziani, Sonmez,

Hsieh, & Byrd,

2012; Fullagar & Wilson, 2012; Jamal, Taillon, & Dredge, 2011; McKercher & Prideaux, 2011;

McLaren & Jaramillo, 2013; Moscardo, 2015; Schwarzin, 2013; Sheldon, Fesenmaier, & Tribe, 2008;

2011). Crossley (2017) notes, “there is general consensus that tourism education has remained

largely insulated from these radical and potentially transformative academic currents” (p. 428).

Thus, this paper is premised on three ideas. First, there is an intersection between sustainable

tourism and critical tourism studies, deemed critical sustainable tourism. Issues of sustainability

cannot be solved without a critical lens that recognizes influences of power, poverty, inequality

and ideology in tourism. Secondly, this paper reflects upon the presence of critical thinking and

critical pedagogy and responds to calls for criticality in research approaches in tourism (e.g.,

Tribe, 2008) and for criticality in tourism education (e.g., Boluk & Carnicelli, 2019; Crossley, 2017;

Fullagar & Wilson, 2012). While critical thinking reflects skills that allow for a more systematic

process of reasoning, critical pedagogy is the explicit engagement with critical inquiry that seeks

to undercover power structures (Burbules & Berk,1999; Huckle, 2017). Third, this paper builds on

the work of Bricker, Black, and Cottrell (2012) who recognized the connections between the for-

mer MDGs and sustainable tourism development. In line with Freire’s (1970) work on conscienti-

zation, the authors propose that students must mutually recognize injustices and inequalities to

be able to address macro and micro level challenges of sustainability in tourism.

Our paper proposes a framework for bringing criticality to sustainable tourism education to

strengthen SDG 4 and empower future decision makers as Critical Tourism Citizens (CTC). A CTC

is defined as one who through a critical disposition is mutually empathetic and willing to lead

change, equipped with the understandings, skills, and capacity to acknowledge power and chal-

lenge the status quo to creatively and responsibly, progress sustainability within tourism. Our

definition of the CTC responds to calls to bring criticality to the tourism classroom, particularly in

the context of EfS and building on the work of Crossley (2017) and Blanchard and Higgins-

Desbiolles (2013). Supported by empirical qualitative data collected through Brookfield’s (1987)

Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) distributed in three North American tourism classes, the

framework includes five strategies for teaching critical thinking and critical perspectives: (a)

Critical Topics, (b) Critical Dialogue (c) Critical Reflection, (d) Critical Positionality and (e) Critical

Praxis. Such strategies build on Crossley’s (2017) work articulating a three-movement approach

which comprises bringing criticality to the classroom; the conscious-raising of structural oppres-

sion through critical pedagogy; and an explicit undertaking of positionality. The strategies also

build upon Blanchard and Higgins-Desbiolles’ (2013) work using Freire’s notion of critical con-

sciousness and engagement.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 3

Our paper positions the framework within the literature on global citizenship and critical citi-

zenship education. Contemporary definitions of citizenship broadly infer ideas of what it means

to be a good citizen, whereby critical citizenship education focuses on the development of an

ideal and committed citizen (Johnson & Morris, 2010). Adding a component of citizenry under-

scores the responsibility of this conscious-raising endeavor that needs to be followed into praxis.

Once students are introduced to critical sustainability issues affecting tourism, critical thinking

skills and the underlying causes of unsustainable practices, they can become part of a commu-

nity “oriented towards social action” (Jamal et al., 2011, p. 136).

Literature review

To achieve sustainability or sustainable tourism in practice, we must start with education. SDG 4

is described as “ensur[ing] inclusive and quality education for all and promoting lifelong

learning” (UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2018, p. 43). The 10

targets expressed within SDG 4 focus on equitable educational access, improvements of literacy

rates, support for teachers, and capacity building of vocational skills. Target 4.7 is of particular

importance to this paper:

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable

development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable

lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global

citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

(UNESCO, 2017, p. 2).

Target 4.7 reflects the need to focus on sustainable development education, emphasizing

social and environmental justice issues. The 2017/18 Global Education Monitoring Report found

51% of reporting countries have policy reflecting the inclusion of sustainable development edu-

cation, 33% of whom have focused curricula and only 7% include the topic in teacher training.

Indeed, “in many countries, teachers are poorly prepared to teach topics related to target 4.7”

(UNESCO, 2018, p. 43). Such statistics do little to describe what is being done to teach sustain-

ability. Education plays an important role in addressing challenges presented in the SDGs includ-

ing sustainability. As Boyle (2017) states, we “can no longer afford a ‘wait and see’ attitude’” (p.

389). Therefore, we need to rethink how we teach sustainability in classrooms. The following sec-

tions consider the importance of critical thinking, pedagogy and citizenry as a means for devel-

oping critical tourism citizens.

Critical teaching for sustainability

Critical thinking is the ability to contemplate one’s thoughts as a metacognitive activity (Paul &

Binker, 1990) that is “purposeful, reasoned and goal directed” (Halpern, 2014, p. 4). Reflecting the

development of analytical skills critical thinking allows one to trace logic and reasoning; it does

not require engagement with a critical issue. The term critico-creative thinking is sometimes used

interchangeably with critical thinking to emphasize focus on the creative process of identifying

alternatives to problems (Fisher, 2001). In contrast, critical pedagogy is rooted in critical inquiry

focusing on teaching to question and challenge dominant ideologies to create social transform-

ation (McLaren, 2003). For a review of the differences between critical thinking and critical peda-

gogy, see Burbules and Berk (1999) and Huckle (2017).

The outcomes of critical pedagogy can include instilling learners with a political and ethical

consciousness, an understanding of power dynamics and the creation of students who can bring

about social action (Crossley, 2017; McLaren & Jaramillo, 2013). According to Giroux (2011, p. 3)

education has the potential to be emancipatory and is “fundamental to democracy.” Democracy

is an instructional tool and theory about discourse, learning and politics (Freire, 1970) supporting

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 4

exchange, questioning and self-criticism (Giroux, 2004b). Current critical pedagogues seek to

challenge messages arising in higher education regarding the reinforcement of capitalism and

re-instill possibilities of democratic social values in the classroom (Johnson & Morris, 2010;

Kincheloe, 2008). Scholars such as Springett (2005), and Sibbel (2009) note the importance of

connecting EfS to values and moral imperatives central for critical pedagogy.

Fostering critical citizenship through education

Citizenship education reinforces nationalistic qualities and reflects a broader notion of what it

means to be a ‘good citizen’ (Althof & Berkowitz, 2006; Johnson & Morris, 2010). Understood

through the principles of democratic citizenship Sherrod, Flanagan, and Youniss (2002) noted, a

key element is to “move beyond one’s individual self-interest and to be committed to the well-

being of some larger group of which one is a member” (p. 265). Recent discussions of citizenship

education adhere to Dewey’s tenets of democracy where citizens deliberate respectfully and

engage in problem solving. There is emergence of critical citizenship education aiming to ques-

tion before consuming (Johnson & Morris, 2010). Individuals need to be “educated to be critical”

through engagement with discussions supported in learning environments (Puolimatka, 1996, p.

329). In their application of critical citizenship to higher education curricula in South Africa,

Costandius and Bitzer (2015) indicate that as a type of educational pedagogy:

Critical citizenship encourages critical reflection on the past and the imaging of a possible future shaped by

social justice to prepare people to live together in harmony in diverse societies. Critical citizenship

education is therefore specifically aimed at the transformation of thinking on a personal level towards a

wider public good. (p. 11)

The authors illustrate that critical citizenship education bridges the modern ideas of citizen-

ship to criticality and interlinks awareness of political processes and power structures.

Limited scholarship has examined the notion of critical citizenship education within the field of

tourism, although two notable studies have engaged with global citizenship. Blanchard and

Higgins-Desbiolles (2013) draw on Freire’s notion of critical consciousness with examples of

peace in literature that evidence the “awakening of critical consciousness through the act of trav-

el” (p. 27). They developed a Peace Through Tourism course that links critical thinking to global

citizenship. Further, Bianchi and Stephenson (2014) examined ethical implications of the contin-

ued growth in tourism and challenged the assumption that international travel is inherently

democratic and beneficial to all, considering negative impacts to those not part of capitalist

mobility. They introduced new interpretations of global citizenship through ‘ethical’ or

‘responsible’ forms of travel, supporting social and/or environmental movements, giving rise to a

new ‘active citizen.’ The authors question whether such forms of tourism nurture a sense of glo-

bal civic responsibility in tourists; if so, tourism could be a tool for reconciliation and social just-

ice. Both examples shed light on discussions concerning criticality specific to emerging global

citizenship in tourism.

Global citizenship is defined as “awareness, caring, and embracing cultural diversity while pro-

moting social justice and sustainability, coupled with a sense of responsibility to act” (Reysen &

Katzarska-Miller, 2013, p. 1). Higgins-Desbiolles’ (2006) encouraged broader thinking regarding

tourism’s role in global communities and Higgins-Desbiolles and Blanchard (2010) discuss priori-

tizing desires of tourism business at the cost of perpetuating human and environmental inequal-

ity. While global citizenship is clearly a goal of the Tourism Education Futures Initiative (TEFI) it is

not explicit in the values put forth by TEFI (stewardship, knowledge, professionalism, ethics and

mutuality). In 2013 TEFI7 mutually considered the capacity of tourism education as contributing

to global citizenship and creating graduates who “can lead lives of consequence” (Paddison &

Dredge, 2014, p. 210). Blanchard and Higgins-Desbiolles (2013) examined the role of tourism as

achieving peace, promoting international relations and global citizenship and Urbain (2013)

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 5

highlighted the peace-building potential of tourism in Japan. Drawing on Freire’s (1970) urgency

to rectify the dichotomy between the oppressor and oppressed, Urbain (2013) concluded that

raising awareness about atrocities and encouraging shared responsibility may lead to global

citizenship.

TEFI7 also provided the groundwork for Caton, Schott, and Daniele (2014, p. 124) who argue

that technologies provide insight into others’ suffering, creating a “moral problem for all who

live in privilege”; as such, global citizenship reflects a common humanity to promote change.

Gretzel et al. (2014) drew on a case study of a leadership development program with the goal to

create a network of global leaders for sustainability. Butcher (2017) draws on Dower’s (2003)

ideas that global citizenship reflects political concerns that span borders related to climate

change and development. Butcher (2017) challenges the moral and political framework of global

citizenship, suggesting problems volunteer tourists encounter that do little to prompt critical

reflection and action. This contradicts Bianchi and Stephenson’s (2014) notion that responsible

travel may support active citizenship. Current studies draw attention to the need for awareness

around cultural diversity, responsibility and sustainability in pedagogical activities to support glo-

bal citizenship. However, an emphasis on critical citizenship is absent. Accordingly, building on

the limited scholarship, this paper empirically explores the development of a CTC through crit-

ical pedagogy.

Integrating critical education into sustainable tourism studies is essential as students identify

as consumers/travelers and future producers/professionals who may contribute to decision-mak-

ing processes to advance sustainability. While raising awareness of the material relations of

power and ideological forces students may understand their agency in shaping sustainable tour-

ism agendas. Pedagogy may provide a language of both critique and possibility, mutually

encouraging political and moral practice (Giroux, 2004b). It is imperative that educators and stu-

dents (Freire, 1970), practice critiquing and assessing claims (Puolimatka, 1996) while also provid-

ing space for self-development.

As a political practice, pedagogy can draw attention to relationships between power and

knowledge. Pedagogy can be influenced by hegemonic forces that direct what constitutes valid

knowledge from identities reproduced through the socialization of education (Dadds, 2001).

Educators need a critical consciousness to engage students in discussions of politics that make

the “workings of power visible and accountable” (Giroux, 2004b, p. 502). As a moral practice,

pedagogy may recognize what it means to invest in public life and concerns about the future.

This may encourage students to locate themselves in public discourse (Giroux, 2004a). Morally

committed citizens are needed to confront propensities concerning apathy, corruption and

exploitation (Puolimatka, 1996). Educating critical citizens includes equipping one with the tools

needed to make rational decisions; moral integrity and awareness of power that can drive trans-

formations for a sustainable society. A CTC can mobilize learnings by actively participating in

public policy and influencing positions of power promoting sustainability within tourism.

Methodology

This paper proposes a framework for bringing criticality to sustainable tourism education to

strengthen SDG 4 and empower future decision makers as CTCs. Specifically, qualitative data col-

lected from undergraduate students who completed an adapted version of Brookfield’s (1987) CIQ

is presented. The CIQ was administered six times in three North American university tourism

classes during September–December 2016 (total N ¼ 72). Brookfield’s (1987) CIQ is a five-question

evaluation tool encouraging student reflection on learning experiences through probing about

moments they felt most engaged, distanced, affirmed, confused and surprised. The authors devel-

oped a sixth question, requiring reflection on actions students took to improve their learning.

Limited scholarship has employed the CIQ to explore critical thinking and/or enhance critical

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 6

reflection, albeit, Gilstrap and Dupree (2008) who identified the CIQ as an effective tool to “assess

student critical thinking” in situ, and as a formative assessment for educators highlighting opportu-

nities to enhance teaching methods (p. 410; also see Glowacki-Dudka & Barnett, 2007). Keefer’s

(2009) research analyzed the CIQ after four years of organizational and academic use and notes

the CIQ “should be adaptable based on learner and instructor needs (p. 181).” Thus, the CIQ was a

method of data collection to study effective teaching methods and a strategy for bringing critical-

ity to the classroom through critical reflection. The CIQ was also used to analyze how the research-

ers understand the role of criticality in sustainable tourism education.

Data were generated in a cross-institutional context. The first course focused on tourism and

community development through a service-learning approach with a partner responsible for

integrating new immigrants to the community. Students planned a welcoming event for new-

comers and presented social action plans responding to community needs. The second course

focused on ethical topics of international tourism and used a scenario-based learning approach

challenging students to consider different perspectives related to environmental and social just-

ice issues. The third course focused on analysis of tourism economics and included critical

engagement with micro and macro impacts of implementing sustainable tourism development.

Each course began with an explicit lesson on critical thinking, co-constructed by the authors,

approaching topics that required questions of power structures through critical reflection using

the CIQ. The researchers coordinated three class activities allowing similar content to be shared

reinforcing the fundamentals of EfS and principles of sustainable tourism. The researchers mutu-

ally focused on critical thinking skill development and critical pedagogical practice.

The research team engaged in open, axial and selective coding that began during data collec-

tion; though not driven inherently by grounded theory and constant comparative analysis (see

Glaser & Strauss, 1967), the process of implementing the CIQ required reflection and analysis

after each round of data collection. It is incumbent upon the educator to share an overview of

how students reflected on the CIQ. This process involved ongoing dialogue among the research-

ers throughout the semester for a deeper understanding of what criticality within sustainable

tourism studies encompasses. The researchers engaged in inductive open coding of the data in

their respective classes (January–July 2017). Research meetings about initial individual analysis

(April–September 2017) provided opportunities to discuss similarities and differences in the data.

The data were individually revisited to explore areas of overlap (axial coding) before exchanging

data sets for cross analysis (September 2017). In a selective analysis process, the researchers

cross-analyzed data (October 2017–January 2018) and identified themes under three areas: evi-

dence reflecting critical thinking and transformational learning, consideration of factors leading

to critical thinking and the utility of the CIQ.

Cri cal

Topics

Cri cal

Dialogue

Cri cal

Posi onality

Cri cal

Reflec on

Cri cal

Praxis

Figure 1. Strategies for fostering critical tourism citizens.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 7

In the final round of selective coding (October 2017–January 2018), the team had in-depth

conversations regarding factors leading to critical thinking evidenced in the data. It was the iden-

tification of these factors, which led to the development of the pedagogical framework. Figure 1

identifies strategies, evident across data, to teach critical thinking within sustainable tourism

studies. Over a two-year period, the framework resulted from ongoing individual and cross ana-

lysis of the CIQ data, continual researcher communication regarding teaching practice, deep edu-

cator-researcher reflexive practice and a cumulative literature review (August 2016–February

2018). The inductive nature of this study and the framework presented informs the basis of the-

ory building around the ideas of critical sustainable tourism education.

The framework serves to support educators, engage students in a critical examination of EfS,

and illustrates the role of critical thinking and use of critical pedagogy in transforming sustain-

able tourism education. The strategies are cyclic and continuous, and can be simultaneously con-

sidered and enacted. The framework is designed to foster a CTC. The following sections provide

empirical evidence from the CIQs that contributed to the development of the frame-

work strategies.

Fostering critical tourism citizens

Critical topics

Addressing sustainability in tourism places an important responsibility on graduates. Students

should not merely be aware of contemporary tourism issues but should view industry concerns

with a critical lens, anticipate problems that may arise and identify their accountability in

responding to sustainability challenges. Boluk, Cavaliere, and Higgins-Desbiolles (2017) call for

papers proposed a number of indicative themes in relation to the UN’s 17 SDGs. The data

revealed the impact of exposing students to an array of critical sustainable tourism topics, pro-

viding insight into tourism impacts which afforded opportunities to formulate ideas and practice

responses to pressing global problems. For example, one student learned “climate change is such

a big issue, yet we keep traveling to places like the Arctic which makes it worse.” This reflection rec-

ognizes the importance of introducing pertinent critical sustainability topics, creating opportuni-

ties for considering one’s personal agency.

The introduction of critical topics requires a twofold willingness from both educators and stu-

dents. Educators bare a responsibility to bring forth difficult topics to the curriculum. This creates

mutual discomfort yet encourages student engagement with their own critical ideas (and those

of their peers, educators, scholars, media), providing opportunities to discuss topics that counter

the positive status quo image of tourism. Challenging the conditions of the tourism industry was

commonly recognized in student CIQ reflections “I have learned that tourism isn’t always the

answer, during our council meeting I learned from my peers that tourism could potentially generate

more harm to Brazil than help.” Another student shared “I have given deeper thought into the

impact of tourism and how outside sources affect the industry.” Other students considered, seem-

ingly for the first time, that “tourism isn’t always the answer.” One student said “in my other

classes it has been stressed why tourism is important and has not been informative about the cons

of tourism as well. This class has taught me about some of the negative aspects, making me think

about what can be done.” Educators must provide opportunities to see how the industry inter-

sects with other socio-ecological systems and analyze positive and negative impacts, compre-

hending reality versus market messages and the quality of life for local destination stakeholders

monopolized by corporations. These are imperative components to understanding sustainability.

Students need to be accountable and willing to engage in topics that are thought provoking

and challenge their assumptions. Some students demonstrated an openness to exploring alterna-

tive ways of thinking “my viewpoints on so many issues are changing! This class has been an

eye opener!”

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 8

Contemporary politics, specifically the right-wing populist movements and related political

parties that are gaining traction in North and South America and in EU member states, coupled

with the rise of the spread of misinformation that requires readers to engage in critical consump-

tion, further complicate educational spaces. This provides a particularly challenging backdrop

albeit an essential time to confront competing discourses. An appreciation for the interplay

between politics and tourism is crucial, as tourism is political. The influence of right-wing political

administration on destination attitudes may result in boycotts into the U.S.; right-wing narratives

regarding ‘unsafe’ places to travel may also signal concerns, misinformation and influence

choices of American travelers. This is demonstrated in travel bans and changes in visa entry

processes that reduce mobility for individuals. Thus, introducing topics in the classroom around

travel as a right or a privilege, implications of travel policy, and the intersection with human

rights issues such as the refugee crisis and immigration are important. Our data revealed that

these topics encouraged students to consider “how much politics are connected to the course,”

“how relatable the topics are to real life,” and these topics generated a “deeper understanding of

international travel and how current events will impact the industry.” Specifically, one student drew

a parallel between the instability in Syria and tourism, “the Syrian [crisis] surprised me on how

much it links to tourism. I didn’t link this together before.” EU membership and the implications of

Brexit is another example of the relationship between politics and tourism as one student

reflected “just how bad the Brexit situation is.”

Novice learners are challenged to identify essential topics to master (Young & Olutoye, 2015);

contemporary issues are essential to the curriculum. Introducing an array of critical topics may

encourage thought around opportunities for the tourism industry to be a conduit for equity,

agency and sustainability. Such topics can draw awareness to complex problems requiring sys-

tems thinking and necessitates dialogue.

Critical dialogue

The incorporation of critical topics provides a platform to imagine potential creative solutions to

address contemporary challenges facing the tourism industry and practice how one may effect-

ively present ideas. As Crossley (2017) contends, critical content should be “accompanied by an

equally important creative and dialogical pedagogical context” to which learners can be nurtured

(p. 429; also see Schwarzin, 2013). The importance of critical dialogue was apparent in the data.

For example, “the group discussions have been really helpful in learning others’ points of view, but

also helping me articulate my own.” Another student stressed “the group discussions helped me

with the development of my own ideas.” The importance of student interaction was shared, “I liked

the group work and then discussions because it allowed me to express my thoughts and learn how

my class members felt as well as my instructor.” Engaging in dialogue was particularly important

to this student:

I really liked coming together as a group and talking about what we had just read. I think the class discussions

made the quality of our group’s conversation even better. Normally in groups there is a lot of listening and

people bringing up their isolated thoughts, but yesterday I noticed there was a lot of back and forth and that

really promoted critical thinking within the group.

Critical dialogue is a pivotal strategy required to foster a CTC. A learning goal for the incorp-

oration of critical dialogue may be to assess divergent viewpoints regarding critical tourism

topics to develop an informed perspective. This requires an iterative process, critical engagement

with the literature, among the learners, with the teacher (Freire, 1970) and stakeholders.

Encouraging critical dialogue provides space to practice and engage in oral articulation of

opinions and to contemplate one’s thinking (Paul & Binker, 1990), but also to learn the language

of the tourism profession. The practice of critical dialogue requires a skill set including curiosity

and inquiry, quietude and active listening, suspending assumptions, expressing one’s viewpoint,

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 9

and reflection. Student reflections noted a culmination of skills required in engaging in critical

dialogue to understand the attitudes of others, “it was interesting to see how other [ …] perspec-

tives were either similar or different to my perspective.” Providing the space to dialogue led to this

reflection, “I’m not as scared of public speaking and dialogue as I thought and I’m more open-

minded and see things from different angles.” Another student explained, “The entire class engaged

in an open discussion about topics especially when we broke into groups. Not many college classes

encourage open discussion and, in this case, it was incredibly beneficial.” An important outcome of

providing a safe space for students to practice dialoguing is particularly relevant to progressing

sustainability.

Reflection and inquiry refer to metacognition which is a primer for facilitating critical thinking

(Schon, 1983). Students must reflect on the process of unpacking their thinking and can be facili-

tated via a Socratic approach whereby educators provide questions not answers, and thus model

inquiry and facilitate critical thinking. Modelling questions categorized as procedural (those with

a right or wrong answer), preference (those with no correct answer), and judgment (questions

requiring critical reflection to obtain the best answer; Paul & Elder, 2006) are important in facili-

tating critical thinking. A Socratic paradigm aids in the analysis of information “requiring clarity,

logical consistency, and self-regulation” (Oyler & Romanelli, 2014, p. 1). Socratic tactics may be

challenging from the educator’s perspective as to not impede the direction of the discussion

and from the student’s perspective to avoid groupthink. A Socratic approach may facilitate self-

generated knowledge and an ability to regulate thinking which may aid in recognizing one’s

role in responding to sustainability challenges. Although critical dialogue could generate uncom-

fortable feelings, such practice will foster critical engagement.

Given the challenging political milieu educators may consider the way in which dialogue

activities are deployed. Small group activities may be useful and include student research on

topics alternative to their position. While sustainable development has been used as a popular

conceptual framework in tourism, the tourism industry is mostly absent from the SDGs (albeit 8,

12, 14) and while the broadly written approach may lend to open interpretation across fields,

the size and impact of the industry highlights the importance of sustainability considerations.

Identifying critical topics will foster an opportunity to consider meanings of concepts, prioritized

interests, and opportunities to deconstruct the origins of sustainable tourism. The maintenance

of the status quo in sustainability is commonly ordered by capitalistic interests concerned with

maintaining a linear economy, rendering environmental and socio-cultural interests as secondary

(Springett, 2005). Acknowledging the nuances of the SDGs and considering different perspectives

is essential to challenge the status quo and actively progress sustainability. Explicit in students’

reflections was their openness to listen to alternative perspectives and engage in dialogue.

Scholars have noted the difficulty in teaching interdisciplinary topics calling for critical and sys-

tems thinking to effectively address the complexities (Capra, 1996; Coops et al., 2015). That is,

“the more we study the major problems of our time, the more we come to realize that they can-

not be understood in isolation. They are systematic problems and are interconnected and inter-

dependent” (Capra, 1996, p. 4).

Critical reflection

Active reflection of the educator and learner is a necessary component to invoke an emphasis

on participation in one’s own learning process. Identifying the importance for reflexivity in tour-

ism pedagogy is not new. Fullagar and Wilson (2012) highlighted the implications of “narrow

criticality” which may “run the risk of becoming unreflexive about power-knowledge,” and halt

opportunities for “thinking and acting” (p. 2). Critical reflexivity creates opportunities to consider

ways to address sustainability challenges. Jamal et al. (2011) concur with Tribe (2002) regarding

the need to educate reflective practitioners who can promote sustainability.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 10

The five strategies proposed in our framework are intended to be cyclic (see Figure 1), yet

critical reflection may occur as an outcome of the discussion of critical topics. Reflection may

emerge from critically reading and engaging with critical discourse (Mezirow, 1998). Through crit-

ical positionality, one can critically reflect on how and why they think a certain way. One student

reflected “This was kind of eye opening for me because it’s a reminder that not everyone shares the

same views as myself. I have always struggled to understand how we can be so eager to help cer-

tain groups in society but are quick to discriminate and judge others.” Another student said this,

“when my group member played devil’s advocate, this really made me examine my answer before I

contributed.”

An additional aspect of supporting critical reflection requires intentionally building in time

within the curriculum to practice this skill. Brookfield (2012) suggests that facilitating intentional

silence may support learner’s engagement. Planning for time to support intentional debriefing is

crucial for the learner to be able to participate in active critical reflection. Purposely creating

space for critical reflection led to the following “seeing class material coincide with my daily life,

watching the news and seeing the relevance to class.” Another student said, “the moment I felt

most engaged during class was when we discussed current events and relatable issues within our

specific community [ … ] the relatable examples made it a lot easier to understand.” This demon-

strates the importance of practicing this reflective skill set and provides evidence that in-class

learnings hold implications beyond class.

Mezirow’s (1998) research supports notions that active reflection requires time and is a chal-

lenging process that ultimately impacts one’s behaviors in the future (critical praxis). A reflection

highlighted “This class has changed my perspectives on the value of being involved in the commu-

nity. I am more aware and more likely to volunteer and be involved as a result of this class.”

Another student shared “the thing that surprised me the most was at the Networking Event this

weekend. I was surprised with how well we were able to communicate with our family, even though

there was a language barrier.” Critical reflection was also noted when some members of the uni-

versity community said they would not support a fundraising activity for Syrian refugees:

I have been surprised that people can be willing to help, but have a limitation on what they may help with.

What’s worse, not only are people not willing to help anyone in need, but they may not show willingness to

even listen to opposing opinions. For me, one of the most important parts about my education is learning that

there are other opinions, and these may be different to my own.

The relationship between critical reflection and capitalist driven proliferation of economic

growth is important. Awareness between time-space compression and mindless consumption

can further sustainability (Dickinson & Peeters, 2012). Capitalism and neoliberalism support pro-

duction and consumption, yet quiet contemplation may facilitate critical reflection. One student

shared, “Every time we have discussions that make us think critically about the way power works,

we are performing a subversive act.” This strategy is a reminder to purposefully build time into

the curriculum for active reflection, intentional silence, and deliberate debriefing. Engaging with

difficult topics may require deeper paradigm shifts and students must have time to process

these changes.

Brookfield (2012) presents several teaching tools that support active reflection. For example,

Chalk Talk is an activity that emphasizes the need for the educator to plan time and space for

the learner to engage in active and intentional critical reflection. One student explains “I found

critical thinking most helpful because I get to use my brain and be more challenged but helpful to

know what’s going on in the world and how my peers feel about it.” The use of the CIQ required

the researchers to plan time for critical reflection and debriefing in a structured approach. The

researchers’ experiences with active critical reflection allowed for awareness to balance content

while reflecting on the approach to time. The CIQ requires time for both independent and group

reflection and allows the educators to provide feedback about their process of critical reflection,

brought forth from the instrument.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 11

Critical positionality

The strategy of critical positionality builds on research which notes that critical thinking helps to

move individuals along a continuum from weak to strong adoptions of sustainability. This ‘holds

up a mirror’ to themselves with the contradicting discourses of consumption and sustainability

(Kearins & Springett, 2003; Springett, 2005). This framework strategy brings awareness to privil-

ege, position, and power. Critically considering our own positionality as instructors fosters an

effort to co-explore ways of confronting diverse power dynamics, model critical thinking

(Brookfield, 1987) and challenges hierarchies between students and teachers (Freire, 1970).

Although the emphasis of this paper is not to specifically reflect on our own positionality, one

way for instructors to share their insights in the classroom may be to also complete CIQs

throughout the term, alongside students and share these responses with students.

The following student excerpt elucidates this strategy: “I felt most engaged when we were dis-

cussing the premise of invisible power because I am very interested in post structuralism and how

society is shaped through power dynamics.” This awareness allows for deeper investigation into

the perspective of the other, opportunities to understand bias and various forms of oppression.

The following illustrates the process of critically engaging with one’s positionality: “Learning

about different cultures and differences between countries. The different “norms” that each country

has that we may not have previously considered.”

Through implementation of this strategy, an educator may encourage students to consider

their perspectives, providing space to pivot following reflection: “What surprised me is how often

people are marginalized for no apparent reason. I find we are very quick to judge without knowing

the circumstances that one has been through in their lives and we tend to target the things about

people that they have no control over.” The ability to change one’s vantage point following reflec-

tion on one’s privilege or lack thereof, and to embrace the practice of flexibility of perception,

can strengthen understandings of the other. Critical positionality helps students develop

empathy, humility and understanding of their own position and that of others. Brookfield (1995)

argues that to critically reflect we must ‘hunt our assumptions’ about the world. Through this

process we can build a deeper respect for diverse perspectives and encourage reduction in pre-

dominant Western-centric perspectives that dominate discourse, international policy and teach-

ing materials.

Winter (2009, p. 23) explains how tourism’s key concepts remain influenced by Western

Europe and North American perspectives; “The Western-centric modus operandi of research and

teaching which endures today means the geographic, cultural and racial biases in the field

remain a common blind-spot.” Teaching for critical positionality brings forth the educator’s and

learner’s biases and assumptions which in turn may reframe worldviews. Another student shared

how the consideration of ethics allowed for a more thorough understanding of tourism impacts

“I thought about the ethics of tourism because I can see how it has negative impacts, and I also see

the positives.” After a classroom activity that encouraged consideration of critical positionality a

student shared “Getting to think about what is ethical and what is not, made me feel

most engaged.”

From a more philosophical perspective and imperative for achieving sustainability, we need

to critically position ourselves within the realities of the violence of capitalism (Ziˇ zek, 2008). One

student reflected “How unethical society can be, especially when money is involved. It’s sickening

how little people care about one another versus how much profit they will get.” Radical views con-

tend with the role that multilateral international organizations serve in proliferation of capitalism

and assaults on nature and culture (Salleh, 2010). Another student reflected “I found it confusing

that people don’t think about how the locals feel about tourism.” Through critical positionality we

may be able to encourage engagement with the impacts of capitalistic structures on bio-cultural

conservation. Another student shared, “This week’s lesson made me realize a different side of

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 12

sustainability other than just affecting the environment.” The reflections shared here suggest that

teaching for critical positionality is imperative to furthering actions toward holistic sustainability.

Critical praxis

Inherent in our framework for the development of a CTC is that it moves from theory to praxis,

or as Freire (1970) described, an “authentic union” of critical reflection and action (p. 48; also see

Johnson & Morris, 2010). Therefore, in bringing forth critical topics, engaging in critical dialogue

and reflection, and recognizing one’s positionality, a foundation is built to apply abstract critical

theory to real world situations. This is premised on the idea that justice requires action (Freire,

1970) and all human behavior is either in support of, or in opposition to dominant ideology and

social order (Giroux, 1983). A student reflected on awareness around the lack of engagement in

the community, “I felt puzzled with all the ways [my state] can be sustainable and yet I feel like no

one is taking action to do so.” Tourism educators must provide opportunities for translating critic-

ality in the classroom to criticality in practice, to create professionals who are prepared to enact

against injustices (Jamal et al., 2011) with sustainability in mind.

Often the development of tourism curricula is thought to be a balance of how it embodies

critical thinking and a liberal arts education, as well as how it responds to the neoliberal push of

developing ‘skills’ necessary in the 21st century workforce (Belhassen & Caton, 2011). This strat-

egy considers how students bridge work skills through the cognitive and emotive responses to

critical issues in the classroom to tangible ways they behave and creates responsible actions to

complex, real world sustainability challenges. Tribe (2002) argued for ethical decision-making in

tourism, and likewise, value-based hospitality curricula have been offered (e.g., TEFI, BEST

Educators Network; Sheldon et al., 2011). Philosophical acceptance and adoption of values is

necessary and a CTC is delimited to actions in industry and personal practice as values and eth-

ics transcend these spheres. Cultivating motivations and capacities for activism is imperative for

the development of a CTC (Boluk & Carnicelli, 2015). A student expressed the urge to engage

after hearing others share their critical positionalities “I was surprised how much a simple 15-

minute group presentation in class could strike a chord and empower me to work towards a change

in larger society.” Critical praxis is focused on challenging students to consider how to enact solu-

tions. A student shared, “Maybe not surprising, but I was very interested in these discussions on dif-

ferent topics and applying them both internationally and in [my state].” Educators should provide

tools, so students may modify existing systems, or build radical alternative systems (e.g., Lotz-

Sisitka et al., 2015).

Arguably, this is the most difficult task, as it requires action steps that may force students to

uncomfortably confront how they behave in their own lives. This is aptly demonstrated by a stu-

dent who commented that their “view of mass tourism has changed drastically and sometimes pre-

vents the idea of me partaking in traveling.” Certain pedagogies such as experiential and service

learning, may place action steps in context. Exposing students to tourism challenges within their

own communities encourages reflection on how they can participate in more sustainable practi-

ces and decision-making. A student noted gaining “knowledge on how to help the different

groups” and how to “reach out to these communities.” Critical praxis increases willingness to take

home the responsibility of addressing these issues. After exposure to tools to critique ‘best prac-

tices’ in sustainable tourism development, a student explained “how easy it would be to apply

best practices to [our community] if only us, as a group of local inhabitants, would put forth

the effort.”

Critical praxis requires developing a vision of how things should look if guided by values such

as justice, equity, respect, and stewardship while creatively exploring possible solutions and

plans for change. The SDGs are ideal topics that enable critical dialogue and move students

towards action of working sustainability into praxis. The SDGs are meant to be problem-solved,

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 13

in need of solutions and real actions, to address desired outcomes. If the SDGs are utilized as

critical topics and the framework is implemented, students can develop skills for enactment in

the field. To do so, they must draw from inductive reasoning and think laterally while consider-

ing ideas that may be radical. Finally, they should act, practicing responsible behaviors through

continuous adaptation to effect change.

Discussion

SDG 4 sets the stage for achieving other SDGs, and classrooms provide the optimal backdrop to

critique the language used, imagine creative responses to challenges, and encourage students to

consider their role in advancing the goals. This research has illuminated the absence of critical

thinking throughout the presentation of the 17 SDGs. This is particularly evident in SDG 4 and

the expressed targets. The troubled milieu of tertiary systems confronted with neoliberal agendas

favoring capitalism over critical thinking provided the impetus for this research. To this end, this

paper introduced a framework that uses critical pedagogy to encourage a sense of criticality that

can then question these very systems. Our pedagogical framework confronts neoliberal struc-

tures and illustrates how education may be emancipatory (Giroux, 2011) building on the founda-

tions of democracy (Giroux, 2004b).

Students must recognize injustices and inequalities to address macro and micro challenges of

sustainability in tourism. Our framework builds on current scholarship on critical citizenship edu-

cation and global citizenship. This research supports Freire’s (1970) theory on conscientization as

he held imperative that educators and students practice critiquing and assessing claims

(Puolimatka, 1996) while also providing space for self-development. Our framework provides

strategies for educators to implement Freire’s work. In presenting the definitions and current

scholarship in pedagogical activities to support global citizenship, we recognized a relationship

between global citizenship, sustainability and responsibility, and the absence of critical thinking.

This led to our development of a CTC definition and framework including bringing forth critical

topics, facilitating critical discussions, providing time for critical reflection in relation to one’s

positionality, and encouraging action to further sustainability.

Bringing the SDGs to the classroom is crucial given that global knowledge of the SDGs is

poor (Lampert & Papadongonas, 2016) and doing so could enhance students’ appreciation

regarding how the SDGs intersect with their field of inquiry. Sustainable tourism may help

address issues in relation to poverty (SDG1), hunger (SDG2), water and sanitation (SDG6), reduc-

ing inequality (SDG10) developing clean energy sources (SDG7), enhancing well-being (SDG3),

improving gender equality (SDG5) and in considering one’s own consumption and production

(SDG12) practices. The framework proposes critical reflection which may elicit self-critique

(Giroux, 2004b) regarding one’s behaviours and claims (Puolimatka, 1996). Students also need to

consider their positionality and roles within the neoliberal system and make informed decisions

that translate theory to action (critical praxis). If such criticality is strengthened, a CTC, one who

recognizes collective agency (Giroux, 2004b) is fostered and equipped to make responsible deci-

sions. The CTC framework assists actualizing Target 4.7 to “ensure that all learners acquire the

knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development’ and promote ‘global cit-

izenship’.” Since the SDGs do not include critical processes in which the targets should be actual-

ized specifically in relation to education, pedagogy or teaching, we must start in our classrooms

to develop citizens who may confront complex sustainability challenges.

Conclusion

This study adopts a critical sustainable tourism lens and responds to the call made by Boluk

et al. (2017) to reflect on the role of criticality to advance the sustainable development of

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 14

tourism systems. Specifically, we have drawn attention to SDG 4 Quality Education because as

we see it, to achieve sustainability or sustainable tourism in practice, we must start with educa-

tion. We argue that mobilizing SDG 4 could help realize all SDGs. Recognizing the absence of

critical thinking in the description of SDG 4 and the limited detail explaining critical processes in

which the targets could be actualized has been our point of departure for this contribution. Our

paper builds on the work of Bricker et al. (2012) who recognized the connections between the

former MDGs and sustainable tourism development.

Our paper responds to calls for criticality in research approaches in tourism (e.g., Tribe, 2007,

2008) and for criticality in tourism education (e.g., Boluk & Carnicelli, 2019; Crossley, 2017;

Fullagar & Wilson, 2012) by proposing a five strategy framework (see Figure 1) derived from our

analysis of CIQs (Brookfield, 1987) administered in three North American tourism classrooms.

Importantly, the strategies presented aim to equip instructors for preparing students to be crit-

ical thinkers in order to address complex sustainability issues. We have argued that the imple-

mentation of our framework may serve to strengthen SDG 4 and empower future decision

makers as Critical Tourism Citizens (CTC). The described strategies build on Crossley’s (2017) work

articulating a three-movement approach which comprises fundamental skill development of crit-

ical thinking; the conscious-raising of structural oppression through critical pedagogy; and an

explicit undertaking of positionality. The strategies also build upon Blanchard and Higgins-

Desbiolles’ (2013) work using Freire’s notion of critical consciousness and engagement. Our def-

inition of the CTC responds to calls to bring criticality to the tourism classroom, particularly in

the context of EfS and builds on the work of Crossley (2017) and Blanchard and Higgins-

Desbiolles (2013). Our paper mutually positions the framework and CTC definition within the lit-

erature on global citizenship and critical citizenship education.

Critical pedagogy has been criticized as being abstract (Ellsworth, 1989). In response, our

framework illustrates tangible strategies for teaching critical thinking. As such, future research

should interrogate our new framework for its utility in tracking critical thinking and could include

analysis of syllabi, curriculum design, and instructional methods supporting EfS and criticality.

Sharing resources may provide educators with evidence to highlight specific examples drawing

on alternative stakeholder discourses for critical perspectives (Fullagar & Wilson, 2012). Engaging

in criticality requires mutual commitment from students and educators. It necessitates that edu-

cators are mindful, self-aware, and open to considering the unique experiences of their students

and care enough to push students outside of their comfort zones. Caring may be driven by a

passion to be part of the change and involves time and reflexivity. Time however, in a neoliberal

context, is not on our side and capitalism has influenced administrators to prioritize student

recruitment and vocational training perpetuating the status quo. With 2030 set as the deadline

for achieving the SDGs it is incumbent upon us all to consider our agency in achieving the goals.

Educators have a responsibility, in line with social justice scholarship (e.g., Freire, 1970). If we

frame curricular and co-curricular meetings with students and time spent writing on pedagogy

to progress SDG 4, we may be successful in achieving this goal. As such, with our new frame-

work, the definition of the CTC, and in the lead up to 2030, the authors’ challenge tourism edu-

cators to consider pedagogical practices and scholarship through the lens of Quality Education

that embodies criticality.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

Althof, W., & Berkowitz, M. W. (2006). Moral education and character education: Their relationship and roles in citi-

zenship education. Journal of Moral Education, 35(4), 495–518. doi:10.1080/03057240601012204

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 15

Assadourian, E. (2012). The path to degrowth in overdeveloped countries. In E. Assadourian & M. Renner (Eds.),

State of the world 2012: Moving toward sustainable prosperity (pp. 22–37). Washington, DC: Island Press.

Ateljevic, I., Morgan, N., & Pritchard, A. (Eds.). (2013). The critical turn in tourism studies: Creating an academy

of hope. London: Routledge.

Ayikoru, M., Tribe, J., & Airey, D. (2009). Reading tourism education: Neoliberalism unveiled. Annals of Tourism

Research, 36(2), 191–221. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.11.001

Belhassen, Y., & Caton, K. (2011). On the need for critical pedagogy in tourism education. Tourism Management,

32(6), 1389–1396. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.01.014

Blanchard, L., & Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2013). Peace matters, tourism matters. In L. Blanchard and F. Higgins-

Desbiolles (Eds.), Peace through tourism promoting human security through international citizenship (pp. 19–33).

London: Routledge.

Boluk, K., & Carnicelli, S. (2015). Activism and critical reflection through experiential learning. Journal of Teaching

in Travel & Tourism, 15(3), 242–251. doi:10.1080/15313220.2015.1059304

Boluk, K., & Carnicelli, S. (2019). Tourism for the emancipation of the oppressed: Towards a critical tourism educa-

tion drawing on Freirean philosophy. Annals of Tourism Research, 76, 168–179. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2019.04.002

Boluk, K., Cavaliere, C., & Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2017). Critical thinking to realize sustainability in tourism systems:

Reflecting on the 2030 sustainable development goals. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(9), 1201–1204. doi:

10.1080/09669582.2017.1333263

Boyle, A. (2017). Integrating sustainability in the tourism curriculum: dilemmas and directions. In P. Benckendorff &

A. Zehrer (Eds.), Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Tourism (pp. 389 – 401). Northampton, MA: Edward

Elgar.

Bianchi, R. V., & Stephenson, M. L. (2014). Tourism and citizenship: Rights, freedoms and responsibilities in the global

order. London: Routledge.

Bricker, K. S., Black, R., & Cottrell, S. (Eds.). (2012). Sustainable tourism and the millennium development goals.

Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.

Brookfield, S. (2012). Teaching for critical thinking tools and techniques to help students question their assumptions.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Burbules, N., & Berk, R. (1999). Critical thinking and critical pedagogy: Relations, differences, and limits. In T.

Popkewitz & L. Fendler (Eds.), Critical theories in education. New York: Routledge.

Butcher, J. (2017). Citizenship, globalcitizenship and volunteer tourism: A critical analysis. Tourism Recreation

Research, 42(2), 129–138.

Capra, F. (1996). The web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems. New York, NY: Random House.

Caton, K., Schott, C., & Daniele, R. (2014). Tourism’s imperative for global citizenship. Journal of Teaching in Travel &

Tourism, 14, 123–128. doi:10.1080/15313220.2014.907955

Coops, N. C., Marcus, J., Construt, I., Frank, E., Kellett, R., Mazzi, E., … Sipos, Y. (2015). How an entry-level,

interdisciplinary sustainability course revealed the benefits and challenges of a university-wide initiative for

sustainability education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(5), 729–747. doi:10.1108/

IJSHE-04-2014-0059

Costandius, E., & Bitzer, E. (2015). Engaging higher education curricula: A critical citizenship perspective. Stellenbosch:

Sun Media.

Cotterell, D., Arcodia, C., & Ferreira, J. A. (2017). Teaching for strong sustainability in university tourism courses.

In P. Benckendorff & A. Zehrer (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and learning in tourism (pp. 373–388). Northampton,

MA: Edward & Elgar.

Crossley, E.´ (2017). Criticality in tourism education. In P. Benckendorff & A. Zehrer (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and

learning in tourism (pp. 427–438). Northampton, MA: Edward & Elgar.

Dadds, M. (2001). The politics of pedagogy. Teachers and Teaching, 7(1), 43–58. doi:10.1080/713698759

Dickinson, J. E., & Peeters, P. (2014). Time, tourism consumption and sustainable development. International Journal

of Tourism Research, 16(1), 11–21. doi:10.1002/jtr.1893

Dower, M. (2003) Developing sustainable rural tourism. Thematic guide one. Athens: European Summer Academy

for Sustainable Rural Development.

Dredge, D., Benckendorff, P., Day, M., Gross, M. J., Walo, M., Weeks, P., & Whitelaw, P. (2012). The philosophic practi-

tioner and the curriculum space. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 2154–2176. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2012.07.017

Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why Doesn’t This Feel Empowering? Working Through the Repressive Myths of Critical

Pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(3), 297–325. doi:10.17763/haer.59.3.058342114k266250

Farber Canziani, B., Sonmez,

S., Hsieh, Y., & Byrd, E. T. (2012). A learning theory framework for sustainability

education in tourism. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 12(1), 3–20. doi:10.1080/15313220.2012.650052

Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking an introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 16

Fullagar, S., & Wilson, E. (2012). Critical pedagogies: A reflexive approach to knowledge creation in tourism and

hospitality studies. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 19(1), 1–6. doi:10.1017/jht.2012.3

Gilstrap, D. L., & Dupree, J. (2008). Assessing learning, critical reflection, and quality educational outcomes: The

Critical Incident Questionnaire. College & Research Libraries, 69(5), 407–426. doi:10.5860/0690407

Giroux, H. A. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. Westport, CT: Bergin &

Garvey.

Giroux, H. A. (2004a). Critical pedagogy and the postmodern/modern divide: Towards a pedagogy of democratiza-

tion. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1), 31–47.

Giroux, H. A. (2004b). Public pedagogy and the politics of neo-liberalism: Making the political more pedagogical.

Policy Futures in Education, 2(3 & 4), 494–503. doi:10.2304/pfie.2004.2.3.5

Giroux, H. A. (2011). On critical pedagogy. New York, NY: Continuum.

Giroux, H. A. (2016). Disposable futures: Neoliberalism’s assault on higher education. Lımite, 11(35), 7–17.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Barnett, N. (2007). Connecting critical reflection and group development in online adult

education classrooms. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 43–52.

Gretzel, U., Davis, E. B., Bowser, G., Jiang, J., & Brown, M. (2014). Creating global leaders with sustainability mindsets:

Insights from the RMSSN summer academy. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 14(2), 164-183.

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A brief edition of thought & knowledge. New York, NY:

Routledge.

Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2006). More than an industry: Tourism as a social force. Tourism Management, 27(6),

1192–1208. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.05.020

Higgins-Desbiolles, F., & Blanchard, L. (2010). Challenging peace through tourism: Placing tourism in the context

of human rights, justice and peace. In O. Moufakkir and I. Kelly (Eds.), Tourism progress and peace (pp. 35–47).

Oxford: CABI.

Holdsworth, S., & Thomas, I. (2015). Framework for introducing education for sustainable development into univer-

sity curriculum. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 9(2), 137–159. doi:10.1177/0973408215588246

Huckle, J. (2017). Becoming critical: A challenge for the Global Learning Programme? International Journal

of Development Education and Global Learning, 8(3), 63–84.

Jamal, T., Taillon, J., & Dredge, D. (2011). Sustainable tourism pedagogy and academic community collaboration:

A progressive service-learning approach. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 11(2), 133–147. doi:10.1057/thr.2011.3

Johnson, L., & Morris, P. (2010). Towards a framework for critical citizenship education. The Curriculum Journal,

21(1), 77–96. doi:10.1080/09585170903560444

Kearins, K., & Springett, D. (2003). Educating for sustainability: Developing critical skills. Journal of Management

Education, 27(2), 188–204. doi:10.1177/1052562903251411

Keefer, J. M. (2009). The critical incident questionnaire (CIQ): From research to practice and back again. Paper

presented at the Adult education research conference, Chicago, IL (pp. 176–182). Retrieved from http://newprair-

iepress.org/aerc/2009/papers/31

Kincheloe, J. L. (2008). Critical pedagogy primer (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Lampert, M., & Papadongonas, P. (2016). Towards 2030 without poverty (pp. 1–36). Amsterdam: Glocalities. Retrieved

from https://www.glocalities.com/reports/towards-2030-without-poverty.html

Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A. E., Kronlid, D., & Mcgarry, D. (2015). Transformative, transgressive Social Learning:

Rethinking Higher Education Pedagogy in Times of Systemic Global Dysfunction. Current Opinion in

Environmental Sustainability, 16 , 73–80.

McKercher, B., & Prideaux, B. (2011). Are tourism impacts low on personal environmental agendas? Journal of

Sustainable Tourism, 19(3), 325–345. doi:10.1080/09669582.2010.524702

McLaren, P. (2003). Critical Pedagogy: A look at the major concepts. In A. Darder, M. Baltodano, & R. D. Torres

(Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (pp. 69–97). New York, NY: Routledge.

McLaren, P., & Jaramillo, N. E. (2013). Forward: Dialectical thinking and critical pedagogy – towards a critical tourism

studies. In I. Ateljevic, N. Morgan, & A. Pritchard (Eds.), The critical turn in tourism studies: Creating an academy of

hope (pp. xvii–xl). New York, NY: Routledge.

Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection.

Adult Education Quarterly,

48(3), 185–198. doi:10.1177/

074171369804800305

Moscardo, G. (2015). The importance of education for sustainability in tourism. In G. Moscardo & P. Benckendorff

(Eds.), Education for sustainability in tourism: A handbook of processes, resources, and strategies (pp. 1–24). New

York, NY: Springer.

Oyler, D. R., & Romanelli, F. (2014). The fact of ignorance revisiting the Socratic method as a tool for teaching crit-

ical thinking. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(7), 1–9.

Paddison, B., & Dredge, D. (2014). TEFI7-Tourism Education for global citizenship: Educating for lives of conse-

quence. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 14, 210–214. doi:10.1080/15313220.2014.907960

Paul, R. W., & Binker, A. J. A. (1990). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world.

Rohnert Park, CA: Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Page 17

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). The thinkers guide to the art of Socratic questioning. Dilton Beach, CA: The Foundation for

Critical Thinking.

Puolimatka, T. (1996). Democracy, education and the critical citizen. Philosophy of Education Archive, 329, 338.

Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes. International

Journal of Psychology, 48(5), 858–870. doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.701749

Salleh, A. (2010). From metabolic rift to “metabolic value”: Reflections on environmental sociology and the alterna-

tive globalization movement. Organization & Environment, 23(2), 205–219. doi:10.1177/1086026610372134

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Schwarzin, L. (2013). To act as though the future mattered. In I. Ateljevic, N. Morgan, & A. Pritchard (Eds.), The crit-

ical turn in tourism studies: Creating an academy of hope (pp. 135–148). New York, NY: Routledge.

Sheldon, P. J., Fesenmaier, D. R., & Tribe, J. (2011). The tourism education futures initiative (TEFI): Activating change

in tourism education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 11(1), 2–23. doi:10.1080/15313220.2011.548728

Sherrod, L. R., Flanagan, C., & Youniss, J. (2002). Dimensions of citizenship and opportunities for youth develop-

ment: The what, why, when, where, and who of citizenship development. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4),

264–272. doi:10.1207/S1532480XADS0604_14

Sibbel, A. (2009). Pathways towards sustainability through higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in

Higher Education, 10(1), 68–82. doi:10.1108/14676370910925262

Springett, D. (2005). ‘Education for sustainability’ in the business studies curriculum: A call for a critical agenda.

Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(3), 146–159. doi:10.1002/bse.447

Tribe, J. (2007). Critical tourism: Rules and resistance. In I. Ateljevic, A. Pritchard, & N. Morgan (Eds.), The critical turn

in tourism studies: Innovative research methodologies (pp. 29-40). New York: Elsevier.

Tribe, J. (2002). Education for ethical tourism action. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(4), 309–324. doi:10.1080/

09669580208667170

Tribe, J. (2005). Tourism, knowledge and the curriculum. In D. Airey & J. Tribe (Eds.), An international handbook of

tourism education (pp. 47–60). New York, NY: Routledge.

Tribe, J. (2008). Tourism: A critical business. Journal of Travel Research, 46(3), 245–255. doi:10.1177/

0047287507304051

United Nations (UN). (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York, NY:

United Nations Publication.

UNESCO. (2017). Measurement strategy for SDG Target 4.7. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/kboluk/Desktop/gaml4-

measurement-strategy-sdg-target4.7.pdf

UNESCO. (2018). Global Education Monitoring Report Summary 2017/18: Accountability in our Education: Meeting

our commitments. Retrieved from https://releifweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/259338e.pdf

Urbain, Y. (2013). Awareness-raising and global citizenship through peace tourism. In L. Blanchard & F. Higgins-

Desbiolles (Eds.), Peace through tourism promoting human security through international citizenship (pp. 144–155).

London: Routledge.

Winter, T. (2009). Asian tourism and the retreat of Anglo-western centrism in tourism theory. Current Issues in

Tourism, 12(1), 21–31. doi:10.1080/13683500802220695

Young, D. A., & Olutoye, O. A. (2015). Handbook of critical incidents and essential topics in pediatric anesthesiology.

Cambridge: University Printing House.

Ziˇ zek, S. (2008). Violence: Six sideways reflections. London: Picador.

ACTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING TO ADVANCE THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT