approaches to planning and evaluation in education for sustainable
development, and the extent to which mixed method approaches
would rather provide more desirable outcomes. They argue that
the two approaches are complementary and that there are
significant gains from combining both. Their case is argued with
reference to examples from a programme addressing the
‘Reorientation of University Curricula to Address Sustainability
(RUCAS): A European Commission Tempus-funded Programme’.
Their mixed method data collection strategy involved collecting
data in an iterative process, whereby data collected in one phase
contribute to data collected in the next. Their experience indicates
that the application of sequential transformative mixed methods
can produce more robust results than could be accomplished using
a single approach in programme planning and evaluation focussed
on education for sustainable development.