This discussion questions the role of competences, values and dispositions in the ESD discourse. We explore how competences and dispositions are used as intended outcomes in ESD and ask if definitions of competence widely used in the ESD discourse conflate cognitive and affective objectives, relatable to being able to do something and being willing to do the same thing, in a way that is unhelpful in the contexts of teaching and assessing in ESD (Schneider, 2019; Glaesser, 2019; Shephard & Dulgar, 2015). We theorise if teaching a student to be able to perform a sustainability-related behaviour and teaching that same student to be willing to perform that behaviour are different educational tasks, requiring different teaching and learning approaches, different assessments and perhaps even different teachers (Shephard, 2008; Shephard, 2020). We ask if replacing the term competent with the terms able and willing, as appropriate, would allow ESD practitioners to communicate with one another and with others far more effectively than they do at present and to address the confusion that has encompassed ESD for more than three decades. This discussion also addresses the competences of critical thinking (as something that most educators agree contributes to the link between learning and behaviour) and the dispositions that underpin these competencies. We ask if critical thinking involves using a range of cognitive skills, or abilities, or competencies, but perhaps is also dependent on a range of affective dispositions to underpin these abilities. These dispositions, or affective attributes, may help a person to decide whether or not to bother thinking critically (for some personal effort is always involved in critical thinking) and whether or not to be open-minded or fair-minded in the process (as examples). On the way we theorise what the role of higher education might be in teaching these dispositions or affective attributes (Shephard & Egan, 2018), whether these dispositions or affective attributes are essentially personal values, and (if they are) which personal values should be taught in higher education and which probably should not be taught.

Glaesser, J. (2019). Competence in educational theory and practice: A critical discussion. Oxford Review of Education, 45(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1493987 Schneider, K. (2019). What Does Competence Mean? Psychology, 10(14), 1938–1958. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2019.1014125 Shephard, K. (2008). Higher education for sustainability: Seeking affective learning outcomes. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370810842201 Shephard, K. (2020)Higher Educationfor Sustainability: Seeking IntellectualIndependence in Aotearoa NewZealand,Springer https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-15-1940-6 Shephard, K., & Egan, T. (2018). Higher Education for Professional and Civic Values: A Critical Review and Analysis. Sustainability, 10(12), 4442. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124442 Shephard, K.,& Dulgar, P. (2015) Why It Matters How We Frame “Education” in Education for Sustainable Development, Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 14:3, 137-148, DOI: 10.1080/1533015X.2015.1067577