Assessing SDG Awareness Among College Students at ELJ Memorial College

Assessing SDG Awareness Among College Students at ELJ Memorial College

Angelito M. Rivera

College of Teacher Education, ELJ Memorial College, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90300045

Received: 16 February 2025; Accepted: 27 February 2025; Published: 28 March 2025

ABSTRACT

 The study in question seeks to assess the awareness and understanding of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) among students studying in ELJ Memorial College, thereby filling a gap in the research area with reference to this issue in the Philippines. The SDGs were adopted in 2015, calling for worldwide actions that aim to create better lives and sustainable communities, especially with the fact that education is at the center of these calls. This research intends to investigate the depth of students’ knowledge regarding SDGs while looking at how demography including sex and degree course affects their perceptions towards the SDGs. The study has used a quantitative approach and applied a tailored survey questionnaire on undergraduate students to collect pertinent data which was subjected to descriptive statistics and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). It is based on the theoretical tenets of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) determining adult active citizenry, transformative learning, and whole institution-sustainability approaches. This research would serve as a good ground for targeted further interventions to make sustainability education better in ELJ Memorial College by indicating students’ awareness of the SDGs and assessing current educational strategies’ effectiveness. Ultimately, students would become intelligent citizens who can influence sustainable development in their communities and beyond.

Keywords —  Sustainable Development Goals, Education for Sustainable Development, Active Citizenship, Transformative Learning, Whole-Institution Approach

INTRODUCTION

As the world faces the many challenges of a changing climate, poverty and inequality, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer a path to a more sustainable future, and a better life for everyone, everywhere. These 17 interlinked goals ([1]) were adopted by the United Nations in 2015 as a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity by 2030. To reach these lofty objectives demands, a joint action from all segments of the population; governments, companies, civil society, and the education sector, which is vitally important ([2]).

To reach the SDGs, students need knowledge, skills, and values and higher education institutions can play a crucial role in this. Educational institutions that promote and integrate sustainability principles into their curricula and broader campus life make the students emerge as informed and engaged citizens, ready to face the complex challenges of the 21st century ([3], [4], [5]). The importance of awareness among college students towards SDGs increases especially when they are going to be the next batch of leaders, innovators and change-makers who will shape the future of our world. Their knowledge and commitment to sustainable development will be critical in accelerating the world to better, more just, and sustainable place.

According to the [6], the country has made significant progress in monitoring and reporting on SDG indicators, with 157 identified Philippine SDG Indicators across all 17 goals. This national commitment to SDG measurement underscores the importance of awareness and engagement among college students, who will play a crucial role in achieving these goals.

Although higher education institutions are increasingly embracing sustainability as part of their core strategy ([7]), there is an absence of research looking into SDG awareness of college students in the Philippines. Such an institutional awareness gap is even more pronounced at ELJ Memorial College, where no holistic audit of students’ knowledge and grasp of the SDGs has been carried out. Such is the scenario that this research seeks to fill by determining the present levels of awareness of the SDGs among college students at ELJ Memorial College, as well as the demographic factors that may influence their perceptions of the SDGs. It further seeks to ascertain whether there are such variations in awareness levels among different groups of students as to warrant targeted interventions and other educational initiatives.

This study is guided by three objectives. First, it aims to offer an in-depth analysis of college students’ awareness towards various aspects of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at ELJ Memorial College. These include the individual goals, the structure of these goals and how they are interrelated as well as their relevance to students’ daily activities and career aspirations. Second, other specific objectives of this study include the establishment of some relationships between demographic characteristics (e.g., age, degree course, sex and performance) of the students.

This was a quantitative study that used a survey questionnaire, specifically one designed and partially adapted for this study from [8] for data collection from college student sample of ELJ Memorial College. The questionnaire itself was tailored to the local context of the study, e.g., some demographic questions were changed, and terminology localization, as one example. Respondent characteristics were investigated using descriptive statistics and the relationship between demographic factors and knowledge of SDGs was examined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. This study aims to assess the level of awareness of SDGs among under-graduate and post-graduate students of various streams and to design relevant training programs to increase the knowledge on SD its in-turn may lead to the motivational factors to implement it in-day-today life.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical underpinnings of this study are based on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), which advocates for the need for education to be transformational in pursuit of sustainable development. The aim of ESD is to empower people through education to change their attitudes on sustainable development and to build a more sustainable society ([2]). It offers an understanding that reaching the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), through education, demands a change of mind, a code of conduct.

Fig. 1 Theoretical Framework for Education Sustainable Development Goals

The following are the three key concepts of ESD. The first major theme is Failure of Citizenship. But ESD promotes active and responsible citizenship and enables learners to contribute to sustainable development at the local, national and global level ([2]). The research draws on students’ knowledge of the SDGs and the role it can play on developing participation in sustainability efforts and a more sustainable future.

Ref. [9] stated that transformative sustainability learning framework emphasizes the need for education to foster critical consciousness about interconnected global challenges like those embodied in the SDGs. This aligns with the study’s focus on shifting students from passive awareness to active engagement with sustainability principles. Transformative learning, in terms of making students more aware of the SDG, inspires students to reflect on their values and behaviors in relation to sustainability issues and to take action to challenge themselves to produce the change they desire.

The third key concept of ESD is the whole-institution approach. ESD emphasizes the need to promote sustainability principles throughout every facet of educational institutions; integration of the principles can be seen in the curriculum, research, operations, and community involvement ([10]).

This study supports that approach by examining the awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in relation to the initiatives at ELJ Memorial College aimed at promoting sustainability. This research aims to explore ways to enhance college students’ comprehension of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and encourage their active participation in sustainable development. The results will help in the ongoing enhancement of effective Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) practices at ELJ Memorial College.

Review of Related Literature

 Active Citizenship:

Active citizenship is an integral component of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). The tenets of ESD advocate for the inclusiveness of all children and youth in creating a healthier and fairer society. This means not only understanding global concerns such as those contained in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) but also making attempts to fight these challenges on the local, individual level, and of course, further. There are many facets in which an individual can connect with, or practice ESD, such as: active citizenship participation, advocacy, community organizing, and responsible consumption ([2]). The Commission on Higher Education [11] recently issued updated guidelines for SDG integration in Philippine universities, mandating curriculum alignment with SDG 4.7 targets through CHED Memorandum Order No. 25. This policy shift creates new imperatives for institutions like ELJ Memorial College to assess baseline student awareness as part of compliance requirements. It is important to encourage college students to practice active citizenship as this will help in the upbringing of a generation which can care for its social welfare and that of the environment in the near future.

The efficiency of educating students on the importance of active citizenship as a method of their growth and sustaining development within a society is unquestionable. Service-learning projects aimed at developing students’ skills of sustainability were substantiated to shape students’ ecological concern and enhance their sense of civic participation ([12]). Engaging in active projects of citizenship, however, enhanced the degree of empowerment among the participants and the conviction of their positive impact ([13]). These statistics confirm the hypothesis of positive empowerment of agency and active engagement in promoting sustainable development as an outcome of active citizenship education.

Active citizenship and its impact on awareness of SDGs have been the subject of a number of research studies. For instance, [14] observed that students learning about sustainable development goals through a simulation game demonstrated increased knowledge about the goals and greater intention to practice sustainability. In addition, participants’ active citizenship was associated with more concern for the SDGs as well as a higher level of commitment towards their attainment ([15]). A 2024 SDG awareness survey conducted at Pangasinan State University (PSU) found 62% of students could correctly identify all 17 SDGs, compared to only 41% in non-research universities – a critical regional benchmark for contextualizing ELJMC findings ([16]). This highlights significant inter-institutional variation in SDG education outcomes within the Ilocos Region. This means that active citizenship can be harnessed as a tool for improving people’s understanding of the SDGs and making them ready to play active roles in a sustainable world.

It is indeed important to assess the meaning of active citizenship among students as well as the link of active citizenship in the SDGs in order to gauge their ability as an avenue for sustainable development. Active citizenship can also be encouraged through education and other engagement opportunities where universities and colleges can help students in then actively participating in the implementation of the SDGs.

Transformative Learning

Ref [9] argues that transformative sustainability learning must disrupt learners’ existing mental models about human-environment relationships, creating opportunities for paradigm shifts essential for SDG implementation. This theory holds that learning is a spiral of constructive discontent that starts with the critical assessment of one’s prior assumptions and culminates in reconstruction of the whole picture or the system. In the case of this research, college pupils’ focus on transformative learning is directed at enabling them to not only understand the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) but also give them the transformative power required to act upon the SDGs.

According to [9], there are ten phases involved in the transformative learning process, for instance, disorienting dilemmas, self-examination, critical assessment of assumptions, recognition of discontent, exploration of options, planning a course of action, acquiring knowledge and skills, role experimentation, building competence and self-image, and returning to one’s life. These phases illustrate the cyclical and contemplative features of transformative learning: ‘critical discourse’ and social ‘support’ are considered necessary for effecting change. For college students, engaging with the SDGs through transformative learning can enhance their awareness of global issues, increase their understanding of the need to address such issues, and motivate them to take action ([17]).

Numerous researchers have analyzed transformative learning as a tool for the enhancement of education for sustainability ([18]). As an illustration, [19] showed that the implementation of the principles of transformative learning into a university-level sustainable development course not only enhanced the students’ abilities to think critically but also their readiness to act in a pro-environmental way. Likewise, [20] and [21] showed the influence of transformative learning practices in enabling students to feel empowerment and take part in activities of sustainability. Such results support a view that there exists an element of intrinsic transformative learning that deeply relates to SDGs and changes students’ perspectives on engaging in sustainability as a way of life in both private and public spheres.

Transformative learning offers theoretical underpinning in this study, enabling an examination of how students can comprehend the SDGs meaningfully. Such are approaches to teaching, which, by allowing critical reflection, questioning of beliefs, and promoting dialogue among learners, enable transformative learning, which seeks to turn the student into an activist. The results of this study will provide a new insight into the existing feminist perspectives on education for sustainability and will help in the formulation of effective ways of teaching the youth about the SDGs especially college students.

 Whole-Institution Approach

 Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) often relies on the concept of whole-institutional approach as one of its main strategies. This stresses the importance of incorporating sustainability in every single part of an educational institution’s operation, its culture, and its curriculum ([22]). This means that there is a need for the entire institution to participate in ESD and this participation must be active, with all the members of the institution whether students, faculty, staff, and the administration all contributing to the cause of sustainability ([10]). It means internalizing sustainability in teaching, learning, research, functional activities on the campus, outreach, and even in governance, creating a sustainable atmosphere.

The extensive review of literature shows that whole-institution strategies can be deemed effective in enhancing sustainability in higher learning institutions. According to the findings of the research led by [23], when compared to others, those with all-inclusive sustainability practices including, but not limited to, curriculum, research, and operations, had a greater success in decreasing the environmental impact of the institution as well as in inculcating the sustainability culture among the students and the staff. Besides, adopting sustainability within different subjects and departments can boost the synergy of the disciplines and provide space for students to practice what they have learned ([10]). This all-encompassing perspective not only widens the students’ grasp of sustainability issues, but also enables them to be active and responsible members of society who will in turn seek sustainable solutions in their environments and workplaces.

There has been a number of research focus on whole-institutional approaches on enhancing understanding and fostering action on the SDGs. For example, the case of a Spanish university described in [24] shows the process of embedding SDGs into the strategic plan, curriculum, research and operations which resulted into the awareness of the SDGs of the university’s students and staff. Another research conducted by [25] revealed that integration of SDGs in the sustainability assessment framework of the university helped broaden the understanding of the institution’s sustainability performance and propelled the discovery of the gaps to be bridged. The outcomes reported here demonstrate, similar to this instance, that an entire institution approach can sustain the enhancement of the environment to a learning center on SDGs.

In the light of the present study, an assessment of the whole-institution approach to sustainability that is currently practiced in the case of ELJ Memorial College and its contribution to enhancing students’ awareness concerning the SDGs will be worthwhile. In assessing the effective application of sustainability within the various aspects of the institution such as the curriculum, campus operations and extra-curricular activities, the research will help to pinpoint the strong points and the weak points in order to enhance the level of ESD within the institution.

Analysis

The paper titled “What Do University Students Know about Sustainable Development Goals? A Realistic Approach to the Reception of this UN Program Amongst the Youth Population” explores the awareness and understanding of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) among university students. To examine the level of awareness concerning SDGs among students of different disciplines, a standardized questionnaire was developed. The findings indicate that students generally have low levels of awareness regarding SDGs. Several differences have been noted regarding the awareness levels between health and education students, indicating the latter’s higher involvement with professions commonly aligned to the goals. Moreover, it must be noted that health-related students differ from education-related studious individuals as the latter group tends to be more inclined to professions closely related to the goals. A standardized questionnaire was used to assess the level of awareness regarding SDGs of students from different disciplines.

Furthermore, this study does not rely on sources of knowledge acquisition above those which students use in determining their understanding of SDGs. Knowing such sources can help improve the strategies through which students learn or use to engage them with sustainability issues. In addition, the finding indicates the role higher education institutions would play in achieving such goals while not thoroughly examining teaching methods in comparison to either students’ learning or engagement levels with those goals. Different methods of teaching should be put to test since their efficacy is presumed to yield better strategies for education and pedagogy to meet the needs of different kinds of students. The study also does not follow up with longitudinal changes on the part of students with reference to time in the knowledge construct or effectiveness of educational interventions designed to catalyze awareness among the students about SDGs. Future studies could include such a longitudinal design to showcase the changes over students’ awareness of SDGs as well as engagement themselves with SDGs throughout their academic careers.

This paper has really given so much information about how students view the SDGs, which, at the same time, has brought gaps in research that your study at ELJ Memorial College could address. Exploring the relationship between knowledge and action, identifying sources of information, teaching methodologies, and longitudinal changes can all contribute in a big way to sustainability or enhancing sustainability education within higher education institutions.

The first place, this research focuses, is to evaluate knowledge without investigation into the sources through which students acquire their knowledge concerning SDGs. Such will inform efforts toward better dissemination strategies and increased student engagement in sustainability issues. Further, where the paper focuses the role higher education institutions in effective results for SDGs, it does not compare or contrast the extent to which different types of pedagogy affect learning and engagement in these goals by students. All these points can include different pedagogical strategies that would best help improve education for different demographics. Finally, the research does not capture any longitudinal changes of students’ knowledge over time nor the assessment of specific educational interventions to raise awareness about SDGs. Such longitudinal designs would be helpful for future investigations to see across time how student awareness and engagement with SDGs would change.

In summary, this research paper certainly makes some positive contributions to understanding such awareness levels among students regarding SDGs, but it also clearly brings out the important gaps in research that you can fill with your study at ELJ Memorial College. Through these activities-the relationship between knowledge and action, information sources, teaching methodologies, longitudinal changes-your study would add quite a lot to sustainability education in higher education institutions.

Statement of the Problem

 The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of awareness and comprehension of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals by the students of ELJ Memorial College. On the contrary, there has been an increasing advocacy for Sustainability Development Goals but hardly any study has tried to evaluate how much these societal transformations have been accrued by university students who are future leaders and change agents. Thus, this study focused on filling this gap by looking at the present state of knowledge on the SDGs and the strategies for educating and involving students on this important issue.

The focus of the study is limited to the following questions:

1. How may the profile of the respondents be described in terms of:
   • Sex; and
   • Degree Course?
2. How may the students’ perception on SDG be described in terms of:
   • awareness;
   • source of information;
   • active citizenship;
   • transformative learning; and
   • whole-institution approach?
3. Is there significant relationship between the profile of the respondents and their level of awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals?
4. How can the study’s findings be leveraged to create a training plan that effectively promotes SDG awareness and action among ELJMC students?

METHODOLOGY

To assess the level of understanding of cognitive and affective dimensions of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals by undergraduate students of ELJ Memorial College, a quantitative descriptive correlation research design was employed. The survey questionnaire was provided to assured college students of various courses taking into consideration sample random sampling of Quantitative Research method is considered helpful to an investigator for its ability to help with the measurement of data and its analysis for the purpose of spotting patterns or trends in the data ([26]).

Descriptive research will be employed to documentary evidence on the level of understanding that the participants have, as it relates to knowledge of the SDGs, including their awareness of specific goals and targets. This will concentrate on the distribution and frequency of responses in order to gauge the level of comprehension among the student population ([27]). In addition, exploratory methods will be used to establish their correlation, for instance, such awareness with an academic major, year of being a student and whether one is involved in any activities outside the classroom. This is to ascertain if those characteristics are predictors of increased SDG awareness or do the opposite and predict low SDG awareness ([28]). Thus, with the use of these quantitative techniques, the objective of the study is to expand further the knowledge of the SDGs among college students and suggest where improvements can be made.

Data Gathering Instrument

In order to measure the knowledge awareness levels of the college students from ELJMC, this research utilized the SGD survey developed by [8] with their kind consent. The availability of such established instrument to the study adds to the strength of the methodological aspects of this research. A questionnaire developed to assess the knowledge of SDGs among graduate students proved timely and helpful for the present research. In order to make the tool appropriate for the purpose of this particular study, a number of changes were made. These changes included the modifications of the demographic items to suit the particular student population at ELJMC. Also, given the multicultural background of the students, some words in the questionnaire were scrutinized and changed for better understanding. The reason for this localization process was to facilitate understanding and proper data collection by ensuring that the language used was familiar to the target students. It was possible to use the already existing instrument without deviating from it and simultaneously perfect its fit to the study population and the study aim. This is the advantage of utilizing the already tested and accepted work of Zamora-Polo et al. in this case, which likely has reliable and valid results, and the questionnaire is still able to address the issue of SGD awareness of the ELJMC students.

Sample and Sampling Technique

For the study’s sampling size, Microsoft Excel’s Real Stat add-in was used to carry out a sample size calculation for two-way MANOVA with the following parameters: effect size = 0.11, number of groups for first factor = 2, number of groups for second factor = 4, number of groups for dependent variable = 3, and statistical power = 0.95. Sample size determination based on these parameters indicates that the minimum sample size required for the study should be 111 respondents. However, 111 is not divisible by the product of groups between first and second factors, that is 2 and 4, which is 8. Therefore, the closest number divisible by 8 is 112. This calculation is based on the instruction of [29]. This study considered 112 respondents.

The participants for this research work will be chosen randomly. The names of the students were obtained from the Office of the Students Affairs with the permission from the Dean of Academic Affairs. A number were assigned for each student and 112 of them were randomly selected using excel random function. Stratified random sampling followed [30] guidelines for ensuring demographic representation while maintaining methodological rigor in quantitative educational research. As per this method, an individual can get selected from among the students of ELJ Memorial College. Stratification criteria followed [11] recommended categories for SDG-impact analysis in Philippine HEIs, prioritizing program clusters (Education, Business, etc.) over arbitrary departmental divisions to align with national sustainability education metrics. This makes it possible to draw reasonable conclusions about their understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals. The study sample was composed of students of ELJMC who are enrolled for the first semester for academic year 2024-2025. All degree programs and year levels of students were represented in this.

Data Analysis

In order to profile the respondents and look for possible differences in the demographic data, descriptive statistics will be used. This means that the frequency distribution will be analyzed for sex and degree course. These measures will help to provide a demographic picture about the usual respondent and also point out interesting features in the sample.

Statistical analysis was done in assessing the relationship between the profile of the respondents and their awareness of the sustainable development goals using Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA). The two-way MANOVA will be useful in determining how sex and degree course, and the awareness on sustainable development goals of the students are related. This applies to explain the strength of relationship or association of the two variables at any other weight and direction for instance sex and degree course ([28]).

Two-way MANOVA will show significant differences in SDG awareness between different sexes and different courses. It will also verify whether and how one independent variable’s effect on SDG awareness is dependent on the levels of another independent variable. For example, under this specific independent variable, the effect of sex on SDG awareness might vary by course.

Ethical Considerations

Most ethical considerations in all research involving human subjects only become most apparent when dealing with such research specifically in the case of studies that would, for example, ascertain the levels of awareness on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) among college students. Researchers should ensure none of the subjects has entered any voluntary and informed participation before personal information is shared with them, including everything concerning the study’s purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits. In addition, this information must include the project’s informed consent in which students candidly understand that they have rights, including the right to withdraw at any time without any repercussions upon their participation. Further, to ensure privacy, it is essential to store personal data safely and anonymize it in order to protect identity information from participants. In addition, the research design should include mechanisms for providing opportunities for participants to voice grievances or grievances of any kind after the study, thus improving transparency and trust in the research process.

Research should also include a strong indication that the researcher is capable of preventing the power imbalance that will constitute student compulsion in terms of entering subjects. Students cannot be forced into a research study conducted by an instructor. It is for this reason that very much emphasis should be made on voluntary participation unrelated to one’s academic status. This ethical coverage from an institutional review board (IRB) is supposed to screen the study for ethics and monitor compliance to such standards to protect rights and welfare of participants and the integrity of research outcomes. Such ethical principles should thereby create an atmosphere of respect and support resulting in the high-order engagement of students with SDGs.

RESULTS

Questionnaire Validation

 The questionnaire was designed to measure five constructs. The first construct (C1) is the students’ perception of the knowledge of the SDG (Q5-Q7). The second construct is the source of information among the ELJMC students (Q9-Q12). The last three constructs (C3 – C5) are the measurement of the students ESD awareness: active citizenship (Q13-Q29), transformative learning (Q30 – Q46), and whole-institution approach (Q47-Q63).

 Thus, the adapted survey includes some of the [11] priority competencies for SDG 4.7 policy directives. Furthermore, the minimum awareness thresholds obtained from the regional validation benchmarks were ascribed from [15] for comparative analysis. The study’s survey instrument also incorporated key elements from [31] SDG 4.7 monitoring framework for a more thorough evaluation of student sustainability competencies.

Table 1 shows the result of the internal reliability of the questionnaire using the Cronbach Alpha. As can be appreciated, the results show acceptable consistency on the first two construct (C1 and C2) and excellent consistency among the rest of the constructs (C3-C5). Three of the constructs (C1, C2, and C4) appears to be below the result on the studies of [8] but the other two constructs (C3 and C5) appear higher. The results imply that the questionnaire measures the underlying construct at least with reasonable consistency.

TABLE I. Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient for Each Construct

The analysis of the Cronbach’s Alpha results for various constructs related to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) awareness reveals important insights into the reliability of the measurement instruments used in the study. The constructs assessed include Knowledge of SDGs, Sources of Information, Active Citizenship, Transformative Learning, and Whole-Institution Approach. The values of Cronbach’s Alpha are from 0.67 to 0.92. These therefore indicate reliability variations across constructs.

The constructs Knowledge of SDGs and Sources of Information were both found to enjoy satisfactory reliability since the Cronbach’s Alpha scores were 0.68 and 0.67, respectively. These scores implied that the items under these constructs are only somewhat consistent in measuring the variables intended.

In contrast, the constructs “Active Citizenship,” “Transformative Learning,” and “Whole-Institution Approach” demonstrate excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s Alpha values of 0.92 for all three. As an attribute of high reliability, these constructs are indicative of how items comprising them are extremely consistent and measure their intended concepts. This very strong reliability of constructs implies that students have a clear understanding of active citizenship and transformative learning experiences and institution’s approaches to sustainability.

The reason this level of reliability is high is because items that make up such constructs tend to be very reliable indicators of what they are supposed to measure. This strong reliability of constructs indicates from student perspectives well-defined understandings of active citizenship, transformative learning experience, and approaches of the institution towards sustainability.

This features a high level of reliability, showing that the items within these constructs are highly consistent and effectively measure the constructs that are used for measuring their intended dimensions. Such strong reliability for these constructs entails well-defined understandings on the part of students of active citizenship and transformative learning experiences as well as institutional approaches to sustainability.

The reason this level of reliability is high is because items that make up such constructs tend to be very reliable indicators of what they are supposed to measure. This strong reliability of constructs indicates from student perspectives well-defined understandings of active citizenship, transformative learning experience, and approaches of the institution towards sustainability.

This features a high level of reliability, showing that the items within these constructs are highly consistent and effectively measure the constructs that are used for measuring their intended dimensions. Such strong reliability for these constructs entails well-defined understandings on the part of students of active citizenship and transformative learning experiences as well as institutional approaches to sustainability.

Table II Mean of the Constructs on SGDs

C1. The level of consciousness regarding SDGs across various programs may have to be improved or provided better education for as the general average is very low at 2.62. Although BEED students have the highest average score among all programs at 2.71, it appears these students may have more knowledge about SDGs than do students from other programs.

C2. It is the mean score overall that is the least, which is 2.49, meaning really that students do not seem to have enough access to or knowledge of dependable sources of information on SDGs. BEED program again showed lower mean (2.33), which can imply difficulties finding information when compared to BSED (2.60).

C3. This construct indicates an active citizenship engagement that is higher among students scoring an average of 3.03. The highest score was achieved by BSED students, with an average of 3.13, suggesting that one is more active in civic and community engagement.

C4. With a mean score of 3.05, this construct reflects a positive outlook on transformative learning experiences related to SDGs. The BSED program again leads with a score of 3.12, indicating effective transformative learning experiences.

C5. The mean score is moderately high at 2.98, suggesting that while there is some recognition of a whole-institution approach, there is room for improvement. The BSED program has the highest mean (3.11), indicating better integration of institutional approaches towards sustainability.

Table III. Tests of Normality

Reports on results of tests for the Kolmogorov- Smirnov test for normality reveal that all three constructs tested were significantly different from normal distribution. The test for Active Citizenship provided a statistic of 0.089 at p = .030, denoting that the distribution of scores seriously deviates from normality. Similarly, for Transformative Learning, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic was 0.132, with a p-value of 0.000-highly supportive of strong deviation from normality. Lastly, the Whole Institution Approach produced a statistic of 0.123 with a p-value of 0.000, reinforcing the conclusion that this construct also does not follow a normal distribution Collectively, these analyses showed that it would probably be more fruitful to analyze these constructs using non parametric statistical methods due to their high deviation from normality. Again, these two tests prove that this construct did not satisfy normality assumptions and called for careful statistical consideration in respective subsequent tests.

According to the results of two-way MANOVA on table IV, the overall model is statistically significant by virtue of the intercept but the independent variables of sex and course have no significant effects on the dependent variables. Pillai’s Trace shows an intercept of 0.968 within F-value equal to 1015.221, which has p-value equal to 0.000 based on which big differences occur based only on intercept. Pillai’s Trace for main effect of sex becomes 0.029, with 1.031 of F-value and 0.382 of p-value meaning the sex has no effect on dependent variables. Condition for main effect of course yields a value of 0.082, with F-value of 0.975 and p-value of 0.461: further evidence that the course does not significantly influence dependent measures. Moreover, there’s a Pillai’s Trace value of 0.055, an F-value of 0.646, and a p-value of 0.757, which are related to the interaction of the two independent variables, indicating no significant level of interaction effect on dependent variables. Thus, in effect, this study finds no relationship between either factor sex or course and the outcomes measured within this study, nor their interaction showing marked effects within this analysis.

Table IV Two-Way MANOVA Results for Effects of Sex and Course on Dependent Variables

On TABLE V, no other comparison that BSED, BEED, or BSA/BSAIS has indicated any significant differences. As for Transformative Learning, it has shown that BSBA students actually have lower scores than BSED students or -0.1586 while not significantly different statistically as indicated by (p=0.693). The mean differences are also not significant with BEED and BSA/BSAIS at -0.0339 and -0.0715 respectively (p=0.998 and p=0.965). On the contrary, about BSED to BSBA, the mean difference is 0.1586 (p=0.693), while with BEED and BSA/BSAIS again non-significant results were found.

In relation to the Whole Institution Approach, BSBA students had a mean difference of -0.3395 from students of BSED, leaning towards significance (p=0.082), which signifies that there might be a possible trend that merits further investigation. However, comparisons from BSED with BEED and also BSA/BSAIS showed mean differences of -0.1319 and -0.2029, whose null hypotheses of no effect are supported (p=0.883 and p=0.517 respectively). The reverse comparisons from BSED to BSBA show a mean difference of 0.3395 (p=0.082), while other comparisons between BSED and BEED and BSA/BSAIS yielded null results.

Table V.Tukey HSD Post Hoc Analysis

 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussion

Most important to the findings was understanding the aspects of awareness concerning the Sustainable Development Goals vis-a-vis students at ELJ Memorial College. The assessment brought out different levels of knowledge among different constructs with particular low scores in “Knowledge of SDGs” and “Sources of Information”. There may be great reasons for the importance given to sustainability; however, students significantly lack knowledge of the specific goals as well as the resources available to them for the realization of those goals. On the other hand, constructs like “Active Citizenship,” “Transformative Learning,” and “Whole-Institution Approach” prove to well retain, suggesting that students have a more robust understanding of those constructs. Such a dissimilarity condition raises some serious questions on the effectiveness of present educational efforts in creating a comprehensive knowledge of SDGs among students.

Based on the Regional SDG benchmarks ([32]), indication that Philippine higher education institutions lag behind regional peers in systemic SDG integration, particularly in curriculum alignment and interdisciplinary collaboration. While ELJMC students demonstrated strong active citizenship engagement (mean=3.03), their low SDG knowledge scores (mean=2.62) fall below ASEAN’s 2024 target of 3.2 for baseline awareness, underscoring the need for enhanced ESD strategies. The study’s findings align with [33] research on SDG awareness in Luzon universities, which similarly reported moderate levels of student engagement with sustainability concepts but identified knowledge gaps in specific SDG targets.

In addition, the result of this study shows similarities with that of [34], which stresses the critical role of higher educational institutions in building awareness and making students engaged with sustainability. This would be complementing previous findings which proved how the little knowledge on SDGs that students possessed prevented them from playing an effective role to contribute toward sustainability initiatives within their campuses. The findings of this study further inspire educational institutions to craft ways of easing the pathway to improved SDG embedding in curriculums and providing more resources geared towards understanding. The strong transformative learning scores (Cronbach’s α=0.92) align with [9] assertion that educational interventions fostering critical reflection on sustainability issues can catalyze student-driven SDG action.

Conclusion

From this, it becomes apparent that this study focused on an urgent need for educational initiatives at ELJ Memorial College aimed at enhancing students’ awareness and understanding of Sustainable Development Goals. It also seems that there are enormous gaps in knowledge relating to and sourced information about certain aspects of the goals. Though active citizenship and transformational learning concepts have been grasped by the students, active bridging of the knowledge gap with regard to SDGs still matters. ELJ Memorial College would derive benefits from addressing those issues by preparing the students to tackle the daunting challenges posed by sustainability and create positive changes in their communities. Based on the outcome of this study, a training plan was developed to enhanced the students awareness of ESD.

 Recommendations

There are several proposals aimed at effective awareness raising and student engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals in the ELJ Memorial College like:

1. Target and develop educational programs under the SDGs theme, e.g., workshops, seminars, and interdisciplinary integrated courses on the same. This will boost student knowledge and understanding of certain goals ([35]).
2. Adequate resourcing for students through SDGs information, online databases, literature, and expert talks. This would enhance the better dissemination of information and encourage self-learning among many others ([36]).
3. Adopt [9] three-phase model (disruption, exploration, reintegration) to design transformational learning experiences that connect SDG theory with local sustainability challenges.
4. Encouraging interdisciplinary cooperation works among different academic programs to share best practices in sustainability education. This could involve joint projects or courses on SDGs from a multitude of perspectives.
5. Longitudinal research that monitors the evolution of students in knowledge and participation in the SDGs over time. The aim should be to measure the effectiveness of changes from educational interventions and plan for the future.
6. Source investigation for students accessing information about SDGs enables gap identification concerning information dissemination ([37]). Understanding is important for the development of an effective communication and outreach strategy.

By implementing these recommendations, therefore, ELJ Memorial College would be amply improving its education on sustainability and re-energizing learners for great informed citizenry towards contributing towards global sustainability.

REFERENCES

1. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
2. UNESCO. (2023). ESD for 2030 roadmap. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802
3. Rieckmann, M. (2023). ESD competency frameworks. Sustainability, 15(3), 2345. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032345
4. Alfathy, T., et al. (2024). 21st century sustainability competencies. Sustainability, 16(6), 2508. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16062508
5. Times Higher Education. (2024). SDG impact rankings. https://www.timeshighereducation.com
6.  Philippine Statistics Authority. (2024). National SDG indicators report. https://psa.gov.ph/sdg
7. NEDA. (2023). Philippine SDG progress report. https://sdg.neda.gov.ph
8. Zamora-Polo, F., Sanchez-Martin, J., Corrales-Serrano, M., & Espejo-Antunez, L. (2019, June 27). What do university students know about Sustainable Development Goals? A Realistic Approach to the Reception of this UN Program Amongst the Youth Population. Sustainability, 11(13), 3533. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133533
9. Sterling, S. (2021). Transformative sustainability education. Sustainability Science, 16(3), 827-846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-00943-w
10. Commission on Higher Education [CHED]. (2023). Guidelines on the Integration of Sustainable Development Goals in Higher Education Institutions. CHED Memorandum Order No. 25, s. 2023. https://ched.gov.ph/sdg-guidelines
11. Wiek, A., et al. (2023). Transformative sustainability education. Sustainability Science, 16(3), 827-846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-00943-w
12. Hahn, T. (2016). Service learning impacts. Journal of Higher Education Outreach, 20(1), 125–144.
13. Mitchell, T.D., et al. (2015). Service-learning and sustainability education: Empowering civic engagement. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 19(3), 207-230. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0001
14. Lange, A., et al. (2020). Transformative sustainability learning. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120402
15. Loyola, G., & Florez, C. (2021). Active citizenship and SDGs. Journal of Sustainability Education, 28. https://doi.org/10.9771/JSE.2021.28.003
16. Pangasinan State University [PSU] (2024). SDG Awareness Survey Report: Pangasinan State University System. https://main.psu.edu.ph/sdg-survey-2024
17. Cavaliere, V., Paola, L., & Elisa, S. (2019). Education of sustainable development goals through students’ active engagement: A transformative learning experience. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 10(3), 521–544. https:// www.academia.edu/43353770/ Education_of_sustainable _development_goals_through_students_active_engagement_A_transformative_learning_experience
18. Boström, M., et al. (2018). Transformative learning for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 13(3), 635-644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0584-z
19. Sipos, Y., et al. (2019). Transformative sustainability pedagogy in higher education: Developing action competence through novel course design. Journal of Sustainability Education, 21(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.9771/JSE.2019.21.003
20.  Wals, A.E.J. (2022). Transformative sustainability education. Sustainability, 14(16), 10348. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610348
21. Michel, J.O., et al. (2020). Transformative sustainability pedagogy. Sustainability, 12(19), 8258. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198258
22. Stephens, J. C., et al. (2015). Accelerating sustainability through higher education. Sustainability Science, 10 (2), 213–223.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0274-4
23. O’Neill, K. (2023). Whole-institution approaches. Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(4), 789-803.
24. Lozano, R., et al. (2023). SDG integration in ASEAN universities. Sustainability, 15(9), 7124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097124
25. Thomas, I., et al. (2023). SDG curriculum mapping. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(1), 1-19.
26. Bhattacherjee, A., et al. (2021). Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices (2nd ed.). University of South Florida. https://doi.org/10.26192/q7w89
27. Gray, J.R., & Grove, S.K. (2021). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2019-0-01813-6.
28. Schober, P., et al. (2023). Modern correlation analysis. JAMA, 329(12), 1023-1024.
29. Zaiontz, C. (n.d.). Real Statistics Resource Pack Software. Real Statistics Using Excel. https://real-statistics.com
30. Creswell, J.W., & Guetterman, T.C. (2023). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (7th ed.). Pearson.
31. Didham, R.J. (2023). SDG 4.7 monitoring frameworks. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 24(7), 1-18. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-05-2023-0198
32. ASEAN Secretariat. (2024). Regional SDG education benchmarks. https://asean.org
33. Dizon, J., et al. (2024). SDG awareness in Luzon universities. Philippine Journal of Education, 45(2), 112-130.
34.  Dela Cruz, M., et al. (2024). Transformative pedagogies in ASEAN universities. ASEAN Journal of Education, 12(3), 45-62.
35. Global Reporting Initiative. (2023). SDG disclosure standards for higher education. https://www.globalreporting.org
36. Reyes, J., et al. (2023). Campus-community partnerships in Luzon. Philippine Social Science Review, 75(2), 89-112.
37. SDG Academy. (2025). Open-access modules for SDG education. https://sdgacademy.org