Attending the BERA 50th Anniversary Conference and WERA Focal Meeting in Manchester was a highlight of my year as an early career researcher (ECR) and provided important opportunities for academic growth. However, the conference also prompted me to reflect on an often overlooked aspect: the ‘hidden curriculum’ of such events and its implications for sustainability.

The term ‘hidden curriculum’ refers to the implicit norms, values and practices within academic settings. It is typically discussed in the context of equity and access to knowledge. However, I think it is equally important to consider in the context of how conferences address – or fail to address – sustainability. In this blog post I explore two areas: artificial intelligence (AI) and academic travel.

Artificial intelligence

The conference featured an extensive array of sessions on AI (16 sessions and over 35 presentations). Topics ranged across generative AI’s impact on academic integrity, user perspectives and pedagogy. In ECR sessions, discussions turned to useful AI technologies for referencing, reading journals and notetaking. Despite the breadth of discussions, there was a noticeable lack of focus on the ethical concerns related to the environmental impact of AI technologies.

As climate scientists increasingly highlight the substantial energy consumption associated with AI data centres and uncertainty around its longer-term impacts on climate (Luers et al., 2024), it is important that discussions of AI also consider its ecological footprint. Given the climate emergency we are in, should we discuss the environmental impacts of these technologies more openly before adopting them? What are the environmental impacts and which groups are more likely to experience the benefits of using such technologies while at the same time being able to mitigate the impacts?

The convention of flying

An implicit theme at the conference was the assumption that frequent air travel is part of academic success. As an ECR I was told to ‘grab international opportunities with both hands’. While engaging with international colleagues is valuable, the environmental impact of flying is significant, and there are equity issues related to who has access to this form of travel. The future of academia may still involve flying, but we must reduce unnecessary trips and reconsider the norms around it. It was notable that presentations on research involving air travel rarely addressed the environmental costs. Just as we consider ethics in other research areas, sustainability and travel should also be critically examined, as has been highlighted recently in the BERA Research Ethics Case Studies (Dunlop & Rushton, 2024).

In ECR sessions, the lack of dialogue around sustainable methods of collaboration or even an acknowledgement of those who may feel morally unable to fly in the current climate suggests a need for re-evaluation. There is an assumption that the benefits of in-person meetings always outweigh their environmental impact. Do they? Does this expectation that we should, and would be willing to, fly shape our practices and values in academia, particularly when considering our responsibility towards the planet?

‘In reflecting on the BERA 50th Anniversary Conference, I see an opportunity for deeper consideration of the “hidden curriculum” of sustainability within academic settings.’

A call for reflection and action

In reflecting on the BERA 50th Anniversary Conference, I see an opportunity for deeper consideration of the ‘hidden curriculum’ of sustainability within academic settings. While the conference provided valuable insights and opportunities for collaboration, there were notable gaps in addressing the sustainability implications of our practices. In this blog post, I have highlighted AI and air travel as two examples – other reflections could focus on sustainable food choices or energy consumption. You will have your own reflections too.

As researchers, we stand at the intersection of policy and public behaviour. Research shows that organisations that occupy this position can have a significant influence on shifting social norms and behaviours (Bickerstaff et al., 2024). Climate change is a risk amplifier and will exacerbate many of the areas we study: educational inequality, poverty and social injustice. Therefore, it is vital for academic organisations like BERA to lead by example and integrate sustainability into their practices and policies. This call for action is not about prescribing exact solutions but about initiating continued conversations on how we, as a community, can better align our research practices with our shared responsibility to mitigate climate change.

For more information about the actions BERA has already taken to make its activities more sustainable please visit this link.

References

Bickerstaff, K., Abram, S., Christie, I., Devine-Wright, P., Guilbert, S., Hinchliffe, S., Moseley, A., Pitchforth, E., Walker, G., & Whitmarsh, L. (2024). Making a net zero society: Follow the social science – full report. ACCESS Project, University of Exeter, UK.

Dunlop, L., & Rushton, E. (2024). Frontlines of climate change education. In S. W. Chong, & A. Fox (Eds.), Research ethics case studies. British Educational Research Association. https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/research-ethics-case-studies-2024-frontlines-of-climate-change-education

Luers, A., Koomey, J., Masanet, E., Gaffney, O., Creutzig, F., Lavista Ferres, J., & Horvitz, E. (2024). Will AI accelerate or delay the race to net-zero emissions? Nature, 628(8009), 718–720.