Average rating: | Rated 5 of 5. |
Level of importance: | Rated 5 of 5. |
Level of validity: | Rated 5 of 5. |
Level of completeness: | Rated 4 of 5. |
Level of comprehensibility: | Rated 5 of 5. |
Competing interests: | None |
The article has sound theoretical side as well as empirical with the results of a survey of 30 social work students from 4 different Western European countries. There is found a sound connection between theoretical and empirical sides of the article. However, it can be slightly questioned the author's position towards the relevance of "sustainability" in the article. To the point, "sustainability" has to be developed on the "plus" scale, but not having anything at "minus" scale (damage, "bad waste", etc.) The balanced sustainability can have very small "plus", but not the "minus", as degradation, loss of health., etc. ... It really can be questioned slightly the part of "education" in the article. Is it not "education" - for "education"? What is the aim not only of "sustainability", but also - of "education"? It is not enough to say that it is not effective and efficient. What does it mean - the "effectiveness" of education? What are it's purposes? What values are cionsidered for these purposes? Social work is not only assistance technically, which is necessary for the needs of the clients, but also - social values to adhere. What is the content of these social values? The authors speak about cultural skills and competencies - but for what aim? It is not only the "game of methods in education" - but for what purpose?What certain culture to adhere to? - First of all, because it is important for inclusion, integration and cooperation between people. It has to be much broader and deeper the authors' reference in the text of Niemczyk (2019) minds about "glocal" as a critique of some contemporary notions of globalization.