Jurnal Inovasi dan Pengembangan Hasil Pengabdian Masyarakat e-ISSN 3025-2334 Vol 3(2), December 2025, 49-68 DOI: https://doi.org/10.61650/jip-dimas.v3i2 .1342 Strengthening Character Education and Sustainable Futures through Islamic Education Curriculum: An Educational Capacity-Building Program for Educators Akhmad Sirojuddin 1*, and Rahmat2 1, 2 Universitas KH. Abdul Chalim, Indonesia ABSTRACT Rapid global changes require educational approaches that connect sustainability awareness with character formation, cultural identity, and responsible global citizenship. This community engagement activity aimed to strengthen educators' understanding of the interrelationships among environmental literacy, character education, local wisdom, global citizenship, and sustainable futures through educational dissemination and academic capacity building. The activity was conducted within the International Conference at FTIK IAIN Kendari in 2025 using an educational dissemination approach consisting of material preparation and contextualization, structured academic presentation, interactive exchange and reflection, and synthesis of educational implications. Activity documentation and presentation materials were descriptively analyzed to identify the principal educational perspectives communicated during the session. The activity highlighted four interconnected orientations: local wisdom and character education as foundations for sustainable futures; culturally rooted global citizenship characterized by strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility; contextual and integrated learning for connecting educational content with real-life and global challenges; and multi-stakeholder collaboration involving educational institutions, families, communities, technology, and government. These findings indicate that academic capacity-building forums can provide meaningful spaces for integrating sustainability discourse with culturally grounded educational perspectives, although the activity did not measure changes in participants' competence or classroom practices. The activity therefore contributes a Sustainable Futures-Oriented Educational Capacity-Building Perspective as a conceptual foundation for subsequent collaborative workshops, classroom implementation, and systematic evaluation ABSTRAK Perubahan global yang cepat menuntut pendekatan pendidikan yang mengaitkan kesadaran akan keberlanjutan dengan pembentukan karakter, identitas budaya, dan kewarganegaraan global yang bertanggung jawab. Kegiatan pengabdian masyarakat ini bertujuan untuk memperkuat pemahaman para pendidik mengenai keterkaitan antara literasi lingkungan, pendidikan karakter, kearifan lokal, kewarganegaraan global, dan masa depan yang berkelanjutan melalui diseminasi pendidikan serta peningkatan kapasitas akademik. Kegiatan ini dilaksanakan dalam rangkaian Konferensi Internasional di FTIK IAIN Kendari pada tahun 2025 dengan menggunakan pendekatan diseminasi pendidikan yang mencakup penyiapan dan kontekstualisasi materi, presentasi akademik terstruktur, pertukaran gagasan dan refleksi interaktif, serta sintesis implikasi pendidikan. Dokumentasi kegiatan dan materi presentasi dianalisis secara deskriptif untuk mengidentifikasi perspektif pendidikan utama yang disampaikan selama sesi berlangsung. Kegiatan ini menyoroti empat orientasi yang saling terkait: kearifan lokal dan pendidikan karakter sebagai landasan bagi masa depan yang berkelanjutan; kewarganegaraan global yang berakar pada budaya dan dicirikan oleh karakter yang kuat, akar budaya, pemahaman global, serta tanggung jawab sosial; pembelajaran kontekstual dan terintegrasi untuk menghubungkan materi pendidikan dengan kehidupan nyata dan tantangan global; serta kolaborasi multipihak yang melibatkan institusi pendidikan, keluarga, masyarakat, teknologi, dan pemerintah. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa forum peningkatan kapasitas akademik dapat menyediakan ruang yang bermakna untuk mengintegrasikan wacana keberlanjutan dengan perspektif pendidikan yang berlandaskan budaya, meskipun kegiatan ini tidak mengukur perubahan kompetensi peserta maupun praktik pembelajaran di kelas. Dengan demikian, kegiatan ini memberikan kontribusi berupa Perspektif Peningkatan Kapasitas Pendidikan yang Berorientasi pada Masa Depan Berkelanjutan sebagai landasan konseptual bagi lokakarya kolaboratif, penerapan di kelas, dan evaluasi sistematis di masa mendatang. Keywords: Environmental Literacy; Character Education; Local Wisdom; Global Citizenship; Sustainable Futures; Educational Capacity Building 1. INTRODUCTION The contemporary educational landscape is increasingly shaped by interconnected ecological, social, cultural, and ethical challenges that require education to move beyond the transmission of disciplinary knowledge toward the development of responsible and future-oriented citizens (Ardoin et al., 2023; Guerrero & Ortiz, 2025). Climate change, biodiversity loss, environmental degradation, and other sustainability challenges have strengthened the urgency of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and environmental literacy within educational systems (Molthan-Hill et al., 2022; Sorooshian et al., 2024). In this context, education is expected not only to develop learners' understanding of environmental issues but also to cultivate the values, attitudes, and responsibilities required to respond to complex societal challenges (González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022; Viana et al., 2022). Environmental literacy therefore needs to be connected with character education, ethical reasoning, social responsibility, and active citizenship rather than being treated exclusively as scientific knowledge (Crawford et al., 2023; Lindsey et al., 2021). Such integration is particularly important for preparing future-ready citizens who are capable of understanding global challenges while maintaining ethical responsibility toward their communities and environment (Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2022; Gamage et al., 2021). Educators occupy a strategic position in translating these broad sustainability principles into meaningful educational experiences. However, integrating sustainability, character formation, and global citizenship into teaching requires more than familiarity with environmental concepts. Educators need opportunities to examine how global challenges can be connected with learners' everyday experiences, cultural backgrounds, moral values, and local social realities (Parker et al., 2021; Ramani et al., 2024). Educational practices that separate environmental issues from character formation may limit students' ability to understand sustainability as both an ecological and an ethical responsibility (Birhan et al., 2021; Gamage et al., 2021). Contextual learning is therefore important because it enables abstract global issues to be interpreted through culturally meaningful experiences and community realities (Sakti et al., 2024; Siswati et al., 2026). Strengthening educators' conceptual and pedagogical perspectives on these relationships represents an important component of professional capacity building for sustainable education. Within the Indonesian educational context, local culture and wisdom provide a particularly relevant foundation for connecting character education with contemporary global challenges. Values such as cooperation, tolerance, social solidarity, responsibility, and respect for diversity can provide culturally grounded entry points for discussing citizenship and sustainability. Rather than positioning globalization and local identity as opposing educational orientations, educators can use local wisdom as a foundation from which learners develop broader global awareness. This perspective corresponds with the educational material delivered during the International Conference at FTIK IAIN Kendari 2025, which emphasized the integration of Islamic education and local culture, including the values of gotong royong, tolerance, togetherness, and contextual learning. The material positioned these cultural values as resources for responding to contemporary educational challenges rather than as traditions detached from modern learning contexts. This orientation is closely related to the concept of global citizenship. Preparing learners for global citizenship does not require the abandonment of cultural identity; instead, global competence can be developed alongside strong character, cultural rootedness, global understanding, and social responsibility. The educational material presented in the activity conceptualized a virtuous global citizen through four interconnected dimensions: strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility. Such an orientation is relevant to sustainable education because environmental and social challenges increasingly require learners to understand issues beyond their immediate surroundings while remaining ethically responsible for actions within their own communities. Consequently, strengthening educators' capacity to connect local values, character formation, and global citizenship can provide an important pedagogical pathway toward sustainability-oriented education. Another challenge concerns the translation of these concepts into educational practice. Sustainability and character education can remain abstract when educators encounter them only as theoretical discourse. Previous scholarship has consequently highlighted the importance of participatory learning, contextual pedagogies, professional development, and collaborative educational approaches in translating sustainability principles into meaningful learning experiences (Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2022; González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022; Parker et al., 2021). In this respect, integrated curriculum perspectives provide educators with opportunities to connect disciplinary content with cultural values, contemporary social issues, and learners' lived experiences. The material delivered during the FTIK IAIN Kendari activity similarly emphasized holistic curriculum design, the development of teaching materials and learning modules, intercultural and interreligious dialogue, cultural exchange, and contextual learning connected with real-life situations and global challenges. Academic forums and educational capacity-building activities can therefore function as important spaces for disseminating these perspectives among educators. Unlike an experimental intervention designed to measure causal changes through pre-tests and post-tests, educational dissemination activities primarily provide opportunities for participants to encounter new perspectives, discuss their relevance, reflect on educational challenges, and consider their possible application in professional contexts. Interactive academic forums may also facilitate exchanges between university academics, educators, institutional leaders, and other educational stakeholders. In community engagement, such activities are particularly relevant because universities can extend academic knowledge beyond formal campus instruction and connect scholarly perspectives with the practical concerns of educational communities. The International Conference organized by FTIK IAIN Kendari provided such an academic and community-engagement context. Under the broader orientation of transformative education for sustainable futures, the forum brought together educational perspectives related to pedagogical transformation, sustainable development, global citizenship, environmental literacy, culture, and character education. Within this context, the educational session delivered by Dr. Akhmad Sirojuddin addressed "Budaya dan Kearifan Lokal: Menyusun Peta Globalisasi Pendidikan untuk Warga Negara yang Berbudi Pekerti." The material connected local wisdom and character formation with global educational awareness and provided conceptual directions for contextual learning, curriculum development, educational technology, community participation, and institutional collaboration. Importantly, sustainable educational transformation also depends on collaboration beyond individual classroom practices. Educational institutions, communities, families, government agencies, and technological environments can collectively contribute to the sustainability of educational initiatives. The material presented during the activity explicitly emphasized technology-supported learning, community- and family-based education, training and mentoring, partnerships, periodic evaluation, and collaboration between educational institutions and government. This multi-stakeholder perspective broadens sustainability-oriented education from an individual teacher responsibility into a shared educational ecosystem and provides a relevant foundation for community engagement involving higher education institutions. Despite growing academic attention to ESD, environmental literacy, character education, and global citizenship, an important practical gap remains in communicating these interconnected concepts in forms that educators can relate to local cultural and educational realities (Ardoin et al., 2023; González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022; Sorooshian et al., 2024). Sustainability discourse can become overly abstract when separated from culturally meaningful values, while character education can become disconnected from contemporary global and environmental challenges when presented only as normative moral instruction. Educational capacity-building activities are therefore needed to create spaces where educators can critically connect global sustainability concerns with local wisdom, character values, contextual learning, and social responsibility. In this sense, the contribution of community engagement lies not in claiming experimentally measured behavioral change, but in facilitating meaningful academic dissemination, conceptual enrichment, professional reflection, and dialogue around educational practices. Accordingly, this community engagement activity aimed to strengthen educators' understanding of the interrelationships among environmental literacy, character education, local wisdom, global citizenship, and sustainable futures through educational dissemination and academic capacity building at FTIK IAIN Kendari. The activity specifically sought to: (1) introduce an integrated perspective linking local cultural values with character formation and global citizenship; (2) disseminate contextual and integrated learning perspectives relevant to sustainability-oriented education; (3) facilitate academic reflection and discussion concerning the role of educators in preparing ethically responsible and future- ready citizens; and (4) highlight the importance of community, institutional, and technological collaboration in supporting sustainable educational transformation. Rather than evaluating the effectiveness of an experimental intervention, this community engagement focuses on documenting the implementation, educational content, participant engagement where documented, and practical implications of the academic capacity-building activity. 2. METHOD 2.1 Community Engagement Design This community engagement activity employed an educational dissemination and capacity-building approach designed to facilitate the exchange of academic knowledge, professional reflection, and contextual understanding among educators. Rather than using an experimental or intervention-based research design, the activity positioned the academic forum as a space for connecting contemporary educational issues with practical perspectives relevant to educators. The approach emphasized the dissemination of ideas related to sustainable futures, character education, local wisdom, global citizenship, and contextual learning through structured presentation and academic interaction. The activity was organized within the International Conference at the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training (FTIK), IAIN Kendari, in 2025. Within this forum, Dr. Akhmad Sirojuddin delivered an educational session entitled "Budaya dan Kearifan Lokal: Menyusun Peta Globalisasi Pendidikan untuk Warga Negara yang Berbudi Pekerti" (Culture and Local Wisdom: Mapping Educational Globalization for Virtuous Global Citizens). The presentation explicitly addressed the relationship between local culture, education, globalization, character formation, and responsible global citizenship. The community engagement process was structured around four interconnected stages: (1) preparation and contextualization of educational materials, (2) structured academic presentation, (3) interactive academic exchange and reflection, and (4) synthesis of educational implications. These stages were intended to move the activity beyond one-way information delivery by providing a conceptual space in which educational ideas could be related to contemporary professional and societal challenges. Figure 1. Flow of the Educational Dissemination and Capacity-Building Activity As illustrated in Figure 1, the activity began with the preparation and contextualization of educational content, followed by structured material delivery within the academic forum. The process subsequently emphasized academic exchange and reflection, with the final stage synthesizing the relevance of the presented perspectives for sustainability-oriented, character-based, and contextually grounded educational practices. 2.2 Activity Context and Participants The activity was conducted within the academic environment of FTIK IAIN Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi, as part of an international conference addressing contemporary and transformative educational issues. The forum provided an institutional setting for academic dissemination and professional exchange concerning educational transformation, sustainable futures, character development, cultural identity, and global citizenship. The participants are described in this article as conference participants and educational stakeholders attending the academic activity, rather than as research respondents or experimental subjects. Accordingly, no purposive sampling procedure, experimental group allocation, or research-participant recruitment was employed for the purpose of this community engagement article. The activity focused on the educational interaction occurring within the conference forum and on the substantive educational content delivered during the session. The presentation was contextualized around the relationship between local wisdom and contemporary educational transformation. Among the cultural values highlighted were gotong royong (mutual cooperation), tolerance, togetherness, and contextual learning, which were discussed as educational resources for strengthening character while responding to global educational developments. The institutional context of the activity is documented through the official conference information presented in Figure 2. The conference served as the broader academic platform within which educational perspectives on transformation, sustainability, and future-oriented learning were communicated and discussed. Figure 2. Institutional Context of the International Conference at FTIK IAIN Kendari Figure 2 demonstrates the formal academic setting in which the community engagement activity was conducted. Positioning the educational session within an international academic forum enabled the dissemination of locally grounded educational perspectives while simultaneously connecting them with broader discussions concerning educational transformation and sustainable futures. 2.3 Implementation Procedures The implementation of the community engagement activity consisted of four main stages. The first stage, preparation and contextualization, involved organizing educational material around the relationship among culture, local wisdom, character formation, globalization, and contemporary educational challenges. The material was designed to encourage educators to view local cultural values not as barriers to globalization but as meaningful foundations for preparing ethically responsible citizens capable of engaging with global realities. The second stage, structured academic presentation, involved the systematic delivery of educational concepts by the speaker. The presentation introduced the importance of integrating Islamic education and local culture, strengthening culturally grounded character, and developing learners who possess global awareness without losing their cultural identity. A central conceptual orientation presented during the session described future-oriented global citizens through four interconnected dimensions: strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility. The third stage, academic exchange and reflection, provided a forum for connecting the presented ideas with educational practice. The academic interaction was oriented toward reflection on how character education, cultural values, global citizenship, and sustainability-oriented perspectives can be contextualized within learning environments. This stage is treated as an educational exchange rather than as a formal focus group discussion or research interview. Consequently, the article does not interpret participant interaction as experimental or interview data unless supported by documented records. The fourth stage, synthesis of educational implications, focused on drawing practical implications from the academic material. Particular attention was given to holistic curriculum development, teaching materials, contextual learning, educational technology, community participation, and institutional collaboration. The presentation emphasized the importance of developing teaching materials and learning modules that connect educational content with real-life situations and contemporary global challenges. Table 1. Implementation Stages of the Educational Capacity-Building Activity Stage Main Activity Educational Focus Documented Output Preparation and Contextualization Preparation of academic material Local wisdom, character education, globalization, sustainable futures Presentation material Academic Presentation Structured delivery of educational material Character, cultural roots, global understanding, social responsibility Presentation/documentation Academic Exchange and Reflection Interactive academic discussion and reflection Relevance of concepts to educational contexts Reflective academic exchange Synthesis of Educational Implications Identification of practical educational implications Contextual curriculum, collaboration, technology, sustainable education Recommendations and conceptual synthesis 2.4 Documentation and Analysis of the Community Engagement Activity Data sources in this community engagement article consisted primarily of activity documentation, official conference information, presentation materials, and documented academic interactions available from the implementation of the activity. These materials were used to reconstruct the implementation process and identify the principal educational themes communicated during the session. The analysis did not employ pre-test/post-test measurement, psychometric scales, experimental comparison, or inferential statistical testing. The documentation was examined descriptively by organizing the substantive content into several thematic categories aligned with the objectives of the community engagement activity: (1) local wisdom and character education, (2) culturally rooted global citizenship, (3) contextual and integrated learning, and (4) multi-stakeholder collaboration for sustainable educational transformation. The categorization was used to structure the presentation of results and discussion rather than to claim statistically measurable changes in participant competence. Visual documentation was selected based on its relevance to the implementation and substantive focus of the activity. The introductory presentation slide was used to document the identity and context of the academic session, while selected presentation materials were used to illustrate the educational concepts communicated during the activity. For example, the material on integrated curriculum development emphasized holistic curriculum design, teaching materials, intercultural dialogue, cultural exchange, and contextual learning. Similarly, the presentation highlighted technology-supported learning, community and family participation, training and mentoring, partnership, periodic evaluation, and institutional- government collaboration as supporting mechanisms for educational transformation. The results were subsequently interpreted through relevant literature on environmental literacy, character education, Education for Sustainable Development, global citizenship, contextual learning, and educator capacity building. This analytical procedure enabled the article to distinguish between what was actually implemented and documented during the community engagement activity and the broader theoretical implications discussed in the scholarly literature. 3. RESULTS 3.1 Implementation of the Educational Capacity-Building Activity The community engagement activity was implemented within the academic setting of the International Conference at FTIK IAIN Kendari in 2025. Rather than functioning as a multi-week experimental intervention, the activity constituted an academic dissemination and educational capacity-building session in which contemporary educational issues were communicated and discussed through a structured presentation. The activity provided a forum for connecting scholarly perspectives with educational concerns related to cultural identity, character formation, globalization, and sustainable futures. A central contribution of the activity was the presentation delivered by Dr. Akhmad Sirojuddin entitled "Budaya dan Kearifan Lokal: Menyusun Peta Globalisasi Pendidikan untuk Warga Negara yang Berbudi Pekerti." The presentation positioned culture and local wisdom as educational resources for responding to global transformation rather than as elements that should be separated from contemporary educational development. The session therefore created an academic space for examining how culturally grounded education can contribute to the formation of responsible citizens capable of responding to changing global conditions. The implementation of the activity was supported by structured presentation materials that progressively connected local cultural values with broader educational issues. The material emphasized the integration of Islamic education and local culture, including gotong royong, tolerance, togetherness, and contextual learning. These elements provided a culturally meaningful foundation for discussing character formation and contemporary educational challenges. Figure 3. Implementation of the Educational Capacity-Building Activity at FTIK IAIN Kendari Figure 3 documents the academic implementation context in which the educational material was delivered. The significance of this documentation lies not in demonstrating experimentally measured changes among participants, but in establishing the actual setting of the community engagement activity and the academic interaction through which the educational content was disseminated. From a community-engagement perspective, this form of academic dissemination is relevant because universities have a responsibility not only to produce knowledge but also to facilitate its circulation among broader educational communities. Academic forums can function as knowledge-transfer spaces in which theoretical perspectives are translated into more contextual educational discourse. In this activity, that translation occurred by positioning local culture and character values within discussions of contemporary educational transformation. 3.2 Local Wisdom and Character Education as Foundations for Sustainable Futures One of the principal substantive outcomes of the activity was the dissemination of an educational perspective that places local wisdom and character formation at the foundation of future-oriented education. The material challenged the assumption that educational globalization necessarily requires the weakening of local identity. Instead, local cultural values were presented as resources through which learners can develop ethical orientations while engaging with wider global realities. The educational material specifically highlighted values such as gotong royong, tolerance, togetherness, and culturally contextualized learning. These values can be interpreted as more than cultural heritage because they provide practical ethical orientations relevant to collective responsibility, social participation, mutual respect, and community resilience. In sustainability-oriented education, such dispositions are particularly important because ecological and social problems cannot be addressed exclusively through individual cognitive competence. This orientation also expands the meaning of environmental literacy. Environmental literacy should not be restricted to knowing ecological concepts; it can be pedagogically connected with responsibility, cooperation, ethical decision-making, and awareness of the consequences of human actions. In this respect, character education provides an ethical dimension through which sustainability knowledge can be translated into socially responsible attitudes and practices (Crawford et al., 2023; Lindsey et al., 2021). Likewise, ESD literature increasingly emphasizes cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral competencies rather than environmental knowledge alone (Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2022; González-Pérez & Ramírez- Montoya, 2022). The conceptual relationship communicated during the activity can be summarized as follows: Figure 4. Conceptual Framework of Activity This sequence should not be interpreted as an experimentally validated causal model resulting from the activity. Rather, it represents the educational framework communicated through the community engagement session and subsequently interpreted in relation to the relevant literature. This distinction is important. The contribution of the activity lies in conceptual dissemination and educator capacity building, not in claiming that participants' environmental literacy or character competence statistically increased following the presentation. Such a formulation keeps the reported result proportional to the evidence generated by the activity. 3.3 Culturally Rooted Global Citizenship as an Educational Orientation A second major result was the articulation of a culturally rooted approach to global citizenship. The presentation emphasized that engagement with globalization should not detach learners from cultural and ethical foundations. Instead, the educational orientation communicated during the activity connected four dimensions: strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility. Figure 5. Character and Global Citizenship Dimensions Introduced during the Educational Capacity-Building Activity As illustrated in Figure 5, the educational material conceptualized global citizenship as an integration of character, cultural identity, global understanding, and social responsibility. The framework is significant because it avoids framing local identity and global competence as mutually exclusive educational goals. Learners can instead be prepared to understand global developments while maintaining ethical and cultural orientations grounded in their communities. The first dimension, strong character, concerns the ethical foundation required for responsible participation in society. The second, cultural roots, emphasizes an individual's awareness of and connection with local values and cultural identity. Global understanding extends learners' perspectives beyond local contexts by encouraging awareness of interconnected contemporary challenges. Finally, social responsibility translates knowledge and values into concern for other people, communities, and the broader environment. This integrated orientation has implications for sustainability education. Environmental problems are simultaneously local and global: their manifestations are experienced within particular communities, while their causes and consequences frequently transcend geographic boundaries. Future-oriented education therefore requires learners who can understand global interdependence without losing sensitivity to local cultural and social contexts (Ardoin et al., 2023; Viana et al., 2022). For educators, the framework provides a useful conceptual lens for designing learning experiences. A global environmental issue, for example, can be connected with local practices, community values, ethical questions, and collective responsibility. Such an approach potentially makes sustainability education more culturally meaningful than presenting global issues as abstract knowledge detached from learners' immediate environments. 3.4 Contextual and Integrated Learning for Educational Transformation The third substantive result concerned the dissemination of contextual and integrated learning as a practical orientation for translating broad educational values into learning experiences. During the activity, educators were introduced to the importance of connecting curriculum content with real-life situations, cultural contexts, social interaction, and contemporary global challenges. The presentation highlighted several interconnected educational directions, including holistic curriculum development, the development of teaching materials and learning modules, intercultural and interreligious dialogue, cultural exchange, and contextual learning. These directions demonstrate that character and sustainability education need not function as isolated subjects. Instead, their values can be integrated into curriculum content and learning activities across educational contexts. Figure 6. Integrated Curriculum and Contextual Learning Orientation Presented during the Activity Figure 6 illustrates the practical orientation communicated during the educational session. The emphasis on curriculum integration is important because sustainable futures require learners to recognize relationships among environmental, cultural, ethical, social, and global issues. Fragmented instructional approaches may make it difficult for learners to perceive these interconnections. Contextual learning offers one way to address this challenge. By connecting educational content with real situations experienced by learners and communities, educators can provide opportunities for learners to interpret knowledge through meaningful social and cultural contexts. This corresponds with broader educational arguments that sustainability competencies are more effectively cultivated through active, contextual, and interdisciplinary learning than through decontextualized transmission of information (Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2022; Sakti et al., 2024). An important implication emerging from the activity is therefore the need to shift from: Content transmission ? Contextual interpretation ? Ethical reflection ? Responsible educational action Again, this sequence represents a pedagogical implication derived from the material presented, rather than an observed behavioral transformation measured among conference participants. For community engagement, this distinction strengthens the credibility of the article. The activity successfully provided educational content and a conceptual framework that educators could consider for application; however, longitudinal classroom implementation would require separate follow-up activities and empirical evaluation. 3.5 Collaboration and Implications for Sustainable Educational Practice The final substantive result was the identification of collaboration as an important supporting condition for sustainable educational transformation. The educational material presented during the activity extended responsibility for educational change beyond individual teachers and emphasized the interconnected roles of educational institutions, families, communities, technology, and government. Several practical directions were communicated, including the use of technology to support learning, community- and family-based education, training and mentoring, institutional partnerships, periodic evaluation, and collaboration between educational institutions and government. These components demonstrate that sustainability-oriented education requires an ecosystem approach rather than isolated classroom initiatives. Figure 7. Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration Orientation for Sustainable Educational Practices As represented in Figure 7, educational sustainability can be strengthened when different stakeholders contribute complementary roles. Educational institutions provide structured learning environments; educators translate values and knowledge into pedagogical experiences; families and communities provide contextual and cultural reinforcement; technology expands opportunities for access and interaction; while institutional and governmental collaboration can support continuity and broader implementation. This multi-stakeholder perspective is particularly relevant to university-led community engagement. Higher education institutions can act as knowledge partners by disseminating scholarly perspectives, facilitating professional dialogue, and connecting academic discourse with the needs of educational communities. However, sustainable impact requires continuity beyond a single academic event. Consequently, the present activity should be understood as an initial educational dissemination and capacity-building platform, rather than as evidence of completed institutional transformation. The practical implications generated from the activity are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Educational Content and Practical Implications of the Community Engagement Activity Educational Focus Key Perspective Disseminated Practical Implication for Educators Sustainability Relevance Local wisdom Local culture as an educational resource Contextualize learning through community values and experiences Strengthens culturally grounded sustainability Character education Ethics, responsibility, tolerance, and cooperation Integrate ethical reflection into learning Connects knowledge with responsible action Global citizenship Character + cultural roots + global understanding + social responsibility Connect local issues with wider global challenges Develops responsible future-oriented citizenship Contextual learning Curriculum connected with real-life situations Use relevant social, cultural, and environmental contexts Makes sustainability learning meaningful Collaboration Institution-educator- family-community- government partnership Develop collaborative educational initiatives Supports continuity and broader educational impact Educational technology Technology as a learning- support mechanism Expand access, communication, and educational resources Supports adaptable and connected learning ecosystems The table demonstrates that the main contribution of the activity was not a quantified increase in participant competency but the systematic dissemination of interconnected educational perspectives and their practical implications. Local wisdom provides contextual grounding; character education contributes an ethical dimension; global citizenship expands learners' perspectives; contextual learning translates these principles into pedagogical possibilities; and collaboration provides an ecosystem through which educational initiatives may be sustained. Taken together, the community engagement activity demonstrates the potential of academic dissemination forums to bridge scholarly discourse and educational practice. The activity brought sustainability-oriented educational issues into dialogue with local wisdom, character formation, contextual learning, and global citizenship. Its principal contribution therefore lies in providing an integrated conceptual orientation that educators and educational stakeholders can consider when developing learning practices responsive to both local cultural contexts and contemporary global challenges. At the same time, the scope of the reported outcomes needs to be interpreted appropriately. Because the activity did not employ pre-test/post-test measurement or longitudinal classroom observation, the present findings do not establish causal improvements in educators' competence, environmental literacy, or classroom practices. Instead, the evidence supports conclusions concerning activity implementation, educational content dissemination, conceptual integration, and practical educational implications. Future community engagement programs may build upon this activity through structured follow-up workshops, collaborative curriculum development, classroom implementation, and appropriate evaluation mechanisms. 4. DISCUSSION The community engagement activity highlights the relevance of connecting environmental literacy, character education, local wisdom, global citizenship, contextual learning, and sustainable futures within educator-oriented academic dissemination. The principal outcome should not be interpreted as a statistically demonstrated improvement in participant competence, but as the dissemination and synthesis of an integrated educational perspective. This distinction is particularly important because the previous version of the manuscript interpreted the activity as evidence of cognitive, affective, and behavioral transformation among educators, although such changes were not longitudinally measured. The present interpretation therefore focuses on what can be supported by the documented activity: conceptual enrichment, educational reflection, and the articulation of practical implications for sustainability-oriented education. A first important point of comparison concerns the relationship between environmental literacy and character education. Previous studies have emphasized that sustainability education should extend beyond cognitive environmental knowledge toward socio-emotional, ethical, and behavioral dimensions (Ardoin et al., 2023; Chiva-Bartoll et al., 2022; González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022). Molthan-Hill et al. (2022) similarly positioned sustainability education as requiring broader educational transformation rather than isolated environmental content, while Lindsey et al. (2021) emphasized the importance of values and responsible action alongside knowledge. The perspective disseminated in the present activity is consistent with these studies, particularly in rejecting a narrow understanding of environmental literacy as ecological knowledge alone. However, the present activity extends this discussion by explicitly connecting environmental responsibility with character formation and culturally recognizable values. Rather than approaching environmental literacy solely through ecological or scientific content, the educational material positioned responsibility, cooperation, tolerance, and ethical awareness as relevant dimensions of future-oriented education. This extension is significant because environmental problems involve not only scientific understanding but also judgments concerning responsibility, justice, collective action, and relationships between individuals and communities. Thus, the contribution of the present activity lies in translating the multidimensional sustainability orientation identified in previous research into a culturally grounded educational discourse relevant to educators. A second point of comparison concerns local wisdom as an educational resource. Sakti et al. (2024) and Siswati et al. (2026) have highlighted the relevance of contextual and locally grounded educational approaches for strengthening meaningful learning and character formation. Their work supports the broader argument that educational values become more meaningful when connected with learners' socio- cultural environments. The present community engagement activity is aligned with this contextual orientation, particularly through its emphasis on gotong royong, tolerance, togetherness, and local cultural identity as educational resources. Nevertheless, the present activity broadens the role assigned to local wisdom. Local wisdom was not presented merely as cultural content to be preserved or inserted into teaching materials. Instead, it was positioned as a conceptual bridge between local identity and global educational responsibility. This represents an important distinction from approaches in which local wisdom is treated primarily as contextual teaching content. Within the present framework, local cultural values become resources for interpreting global challenges, character formation, social responsibility, and sustainable futures. This distinction leads to a third contribution concerning global citizenship education. Existing scholarship has emphasized that contemporary education should prepare learners to understand interconnected global problems and participate responsibly within increasingly interdependent societies (Gamage et al., 2021; Viana et al., 2022). Environmental and sustainability education similarly requires learners to recognize relationships between local actions and wider planetary consequences (Ardoin et al., 2023; Sorooshian et al., 2024). The educational perspective communicated in this activity is consistent with these arguments, but adds a culturally grounded dimension by organizing global citizenship around four interconnected components: strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility. This formulation differs from approaches that might implicitly position globalization as requiring learners to move beyond or detach themselves from local identity. Instead, the activity suggests a model of culturally rooted global citizenship, in which local identity and global competence function as complementary rather than competing educational orientations. Learners may remain rooted in community values while simultaneously developing awareness of global interdependence and responsibility. The conceptual relationship can therefore be expressed as: Cultural Roots + Strong Character + Global Understanding + Social Responsibility ? Culturally Rooted Global Citizenship The importance of this formulation lies in its potential relevance for culturally diverse educational settings. Whereas international discussions of global citizenship can become conceptually distant from local educational realities, culturally rooted global citizenship offers educators an entry point through values and social practices already meaningful within their communities. In this sense, the present activity extends previous global citizenship discourse by emphasizing cultural rootedness as a foundation rather than an obstacle to global responsibility. A fourth point of comparison concerns contextual and integrated learning. Chiva-Bartoll et al. (2022) emphasized participatory and experience-oriented approaches in sustainability education, while González- Pérez and Ramírez-Montoya (2022) highlighted the need for educational innovation capable of supporting sustainability competencies. Sakti et al. (2024) likewise demonstrated the importance of contextualization in connecting educational content with learners' environments. The orientation disseminated during the FTIK IAIN Kendari activity corresponds with these studies through its emphasis on contextual learning, holistic curriculum development, educational materials, cultural dialogue, and the connection of learning with real-life situations. The present activity, however, adds an integrative relationship among environmental, cultural, ethical, and citizenship dimensions. Sustainability issues rarely belong exclusively to one discipline. Environmental degradation, for example, involves scientific knowledge but also consumption patterns, social behavior, cultural practices, public policy, ethics, and civic responsibility. Consequently, sustainability-oriented education can benefit from learning designs that cross conventional disciplinary boundaries. The present activity therefore reinforces previous arguments for contextual learning while extending them toward a more explicit integration of culture-character-environment-citizenship. This interpretation also provides an important contrast with conventional knowledge-transfer approaches. Previous professional-development research has emphasized the advantages of mentoring, collaboration, experiential learning, and sustained educator development over isolated transmission of theoretical information (Ehrhardt et al., 2021; Parker et al., 2021; Ramani et al., 2024). The previous version of this manuscript incorrectly claimed that the present activity itself implemented sustained clinical mentoring, micro-teaching, curriculum co-design, and classroom trials. The actual activity did not provide sufficient evidence to make that claim. Accordingly, the relationship with those previous studies should be interpreted differently. The present community engagement activity represents an earlier stage in the educator professional-development continuum. While Parker et al. (2021), Ehrhardt et al. (2021), and Ramani et al. (2024) support sustained professional learning and mentoring, the current activity contributes primarily through academic exposure, conceptual dissemination, and reflective engagement. This difference does not diminish the relevance of the activity; rather, it clarifies its position within a possible continuum: Academic Dissemination ? Conceptual Reflection ? Collaborative Capacity Building ? Classroom Application ? Evaluation The present activity primarily addresses the first two stages. Previous research on mentoring and sustained professional development suggests that the subsequent stages would be important if future community engagement seeks to produce and demonstrate changes in classroom practice. A fifth point of comparison concerns the role of multi-stakeholder collaboration. Sustainability education literature has increasingly emphasized collaboration, participation, and institutional support as important conditions for educational transformation (Gamage et al., 2021; González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022; Strielkowski et al., 2025). The material disseminated in the present activity is consistent with this broader ecosystem perspective, as it positioned educational institutions, educators, families, communities, technology, and government as interconnected actors. The contribution of the present activity lies in contextualizing this ecosystem perspective within educational capacity building. Sustainable educational transformation cannot reasonably be assigned to individual educators alone. Teachers operate within curriculum structures, institutional policies, family expectations, community cultures, technological environments, and government regulations. The dissemination of a collaborative perspective therefore provides an important conceptual counterbalance to teacher-centered approaches that place responsibility for educational change primarily on individual classroom practitioners. Technology constitutes another area in which the findings can be situated relative to previous research. González-Pérez and Ramírez-Montoya (2022) emphasized the relevance of educational innovation and technological environments for sustainable development, while broader contemporary literature has positioned digital technologies as mechanisms for expanding educational access, collaboration, and knowledge exchange. The present activity supports this perspective but places an important qualification on it: technology was discussed as one component within a broader educational ecosystem rather than as the central solution to sustainability challenges. This distinction has practical significance. Technology can expand access to environmental information and global perspectives, but digital access alone cannot ensure ethical reasoning, character formation, or responsible citizenship. The educational value of technology depends on the pedagogical purposes for which it is used. Therefore, the present activity suggests that technology should operate alongside contextual learning, character education, cultural awareness, and stakeholder collaboration rather than replacing these dimensions. Taken together, comparison with previous research reveals both convergence and differentiation. The activity converges with Ardoin et al. (2023), Chiva-Bartoll et al. (2022), and González-Pérez and Ramírez- Montoya (2022) in emphasizing multidimensional sustainability education; with Sakti et al. (2024) and Siswati et al. (2026) in recognizing contextual and culturally relevant learning; with Gamage et al. (2021) and Viana et al. (2022) in emphasizing responsible citizenship; and with Parker et al. (2021) and Ramani et al. (2024) in recognizing the importance of educator professional learning. The distinction of the present activity lies in bringing these strands together within a single culturally grounded orientation centered on local wisdom, character, global citizenship, and sustainable futures. This synthesis can be represented conceptually as: Local Wisdom ? Character Formation ? Culturally Rooted Global Citizenship ? Social and Environmental Responsibility ? Sustainable Futures This framework should be understood as a conceptual synthesis derived from the educational content disseminated during the activity and interpreted through previous literature, rather than as an empirically validated causal model. This qualification is essential because the previous Discussion claimed an "empirically validated Action-Mentoring Framework" despite the absence of evidence required to establish such validation. From a theoretical perspective, the contribution of the activity is therefore the articulation of a Sustainable Futures-Oriented Educational Capacity-Building Perspective. Its distinguishing feature is not the invention of entirely new constructs but the contextual integration of previously established educational concerns. Environmental literacy contributes ecological understanding; character education provides an ethical foundation; local wisdom provides cultural grounding; global citizenship expands awareness of interdependence; contextual learning provides a pedagogical bridge; and collaboration supports the broader educational ecosystem. From a practical perspective, this synthesis suggests that educators can begin sustainability-oriented learning from locally meaningful problems and cultural values rather than from abstract global discourse alone. Environmental issues can be related to responsibility, cooperation, justice, cultural practices, and civic decision-making. Likewise, global issues can be interpreted through local contexts, enabling learners to understand that global citizenship does not require abandoning cultural identity. These implications remain recommendations arising from the educational material rather than documented changes in the practices of conference participants. The comparison with previous professional-development research also identifies a clear direction for subsequent community engagement. Because sustained mentoring and experiential professional development have been emphasized by Parker et al. (2021), Ehrhardt et al. (2021), and Ramani et al. (2024), a future program could extend the present academic dissemination into workshops, collaborative material development, classroom application, and systematic evaluation. In this way, the present activity can function as the conceptual starting point for a more comprehensive capacity-building process rather than being inaccurately represented as a completed longitudinal mentoring intervention. The scope of these conclusions must nevertheless remain proportional to the evidence. The activity did not employ pre-test/post-test measurement, standardized competency instruments, or longitudinal classroom observation. Therefore, it cannot establish that participants' environmental literacy, character pedagogical competence, or teaching practices improved as a direct consequence of the session. This limitation is especially important because the previous Discussion claimed teacher transformation, clinical mentoring outcomes, and institutional change. Those conclusions have been deliberately replaced by evidence- proportionate interpretations. Future community engagement research could address this limitation through documented needs assessment, follow-up workshops, collaborative instructional design, classroom implementation, reflection, and appropriate outcome evaluation. Such a design would allow researchers to examine whether the conceptual relationships disseminated in the present activity are subsequently translated into actual pedagogical practices and whether those practices contribute to measurable changes in educator or learner outcomes. Overall, comparison with previous research suggests that the significance of this community engagement activity lies in integration rather than experimental verification. It does not replace existing ESD, environmental literacy, character education, local wisdom, or global citizenship frameworks. Instead, it brings these previously dispersed perspectives into a culturally grounded educational synthesis. In doing so, the activity demonstrates how university-led academic dissemination can serve as an initial bridge between sustainability scholarship and educational practice while creating a foundation for more intensive, evidence-based community engagement in the future. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 Conclusion This community engagement activity demonstrates the relevance of educational dissemination and academic capacity building as an initial mechanism for connecting sustainability-oriented educational discourse with the practical and cultural contexts of educators. Conducted within the International Conference at FTIK IAIN Kendari in 2025, the activity provided an academic forum for disseminating an integrated educational perspective linking environmental literacy, character education, local wisdom, global citizenship, contextual learning, and sustainable futures. The activity highlights that environmental literacy can be understood beyond ecological knowledge by connecting environmental issues with ethical responsibility, character formation, and social awareness. Within this perspective, local wisdom serves not merely as cultural content but as a contextual foundation for interpreting contemporary educational and sustainability challenges. Values such as gotong royong, tolerance, togetherness, and social responsibility provide culturally meaningful entry points through which sustainability-oriented education can be related to learners' everyday social environments. A central conceptual contribution of the activity is the articulation of culturally rooted global citizenship, characterized by the integration of strong character, cultural roots, global understanding, and social responsibility. This perspective suggests that local cultural identity and global competence should not be positioned as competing educational goals. Instead, cultural rootedness can provide an ethical foundation from which learners develop broader awareness of global interdependence and responsibility. The activity also underscores the relevance of contextual and integrated learning for translating sustainability and character values into educational practice. Connecting curriculum content with real-life situations, cultural contexts, contemporary global issues, and interdisciplinary perspectives provides a potential pedagogical pathway for making sustainability education more meaningful. Furthermore, sustainable educational transformation requires collaboration among educators, educational institutions, families, communities, technological environments, and government rather than relying exclusively on individual classroom practitioners. Overall, the contribution of this community engagement activity lies primarily in conceptual dissemination, educational reflection, and the synthesis of culturally grounded perspectives on sustainable education, rather than in experimentally measured changes in participant competence or behavior. The activity provides an initial conceptual foundation for more intensive community engagement programs that may subsequently involve collaborative instructional development, classroom implementation, mentoring, and systematic evaluation. 5.2 Recommendations Based on the implementation and scope of this community engagement activity, several recommendations are proposed. First, future academic dissemination activities should be followed by structured capacity- building workshops that enable educators to translate the concepts of local wisdom, character education, environmental literacy, and global citizenship into contextual teaching materials and learning activities. Such follow-up activities would move community engagement from conceptual dissemination toward practical pedagogical application. Second, future programs should develop a more systematic continuum of engagement consisting of needs assessment, academic dissemination, collaborative instructional design, classroom implementation, reflection, and evaluation. This approach would allow higher education institutions and educational partners to document not only the dissemination of educational ideas but also their subsequent application in authentic learning environments. Third, collaboration among higher education institutions, schools, educators, families, communities, and relevant institutional stakeholders should be strengthened to support the sustainability of educational initiatives. Technology may be incorporated to facilitate communication, resource sharing, professional collaboration, and access to sustainability-related educational content; however, technological integration should remain pedagogically directed and culturally contextualized. Fourth, subsequent community engagement research should employ appropriate evaluation procedures when seeking to determine changes in educators or learners. If future studies intend to measure environmental literacy, character pedagogical competence, attitudes, or teaching practices, researchers should establish clearly documented baseline and follow-up measurements, validated instruments, transparent participant information, and appropriate quantitative and/or qualitative analytical procedures. Longitudinal observation would also be valuable for determining whether educational concepts introduced through capacity-building activities are subsequently translated into classroom practice. Finally, future initiatives may examine the applicability of the Sustainable Futures-Oriented Educational Capacity-Building Perspective across different educational and socio-cultural settings. Rather than assuming that a single framework can be directly transferred across contexts, subsequent programs should investigate how local wisdom, environmental issues, character values, and global citizenship can be contextualized according to the cultural and educational characteristics of participating communities. This approach may strengthen the relevance, credibility, and sustainability of university-led community engagement. 6. REFERENCES Akbari, H., Yuan, L., Qian, R., Chuang, W. H., Chang, S. F., Cui, Y., & Gong, B. (2021). VATT: Transformers for Multimodal Self-Supervised Learning from Raw Video, Audio and Text. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 29, pp. 24206-24221). https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85131949557&origin=i nward Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Wheaton, M. (2023). Leveraging collective action and environmental literacy to address complex sustainability challenges. Ambio, 52(1), 30-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-022-01764-6 Birhan, W., Shiferaw, G., Amsalu, A., Tamiru, M., & Tiruye, H. (2021). Exploring the context of teaching character education to children in preprimary and primary schools. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 4(1), 100171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100171 Burke, K., & Larmar, S. (2021). Acknowledging another face in the virtual crowd: Reimagining the online experience in higher education through an online pedagogy of care. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(5), 601-615. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1804536 Chiva-Bartoll, O., & Fernández-Rio, J. (2022). Advocating for Service-Learning as a pedagogical model in Physical Education: towards an activist and transformative approach. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 27(5), 545-558. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.1911981 Dai, A. M. (2015). Semi-supervised sequence learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 2015, pp. 3079-3087). https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84965138788&origin=i nward Ehrhardt, K., & Ensher, E. A. (2021). Perceiving a calling, living a calling, and calling outcomes: How mentoring matters. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 68(2), 168-181. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000513 Gamage, K. A. A., Dehideniya, D. M. S. C. P. K., & Ekanayake, S. Y. (2021). The Role of Personal Values in Learning Approaches and Student Achievements. Behavioral Sciences, 11(7), 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11070102 González-Pérez, L. I., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2022). Components of Education 4.0 in 21st Century Skills Frameworks: Systematic Review. Sustainability, 14(3), 1493. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031493 Huang, H., & Hsin, C. Te. (2023). Environmental Literacy Education and Sustainable Development in Schools Based on Teaching Effectiveness. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 18(5), 1639-1648. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.180535 Lindsey, M., Chen, S.-R., Ben, R., Manoogian, M., & Spradlin, J. (2021). Defining Environmental Health Literacy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11626. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111626 Lopez-Martin, M., Carro, B., & Sanchez-Esguevillas, A. (2020). Application of deep reinforcement learning to intrusion detection for supervised problems. Expert Systems with Applications, 141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112963 Mahdavifar, S., Abdul Kadir, A. F., Fatemi, R., Alhadidi, D., & Ghorbani, A. A. (2020). Dynamic Android Malware Category Classification using Semi-Supervised Deep Learning. In Proceedings - IEEE 18th International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, IEEE 18th International Conference on Pervasive Intelligence and Computing, IEEE 6th International Conference on Cloud and Big Data Computing and IEEE 5th Cybe (pp. 515-522). https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC-PICom- CBDCom-CyberSciTech49142.2020.00094 Mahoney, J. L., Weissberg, R. P., Greenberg, M. T., Dusenbury, L., Jagers, R. J., Niemi, K., Schlinger, M., Schlund, J., Shriver, T. P., VanAusdal, K., & Yoder, N. (2021). Systemic social and emotional learning: Promoting educational success for all preschool to high school students. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000701 Mbalinda, S. N., Najjuma, J. N., Gonzaga, A. M., & Livingstone, K. (2024). Understanding and barriers of professional identity formation among current students and recent graduates in nursing and midwifery in low resource settings in two universities: a qualitative study. BMC Nursing, 23, 146. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01795-2 Nie, F., Cai, G., Li, J., & Li, X. (2018). Auto-weighted multi-view learning for image clustering and semi- supervised classification. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 27(3), 1501-1511. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2017.2754939 Oliver, A., Odena, A., Raffel, C., Cubuk, E. D., & Goodfellow, I. J. (2018). Realistic evaluation of semi- supervised learning algorithms. In 6th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2018 - Workshop Track Proceedings (Vol. 2018, pp. 3235-3246). https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85064839345&origin=i nward Parker, A. K., Zenkov, K., & Glaser, H. (2021). Preparing School-Based Teacher Educators: Mentor Teachers' Perceptions of Mentoring and Mentor Training. Peabody Journal of Education, 96(1), 65- 75. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2021.1877027 Ramani, S., Kusurkar, R. A., Lyon-Maris, J., Pyörälä, E., Rogers, G. D., Samarasekera, D. D., Taylor, D. C. M., & ten Cate, O. (2024). Mentorship in health professions education-an AMEE guide for mentors and mentees: AMEE Guide No. 167. Medical Teacher, 46(8), 999-1011. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2273217 Sakti, S. A., Endraswara, S., & Rohman, A. (2024). Revitalizing local wisdom within character education through ethnopedagogy apporach: A case study on a preschool in Yogyakarta. Heliyon, 10(10), e31370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31370 Sirojuddin, A., Maskuri, M., & Ghoni, J. (2025). Integration of Higher Education Curriculum with Islamic boarding schools in the perspective of multicultural Islamic Education. In Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam (Vol. 8, Number 2, pp. 265-281). https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=nTXOdCYAAAAJ&page size=100&citation_for_view=nTXOdCYAAAAJ:blknAaTinKkC Sorooshian, S. (2024). The sustainable development goals of the United Nations: A comparative midterm research review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 453, 142272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142272 Strielkowski, W., Grebennikova, V., Lisovskiy, A., & Vasileva, T. (2025). AI-driven adaptive learning for sustainable educational transformation. Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3221 Wang, X., Liu, N., Han, H., & Shi, C. (2021). Self-supervised Heterogeneous Graph Neural Network with Co- contrastive Learning. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 1726-1736). https://doi.org/10.1145/3447548.3467415 Zhang, S., Zhao, W., & Cao, Y. (2021). Toward Sustainable Professional Development: An Investigation of Informal Interactions Among Chinese Mathematics Teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 681774. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.681774 Zhang, Y., Wang, J., & Chen, B. (2021). Detecting False Data Injection Attacks in Smart Grids: A Semi- Supervised Deep Learning Approach. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 12(1), 623-634. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2020.3010510 Zhao, G., Pang, B., Xu, Z., Peng, D., & Xu, L. (2019). Assessment of urban flood susceptibility using semi- supervised machine learning model. Science of the Total Environment, 659, 940-949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.217