Education for Sustainable Development from a Comparative Subject Didactic Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/sammenlignendefagdidaktik.v2025i8.157361Nøgleord:
Comparative Didactics, Education for Sustainable Development, Multidisciplinary, Subject Didactics, Sustainability EducationResumé
Education for sustainable development (ESD) is an approach to teaching that aims to develop students’ readiness to take action for sustainability. In policy and research, ESD is described as a generic progressive teaching approach with a holistic content that includes subject matter related to environmental, social and economic issues. Consequently, ESD is a multifaceted teaching approach, and a question that then arises is how teachers, who are trained in one or a few subjects, can contribute to the different facets of ESD. In this article, ESD is viewed from a subject didactic perspective. Based on empirical studies it is shown how teachers from different subject areas (social sciences, natural sciences and linguistics) understand ESD, and what they can contribute to the different facets of ESD based on their subject traditions. Also, how ESD can be strengthened by relating ESD to subject didactic perspectives based on examples from language and biology teaching is provided. The article argues that different subject teachers possess different competences based on their subject didactic traditions that in combination can lead to greater opportunities to develop students’ action competencies for sustainability compared to general teaching approaches where these disciplinary competencies are not considered.
Referencer
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2006). Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. In Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, Vol. 5, pp. 1–43. Information Age Publishing.
Bianchi, G., Pisiotis, U., Cabrera, M., Punie, Y., & Bacigalupo, M. (2022). The European sustainability competence framework. Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2760/13286
Boeve‐de Pauw, J. Gericke, N., Olsson, D., & Berglund, T. (2015). The effectiveness of education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 7(11), 15693-15717. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71115693
Borg, C., Gericke, N., Höglund, H., & Bergman, E. (2012). The barriers encountered by teachers implementing education for sustainable development: discipline bound differences and teaching traditions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(2), 185-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2012.699891
Borg, C., Gericke, N., Höglund, H. O., & Bergman, E. (2014). Subject-and experience-bound differences in teachers’ conceptual understanding of sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 526-551. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.833584
Breiting, S., & Mogensen, F. (1999). Action competence and environmental education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 29(3), 349-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764990290305
Costanza, R., Alperovitz, G., Daly, H., Farley, J., Franco, C., Jackson, T., Kubiszewski, I., Schor, J. & Victor, P. (2013). Building a sustainable and desirable economy-in-society-in-nature. ANU Press: Canberra, Australia. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hgz53
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR).
Council of Europe (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR). Retrieved from: https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989
Education, T. S. N. A. f. (2011). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the leisure-time centre 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.skolverket.se/2.3894/in_english/publications
Eilam E, Trop T (2010) ESD pedagogy: A guide for the perplexed. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(1), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958961003674665
Ennis, R.H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018003004
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. The California Academic Press.
Sammenlignende Fagdidaktik 8, 2025 https://tidsskrift.dk/sammenlignendefagdidaktik
Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE). (2014). National core curriculum for basic education 2014. Helsinki: National Board of Education.
Gericke, N. (2022). Teaching for the Anthropocene: Bildung-oriented education for sustainable development in a subject-specific curriculum. In E. Krogh, A. Qvortrup, & S. Ting Graf (Eds.), Bildung, knowledge, and global challenges in education, 53-69. Taylor & Francis.
Gericke, N., Manni, A., & Stagell, U. (2020). The green school movement in Sweden – past, present and future. In A. Gough, J.C. Lee & E.P.K. Tsang (Eds.), Green schools movements around the world: Stories of impact on Education for Sustainable Development, pp. 309-332. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46820-0_17
Giddings, B., Hopwood, B., & O’Brien, G. (2002). Environment, economy and society: Fitting them together into sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 10(4), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.199
Gough, S. (2002). Right answers or wrong problems? Towards a theory of change for environmental learning. Trumpeter, 18(1), 1–15
Hopkins C, & McKeown, R. (2002). Education for sustainable development: an international perspective. Education and sustainability: Responding to the global challenge 13, 13-24.
Jensen, B. & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education, Environmental Education Research, 3(2), 163-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462970030205
Juuti, K. & Gericke, N. (2022). Transforming circular economy principles into teachers’ powerful professional knowledge. In B., Hudson, N., Gericke, N., C., Olin-Scheller, & M. Stolare (Eds.) International perspectives on knowledge and quality: Implications for innovation in teacher education, 127-144. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kaplan, S., & Kaplan, R. (2009). Creating a larger role for environmental psychology: The Reasonable Person Model as an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 329-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.005
Kopnina, H. (2014). Revisiting education for sustainable development (ESD): Examining anthropocentric bias through the transition of environmental education to ESD. Sustainable Development, 22(2), 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.529
Krogh, E., Qvortrup, A & Graf, S. T. (Red.) (2022). Bildung, knowledge, and global challenges in education. Didaktik and curriculum in the anthropocene era. Routledge.
Lai, E.R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson's Research Reports, 6(1), 40-41.
Lampert, P., Goulson, D., Olsson, D., Piccolo, J., & Gericke, N. (2023a). Sustaining insect biodiversity through action competence—An educational framework for transformational change. Biological Conservation, 283, 110094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110094
Lampert, P., Olsson, D., & Gericke, N. (2023b). A research instrument to monitor people's competence to sustain insect biodiversity: the Self-Perceived Action Competence for Insect Conservation scale (SPACIC). International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2023.2281931
Sammenlignende Fagdidaktik 8, 2025 https://tidsskrift.dk/sammenlignendefagdidaktik
Lampert, P., Pany, P., & Gericke, N. (2023c) Hands-on learning with 3D-printed flower models. Journal of Biological Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2023.2282427
Liddicoat, A.J. (2014). Pragmatics and intercultural mediation in intercultural language learning. Intercultural Pragmatics, 11(2), 259–277. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2014-0011
Lijmbach. S., van Arcken, M.M., van Koppen C.S.A. et al. (2002). Your view of nature is not mine!: Learning about pluralism in the classroom. Environmental Education Resarch, 8(2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220128202
Maijala, M., Gericke, N., Kuusalu, S. R., Heikkola, L. M., Mutta, M., Mäntylä, K., & Rose, J. (2023). Conceptualising transformative language teaching for sustainability and why it is needed. Environmental Education Research, 30(3), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2167941
Marcinkowski, T. & Reid, A. (2019). Reviews of research on the attitude-behavior relationship and their implications for future environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 25(4), 459-471. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1634237
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2018). Conducting educational design research. Routledge.
McPeck, J. (1981). Critical thinking and education. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Minestry of Education (2017). Overordnet del – verdier og prinsipper for grunnopplæringen [Overarching part – Values and principles of primary and secondary education].
Mogensen, F. & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new ‘discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620903504032
Munkebye, E., Gericke, N. (2022). Primary school teachers’ understanding of critical thinking in the context of education for sustainable development. In B., Puig, & M.P., Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.) Critical thinking in biology and environmental education – facing challenges in a post-truth world, 249-266. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92006-7_14
Nielsen, F. V. (2012). Fagdidaktik som integrativt relationsfelt. Cursiv, 9, 11–32. Retrieved from: https://dpu.au.dk/forskning/publikationer/cursivskriftserie/2012-9/
Nilsen, H.R. (2010). The joint discourse ‘reflexive sustainable development’ – from weak towards strong sustainable development. Ecological Economics 69, 495–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.011
Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press.
OECD (2002). Definition and Selection of Competencies (DeSeCo): theoretical and conceptual foundations. Directorate for Education, Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, Education Committee. https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/41529556.pdf
Öhman, J. (2004). Moral perspective in selective traditions of environmental education. In P. Wickenberg, H. Axelsson, L. Fritzén, G. Helldén, & J. Öhman (Eds.), Learning to change our world (pp. 33-57). Studentlitteratur.
Sammenlignende Fagdidaktik 8, 2025 https://tidsskrift.dk/sammenlignendefagdidaktik
Olsson, D., Gericke, N., & Boeve-de Pauw, J. (2022). The effectiveness of education for sustainable development revisited–a longitudinal study on secondary students’ action competence for sustainability. Environmental Education Research, 28(3), 405-429. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2033170
Olsson, D., Gericke, N., Sass, W. & Boeve-de Pauw, J. (2020). Self-perceived action competence for sustainability: the theoretical grounding and empirical validation of a novel research instrument, Environmental Education Research, 26 (5), 742–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1736991
Oulton, C., Day, V., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. (2004). Controversial issues - teachers' attitudes and practices in the context of citizenship education. Oxford Review of Education, 30(4), 489-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498042000303973
Pezzey, J. C. (2017). Sustainability constraints versus “optimality” versus intertemporal concern, and axioms versus data. In The Economics of Sustainability (pp. 263-281). Routledge.
Raworth, K. (2017). A doughnut for the Anthropocene: Humanity’s compass in the 21st century. The Lancet Planetary Health, 1(2), e48-e49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30028-1
Rieckmann, M. (2018). Learning to transform the world – key competencies in ESD. In: Leicht, A., Heiss, J. and Byun, W.J. (Eds.). Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development. UNESCO, Paris, pp. 39-59. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002614/261445E.pdf
Sass, W., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Olsson, D., Gericke, N., De Maeyer, S, & van Petegem, P. (2020). Redefining action competence: The case of sustainable development. The Journal of Environmental Education, 51(4), 292-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2020.1765132
Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities, OUP Catalogue. Oxford University Press
Scheie, E., Berglund, T., Munkebye, E., Lyngved Staberg, R., & Gericke, N. (2022). Læreplananalyse av kritisk tenking og bærekraftig utvikling i norsk og svensk læreplan. Acta Didactica Norden, 16(2), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.9095
Sinakou, E., Donche, V., Boeve-de Pauw, J. & Van Petegem, P. (2019). Designing powerful learning environments in education for sustainable development: A conceptual framework. Sustainability, 11(21), 5994. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215994
Sleurs, W. (Ed.) (2008). Competencies for ESD (Education for Sustainable Development) teachers. A framework to integrate ESD in the curriculum of teacher training institutes. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/esd/inf.meeting.docs/EGonInd/8mtg/CSCT%20Handbook_Extract.pdf
Smyth, J.C. (2008). Environment and education: A view of a changing scene. In A. Reid & W. Scott (Eds.), Researching Education and the Environment, pp. 1–30. Routledge.
Sterling, S. (2010). Living in the Earth: Towards an education for our times. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 4(2), 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/097340821000400208
Sund, P., & Gericke, N. (2020). Teaching contributions from secondary school subject areas to education for sustainable development – a comparative study of science, social science and
Sammenlignende Fagdidaktik 8, 2025 https://tidsskrift.dk/sammenlignendefagdidaktik
language teachers. Environmental Education Research, 26(6), 772-794.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1754341
Sund, P., Gericke, N., & Bladh, G. (2020). Educational content in cross-curricular ESE teaching and a model to discern teacher’s teaching traditions. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 14(1), 78-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408220930706
Uitto, A., & Saloranta, S. (2017). Subject Teachers as Educators for Sustainability: A Survey Study. Education Sciences, 7(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010008
UN DESA (2023). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023: Special Edition - July 2023. New York, USA: UN DESA. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2023
UNECE (2012). Learning for the Future: Competences in Education for Sustainable Development, Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/esd/ESD_Publications/Competences_Publication.pdf
UNESCO. (2017). UNESCO Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO.
Vare, P. (2022). The competence turn. In Competences in education for sustainable development: critical perspectives, pp. 11-18. Springer International Publishing.
Vare, P., Lausselet, N., & Rieckmann, M. (2022). In Competences in education for sustainable development, pp. 3-10. Springer International Publishing.
Vare, P., Scott, W. (2007). Learning for a change: exploring the relationship between education and sustainable development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(2), 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/097340820700100209
Wals, A., & Kieft, G. (2010). Education for Sustainable Development: Research Overview. Stockholm: Edita 2010.
Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., & Redman, C. L. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability science, 6, 203-218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0132-6
Willingham, D. T. (2008). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review, 109(4), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Tidsskriftet og forfatterne har ophavsret.
