30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Action Competence Developed Through Student Designs for Sustainable Development in Real-Life Settings
Birthe Lund
Aalborg University, Denmark
Presenting Author: Lund, Birthe
Sustainability education researchers have argued for a pedagogy aiming at fostering students' action competence. Teaching action-oriented knowledge brings about didactical challenges as it involves the ability to shape students’ experiences through designing student learning processes and the environment as transformative learning.
This paper addresses the didactical work and student responses based on a pedagogical experiment, and it analyses the pedagogical and educational challenges that arise from putting such principles into work. The research is based on a recent experiment in a humanistic master program at a Danish PBL University.
The educational intentions were - among others - to create a framework for students to recognize themselves as value-conscious actors, as designers for learning and changing processes. The experiment involved interdisciplinary collaboration with students and faculty from Applied Philosophy and the department of Student Entrepreneurship.
The paper evaluates and analyses how students’ outcome and engagement is related to their conceptualization of sustainability, assessment of the course, and professional significance in the subject. In short, how they create meaning of their experiences based on empirical data from papers written by the students; student evaluations; questionnaires and focus group interviews.
The research indicates that students and lectures found sustainability to be a complex issue to address as it involves habits, power relations, cultural as well as ethical issues, etc. Actions to support sustainable development can be both contradictory and have unintended consequences and the interconnected nature of the challenges and issues calls for external collaboration to accomplish sustainable solutions. To address this complexity, the experiment included student’s practice /internship experiences to support their development of action competence. It was compulsory for the students to create a design, which explicitly addressed sustainability issues based on their internship. Students design served as an assessment criterion for their examination.
The students investigated and reflected on the difference they experienced between the “exposed theories” about sustainability and “theory in use” at the workplace. They selected this gap as a starting point and chose primarily to incorporate design strategies aimed to motivate employees and/or managers to develop their interest and engagement in change processes. Student designs often mirrored theories and experiments they had experienced in class.
The research is informed by critical-constructivist didactics (Klafki) and by pragmatism (Dewey and Mezirow). They emphasize, from different perspectives, the educational and didactical impact of content selection, students' experiential actions and reflections, which together may contribute to the fostering of sustainability education ideals. Klafki’s educational philosophy has a clear democratic and critical approach: For Bildung to take place, the acquisition of knowledge and subsequent problem solving concerning the object must involve student engagement and active opening and its being opened for a content in the Klakian sense. ( Klafki, W. (2002).
Action Competence Approach´ frames an ideal approach to students Bildung because students must be able, willing, and qualified to act. ( Mogensen, F., & Schnack, K. (2010)( Breiting, S. & Schnack, K. (2009) Especially willingness to act is a challenge to address within higher education, as students are primarily expected to focus on gaining skills and measurable qualifications.
The development of action competence cannot be reduced to a cognitive dimension of knowledge as emotions are involved in creating a desire to change conditions (Katrien Van Poeck et.other 2023) (Lund, B. 2017) (Lund, B. 2021). Thus, from an ethical and didactical point of view, developing sustainable action competence is open to criticism, as will act implies transformative learning processes with the risk of ruining student’s self-determination.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study is inspired by Wolfgang Klafki's critical-constructivist pedagogy, which is concerned with the "current educational reality and context of meaning" (Klafki, 2002, p. 29). In this understanding, didactics is closely linked to action research, as the goal of any pedagogical experiment is to change/improve a given pedagogical/didactic practice. Methodologically, I am inspired by pragmatics and its problem-oriented approach and integrate several methodological approaches. As a researcher in my own practice, I have a special position. This implies a research advantage in terms of familiarity with the subject, but it may also cause a blindness.
The basic assumption in this study is that students must experience learning as meaningful and therefore didactics must be concerned with students' meaning-making - both contextually and normatively, as a condition for the development of action competence.
Content analysis addresses the following questions:
Which concepts do students choose to incorporate into their design and how does it influence their understanding?
What does the concrete interaction with their environment mean for the development of their competence to act and how does it influence their reflections on their own possibilities to act and to learn?
To understand how students create meaning of their experiences in this context, mixed methods are used.
The empirical data
The empirical material in this study consists of both questionnaires and written material, including student assignment answers and group interviews.
The number of students in the study amount to 46 (first cohort) and 48 (second cohort). A survey conducted in 2021 (first cohort) and 2023 (second cohort) and the course's semester evaluations (Semester Evaluation 2021 and Semester Evaluation 2023) constitute the quantitative part, while 18 exam papers in anonymized form constitute the qualitative part (2021) as well as a number of focus group interviews (2023). The response rate was 42%. In addition to assessments of questions in categories, the survey also contains responses in the form of text. The semester evaluation of the study is a standard evaluation of modules in the semester. It has a response rate of 52%. Based on the distributions, I judge that the data from both survey is representative of the first cohort.
The tasks consist of an individual written assignment of between 8 and 10 standard pages. Here students must describe how sustainability is addressed in their design practice, and based on a problem formulation, come up with a theoretically well-argued design for addressing the problem.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe requirement to thematize sustainability in their practice as a basis for a design requires students to concretize the concept and form their own ideas about how the sustainability requirements could be met.
The aim of this teaching activity was to substantiate, anchor and make sense of an abstract concept such as sustainability. Some students were not able transfer experience from internship into their design and missed the learning associated with reflecting in depth on authentic sustainability challenges. This is problematic in relation to the development of action competences, as they further miss an evaluative response to their own initiatives and thus also a possible re-examination and transformation of their own understanding.
The students address and discuss value issues particularly related to ethical and moral action based on the forward-looking premise of the Brundtland Report. They also highlighted a process-oriented approach leading to changes in behavior, attitudes and values, for the benefit of both the climate and one's own life.
Critical reflection on possible asymmetrical power relations between actors is rarely thematized.
They aim to develop and support democratic and co-creative processes in which all stakeholders are equally involved in a common problem identification and problem definition. This approach can be justified by a professional and academic socialization at a PBL-based university with the ideal of a participant-led and problem-defined project work.
Participating in this mandatory course gave some students the opportunity to broaden their understanding of further reflection on the concept of sustainability, including what impact it has or can have on their professional practice and on their future. Thus, most respondents considered sustainability as a relevant topic for their future practice and indicated that they gained new knowledge about sustainability.
ReferencesBreiting, S. & Schnack, K. (2009): Uddannelse for Bæredygtig Udvikling i danske skoler – Erfaringer fra de første TUBU-skoler i Tiåret for UBU. Forskningsprogram for Miljø- og Sundhedspædagogik DPU – Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitetsskole, Aarhus Universitet
Klafki, W. (2002). Skoleteori, skoleforskning og skoleudvikling i politisk-samfundsmæssig kontekst. Århus: Klim (Schultheorie, Schulforschung und Schulentwicklung im politisch-gesellschaftlichen) Kontex
Lund, B. (2021). Is Character Quality essential to the development of a “sustainability pedagogy” within a PBL learning community? I: Scholkmann, A., Telléus, P. K., Ryberg, T., Hung, W., Andreasen, L. B., Kofoed, L. B., Christiansen, N. L. S., & Nielsen, S. R. (Eds.) (2021). Transforming PBL Through Hybrid Learning Models: Timely Challenges and Answers in a (Post)-Pandemic Perspective and Beyond. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. International Research Symposium on PBL
Lund, B. (2020). Bæredygtighedspædagogik og handlekompetence – et velkommen tilbage til 70erne? Forskning og Forandring. 3, 2, pp. 47 -68.
Lund, B. (2017). Managing student`s emotion in order to foster innovation: View on entrepreneurship education in school. I T. Chemi, S. Grams Davy & B. Lund (Red.), Innovative pedagogy: recognition of emotions and creativity in education. (pp. 91–105). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher
Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education 1(1), pp. 58-63.
Mezirow, J. (2006). An overview of transformative learning. In P. Sutherland & J. Crowther (Eds.), Lifelong learning: Concepts and contexts (pp. 24-38). New York: Routledge
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, 59-74.
Van Poeck , K et al (2023) Teaching action-oriented knowledge on sustainability issues, Environmental Education Research. (Latest article not yet published in a volume/issue)
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
An Action-Oriented Approach to ESD – Students Influencing Society and Its Relationship with Action Competence
Ane Eir Torsdottir1, Daniel Olsson2, Astrid Sinnes1
1NMBU - Norwegian University of Life Scie, Norway; 2Karlstad University
Presenting Author: Torsdottir, Ane Eir
Education for sustainable development (ESD) is becoming increasingly important as a response to the urgent societal and environmental problems the world is facing. ESD is considered as a holistic concept as complex issues can only be effectively addressed by integrating multiple perspectives and relationships (Mogren et al., 2018; UNESCO, 2014). Recognizing this, UNESCO (2020) recommends a whole school approach (WSA), which is a way for schools to transform their practice towards ESD (Shallcross & Robinson, 2008).
Students cannot just learn about sustainable development, they should get to experience and take part in concrete and authentic actions for sustainability (Sinakou et al., 2019). By improving students' own environments, the WSA aims to enhance students' learning about societal needs (Mogren et al., 2018). Because of this there should be an action-oriented approach to ESD, where students get experiences with performing concrete actions to contribute to solutions to concrete and authentic, local sustainability issues through the ESD teaching at their schools (Sinakou et al., 2019).
Schools are responsible for empowering students to address the world's extensive and complex societal challenges. Consequently, ESD provide students opportunities to develop their action competence for sustainability (Sass et al., 2020). There are many interpretations of what action competence is (Sass et al., 2020). In their definition, Sass et al. (2020) argue that action competence consists of three main elements: 1) Knowledge of the problem and its action possibilities, 2) Confidence in one’s own influence, and 3) Willingness to act. For students to develop action competence around sustainable issues, they should be allowed to take responsibility for their own learning and tackle sustainable development problems (Sinakou et al., 2019).
In the face of difficulties, people have little motivation to act if they do not believe they can perform the task, or if they believe the task will not yield the desired result (Sass et al., 2020). Thus, the experience of participating and having an impact at school and in society can help students develop action competence. This was supported by Torsdottir et al. (In manuscript) who found that student participation and influence can be important for developing action competence. However, their research looked at student participation as a way of influencing within the school setting, and not on how students school experiences in participating in society can help students develop action competence.
Although the literature suggests that an action-oriented approach can help students develop action competence, few studies have focused on this aspect of the teaching when measuring action competence as a outcome of ESD (e.g. Olsson et al., 2022). Because of the importance of action-oriented approaches to ESD, the current study focuses on an action-oriented approach with students getting experiences in influencing society. For small children this should be about actions towards their schools or schoolyards, but as they get older they can take a more active role in society (Chawla & Cushing, 2007). Chawla and Cushing (2007) argue that teaching is not only about how to teach young people to act favorably to the environment, but also how to teach them to do it in an effective and strategic way. Strategic actions can be pressuring businesses or municipality departments to become more environmentally friendly, as that has a much larger effect that what you can contribute through private actions. Due to this, the current study will focus on one part of action-orientation, namely school experiences in influencing society.
The research question is:
What is the relationship between students’ school experiences in participating in society and their self-perceived action competence for sustainability?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study is based on a questionnaire conducted on 902 upper secondary school students in three upper secondary schools in Norway. All schools in the study were part of a larger project called ‘ESD in Practice’, a collaboration between the teacher education at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, a county municipality and four upper secondary schools working together to develop a focus on ESD throughout the whole school. In the current study, we collected questionnaire data to investigate the effects on students’ school experiences in influencing society and their self-perceived action competence.
Two scales have been used in the study. The School Experiences in Influencing Society (SEISS) scale is a single-factor model developed by the authors to tap into if students got to experience how to affect for example politicians or businesses through the school work. The self-perceived action competence for sustainability (SPACS) scale was developed by (Olsson et al., 2020) and was created to catch the three factors in the definition of action competence made by Sass et al. (2020).
The participants answered to the items in both scales on a five-point Likert scale that ranged from completely disagree to completely agree.
We first imported the dataset to IBM SPSS Statistics version 27, where we performed the data preparation and analyzed the data using descriptive statistics. Then the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for our two theoretical models was performed in Mplus 8. Lastly, we performed a structural equation modelling (SEM) to investigate the relationship between the latent factor measuring school experiences in influencing society and the three latent factors in the self-perceived action competence for sustainability model. The CFAs and SEM-analysis were performed using a robust maximum likelihood (MLR) estimator, and missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood (FIML) methodology (Graham, 2009). To evaluate the CFA models, we looked at the chi-square values and four goodness-of-fit indices with the cut-off values recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999), that is (RMSEA) < 0.06, CFI and TLA > 0.95 and SRMR < 0.08.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe CFA had good model fit for both the SEISS model and the SPACS. All standardized loadings in the latent factors were higher than 0,6. The SEM analyses used to test for a relation between the two models also had good model fit (χ2 (98, N = 902) = 306.615, p < .001, RMSEA = 0.049 [.042, .055], SRMR = 0.045, CFI = 0.963, and TLI = 0.955). The SEM-analysis between school experiences in influencing society and the students self-perceived action competence showed a significant positive relation of 0.397 for Knowledge of action possibilities, 0.344 for Confidence in one’s own influence, and 0,186 for Willingness to act.
The results support previous research saying that an action-oriented approach where students can act on sustainability issues can help students develop action competence (Olsson et al., 2022; Sinakou et al., 2019). Through participatory approaches, participants can get opportunities on several fronts, including exercising their democratic rights and participating in decision-making and actions that promote justice, equality, and well-being for all (Reid et al., 2008). Thus, it might not always be enough to participate within the school. Participating in participatory action-oriented approaches in the students’ local communities can help students be engaged in defining what sustainability means to them in their local contexts (Fischer, 2012). By giving students opportunities to participate in and influence society, they can develop a belief that their actions matter, and help them develop action competence. At ECER in Glasgow, we invite to discussions on the relation between self-perceived action competence and the school experiences in influencing society as well as benefits and shortcomings of our findings.
ReferencesChawla, L., & Cushing, D. F. (2007). Education for strategic environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 13(4), 437-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701581539
Fischer, D. (2012). Framing Student Participation in Education for Sustainable Development. In.
Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annu Rev Psychol, 60, 549-576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530
Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Mogren, A., Gericke, N., & Scherp, H.-Å. (2018). Whole school approaches to education for sustainable development: a model that links to school improvement. Environmental Education Research, 25(4), 508-531. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1455074
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, 1-25. 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
Reid, A., Jensen, B. B., Nikel, J., & Simovska, V. (2008). Participation and Learning: Developing Perspectives on Education and the Environment, Health and Sustainability. In A. Reid, B. B. Jensen, J. Nikel, & V. Simovska (Eds.), Participation and Learning: Perspectives on Education and the Environment, Health and Sustainability (pp. 1-18). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6416-6_1
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
Shallcross, T., & Robinson, J. (2008). Sustainability Education, Whole School Approaches, and Communities of Action. In A. Reid, B. B. Jensen, J. Nikel, & V. Simovska (Eds.), Participation and Learning Perspectives on Education and the Environment, Health and Sustainability (pp. 299-320). Springer.
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 (Basel, Switzerland), 11(21), 5994. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215994
Torsdottir, A. E., Olsson, D., & Sinnes, A. (In manuscript). Student participation in a whole school approach as a way for developing action competence for sustainable development.
UNESCO. (2014). UNESCO Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development.
UNESCO. (2020). Education for Sustainable Development. A roadmap (UNESCO, Ed.). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802.locale=en
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Assessing and Fostering Students' Action Competence to Sustain Insect Biodiversity
Peter Lampert, Daniel Olsson, Niklas Gericke
Karlstad University, Sweden
Presenting Author: Lampert, Peter
The decline of insect biodiversity is a current environmental issue, which is also highly relevant for education. The observed rapid decline is alarming, due to insects’ critical role for the functioning of most ecosystems (Sánchez-Bayo & Wyckhuys, 2019). The decline affects humans directly through ecosystem services provided by insects, such as pollination. Despite several ongoing initiatives, we have not solved the problem of insect declines yet and urgent calls persist to educate a broad public about these declines and to engage people in taking actions that sustain insect biodiversity (Cardoso et al., 2020). Mitigating insect decline is key to reach the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Educating about insect declines and about ways to sustain insect biodiversity is therefore highly important for environmental education and education for sustainable development.
Unfortunately, social and educational research in the field of insect conservation is limited (Knapp et al., 2021; Ruck & Mannion, 2021), despite several ongoing initiatives to support pollinating insects. Existing research does not consider the complexity of the problem and the diversity of insects sufficiently, but focus often on specific groups of pollinators such as honeybees (Schönfelder & Bogner, 2018). In particular, we lack educational research on learners’ competences to support insects, and research on how these competences develop through education. However, such research is paramount to provide evidence for the design and advancement of educational settings in formal and informal environmental education.
The framework of Action Competence could provide a promising way forward for educational research and for the design of approaches focusing on individual competences. The idea of Action competence origins from the fields of environmental and health education (Jensen & Schnack, 1997) and describes peoples’ ability to act toward solving controversial problems. It combines the three dimensions of action-oriented knowledge, the confidence to take actions, and the willingness to take actions. Action competence was recently applied to the issue of sustainable development (Sass et al., 2020), which fits well to sustaining insect biodiversity as an integral part for achieving a sustainable future. However, the existing action competence framework is more general in its focus and has not been applied to the specific topic of sustaining insect biodiversity before.
Therefore, the presented educational research project aims to apply this idea of action competence to the issue of sustaining insect biodiversity, and eventually investigate and foster learners’ competences to take actions. The project includes four interrelated research objectives (RO); (1) the development of a theoretical framework of action competence for insect conservation; (2) the development of research instruments to investigate the self-perceived action competence; (3) the design of an intervention to foster learners’ action competence; and (4) the investigation of changes of the self-perceived action competence through the designed intervention. The presentation at ECER will provide a short overview on the results from all four objectives, with a focus on RO (3) and (4).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe project uses Educational Design Research (Van den Akker et al., 2006) as an overarching theoretical approach to integrate all four objectives. To reach RO 1, the general concept of action competence (Sass et al., 2020) is combined with the results from an analysis of current papers and initiatives in the field of insect conservation. The resulting new framework builds the basis for the development of a corresponding quantitative scale to measure the self-perceived level of action competence to sustain insect biodiversity (RO 2). The scale asks respondents to rate their personal agreement to statements on knowledge, confidence and willingness to take specific actions on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from fully disagree (1) to fully agree (5). The reliability and the validity of the scale were piloted as part of the project and analyzed using established methods, such as assessing Cronbach’s α and performing Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Field, 2018; Hair et al., 2010). The scale was piloted with 180 students from grades 7 and 8 in Sweden (age 13-15), and the analysis showed a high reliability of the scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.964 for the full scale and Cronbach’s α > 0.89 for the subscales of knowledge, confidence, and willingness). The confirmatory factor analysis underlined the good quality of the research instrument (RMSEA=0.05; CFI=0.985; TLI=0.984).
Eventually, this scale was used to assess the impact of a newly developed teaching intervention in grade 7 (age 13-14) of compulsory schools in Sweden (RO 3 & 4) in a pre-post design. The intervention builds on the new theoretical framework and aims to develop learners’ action competence for insect conservation. The initial theory-based design of the intervention builds on the approach of Sinakou et al. (2019) to design powerful learning interventions to develop action competence for sustainability. Following the idea of educational design research, the intervention is tested and adapted in a cyclic approach. A first cycle took place in 2022 with 12 school classes from grade 7. The focus of the investigation is on the development of the self-perceived action competence, but students’ attitudes towards insects are investigated as well using a semantic differential (Schönfelder & Bogner, 2017). Data analysis is ongoing until spring 2023, but results of the performed paired samples t-test from a subsample of students (n=102) are already available at time of submission.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsRO 3 – Intervention: The resulting intervention includes a variety of materials and lesson plans focusing on four core topics: 1) the importance of insects, 2) insect decline and its causes, 3) actions to sustain insect biodiversity, and 4) observing insects as citizen scientists. A central part of the intervention is that students plan and conduct their own actions to help insects. A second core aspect is the use of the citizen science platform iNaturalist that provides students’ with the possibility to track insect diversity in their environment.
RO 4 – Assessing changes of the self-perceived action competence and attitudes towards insects: The paired sample t-tests show a positive significant difference in the self-perceived action competence between pre-test (M = 3.143, SD = 0.611) and post-test (M = 3.771, SD = 0.715); t(101) = 10.028, p < 0.001 with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.937). The biggest effects were related to the self-perceived knowledge, which was rather low in the pre-test. This indicates that students lack the relevant knowledge to take specific action, even when they are willing to do so. Students’ attitudes changed significantly as well, leading to more positive attitudes in the post-test. The biggest changes were observable in items connected to the importance of insects.
All outcomes from the project (framework, scale, intervention, outcomes from the pre-post analysis) are transferable and applicable for other European countries and educational settings. The findings show that students are in need of specific knowledge on taking actions to support insects and that a corresponding teaching intervention can contribute to raise learners self-perceived levels of competence to take actions. The developed framework and scale contribute to advance educational research in the underexplored field of education about insect biodiversity decline as a relevant part of environmental and sustainability education.
ReferencesCardoso, P., Barton, P. S., Birkhofer, K., Chichorro, F., Deacon, C., Fartmann, T., Fukushima, C. S., Gaigher, R., Habel, J. C., & Hallmann, C. A. (2020). Scientists' warning to humanity on insect extinctions. Biological Conservation, 242, 108426.
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics 5th ed. In: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental education research, 3(2), 163-178.
Knapp, J. L., Phillips, B. B., Clements, J., Shaw, R. F., & Osborne, J. L. (2021). Socio‐psychological factors, beyond knowledge, predict people’s engagement in pollinator conservation. People and Nature, 3(1), 204-220.
Ruck, A., & Mannion, G. (2021). Stewardship and beyond? Young people’s lived experience of conservation activities in school grounds. Environmental education research, 27(10), 1502-1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1964439
Sánchez-Bayo, F., & Wyckhuys, K. A. G. (2019). Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers. Biological Conservation, 232, 8-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.020
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.
Schönfelder, M. L., & Bogner, F. X. (2017). Two ways of acquiring environmental knowledge: By encountering living animals at a beehive and by observing bees via digital tools. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 723-741.
Schönfelder, M. L., & Bogner, F. X. (2018). How to sustainably increase students’ willingness to protect pollinators. Environmental education research, 24(3), 461-473.
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.
Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Educational design research (Vol. 2). Routledge London.
|
