30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Quality in Education for Sustainability Teaching (QUEST): What is it, and (how) can it be measured?
Wanda Sass1,2, Daniel Olsson1, Jelle Boeve-de Pauw3, Michiel van Harskamp3, Niklas Gericke1
1Karlstad University; 2University of Antwerp; 3Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University
Presenting Author: Sass, Wanda
With heat waves, droughts, flooding, and hurricanes occurring more frequently on a global scale, sustainability is high on the agendas of policy makers and scholars alike (e.g. European Commission, 2019; United Nations, 2019; Kelly and Clarke, 2016). Sustainability has been defined as a process of mutually interacting socio-cultural, environmental, and socio-economic perspectives (United Nations, 2015). Policy documents put forward Education for Sustainability (EfS), as an adequate educational approach to prepare current and future generations for becoming change-makers capable of taking on sustainability challenges (e.g. UNESCO, 2017). EfS is a democratic educational approach that aims to empower students so they are capable of making their own decisions, rather than pushing them towards uncritical social reproduction (Audigier, 2000; Jickling & Wals, 2008). Currently, evidence of the effectiveness of Education for Sustainability was found (e.g. Olsson et al., 2022; Sass et al., submitted).
Education for sustainabilty
EfS consists of a holistic approach to sustainability problems (Stables & Scott, 2002; United Nations, 2019). Moreover, different perspectives are encouraged when developing actions that aim to contribute to sustainability (Van Poeck et al., 2019). Finally, EfS is oriented towards active student participation and action-taking in order to contribute to solving real-world problems (Sinakou et al., 2022; Varela-Losada et al., 2016). Consensus on the central learning outcome of this type of education is growing, with the concept of action competence appearing in the forefront of the academic discourse (Sass et al., 2020). However, so far no study has investigated more into detail how these different sub units of EfS relate to each other and if these differ according to the national and educational settings in which they occur. This research gap is addressed in this study.
In order to implement EfS, teachers need to employ a complex set of professional competences. However, evidence suggests that they often find themselves ill-equipped to take on this formidable task (Taylor et al., 2019; Boeve-de Pauw et al., 2022). The need for a tool that allows monitoring of quality education for sustainability teaching is apparent. Such a tool can allow us as a research community to study how EfS is put into practice and develops as teachers e.g. participate in (continuous) professional development. It may also be relevant for teachers to reflect on their current and desired practices concerning EfS.
The current study aims to propose and operationalise a Quality Education for Sustainability Teaching (QUEST) framework and research tool (QUEST-Q). Three research questions are central in the current study:
1. What content, educational approach (‘how’), partners (‘with whom’), and venues (‘where’) should be included in Quality Education for Sustainability Teaching?
Guided by the literature, we look into the ‘what’ of teaching (i.e. content in terms of knowledge and skills), the ‘how’ of an action-oriented EfS approach, with whom, and where is taught and learnt.
2. How can QUEST be measured?
Starting from the proposed QUEST framework, we aim to provide a novel measurement instrument developing Swedish and Dutch versions of a questionnaire (the QUEST-Q) fit to answer the third research question. In line with the emancipatory character of education for sustainability, we take the point of view of students into account. In order to do so, we will develop a questionnaire for tapping into their experiences with EfS at secondary school.
3. How do Flemish, Dutch, and Swedish higher secondary students experience EfS teaching at their school?
At ECER, we will provide results regarding the quality of the QUEST-Q (i.e. reliability and validity of the questionnaire) and describe how Flemish, Dutch, and Swedish upper secondary students experience Education for Sustainability Teaching at their school as measured by means of the QUEST-Q.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFour steps (Furr, 2011) guide the development of the QUEST-Q. In a first step, we search the literature in order to articulate the QUEST framework. We then collected an initial item pool in step two. Thirdly, a qualitative pilot provides feedback on accuracy of the questionnaire’s format and phrasing (in Dutch and Swedish). Finally, we collect data from minimally 400 respondents and examine psychometric properties and quality of the initial questionnaire through statistical analysis.
Step 1: articulation of the framework
We reviewed literature on EfS and available measurement instruments. This yielded a framework consisting of four main components, i.e. educational content, approach, partners, and venues.
Step 2: development of an initial item pool
Based on the results of the literature review in step 1, we developed an initial item pool of statements regarding the different components that were articulated in the QUEST framework (i.e. content, approach, partners, and venues). All items shared stem ‘At our school, we learn…’. This initial items pool resulted in 111 items in total.
Step 3: accuracy check with representatives of the population (15 to 19-year-olds)
A limited number of higher secondary school students run through the first version of the questionnaire. They provide feedback through a think-aloud protocol, while reading the entire questionnaire (including introduction with information provided for asking students’ active informed consent). A researcher takes notes of their remarks and these are discussed with all researchers involved in this study. In this stage general remarks are discussed within the entire research team, while remarks referring specifically to Swedish or Dutch language issues are discussed among Swedish or Dutch-speaking researchers, respectively. The questionnaire is adapted with respect to the participants’ comments.
Step 4: statistical verification of the questionnaire’s psychometric properties and quality
We pilot a first version of the QUEST-Q with minimally 100 participants aged 15 to 19 in Sweden, the Netherlands, and Flanders, respectively. Reliability is examined through calculation of Cronbach’s alphas of the main and sub-components. Factor analyses will shed light on the construct validity of the measurement instrument.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsStep 1
Based on the literature review, we defined four QUEST components: 1) content, 2) educational approach, 3) partners, and 4) venues. Content includes a holistic view (United Nations, 2019) on real-world complex sustainability problems (Sinakou et al., 2022; Varela-Losada et al., 2016), norms and values regarding such problems (Van Pouck et al., 2019) and skills such as problem solving, communication, critical, systems, and future thinking (e.g. Jensen & Schnack, 2006). Educational approach focuses on engaging with different perspectives (Rudsberg & Öhman, 2010). Educational partners consist of, amongst others, teachers of different subjects, parents, experts inside the school and beyond, and fellow students. This also involves cross-curricular cooperation (Boeve-de Pauw et al., 2022). Venues can be indoor or outdoor, in nature, in or out of school, or in the local and global community (Sinakou et al., 2022; Varela-Losada et al., 2016).
Step 2
An initial item pool has been created covering each (sub)component of the QUEST framework as derived from the literature. The stem ‘At our school we learn…’ is completed by statements regarding the what, how, with whom, and where of EfS. Sample items are:
… to weigh the pros and cons of different solutions to the same sustainability problems.
… to reflect on actions taken.
… from teachers in natural sciences, social sciences, and language teachers.
… in nature.
Results of the validation process (steps 3 and 4) will be available timely for discussion at ECER2023. Feedback from the participants will be welcomed as an opportunity to add validation of the item pool by academic experts to the students’ perspective (cf. accuracy check in step 3 of the development process).
Descriptive statistics will provide insight in possible differences between Sweden, Flanders, and the Netherlands.
Further avenues for research and implications for EfS teaching and implementation will be discussed.
ReferencesAudigier (2000). Project “Education for democratic citizenship: basic concepts and core competencies for education for democratic citizenship. Council of Europe.
Boeve-de Pauw, J., Olsson, D., Berglund, T., & Gericke, N. (2022). Teachers’ ESD self-efficacy and practices: A longitudinal study on the impact of teacher professional development. Environmental Education Research, 28(6), 867-885.
European Commission (2019). The European Green Deal (COM(2019) 640 final).
Furr, R. M. 2011. Scale Construction and Psychometrics for Social and Personality Psychology. London, New Oakes, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage Publications.
Jickling, B. & Wals, A.E.J. (2008). Globalization and environmental education: looking beyond sustainable development. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(1), 1-21.
Kelly, A., & Clarke, P. (2016). The challenges of globalisation and the new policy paradigms for educational effectiveness and improvement research. In C. Chapman, D. Muijs, D. Reynolds, P. Sammons, & C. Teddlie, (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Educational Effectiveness and Improvement (pp. 365–379). London and New York: Routledge.
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.
Sass, W., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Olsson, D., Gericke, N., De Maeyer, S., and Van Petegem, P. (2020). Redefining Action Competence: The Case of Sustainable Development. The Journal of Environmental Education, 51(4), 292–305.
Sass, W., Claes, E., Boeve-de Pauw, J., De Maeyer, S., Schelfhout, W., Van Petegem, P., & Isac, M.M. (2021). Measuring Professional Action Competence in Education for Sustainable Development (PACesd). Environmental Education Research, 28(2), 260-275.
Sass, W., De Maeyer, S., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (submitted). Effectiveness of Education for Sustainable Development Practices Regarding Students’ Action Competence in Sustainable Development: The importance of an action-oriented approach.
Stables, A. & Scott, W. (2002). The Quest for Holism in Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research 8(1), 53–60.
Taylor, N., Quinn, F., Jenkins, K., Miller-Brown, H., Rizk, N., Prodromou, T., Serow, P., & Taylor, S. (2019). Education for Sustainability in the Secondary Sector—A Review. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 13(1), 102-122.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
United Nations. (2019). Report of the Secretary-General on the 2019 Climate Action Summit and the Way Forward in 2020.
Van Poeck, K., Östman, L., & Öhman, J. 2019. Sustainable Development Teaching: Ethical and Political Challenges. London & New York: Routledge.
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Learning for Sustainability: Young People and Practitioner Perspectives
Kumara Ward, Rosamonde Birch Birch, Tanya MacDonald, Marie Beresford-Dey, Liz Lakin, Martin Purcell
University of Dundee, United Kingdom
Presenting Author: Ward, Kumara;
MacDonald, Tanya
This research was commissioned in August 2022 by the Scottish Government as part of the refresh of the Learning for Sustainability 2030 Action Plan (2019). Researchers at the University of Dundee were asked to investigate the following questions.
- How is learning for sustainability (LfS) understood and implemented by the school and Community Learning and Development (CLD) workforce?
- What can we learn from LfS ‘best practice’ taking place around the system?
- What do the voices of young people and practitioners say and how do we feed them directly into LfS policy and the refresh of the Action Plan?
- What are the successes and challenges LfS has faced since 2019?
- What is the impact of the United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) on LfS?
This research work is predicated on the Scottish Government’s Action Plan for Learning for Sustainability (2019), stating that children and young people in Scotland have an entitlement to learn about sustainability. Set against a backdrop of sustainability-related activities and toward the end of the UN’s Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014, Higgins (2012) reported that the Scottish Government’s commitment to develop the concept of ‘One Planet Schools’ had taken on added significance if the intention to maintain the momentum and build on work that had occurred during the UN Decade for Sustainable Development was to be realised. This work culminated in the 2016 Vision 2030+ report which recommended five priorities for LfS (see conclusion). These priorities were also used to outline the key findings and recommendations for action in the current research and highlight what has been successful and where new approaches need to be considered.
A mixed methods approach was undertaken for this small-sample research using a JISC online survey, World Café events and 3 Horizons focus groups (see methodology below). Sampling for the survey and in person data collection was designed with a mix of urban, semi- urban, rural locations including the highlands and Islands to be representative of the Scottish population. A range of socio-economic parameters was also applied using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SMID) with participants from all major quantiles represented. At each site the researchers engaged with young people 14+ years and separately with practitioners in secondary schools and CLD settings. In total there were 16 separate in-person engagements across Scotland with 80 individual transcripts recorded and shared across the research team for analysis. Analysis was conducted using the Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) (Braun & Clarke, 2012, 2019) process using NVivo for managing coding and developing themes. Given the mixed methods approach, survey data is represented through a number of graphs, with the qualitative data represented through thematic narratives and graphics.
The main findings represent an expansion of the earlier work and include new proposals for the Learning for Sustainability Action Plan refresh. The findings and analysis provide a snapshot of what is currently happening in Scotland and a clear picture of what stakeholders would like to see happening to support LfS in secondary schools and CLD settings. Calls to action from the Children’s Parliament research with children from nursery to S3 were also correlated in our findings to demonstrate a synthesis across of the research findings of both projects. The findings from this project will be disseminated in the ECER Paper session with the lapsing of the information embargo at the time of publication of the research report by the Scottish Government.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8586-294X
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe mixed method approach provided the triangulation of data construction and analysis with rich data through the qualitative World Café methodology. World Café methodology was originally conceived and implemented in 1995 (Brown & Isaacs) has become a globally adopted practice for large group table conversations initiating generative feedback and creative thinking. World Cafés due to their inclusive, democratised, and co-creative nature became very popular within organisations wanting to adopt the principles for community transformation, as well as being a participatory assessment tool for organisational change (Löhr et al, 2020).
Most recently the World Café approach has been used within academic research, where adaptations have been used in participatory qualitative methodology complementing existing models for focus group research (Löhr et al., 2020). Löhr et al. (2020) suggest that the World Café method both increases participation whilst also benefiting participants as it ‘facilitates dialogue and mutual learning, thus motivating their participation and responses’ (p.1). The “research World Café” methodology has also been found to reduce barriers between academic research and practical circumstances of participants, therefore benefiting the relevance, robustness and richness of the data constructed (Schiele et al., 2022). Schiele et al. (2022) demonstrate that World Café’s can also speed up academic research enquiries as it is a ‘circulating focus group’ approach with a larger group in one space rather than individual interviews or a formalised focus group setting.
To extend and deepen the data collection the methodology included a dedicated focus group at the end of each World Café session with practitioners, where additional understandings were sought using the 3 Horizons process, which offers a practical way to engage multiple stakeholders in constructive conversations about transformational change (Sharpe, 2013). The 3 Horizons approach to focus groups complements the principles of World Café and responds to calls for more relational, reflexive and co-creational methodologies in sustainability science and the wider shift towards more societally relevant research (Fazey et al, 2020). In recognition of the need for transformation changes in education (Leicester et al, 2013) the framework offers a practical, effective way to provide robust information to inform a refresh of the Learning for Sustainably Action Plan.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn this presentation, the researchers will discuss the research conclusions and findings which will be publicly available February 2023. The findings and recommendations build upon the five priority areas from the ‘Vision 2030+ Concluding Report of the LfS Implementation Group’ (2016). They include:
1. Learners should have an entitlement for Learning for Sustainability.
2. In line with the new GTCS Professional Standards, every practitioner, school and education leader should demonstrate Learning for Sustainability in their practice.
3. Every school should have a whole-school approach to Learning for Sustainability that is robust, demonstrable, evaluated and supported by leadership at all levels.
4. All school buildings, grounds and policies should support Learning for Sustainability.
5. A strategic national approach to supporting Learning for Sustainability should be established.
The new findings include discussion of the understanding, experiences, and implementation of LfS from both young people and practitioners’ perspectives. A range of case studies that emerged, including successes and best practice of LfS will be shared along with some of the challenges and potential approaches to strengthening LfS within secondary school and CLD contexts. The researchers will outline the future vision and aspirations articulated by young people and practitioners, as well as the research implications for current and future practice and policy.
The Scottish Government Research and Analytical Division have a publication date set for Wednesday 8th February, after which we can share additional conclusions from the research and how these will be used in the refresh of the Learning for Sustainability Action Plan in Scotland.
ReferencesBraun, V. and Clarke, V (2019) Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis, in Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, V 11:4, pp. 589-597. https://doi-org.libezproxy.dundee.ac.uk/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2012) Thematic Analysis, in Cooper, H. (Ed) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Vol2: Research Designs, pp.57-71.
Brown, J. and Isaacs, D. (2005) The World Café: Shaping our Futures through Conversations that matter. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers
Fazey I, Schäpke N, Caniglia G (2020) Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth: Visions of future systems and how to get there, Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 1-18.H3Uni (2022) Practices>Three Horizons accessed 6.7.22 from H3Uni | Practice: developing foresight with Three horizons
Higgins, P. (2012) Learning for Sustainability: The Report of the One Planet Schools Working Group. Education Scotland: One Planet Schools Working Group PDF, accesed at: https://education.gov.scot/improvement/Documents/One-planet-schools-report-learning-for-sustainability.pdf
Leicester G, Bloomer K, Stewart D, Ewing J (2013) Transformative Innovation in Education: A Playbook for Pragmatic Visionaries, Triarchy Press.
LfS National Implementation Group (2016) Vision 2030+. Scottish Government: LfS National Implementation Group.
Löhr, K., Weinhardt, M. and Sieber, S. (2020) The “World Café” as a Participatory Method for Collecting Qualitative Data, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, V:19, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920916976
Sharpe B (2020) Three Horizons: The Patterning of Hope, 2ndEdition, Triarchy Press
Shiele, H., Krummaker, S., Hoffmann, P. and Kowalski, R. (2022) The “research world café” as method of scientific enquiry: Combining rigor with relevance and speed, Journal of Business Research, V:140, pp. 280-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.075
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Affordances and Challenges of Open Schooling in Relation to Students’ Habits
Annie Gregory, Eva Lundqvist, Leif Östman
Uppsala University, Sweden
Presenting Author: Gregory, Annie
In light of global challenges like climate change it is now argued in policy that there is a need for educational interventions to support students to understand and be able to act on sustainability issues. Open schooling is such a policy innovation that aligns with SDG 4 Target 7 to foster students’ relations with sustainability questions in the local environment to develop skills and competencies to create new visions of the future through action (UNESCO, 2017). Open schooling contains an explicit ambition to identify, investigate and act on sustainability problems in the local community. (Van Poeck, et al., 2021a)
The research on open schooling is limited to studies that look at different teaching and learning approaches that could be included as part of ‘open schooling’ (Okada et al., 2020) Few studies look at the challenges that teachers and students face while implementing open schooling as it causes disturbance in their everyday habits of teaching and learning. Van Poeck et al. (2021b) identified disturbances in teaching habits for example, difficulties to design lessons starting from a sustainability challenge which relates to the disturbed habit of using the curriculum as a driver for lesson planning and, difficulties to plan lessons that take students along in an authentic quest for solutions which is related to the disturbed habit of teaching as lecturing. This paper follows up on previous work on the disturbances in teaching habits with the aim to identify challenges (disturbance in habits) as well as the affordances that students face in their everyday practice while doing school work. Here we draw on an investigation from one Swedish school done within a four-year research project called ‘Open schooling for sustainable cities and communities. The investigation should be perceived as an explorative case-study.
The theoretical framework underpinning this study is a transactional learning theory (Östman et al. 2019a) based on the pragmatist work of John Dewey (1916). According to this theory we act without reflecting in our everyday lives, in and through our habits. We start to reflect when our habits are disturbed, and do not function in a specific situation creating a problematic situation (Dewey, 1929) which needs attention (cognitively and/or bodily) if we are to continue with the activity we were involved in. We then engage in an “inquiry” which involves experimentations making the problematic situation more intelligible. An inquiry process can be short but can also require considerable time and energy. It can involve acquisition of new knowledge, skills, values, identities, etc. and can result in an enrichment or transformation of a habit or even the start of a new habit. Also highlighted in this theory is the bodily felt experiences (joy, excitement, etc.) that occur when the inquiry has succeeded. Dewey (1934) describe these experiences as aesthetical experiences of fulfillment and if they are strong the whole process from disturbance to fulfillment is remembered as “an experience”. Such experiences that stand out in the flow of experiences can be a crucial starting point for development of interests and attitudes (Dewey, 1934).
The empirical questions that guide our study are:
- What problematic situations do students face while doing open schooling projects?
- Which habits of students, used in everyday school work, are disturbed in relation to the problematic situations identified?
- Which, if any, positive experiences did the students have and which activities were they connected to?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe present the results from this explorative case study in one Swedish secondary school (students in their first year at the Social Science program, 16-17 years old). Teachers in a teacher team took part in five workshops, run by a team of facilitators with backgrounds as educational researchers, to plan for open schooling projects. Occasionally during the following semester, the students worked in groups on diverse issues, e.g. recycling of clothes, inter-generational dialogue on SDGs and gender issues, food waste, plastic, paper use, and waste/plastic collection and segregation. In this study we report on the students´ views of working with different open schooling projects. The data was collected in a survey with questions on for example what was new/different/hard in this way of working, what the students had learnt and if and in what way they had changed their way of thinking about sustainability issues. Nine groups, with a secretary in each group, answered the questionnaires digitally.
Survey responses were entered as quotes into an excel sheet along with the questions. The analysis involved reading and tagging responses in which problematic situations became visible as a ‘gap’ (Wickman & Östman, 2002) expressed as a need, frustration, a challenge. Along with this we also tagged responses that students reflected as positive experiences primarily expressing insight, realization, motivation, etc. All problematic situations were noted down separately, grouped into categories representing similar gaps and then related to disturbances of specific habits that students use in everyday school work. These disturbances impeded the flow of these activities in some way.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe analysis shows that the students encountered problematic situations in relation to the open-endedness of the project especially with the fact that neither them or their teachers knew when the projects would end, given the limited time allotted to do such activities in the academic calendar and their limited exposure to working in open-ended activities with no definite endings. This is a departure from their habits of working on time-bound projects planned and executed during fixed times in the academic calendar.
In relation to this uncertainty they also advised future students to be ‘structured’, ‘set goals’, ‘plan in advance’. This is a departure from habits of planning in structured projects versus outcomes in real world issues that cannot be ‘planned’ and requires one to be flexible.
While students appreciated connecting with people and extending their learning to other sources of knowledge than the textbook and classroom, at the same time they seem to find it challenging to establish and maintain relations with people outside the school for project outcomes. This relates to a disturbance of their previous habits in projects where their actions were not dependent on other peoples’ actions, for example writing essays or doing group work within the classroom.
By shining a spotlight on problematic situations that students’ face in open schooling practices, the study contributes with knowledge about the challenges students face and the disturbances to their everyday practices in school. In the paper we will discuss how this knowledge can help teachers to be conscious mentors to students’ in open schooling activities. We hope that this will paper will fuel a discussion about how to support teachers that implement open schooling.
ReferencesDewey, J. (1916/1980). Democracy and Education, in J. A. Boydston (ed.), John Dewey: The Middle Works, Volume 9, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1929/1958). Experience and Nature, New York, NY: Dover Publications.
Dewey, J. (1934/2005). Art as Experience. New York: Perigee.Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Touchstone.
Okada, A., Rosa, L. Q. da, & Souza, M. V. de. (2020). Open schooling with inquiry maps in network education: Supporting Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) and fun in learning. Revista Exitus, 10, e020053–e020053. https://doi.org/10.24065/2237-9460.2020v10n1ID1219
Östman, L., Van Poeck, K. and Öhman, J. (2019a). A transactional theory on sustainability learning. In: Van Poeck, K., Östman, L. and Öhman, J. Sustainable Development Teaching: Ethical and Political Challenges. New York: Routledge, 127-139
UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444
Van Poeck, K., Bigaré, N., & Östman, L. O. (2021a). Science Education for Action and engagement towards Sustainability (SEAS): local assessment report: local network Belgium. D3. 2 Second Annual Local Assessment Report.
Van Poeck, K., Östman, L., Bigaré, N. (2021b). Open Schooling about Sustainability Issues: Disturbance and Transformation of Teaching Habits. European Conference on Educational Research (ECER), ‘Education and Society: expectations, prescriptions, reconciliations’, Geneva (online), Switzerland , 6-10 September 2021
Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism: Learning as Discourse Change. Science Education, 86(5), 601–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10036
|
