Conference Agenda

This Symposium builds on the initial findings presented and discussed at ECER 2023 NW30 (Lysgaard & Elf, 2023). It is based on a large Danish research project and co-lab between different Danish educational institutions focusing on concepts of quality in sustainability education in primary and lower secondary education. The Symposium draws on international perspectives on quality to embed the findings within the larger field covered by NW30 and ensure that it adds to the body of knowledge within ESE research.

The papers presented at this symposium draw on qualitative and quantitative inquiries into how concepts of quality are expressed and experienced within Danish primary schools in relationship to sustainability education. The aim of the symposium is motivated by what we identify as a potential to develop further and discuss conceptual challenges relating to the often very conflicting nature of how we can understand quality in ESE. We want to contribute further to discussions of ongoing theoretical and methodological challenges relating to how we can conceptualise quality and whose quality we are interested in.

The symposium is guided by an interest in pragmatism (Dewey, 1913) that emphasizes the experiential and communicative nature of quality in education and teaching: Quality is experienced and appraised in specific communicative settings (e.g. problem-based teaching) by someone (e.g. student, teacher) about something (e.g. subject matter) in order to be the quality that it is; quality is thus not considered to be existing objectively, in itself (Wittek & Kvernbekk, 2011). Further, quality eludes satisfactory measurement by singular quantitative or qualitative processes (Berliner, 2005; Dahler-Larsen, 2019). Rather, quality must be inferred interpretatively and complementarily from qualitative and quantitative data analyses drawing on multiple and mixed methods (Stake, 1995).

At the outset, the conceptual paper 1 situates the discussion of concepts of quality within the ESE field in relationship to the diverging but also overlapping traditions of Anglo-Saxon-inspired curriculum research and European continental notions of didactics. The paper serves to underline the need for empirical and conceptual critical examinations of how concepts of quality are leveraged within ESE research and practice.

Paper 2 presents a qualitative approach that explores the perspectives of primary and secondary school students and how more knowledge about their experiences with sustainability education can inform and qualify a better understanding of what we call experienced quality. The ambition is to explore how investigating the students' perspectives and experiences can inform discussions of different qualities in sustainability education and the potential in how this can qualify the generation of knowledge about teaching green transition.

Paper 3 builds on the discussions of quality by drawing on a quantitative data on Danish youth and their perceptions and understanding of sustainability issues and their own position in relation to these challenges. A specific focus is the relation, or lack of relation, between acquired knowledge and engagement in sustainability issues.

The final paper presents a specific case for teaching on sustainability issues: the case of waste in teaching in lower secondary education. An important emphasis of this paper is the dilemmas that often show up in teaching. Here as part of relationship between the teachers’ efforts to develop interesting and engaging teaching focusing on waste and the formation of the pupils understanding of their own action and possibilities for partaking in wider sustainability practices.

This paper examines the different approaches within ESE teaching based on the entangled trajectories of Anglo-Saxon curriculum research positions and European continental didactic tradition (Buckler & Creech, 2014; Scott & Gough, 2003; Vare & Scott, 2007). Through a tracing of the positions within ESE and their epistemological, historical and regional influences, it is argued that these differences show up as a multifaceted landscape, more that as bi-polar positions. This both influence specific current conceptualizations of what can be considered quality in ESE teaching, but also highlights challenges in changing both implicit and explicit trajectories of thought and practice (Brückner, Lysgaard, & Elf, Forthcoming). By pointing towards the tensions between subject specificity, general ambitions and systemic ambitions of within and across different approaches to ESE education it is argued that there is more linking the different traditions than what separates them, but that tropes, blind spots and bald spots also develop according to the foundational approaches and that this can be seen as underlying factors in the rapid development of new concepts and understandings of quality in ESE research and practice.

Brückner, M., Lysgaard, J. A., & Elf, N. (Forthcoming). Dimensions of Quality in Environmental and Sustainability education research Environmental Education Research. Buckler, C., & Creech, H. (2014). Shaping the future we want: UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development; final report. Paris: UNESCO. Scott, W., & Gough, S. (2003). Sustainable development and learning - Framing the issues: RoutledgeFarmer. Vare, P., & Scott, B. (2007). Learning for a Change: Exploring the Relationship Between Education and Sustainable Development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(2).

This paper explores the perspectives of primary and secondary school students and how more knowledge about their experiences with sustainability education can inform and qualify a better understanding of what we call experienced quality as a contribution to the Environmental and Sustainability Education Research-field (ESE) (Brückner et al., Forthcoming; Elf, 2022). Based on a current scoping review, the ESE field reflects a variety of examples of quality concerning sustainability education (Brückner et al., forthcoming). Examining the diversity in different approaches and discussions of quality in relation to sustainability education, we argue that there is emphasis on studies focusing on mainly two dominating trends: Firstly, examples of quality representing an intended quality view e.g. the development of quality criteria building on values and norms such as ‘participation’ and ‘democratic decision making’ but also qualities in terms of acting, reflecting, communication, cooperation and teamwork (Breiting et al., 2005; Breiting & Wickenberg, 2010). Secondly, we also identified a range of examples stressing dimensions of documented quality (Brückner et al., forthcoming). These examples are of a more evaluative character, illustrating different cases of motivated initiatives with an emphasis on how different indicators, standards or criteria can ensure quality enhancement while being indicative of the implementation of an ESE process (Roberts, 2009; Rode & Michelsen, 2008; Singer-Brodowski et al., 2019). Examining the representations of the trends mentioned above of quality views, we identify a gap in studies representing experienced quality in ESE, and we especially see implications toward a lack of studies examining the student perspective (Brückner et al., forthcoming). Other researchers have previously pointed out that despite being the primary concern of education, the students’ perspectives often figure in the background of theory and research concerning sustainability education (Payne, 1997; Rickinson, 2001). Therefore, this paper aims to place the student perspective in the foreground by drawing on ethnographic fieldwork at three different primary-level schools in Denmark that explicitly work with sustainability in their teaching (CHORA, 2024). Based on focus group interviews with 30 students in 5-6th grade, including participatory observation, we present key findings and themes on how students participate, perceive and experience sustainability education (Gilliam & Gulløv, 2016, 2022; Gulløv & Højlund, 2015; Lehtonen et al., 2019; Verlie, 2019). The ambition is to explore how the students’ experiences can inform discussions of different qualities in sustainability education and the potential in how this can qualify the generation of knowledge about teaching green transition.

Brückner, M., Lysgaard, J. A., & Elf, N. (Forthcoming). Dimensions of Quality in Environmental and Sustainability education research Environmental Education Research. Buckler, C., & Creech, H. (2014). Shaping the future we want: UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development; final report. Paris: UNESCO. Scott, W., & Gough, S. (2003). Sustainable development and learning - Framing the issues: RoutledgeFarmer. Vare, P., & Scott, B. (2007). Learning for a Change: Exploring the Relationship Between Education and Sustainable Development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(2).

In this paper we aim at answering the following research questions: What perceptions and beliefs towards ecological sustainability issues do Danish students in lower secondary school express? Do they fear climate change, and do they belief in saving the planet? Do they know Fridays for future, and are they engaged in it? How do they think about and handle their smartphones? Significant results of these and similar questions will be presented from a data collection from 1267 students in November 2023. The results will be tested against common background variables such as gender and socio-economic background and their level of knowledge about ecological sustainability issues. A general high level of knowledge seems not to correlate with engagement. While fear for climate change is high, their belief in saving the planet is not much lower? Such seemingly contradictory results will be discussed in relations to findings in other studies (Gericke et al., 2019) and theoretical considerations (Ratinen & Uusiautti, 2020; Straume, 2020; Pooley & O’Connor, 2000)

Gericke, N., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Berglund, T., & Olsson, D. (2019). The Sustainability Consciousness Questionnaire. Sustainable Development, 27(1), 35-49. Pooley, J. A., & O’Connor, M. (2000). Environmental Education and Attitudes: Emotions and Beliefs are What is Needed. Environment and Behavior, 32(5), 711-723. Ratinen, I., & Uusiautti, S. (2020). Finnish Students’ Knowledge of Climate Change Mitigation and Its Connection to Hope. Sustainability, 12(6), 2181. Straume, I. S. (2020). What may we hope for? Education in times of climate change. Constellations, 27(3), 540-552.

This paper explores the teaching and learning of issues concerning waste, waste management and recycling in lower-secondary school as part of the broader aim of an education for green transition. Building on the claim that the notion of quality teaching is a combination of both successful and good teaching (Fenstermacher & Richardson, 2005) the question of the paper is how it is possible to balance these two when the topic of the lesson is waste. The paper discusses how teachers face dilemmas of creating interesting lessons about green transition and ‘green values’ on the one hand and supporting the formation of students’ ‘green behaviors’ or ‘green habits’ on the other hand. Analyzing and interpreting narratives from practicing teachers it is shown, how different school conditions are experienced as both enabling and constraining for the development of a ‘waste education’ (Jørgensen, Madsen & Læssøe, 2018). This is followed by a discussion of Dewey’s theory of interest (Dewey, 1913; Jonas, 2011) and theory of habit (Dewey, 1922; Tryggvason, Sund & Öhman, 2022) and their significance for understanding education for green transition in general and waste education in lower-secondary school in particular.

Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and Effort in Education. Houghton Mifflin. Dewey, J. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology. Henry Holt. Fenstermacher, G.D. & Richardson, V. (2005). On Making Determinations of Quality in Teaching. Teachers College Record, 107 (1), 186-213. Jonas, M.E. (2011). Dewey’s Conception of Interest and its Significance for Teacher Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43 (2), 112-129. Jørgensen, N.J., Madsen, K.D. & Læssøe, J. (2018). Waste in education: the potential of materiality and practice. Environmental Education Research, 24, 6, 807-817. Tryggvason, A., Sund, L. & Öhman, J. (2022). Schooling and ESE: revisiting Stevenson’s gap from a pragmatist perspective. Environmental Education Research, 28 (8), 1237-1250.