Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
30 SES 01 D: The Key Role of Teachers in ESD
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper Teachers Collaborative Learning Experience to Frame and Promote Sustainable-oriented Learning in PE University of Gothenburg, Sweden Presenting Author:The path towards a more sustainable world will require a profound transformation of how we think and act, and what knowledge, values and skills that are considered critical to cultivate. Vital for this transformation are conscious and competent teachers, at the heart of the micro-level in education. Sustainability-oriented learning positions education as a transformative process that fosters agency, critical reflection, and the development of life skills and sustainability competencies (Rieckmann et al., 2017; Baena-Morales & González-Víllora, 2023). As Wals (2020) argues, sustainability can function as a driver of educational development, just as education and learning can act as drivers of sustainability. This reciprocal relationship calls for an educative reorientation of curricula, learning outcomes, and pedagogical practices, enabling innovative teaching and learning processes grounded in transformative perspectives (Burns, 2019; Lundvall & Fröberg, 2023). Physical Education (PE) is recognized as a powerful arena for sustainability-oriented learning whilst emphasizing student well-being, highlighting the interconnections between environmental and social dimensions of sustainability and holistic conceptions of health (Baena-Morales & Ferrriz-Valero, 2025; Lundvall & Fröberg, 2023). Collaborations between researchers and PE teachers are requested to produce novel insights, shared understandings and elaborated educational strategies (Baena-Morales & González-Víllora, 2023; Royet et al., 2024). An educative approach to sustainability suggests not only a change of perspective but also seeing curricula, learning outcomes, and content through transformative and educative eyes. Such rethinking and reorientation can offer a new point of departure with additional possibilities for innovative teaching and learning processes (Lundvall & Fröberg, 2023). Transformative learning, understood as collective meaning-making within learning communities, is central to sustainability-oriented education and a key driver of social transformation toward sustainability (Burns, 2019). By critically examining taken-for-granted assumptions, transformative learning enables learners to renegotiate perspectives and enact changes in their understandings, beliefs, and practices (Mezirow, 2009). In this study professional learning is conceptualized as a dynamic, needs-driven, and long-term process that builds on teachers’ prior experiences and develops through experimentation, reflection, and collaboration (Edwards-Groves et al., 2018). This orientation emphasizes learning as social, situated, practice-based, and responsive to specific educational contexts. Such understanding aligns with democratic professionalism (Sachs, 2001), where professional learning is collaborative, transformative, and ethically grounded. From this perspective, sustainability-oriented learning in PE represents a concrete expression of professional ethics, enabling teachers to guide students toward sustainable practices and contribute to broader societal goals—enhancing possibilities to “live well in a world worth living in” (Kemmis et al., 2014, pp. 25–26). The overarching aim of this study was to explore how sustainability-oriented learning can be contextualized and implemented in PE practice. This is realized by using data from a two -year long action research (AR) project conducted with ten Swedish upper-secondary PE teachers. The research questions guiding the investigation are as follows: i) How can participation in a collaborative AR project facilitate sustainability-oriented learning in PE and generate professional and transformative value through social learning processes? and ii) What educational strategies and pedagogical practices are perceived important to promote sustainability-oriented learning in PE? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study is grounded in a social and transformative understanding of professional learning, emphasizing teachers’ participation in collaborative, reflective, and practice-oriented processes. To operationalize this perspective, the study adopts a qualitative, collaborative action research (AR) design. AR was selected for its capacity to support and examine practice-based change through iterative cycles of reflection, planning, action, and evaluation, while simultaneously generating empirical knowledge and fostering transformative professional learning (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; McNiff & Whitehead, 2011). This orientation enables teachers to critically examine assumptions, renegotiate pedagogical practices, and respond to contemporary educational challenges, including the responsibility to educate and empower future citizens for a sustainable society. Participants were ten Swedish PEH teachers (median age 45; median teaching experience 19 years) working at an upper secondary school with approximately 1,200 students in a large Swedish city. The participants constituted the entire PE teaching team at the school. The AR project was initiated in March 2022 and extended over five semesters, comprising 21 workshops organized into five iterative cycles. Each cycle focused on identifying potential reorientations of PE content and curricula, planning and implementing actions in practice, and systematically evaluating outcomes. Workshops were held at four- to five-week intervals and functioned as both professional learning spaces and data-generation settings. The collaborative AR framework, inspired by McNiff and Whitehead (2011), emphasized key transformative principles: (i) a bottom-up perspective attentive to teachers’ values, needs, and expectations; (ii) empowerment of teachers to propose and enact practice-based change; (iii) authentic, situated inquiries into teaching; (iv) collaborative reflection and action; and (v) sustained engagement over time. Data were collected using multiple qualitative methods to capture both individual and collective dimensions of teachers’ learning. Primary data consisted of semi-structured interviews with all participants. Additional data included recordings of collaborative workshops (n = 6), synthesis documents produced during workshops (n = 5), field notes, teachers’ reflective logbooks (n = 10), and the researcher’s reflexive journal. An abductive thematic analysis was conducted, allowing prior research on sustainability and PE to inform theme development. Trustworthiness was strengthened through prolonged engagement, triangulation across data sources and researchers, collaborative analysis among authors, and systematic reflexivity addressing the first author’s dual role as facilitator and analyst (see Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study demonstrates how collaborative AR can empower teachers to integrate sustainability meaningfully into PE, strengthen professional identity, and contribute to the evolving legitimacy of the profession in addressing contemporary societal challenges. The abductive analysis generated four over-arching themes: i) ´Developing critical skills for sustainable HWB; ii) ´New learning objectives and teaching practices for sustainability´; iii) ´Proposing concrete actions and content in PE’ and iv) ´Re-orientated health perspective´. Teachers’ transformative learning processes were characterized by perspective shifts, enhanced agency, and collaborative value creation. Participation in the AR project fostered professional growth at multiple levels: individually (critical reflection on practice), professionally (knowledge-building and identity negotiation), and politically (positioning PE as contributing to the global sustainability agenda). Advancing sustainability-oriented learning in a PE context points to three major implications: i) reframing the objective of PE beyond physical fitness and motor competence toward a holistic conceptualization and promotion of sustainable health and well-being. Such a shift recognizes that a key purpose of the subject is to promote students’ long-term well-being by fostering agency and the transformative knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values they require to flourish and to actively shape their future. ii) elaborating pedagogical strategies, PE teachers should employ experience-based, relational and reflective approaches that support agency, meaning-making and enable students to deepen and co-construct understandings of health and sustainability. Such strategies can help students develop a “toolbox” of resources for navigating health and life challenges, while cultivating critical awareness of normative health discourses and the socio-ecological features that shape well-being; and iii) negotiating new content that contributes to students’ holistic health. This requires a strength-based approach that foregrounds students’ existing health-promoting resources, situates social and emotional well-being and self-awareness as foundational to students’ long-term personal development and strengthens their capacity to navigate life in sustainable ways. References Baena-Morales, S., & Ferriz-Valero, A. (2025). What about physical education and Sustainable Development Goals? A scoping review. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 30(2), 200–217. Baena-Morales, S., & González-Víllora, S. (2023). Physical education for sustainable development goals: Reflections and comments for contribution in the educational framework. Sport, Education and Society, 28(6), 697–713. Burns, H., Kelley, S. S., & Spalding, H. (2019). Teaching Sustainability: Recommendations for Best Pedagogical Practices. Journal of Sustainability Education. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming Critical. (1st ed.). London: Routledge. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G., 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, California: Sage. Lundvall, S., & Fröberg, A. (2023). From individual to lifelong environmental processes: Reframing health in physical education with the sustainable development goals. Sport, Education and Society, 28(6), 684–696. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All You Need to Know About Action Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Mezirow, J. (2009). An overview on transformative learning. In Illeris, K. (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning. Learning theorists… in their own words (pp. 90-105). London: Routledge. Royet, T., Vors, O., Cece, V., & Lentillon Kaestner, V. (2024). Education for sustainability and physical education: a systematic scoping review. Sport, Education and Society, 1–22. Rieckmann, R., Mindt, L., Gardiner, S., Leicht, A., & Heiss, J. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals – Learning objectives. UNESCO. Wals, A. (2020). Sustainability-oriented ecologies of learning. In Ecologies for learning and practice (1st ed., pp. 61–78). Routledge. 30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper Teacher Barriers When Implementing ESD in Danish Lower Secondary Education Aalborg University, Denmark Presenting Author:Sustainability issues are often described as wicked, as they are urgent, uncertain, and disputed [1]. As issues such as climate change are worsening without authorities addressing the issues with sufficient urgency they are even referred to as super-wicked [2]. Other crises such as increasing inequality also intermingle with environmental crises, constituting what is referred to as the polycrises [3]. This poses challenges for education for sustainable development (ESD), a field which is already characterized by a gap between development in policy and theory on the one hand, and educational practices on the other [4, 5]. While teachers play a key role in implementing ESD in practice [6], the complexity of polycrises increases the complexity that teachers need to be able to cope with. Secondary education is often highlighted as important in terms of implementing ESD. This is the first time pupils can participate as active citizens in society [7], but it is also often marked by an ”adolescence dip”, where engagement levels in education drop significantly [8]. This paper builds on the Danish national research- and development project, GreenEdTech (GET). The project proposes to develop digital learning models that enable implementation of ESD competencies in Danish lower secondary education [9]. It does so through a citizen science approach where pupils try to solve authentic sustainability challenges posed by companies or other external actors. We ask the following question: What kind of barriers do teachers in Danish lower secondary experience when trying to implement ESD, and how do they seek to negotiate, change, and address these? To answer this question, we use Kemmis’ practice theory [10, 11]. This is well-suited to explore how teachers try to change their everyday practices when they implement ESD, and what different types of barriers they face. Kemmis sees everyday practices, such as teaching in secondary schools, as composed of 3 different interconnected practice architectures that form the mediating preconditions for a certain practice. Kemmis divides these into a cultural-discursive influencing the thinking and sayings of a practice, a material-economic influencing the doings of a practice, and a social-political which influences relations of a practice. These are connected in patterns of what people say, do, and how they relate to each other in practices, giving practices their well-known forms. Practices are susceptible to change based on changing the sayings, doings, and relations of people participating in the practices, but they often resist transformation. That teachers experience barriers when implementing ESD is nothing new. A Finish survey study highlights interdisciplinary fatigue, lack of institutional support and resource access, time constraints, curriculum constraints and fear of emotional reactions such as discouragement and anxiety among pupils [6]. A larger systematic literature review encounter similar issues as they address subject silos, disempowerment due to gloomy media portrayal, lack of time for planning, and lack of teacher competencies [7]. While there seems to be a consensus that ESD requires approaches such as problem-based, action-based, or project-based learning to fulfil its potential [12], this is often not aligned with the curricular demands and teach-to-the-test culture in current school systems. ESD as a global concept will always have to be translated for different national contexts, and thus the barriers found among secondary teachers will vary across countries as well [7, 13]. More studies in concrete contexts are thus necessary to bridge the gap between academia and practice. This paper seeks to understand the implementation barriers found in the Danish lower secondary context, showcasing one nuance of an issue encountered in different variations across European educational contexts. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The GET project has carried out interventions with 15 schools with a diverse set of demographic backgrounds across Denmark. To address the gap between theory and practice in ESD [5], Design-Based Research (DBR) has been used in the project [14]. In DBR, researchers and practitioners collaborate to simultaneously transform practice and develop new theory by iterating on a theoretically informed model. In the GET project 3 different iterations have been carried out testing a learning model going from a pen-and-paper approach, a first digital prototype, to a finalized version of the digital learning model. Findings from this paper are from the very first pen-and-paper intervention with three schools. Here, the project focused on how teachers perceived the task of implementing ESD in practice and what kind of barriers they faced. This approach was chosen to qualify the development of a digital learning model that could support the schools' needs in the best way possible. • At school 1, a public compulsory school, a mono-disciplinary social sciences approach was chosen. Here classes from 8th grade collaborated with a local textile sorting company. • At school 2, a private boarding school, 10th grade pupils had voluntarily picked a newly established course with interdisciplinary project-based learning. Pupils themselves found local companies to collaborate with. • At school 3, a private school, 10th grade pupils worked with already established interdisciplinary and project-based approaches. Pupils collaborated with a local Danish zoo, that had an environmental conservation project in Kenya, which the pupils visited. Data was collected through a variety of qualitative approaches. Ethnographic fieldnotes were taken during recruitment efforts and class observations, while teacher training workshops where recorded. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with teachers and pupils as learning models were tested out in practice, and interviews with teachers were carried out post-intervention too. A common feature of these qualitative methods is that they are particularly suited for understanding the lived everyday experiences and practices of the teacher informants [15]. These qualitative methods are thus closely linked to the practice theory approach chosen for the paper. They helped shine light on how the specific teaching practices were carried out, and how certain practice architectures resisted attempts of transformation [10, 11]. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings School 1 was strongly hindered by material-economic barriers commonly found in research. Both a lack of time and resources was prominent. However, the collaboration with the company was very fruitful, and through participation in the project, the school succeeded in implementing ESD in social sciences, which was new for them. At School 2, the teacher group had collaboration issues due to disagreements about the purpose of the class, and both teachers and pupils struggled with the open-ended teaching style and partner collaboration. Practice architectures from previously experienced traditional school practices shaped how participants acted and related. Thus, as parts of the practice changed with the new type of teaching, participants struggled with navigating in these new structures. At School 3 teachers worked with changing the social-political architectures through addressing a youth well-being crisis not necessarily directly related to ESD. While ESD was a key part of the course, teachers applied the project-based teaching mainly to build well-being, courage and community in the class. School 1 underlined commonly found material-structural barriers such as lack of time and resources, but also that these can be overcome through collaboration between practice and academia. While project-based and authentic teaching is often highlighted in ESD [12], both pupils and teachers from School 2 were used to more traditional practices, making the introduction of these new ways of teaching difficult. Strong scaffolding of projects with external partners and common teacher understanding of the purpose is necessary for practices to come together meaningfully. At School 3, findings about pupil well-being highlight that sustainability is just one crisis among others that schools face. This suggests a need for considering how ESD can include these, whilst not losing sight of its own aims and potentials. References [1] T Block, G Goeminne, K Van Poeck. Balancing the urgency and wickedness of sustainability challenges: three maxims for post-normal education, ENVIRON EDUC RES. 24 (2018) 1424–1439. [2] K Levin, B Cashore, S Bernstein, G Auld. Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change, Policy Sci. 45 (2012) 123–152. [3] E Morin, AB Kern, Homeland Earth, Hampton Press 1999. [4] Á Tryggvason, L Sund, J Öhman. Schooling and ESE: revisiting Stevenson's gap from a pragmatist perspective, Environmental Education Research. 28 (2022) 1237–1250. [5] RB Stevenson. Schooling and environmental education: contradictions in purpose and practice, Environmental education research. 13 (2007) 139–153. [6] E Castellazzi, V Hakkarainen, M Saari, CM Raymond. Barriers and Enablers of Interdisciplinary Climate Education: Insights From Secondary Teachers, Australian journal of environmental education. (2025) 1–18. [7] N Taylor, F Quinn, K Jenkins, H Miller-Brown, N Rizk, T Prodromou, et al. Education for Sustainability in the Secondary Sector—A Review, Journal of education for sustainable development. 13 (2019) 102–122. [8] D Olsson, N Gericke, J Boeve-de Pauw, T Berglund, T Chang. Green schools in Taiwan – Effects on student sustainability consciousness, Global Environ.Change. 54 (2019) 184–194. [9] A Redman, A Wiek. Competencies for Advancing Transformations Towards Sustainability, Frontiers in education (Lausanne). 6 (2021). [10] S Kemmis. Action research as a practice-based practice, Educational action research. 17 (2009) 463–474. [11] S Kemmis, Transforming Practices : Changing the World with the Theory of Practice Architectures, 1st ed., Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2022. [12] K Sposab, M Rieckmann. Development of Sustainability Competencies in Secondary School Education: A Scoping Literature Review, Sustainability. 16 (2024) 10228. [13] R Suárez-López, M Eugenio-Gozalbo. How is sustainability addressed in primary and secondary education curricula? Assessing the cases of Spain and Portugal, International research in geographical and environmental education. 31 (2021) 106–122. [14] F Wang, MJ Hannafin. Design-Based Research and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments, Educational technology research and development. 53 (2005) 5–23. [15] S Brinkmann, L Tanggaard, Kvalitative metoder : en grundbog, 4th ed., Hans Reitzels Forlag, Kbh, 2025. 30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper Examining Classroom Teachers' Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Education for Sustainable Development: A Cross-Sectional Study 1: Sehit Serkan Gencer Primary School, Bingol, Turkey (Türkiye); 2: Agri Ibrahim Cecen University, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:Introduction In the Anthropocene era, human activities, such as fossil fuels use, deforestation, have become a decisive force on the earth’s geological, ecological, and social systems. These activities lead to interconnected and multi-layered problems such as climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, and economic inequalities (IPBES, 2019; Pereira et al., 2024; UN, 2024; WWF, 2024). To address these multi-layered issues, the concept of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) has been recognized globally and has been central to educational reforms worldwide (Rieckmann, 2018; UNESCO, 2015; UNESCO, 2020). This reform is fundamentally based on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations in 2015, which provide a comprehensive roadmap for researchers and policymakers in education (UN, 2015; UNESCO, 2020). ESD is a holistic and transformative learning process that equips students with the knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes necessary for environmental integrity, economic sustainability, and a just society (UNESCO,2020). Teachers play a central role in the success of this process by transferring their sustainability competencies to students. Classroom teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and pedagogical content knowledge in the context of ESD are critical since they play a crucial role in the quality of education and the capacity for societal transformation (Bertschy et al., 2013; Eilks, 2015). Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework integrates Bandura's (1977) self-efficacy theory and Shulman's (1986, 1987) pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) within the context of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). Malandrakis et al. (2019) operationalized this framework by developing the Teachers' Self-Efficacy Scale for ESD. It is based on a comprehensive literature review and OECD's (2002) competency framework, which identifies four core self-efficacy domains: values and ethics, systems thinking, emotions and feelings, and actions (Malandrakis et al., 2019). Recognizing the complex reciprocal relationship between knowledge and self-efficacy, the framework separately assesses teachers' perceived content knowledge (pCK) and perceived pedagogical content knowledge (pPCK). In this way, the theoretical framework ensures harmony between self-beliefs and possessed competencies (Malandrakis et al., 2019). This study employs this comprehensive framework to examine classroom teachers' ESD self-efficacy beliefs and their relationship with perceived knowledge in the Turkish context. Objectives The primary objective of this study is to adapt the “Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale for Education for Sustainable Development” developed by Malandrakis et al. (2019) into Turkish and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the scale. The study also aims to determine ESD self-efficacy beliefs of classroom teachers working in the Eastern Anatolia region of Türkiye (in the provinces of Ağrı, Bingöl, and Van), as well as their pCK and pPCK levels. Furthermore, it aims to examine whether these variables differ according to demographic variables such as gender, professional experience (seniority), education level, and whether the teacher has taken an ESD course at university or in-service training. Research Questions 1. Is the Turkish version of the Teacher Self-Efficacy on Education for Sustainable (ESD self-efficacy) Development a valid and reliable measurement tool? 2. What are the levels of classroom teachers’ ESD self-efficacy, perceived content knowledge (pCK), and pedagogical content knowledge (pPCK)? 3. Is there a meaningful relationship between the components of Teacher Self-Efficacy on Education for Sustainable Development (i.e., systemic thinking, emotions and feelings, values and ethics, actions), pCK, and pPCK? 4. Do classroom teachers' ESD self-efficacy, pCK, and pPCK levels differ according to gender, experience, education level, and whether they have previously taken an SKE course/training? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study employed a cross-sectional research design to examine classroom teachers' self-efficacy beliefs in education for sustainable development (ESD). The study investigated self-efficacy levels across four ESD competency domains (i.e., systemic thinking, emotions and feelings, values and ethics, actions), explored relationships between self-efficacy, perceived content knowledge (pCK), and perceived pedagogical content knowledge (pPCK), and how these variables differ based on demographic characteristics. The target population consisted of primary school teachers in Eastern Anatolia, Türkiye, during 2024-2025. Using convenience sampling (Fraenkel et al., 2011), participants were recruited from three provinces: Ağrı, Bingöl, and Van. The final sample comprised 1,012 primary school teachers from 370 schools (Ağrı: 326 teachers; Bingöl: 319 teachers; Van: 367 teachers). Instruments Data were collected using a Demographic Information Form and the Teacher Self-Efficacy for Education for Sustainable Development Scale (Malandrakis et al., 2019). The demographic form gathered information on gender, educational level, professional experience, and completion of ESD-related courses. The ESD self-efficacy scale contains two sections. Section one includes 24 items measuring self-efficacy across four ESD competency domains (7-point Likert scale): values and ethics (6 items), systems thinking (5 items), emotions and feelings (3 items), and action (10 items). Section two comprises 31 items assessing perceived content knowledge (pCK) (14 items, 4-point Likert) and perceived pedagogical content knowledge (pPCK) (17 items, 4-point Likert). The original scale demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .967; subscales: .853-.935). Scale Adaptation The scale was adapted through forward and back translation, with content validity established through expert review by two ESD specialists and one language expert. Modifications included contextual examples for clarity and cultural appropriateness, confirmed by the original developer. Ethical approvals were obtained from Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University and the Turkish Ministry of National Education. A pilot study (n=350) assessed psychometric properties. Confirmatory factor analysis examined construct validity using multiple fit indices (CFI, TLI, RMSEA, SRMR; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach's alpha (acceptable ≥ .70). Data Collection and Analysis Data were collected during fall 2024 through paper-based surveys during teachers' break times (~30 minutes). All participants provided informed consent. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 24 and AMOS 21. After examining missing data and normality assumptions, confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha assessed validity and reliability. Descriptive statistics characterized teachers' ESD self-efficacy, pCK, and pPCK levels. Pearson correlations examined variable relationships. Independent samples t-tests and ANOVA investigated demographic group differences, with effect sizes reported. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Scale Validity and Reliability Confirmatory factor analysis supported the Turkish version's four-factor structure with acceptable model fit (χ²/df = 2.548, CFI = .86, TLI = .85, RMSEA = .068, SRMR = .062). All subscales demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = .93-.96), confirming the scale as valid and reliable for Turkish primary school teachers. ESD Self-Efficacy, pCK, and pPCK Levels Primary school teachers reported moderate-to-high self-efficacy (M = 5.04, SD = 1.09 on a 7-point scale), indicating they "sufficiently trust" their ESD teaching capabilities. Among competency domains, emotions and feelings received the highest rating (M = 5.33), while action received the lowest (M = 4.88). Teachers reported moderate perceived content knowledge (pCK; M = 3.01, SD = 0.57 on a 4-point scale), with water pollution and climate change most familiar, while energy footprint and ecological footprint were least familiar. Perceived pedagogical content knowledge (pPCK) was also moderate (M = 2.96, SD = 0.61). Correlational Relationships Strong positive correlations emerged among all self-efficacy components (r = .78-.84, p < .01). Self-efficacy showed moderate-to-strong correlations with PCK (r = .50, p < .01) and PPCK (r = .61, p < .01). PCK and PPCK were strongly correlated (r = .64, p < .01). The action dimension demonstrated the strongest relationship with PCK (r = .51), while other dimensions showed moderate correlations (r = .42-.44). Demographic Differences Male teachers scored significantly higher on overall self-efficacy (M = 5.13 vs. 4.95, p = .009), though effect sizes were small (η² = .17). No significant gender differences emerged for PCK or PPCK. Teachers who completed ESD university courses demonstrated significantly higher self-efficacy and PPCK compared to those without such training, with no PCK difference. Teachers with postgraduate education scored significantly higher across all dimensions than undergraduate-only teachers, with small effect sizes. Professional experience showed significant differences only in PCK levels. References Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 Bertschy, F., Künzli, C., & Lehmann, M. (2013). Teachers' competencies for the implementation of educational offers in the field of education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 5(12), 5067-5080. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5125067 Eilks, I. (2015). Science education and education for sustainable development–justifications, models, practices and perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 149-158. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1313a Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill. IPBES. (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services. https://www.ipbes.net/global-assessment Malandrakis, G., Papadopoulou, P., Gavrilakis, C., & Mogias, A. (2019). An education for sustainable development self-efficacy scale for primary pre-service teachers: Construction and validation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 50(1), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2018.1492366 Pereira, H. M., Martins, I. S., Rosa, I. M., Kim, H., Leadley, P., Popp, A., ... & Alkemade, R. (2024). Global trends and scenarios for terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services from 1900 to 2050. Science, 384(6694), 458-465 Rieckmann, M. (2018). Learning to transform the world: Key competencies in Education for Sustainable Development. In A. Leicht, J. Heiss, & W. J. Byun (Eds.), Issues and trends in Education for Sustainable Development (pp. 39-59). UNESCO. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004 UN. (2024). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/ UNESCO. (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning objectives. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444 UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802 WWF. (2024). Living Planet Report 2024: A system in peril. World Wildlife Fund. https://www.wwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-10/living-planet-report-2024.pdf 30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper Savoirs or Competences? School environmental practices in the Chilean context 1: Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Chile; 2: Universidad Diego Portales, Chile; 3: Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano, Chile Presenting Author:The current socio-ecological crisis requires us to radically transform the ways we inhabit the world, proposing new social assemblages that take into account the agency of different human and non-human actors (Latour, 2008). In this context, it is urgent to re-examine schools as spaces for contesting meanings. This involves highlighting both their role in reproducing social structures and their potential to create new and multiple forms of knowledge and learning, thereby producing situated, transformative practices (Freire, 1968/1992). This communication seeks to challenge the concept of competencies for sustainability as a framework based on a perspective of instrumental education for the goal of Sustainable Development, with this understood as an ideal with cross-cultural validity (Jickling, 1994; Jickling & Wals, 2008; Sauvé, 1996; Sauvé & Berryman, 2013)(Sterling, 2025). Based on this critique, we propose: i) to theoretically position the concept of saberes ambientales / environmental savoirs (Leff, 1998) in order to sustain a situated knowledge framework (Haraway, 1991) for the projection of pedagogical alternatives in the context of polycrisis as an alternative to the hegemonic proposal of ESD; ii) to identify and analyze key teachers´ environmental knowledges for a critical environmental education with socially transformative potential; and iii) to bring this knowledge into dialogue with the interdisciplinary pedagogical proposal of Transformative Education with Nature (Condeza-Marmentini & Aedo, 2025) in two Chilean schools from the perspective of different actors in the school community. In general terms, there are at least four types of research aimed at recognizing the work of teachers involved in environmental issues. The first type seeks to highlight their experiences, perceptions, and values in and towards nature, the environment, and social issues in general, in relation to the long-term educational purposes they uphold (Condeza-Marmentini & Flores-Gonzalez, 2019b; Hart, 2003; Hart & Nolan, 1999; Hwang, 2009; Nikel, 2007; Öhman, 2004; Sauvé, 2004; Stevenson, 2007; Sund & Wickman, 2008). A second type of research focuses on teaching practices in the Global North and has addressed questions about teachers' adaptation to the ESD approach and associated practices, normalizing it as a desirable approach while highlighting its potential benefits and challenges. Distinctively, a third type of research has been developed in Global South countries, where the focus has been on studying educational practices related to the “environment” (Condeza-Marmentini, 2020; Hwang, 2009), highlighting the interaction between their epistemological visions of nature and the ESD proposal (Raselimo & Wilmot, 2013; Waktola, 2009; Watson & Halse, 2005; Yang et al., 2010), highlighting contextual challenges present in the process of adopting the internationalized ESD curriculum (Gough, 2013). This group includes research on contexts in which ESD has been expressed in educational policies — but not in teacher training programs — as is the case in Chile (UNESCO, 2019). A fourth type of research highlights the impact of neoliberal incentive policies implemented by national and international educational agencies, which, within the framework of ESD, aim to strengthen teachers’ identities as environmental managers to facilitate the development of transformative practices (Ketlhoilwe, 2013; Ross, 2015). In this context, we acknowledge the urgency of researching pedagogical practices guided by complex knowledge and situated, decolonized, and transformative epistemologies (Condeza-Marmentini & Flores-Gonzalez, 2019; Sauvé & Berryman, 2013). This call converges with contextualized and transformative/transgressive positions on the subject, such as those of Stephen Sterling, Marcia McKenzie, Arjen Wals, and Helia Lotz-Sisitka, as well as many others in the Global South. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used To address the research objectives from an interpretive-qualitative paradigm and through a socio-critical approach, two case studies of public schools in Chile are examined. The selection of cases used strategic purposive sampling. The first school is located in the suburbs of the city of Santiago and is characterized by a vulnerability index of almost 100%; the second is a rural school in the Valparaíso region, in an area that has been affected for more than fifty years by various environmental problems derived from the extractive mining model typical of the northern and central regions of the country. Both the extractive model and the Chilean educational model are strongly influenced by neoliberal policies. Both schools are studied from the perspective of students, teachers, administrators, parents, and neighborhood leaders, using tools such as in-depth interviews with key actors and focus groups. The data analysis was performed using a thematic analysis grounded in educational theory and research, as well as in key geography concepts (place, environment, and territory). In addition, codes and emerging categories were collected to identify specific elements of each case. Finally, the research results are discussed in terms of the proposal and practices associated with the Transformative Education with Nature Pedagogical Model. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The research concludes that there are different types of environmental competencies/knowledge, depending on the case study. The teaching competencies of flexibility, uncertainty management, territorialization, and community work are highlighted. In the case of the school located in the Santiago periphery sustained training work by the educational team is observed to address a proposal for restorative education, which is key, given the violence students experience daily. Planning around the following axes is also highlighted: immanence, movement, integration, and multiplicity. Several of these axes are usually worked outside of school and in relation to the community. Through these guidelines and practices, the school has improved its evaluations and standardized results, becoming a benchmark in school coexistence and interculturality. The school located in the Valparaíso region has different characteristics. Its purpose is to develop students' job skills and—informally—to strengthen their self-perception of their long-term capacity for achievement. The impact on the community, in the context of the risk of dam failure of mining tailings and local memory of disasters, is discussed, in tension with the region's traditional mining identity. The territory is in a state of flux towards the declaration of open environmental conflict, as reflected in a variety of views on the environment and environmental education practices. The relevance of the National ESD Policy and its instruments is discussed considering the pedagogical practices described and analyzed and the perspective of Latin American Environmental Thought, with a focus on the concept of environmental savoir. Finally, the Transformative Education with Nature conceptual proposal is highlighted as an educational alternative that articulates generic and specific competencies, enabling the emergence of situated environmental citizenships. References Condeza-Marmentini, A., & Aedo, M. P. (2025). Modelo Pedagógico de Educación Transformadora con la Naturaleza. In L. F. González Beltrán (Ed.), Educação no século XXI: perspectivas contemporâneas sobre ensino-aprendizagem Vol. III pp. 122 –155). Editora Artemis. Condeza-Marmentini, A., & Flores-Gonzalez, L. (2019). Teachers' Transgressive Pedagogical Practices in Context: Ecology, Politics, and Social Change. Sustainability, 11(21), Article 6145. Gough, N. (2013). Thinking Globally in Environmental Education a Critical History. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575 –599. Hart, P. (2003). Teachers' thinking in environmental education. Consciousenes and responsability (J. Jipson, Ed. Vol. 29). Peter Lang. Ketlhoilwe, M. J. (2013). Governmentality in environmental education policy discourses: A qualitative study of teachers in Botswana. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 22(4), 291–302. Latour, B. (2008). Re-ensamblar lo social. Una introducción a la teoría del actor-red. Manantial. Leff, E. (1998). Saber Ambiental: Sustentabilidad, racionalidad, complejidad, poder. Siglo XXI. Nikel, J. (2007). Making sense of education ‘responsibly’: findings from a study of student teachers' understanding(s) of education, sustainable development and Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 13(5), 19. Öhman, J. (2004). Moral Perspectives in Selective Traditions of Environmental Education - conditions for environmental moral meaning-making and students’ constitution as democratic citizens. In P. Wickenberg (Ed.), Learning to change our world? Swedish research on education & sustainable development (pp. 21–32). Studentlitteratur. Raselimo, M., & Wilmot, D. (2013). Geography teachers' interpretation of a curriculum reform initiative. South African Journal of Education, 33(1), Article Unsp 681. Ross, H. (2015). Negotiating managerialism: professional recognition and teachers of sustainable development education. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 403–416. Sauvé, L. (1999). La Educación Ambiental entre la Modenidad y la Postmodernidad. Tópicos en Educación Ambiental, 1(2), 18. Sauvé, L., & Berryman, T. (2013). Language and Discourses of Education, Environment and Sustainable Development. In R. B. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), International Handbook of Research on Environmental Education. AERA. Sund, P. & Wickman, P. O. (2008). Teachers' objects of responsibility: something to care about in education for sustainable development? Environmental Education Research, 14(2), 145–163. UNESCO. (2021). Teachers have their say: Motivation, skills and opportunities to teach education for sustainable development and global citizenship. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Waktola, D. K. (2009). Challenges and opportunities in mainstreaming environmental education into the curricula of teachers' colleges in Ethiopia. Environmental Education Research, 15(5), 589–605. | ||