1. Introduction

Education is a fundamentally future-oriented discipline and practice. Indeed, futures scholars have argued for more futures-oriented learning and teaching since the 1980s. This idea has been explored under many different names: Futures literacy, futures thinking, futures consciousness and futures skills are but a few examples of circulating terminology. All of these broadly refer to an individual’s capacity to engage with a plurality of futures. And yet, despite these long-standing efforts, futures have still not made it broadly into classrooms – perhaps not least due to the transdisciplinary nature of the topic and heterogeneity of the available literature. In an effort to help build bridges between the two fields, our study investigates and synthesizes theoretical foundations of learners’ ability to engage with futures. Situated at the intersection of futures studies and education, we ask: How can futures competence in learners be pedagogically defined and conceptualized? What are dispositional constituents of such a futures competence?

2. Methods

Researchers from both futures studies and education have already laid important groundwork for theorizing futures pedagogically. We therefore employ a systematic literature review following a configurative synthesis logic in order to bring together various conceptualizations and models.

We reviewed three databases (ERIC, Google Scholar and Scopus, alongside citation searching) with the search terms >education< combined with four futures key words (>futures skills/literacy/thinking/competence<). Our focus was explicitly on studies in educational contexts that specify non-subject-specific competencies relating to learners’ ability to engage with futures, i.e. publications that contribute to a conceptual understanding of what constitutes futures competence. Among the 104 journal articles, conference papers and book chapters identified as eligible, we selected 22 records for analysis and synthesis. Those include four different types of publication, namely literature review, conceptual paper, grounded theory, and case study. For the purpose of synthesis, the included publications were provisionally classified according to the type of conceptual contribution they make, distinguishing between (a) dimensional descriptions of futures-related capacities, (b) componential accounts naming specific aspects or dispositions, and (c) progressional models describing sequences or learning processes. All records were then subjected to inductive and deductive analysis.

3. Results and Discussion

Preliminary results indicate that descriptions of futures competence in the literature systematically address four modes of engagement, yielding a descriptive analytical framework grounded in competence theory: 1) Cognitive–epistemic, 2) Imaginative–creative, 3) Reflexive–normative and 4) Action–agency oriented.

Recoding the descriptions extracted from the literature according to these four analytically derived dimensions of futures engagement, we propose a working competence model that integrates these dimensions as mutually constitutive aspects of learners’ futures competence.

While abstract and non-subject specific, this model is not meant as a general theory of futures competence; rather, it was specifically conceived to serve as a concrete starting point with an integrative view for theorizing teachers’ futures competence, i.e. the profile required of educators to effectively nurture this capacity in – or better, with – their students.

Against this backdrop, the model is intended as a theoretical basis for further dialogue between disciplines and continued research at the intersection of education and futures studies.

4. Educational significance of the research

Insufficient consideration for educators, whose associated teaching skills with relation to futures tend to be silently assumed or implicitly expected, has been repeatedly identified as an obstacle to bringing futures into classrooms. We view a thorough understanding of what constitutes futures competence at the learner level as a necessary first step towards conceptualizing the futures competence of teachers. Grounded in existing models from both education and futures studies, our synthesis provides precisely such a starting point.

In addition, the non-subject-specific nature of the model allows and calls for its application into other disciplines, e.g. in the context of education for sustainable development, science education and others.

Background: Due to sociologist Gérard Delanty, the future is a way of experiencing the world. But how can we experience a world that exists in our imagination only, as a time yet to come? Due to UNESCO, being futures literate empowers the imagination. But shouldn't we rather strengthen our imagination in order to become futures literate? At the UNESCO Chair in Learning and Teaching Futures Literacy in the Anthropocene, futures literacy pedagogy is being developed: didactic concepts, methods, and tools that foster futures thinking in lecture theatres and classrooms across the curriculum. Futures literacy as an educational concept for learning and teaching in the Anthropocene therefore aims to promote imagination in particular. As research findings in psychology and neuroscience show, children and young people need continuous support in developing their imaginative abilities. Futures literacy as an educational concept needs to be translated into teaching methodologies for pedagogical practice. The Futures Stories Lab has been developed as a framework concept for teaching futures literacy. The five steps – or chapters – of the Futures Stories Lab offer a structured, but flexible setting for a futures literacy experience in educational contexts. Theoretically based on the craft-based approach of possibility studies, the econarratological approach of Environmental Humanities, inspired by temporal pedagogy based on Anthropocene studies, and committed to cultural sustainability in education, futures literacy pedagogy creates transformative learning experiences for practicing futures thinking, for imagining and narrating sustainable futures. This research lecture introduces foundational principles based on a pilot study. The following research question has been posited: how may the methodological format of the Futures Stories Lab encourage the development of futures thinking within the context of primary education?

Methods: In order to develop the foundational principles of futures literacy pedagogy, teaching formats are being tested, combining educational design research (EDR) and arts-based research (ABR). While ABR is responsible for the artistic and aesthetic dimension, EDR ensures the systematic, cyclical research and development process through which the formats are iteratively tested, reflected upon and improved. In a pilot study on soil futures, iterative cycles were used to investigate the extent to which the method “Futures Stories Lab” promotes futures thinking in primary education. A follow-up study investigates the potential of the interactive exhibition format “Future on Campus” for implementing futures literacy in teacher education. The interactive exhibition serves as a real-world laboratory in which futures thinking is explored co-creatively at interactive stations.

Results and Discussion: The pilot study allows to derive initial design principles for the teaching method “Futures Stories Lab” that will be outlined in the research lecture: a) relevance to everyday life: the learning opportunities tie in with places, experiences and topics that are familiar to children (e.g. school playground, compost, worm bin) and are framed by current and local environmental issues; b) Multimodality and creative forms of expression: the combination of factual topics with artistic, dramatic, and media approaches, as well as analogue and digital design options, provides opportunities for transformative learning; c) reflection and participation: children actively shape the learning process, reflect regularly and experience their ideas becoming visible and effective – this strengthens self-efficacy and transfer; d) didactic framing by teachers: a clear task structure, language-sensitive materials and targeted stimulus questions support the learning process; the role of the teacher is understood as that of a facilitator and learning companion; e) narration as the key to shaping the future: scenarios, characters, and stories help to make the future emotionally tangible; personal and collective visions of the future are linked together.

Educational significance: Futures literacy pedagogy offers manifold possibilities for teaching futures thinking in structured, but flexible settings. The craft-based and narrative approach that is central for futures literacy pedagogy leads to a combination of creative, cultural, and scientific practices when engaging students with future imaginaries in the structured, but flexible setting of the Futures Stories Lab. Within the wider framework of cultural sustainability in education, a narrative-aesthetical approach is therefore favoured for strengthening the power of the imagination.

Introduction

In the face of the global polycrisis—students increasingly report feelings of uncertainty, fear, and paralysis about the future (Hickman et al., 2021). These emotional responses are often compounded by dominant discourses on “the future”, which frame it as singular, expert-driven, and technocratic. In such framings, learners are positioned not as co-creators of futures but as recipients of predetermined visions (Poli, 2021).

This paper explores how Futures Literacy (FL)—defined as the capability to imagine and reason about multiple possible, probable, and preferable futures (Miller, 2018)—offers a promising pedagogical response to futures anxiety. By engaging students in futures thinking and treating uncertainty as a resource supporting the development of their FL. This in turn serves to enable learners in navigating complex societal changes and reimagining their role in shaping the future. Rather than focusing on prediction or control, FL cultivates imagination, critical reflection, and emotional resilience.

Drawing on experiences from three university-level courses in teacher education (run between 2023-2025), this paper examines how learners engaged with futures thinking, what challenges emerged, and what conditions supported deeper anticipatory engagement.

The paper asks:

• How do students experience futures thinking when invited into co-creative practices?

• What emotional and cognitive shifts emerge through engaging with FL?

Methods

This paper synthesises insights from three courses delivered at the University of Tartu. Across courses, students engaged with different futuring methods and scrutinised dominant imaginaries. All courses were framed by principles of participatory, transformative pedagogy.

Data consists of student reflections and learning journals, collected between 2023 and 2025. Using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun et al., 2023), I examined how students described their learning processes, emotional responses, and shifts in agency over time. As educator-researcher, I also draw on field notes and design memos to reflect on the design tensions encountered in facilitating FL.

Results and Discussion

Analysis reveals two primary contributions of FL to educational settings. First, as a response to futures anxiety, FL offers learners not certainty, but confidence in uncertainty. Structured engagements with futures thinking helped participants see futures as open and malleable and articulate futures beyond dominant dystopian or simplistically techno-optimistic scripts. Participants reported that FL activities supported both emotional processing and a renewed sense of agency in shaping futures.

Second, FL enabled a critical interrogation of what constitutes “desirable” futures—and who gets to define them. Learners began to question status quo assumptions about sustainability, progress, and educational success. Creating and negotiating their own visions of desirable futures served to clarify and debate values in the present.

At the same time, coursework has systematically revealed limits in imagination, with many students struggling to envision radically different futures. This gap underscores a tension: while educators should support learners in stretching their imagination, doing so without falling into prescriptive or coercive pedagogies is challenging. In this sense, FL is not only a competence but a pedagogical ethos—one that emphasises reflexivity, plurality, and agency over prediction or consensus.

Educational Significance of the Research

This paper contributes to both futures studies and educational theory by proposing FL as a response to the rising emotional, ethical, and political stakes of education in a time of uncertainty. It challenges the “future education” narrative by reframing the future as plural, contested, and open to co-creation. FL offers a way to democratise anticipation—inviting learners to become not merely future-ready, but future-making.

For educators, FL provides a framework to hold space for discomfort, invite imaginative risk-taking, and explore futures as sites of both critique and creativity. Ultimately, this paper argues that equipping learners with FL is not a luxury but a necessity for navigating the complexities of our planetary condition.

Bibliography

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., Davey, L., & Jenkinson, E. (2023). Doing reflexive thematic analysis. In Supporting research in counselling and psychotherapy: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research (pp. 19–38). Springer.

Miller, R. (2018). Sensing and making-sense of futures literacy: Towards a futures literacy framework (FLF). In Transforming the future (pp. 15–50). Routledge.

Poli, R. (2021). The challenges of futures literacy. Futures, 132, 102800.