Topic 5: Lessons learned and future practice

We have now reached the end of the course HEDS241, and in this final individual reflection I will look back on what I have learned this semester. I will also look forward, reflecting on how I can use the competences from this course in my own teaching. 

• What are the most important things that you have learnt through your engagement in this course? Why?

The most important things I have been introduced to in this course are the critical perspectives on education, universities, and sustainability education such as for instance Osberg, D. and Biesta, G. (2020), Lotz-Sisitka et al. (2015), Stein et al (2022), Orr 1991, It has been a comfort to know that I am not alone in thinking that the educational system is not doing what it preaches in terms of sustainability, and that we as educators are not giving students the competence they need concerning sustainability. For me it is important to acknowledge our shortcomings and mistakes before we can move on and do something about the problem.

I also found it very interesting to learn about all the different views on sustainability (Hopwood et al 2005). This helped me understand and interpret discussions I have had with others about sustainability. I also thought it was interesting to read some of the research concerning sustainability competences, and I especially liked the competence models that included implementation competency, such as Brundiers et al., 2021).

Figure: Sustainability competencies from Brundier et al (2021)

 

The models for sustainability didactics for higher education was what motivated me to take this course in the first place, and I did learn a lot about this topic. For instance, I learned that there are different approaches or teaching styles concerning sustainability education; normative, fact-based and pluralistic (Öhman and Östman, 2019). The pluralistic approach treats sustainability questions as political problems, where people might agree on the facts, but can have different ideas to how to solve the problem. The pluralistic tradition has been found to be the most promising way forward. 

We also learned about several different pluralistic didactic models for teaching sustainability, such as Constructive alignment and Tree of Science (Wilhelm et al., 2019), Wicked problems (Block et al., 2019), Sustainability commitment (Öhman & Sund, 2021), and finally Five forms of democratic participation (Lundegård & Caiman, 2019). I preferred the last one, as it resonates with my own teaching philosophy of student activity and participation.

·        How will your learning influence your practice?

I liked the pluralistic approach to sustainability education, and especially the the five forms of democratic participation-model. Without having had a name for it, I think that my teaching has been moving in this direction for a while. For instance I try to choose authentic learning situations that give room for student agency and creativity, as well as giving room for deliberate discussions and critical reflection.  However I still have a lot of work to do here concerning creating authentic learning situations. I also think I should make the didactic choices explicit for the students, especially since they are teacher students and it is important for them to reflect on didactics.

·        What are your thoughts about didactics for sustainability in your
own context?

As a teacher educator, I  think that I have more questions concerning sustainability didactics now, than I had before the course. Some of the questions I have are; What is the relation between the didactics in higher education and didactics that teachers use in school? Is it the same, or different? Do we need a special type of didactics in teacher education to give teacher students the type of educator competences that they need to teach their students about sustainability? Or can I teach my teacher students the Five forms of democratic participation, so that they can use them with their pupils?

·        What are you going to do as a result of your involvement in this course? Why?

 I have already started sharing some of my insights from this course with colleges. Recently I presented some of the didactic models that we have learned in this course in a transdisciplinary sustainability group at my Department. I think it is very important for us as teacher educators to discuss HOW we teach sustainability and not just whether we teach it or not, and I would like to contribute to this discussion. I hope in the future we can have more discussions and seminars on sustainability didactics, and perhaps we as colleges can even agree on choosing one model.

 ·        What suggestions do you have (activities and/or in general) for development of didactics for sustainability in your own teaching or context? 

This course has made me reflect on my own responsibility concerning teaching sustainability. As I mainly teach chemistry and science didactics for teacher students, I have felt that sustainability is not really my responsibility. However, some of the readings we have done for this course has made me rethink this. 

Figure: Chemical hazard symbol for environmental danger.

Environmental educator Orr argues that all education is environmental education, and he suggests that we should set a goal of ecological literacy for all students (Orr, 1991). Ecological literacy would mean that students can reflect on the ecological implications of all the topics that they learn about. So then, perhaps it is my responsibility to teach the ecological dimension of chemistry. Understanding hazard symbols are part of what students learn, but perhaps I could link this more clearly to the ecological consequences of use and chemical waste. When teaching the elements and the periodic table students could discuss the consequences of mining and use of elements such as titanium, lithium or gold. The teacher students could also discuss the ecological dilemmas of producing new materials such as plastic, or synthesizing chemicals such as PFAS, nicknamed "Forever chemicals", as they are persistant and stays on in the environment.

Sources:

Block, T., Van Poeck, K., & Östman, L. (2019). Tackling wicked problems in teaching and learning. Sustainability issues as knowledge, ethical and political challenges. In Sustainable Development Teaching (1st ed., pp. 28–39). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351124348-3

Brundiers, K., Barth, M., Cebrián, G. et al. (2021) Key competencies in sustainability in higher education—toward an agreed-upon reference framework. Sustain Sci 16, 13–29.

Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., and O’Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. Sustainable Development, 13(1):38–52.

Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A. E., Kronlid, D., and McGarry, D. (2015). Transformative, transgressive social learning: Rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dysfunction. 

Lundegård, I., & Caiman, C. (2019). Didaktik för naturvetenskap och hållbar utveckling - Fem former av demokratiskt deltagande. Education for science and Sustainable Development-Five forms of Democratic Participation. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 15(1), 38-53. (In Swedish)

Orr, D. (1991) What is education for?

Osberg, D. and Biesta, G. (2020). Beyond curriculum: Groundwork for a non-instrumental theory of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 

Stein, S., Andreotti, V., Susa, R., Ahenakew, C., and Cajková, T. (2022). From “education for sustainable development” to “education for the end of the world as we know it” Educational Philosophy and Theory, 54(3):274–287

Wilhelm, S., Förster, R., & Zimmermann, A. B. (2019). Implementing competence orientation: Towards constructively aligned education for sustainable development in university-level teaching-and-learning  Sustainability, 11(7), 1891.

Öhman, J., & Östman, L. (2019). Different teaching traditions in environmental and sustainability education. In Sustainable Development Teaching (pp. 70-82). Routledge.

Öhman, J., & Sund, L. (2021). A didactic model of sustainability commitment. Sustainability, 13(6), 3083.