When schools or programs adopt a new approach, they want to know whether it works. The authors point to three common weaknesses in how this is checked. Many studies use a school label, such as "eco-school", in place of evidence of what is actually taught. Many survey students only once, or test just before and after a short program. And they measure "action" in very different ways.
At one upper secondary school in Sweden, all teachers took a two-year training program in education for sustainable development (ESD). The researchers surveyed 760 students three times between February 2018 and April 2019. They also surveyed students in the same grades at the same school before the training started.
What they found:
- Measuring experience, not labels. Students rated how often lessons linked environmental, economic and social issues, and how often lessons involved open discussion, critical reading and taking a stand. This showed the first kind of teaching grew while the second didn't.
- A clear definition of the outcome. "Action competence" was measured as three parts: knowing ways to act, confidence that you can make a difference, and willingness to act. Measuring the parts separately showed that knowledge and willingness grew but confidence didn't.
- Following the same students showed real change. Only 208 students answered all three surveys, so the analysis used every answer available rather than discarding partial responses.
- A baseline group ruled out age. Final-year students scored higher than the earlier group, so the growth wasn't just students getting older.
- Linking experience to outcomes pointed to what mattered. Students who experienced more open discussion reported more knowledge, confidence and willingness to act.
- Checks built confidence in the results. The team used previously tested questions and checked that students read them the same way each time. One question that didn't fit was dropped. They also confirmed that results held for girls and boys and for both study programs.
What this means for your practice:
- Measure what learners experience. Ask participants how often specific practices happened, rather than assuming your program delivers what it promises.
- Break big outcomes into parts. Measure knowledge, confidence and willingness separately; they can move differently.
- Follow the same people over time. Survey at the start, middle and end of a long program, not just once.
- Expect drop-off and plan for it. Keep partial responses rather than discarding them.
- Find a comparison group. Survey a similar group before your change begins, to separate your program's effect from natural growth.
- Use tested questions. Borrow established survey items rather than writing your own from scratch.
- Check results across groups. Look at whether different groups, such as girls and boys, start or grow differently.
- Allow enough time. Some changes, such as confidence and discussion-rich teaching, took longer than two years to show.
The Bottom Line
Researchers surveyed 760 students aged 17 to 19 up to three times over two years. They compared the results with a group from the same school before the teachers' training began. They measured what students experienced in lessons, not just whether the school called itself a sustainability school, and linked that experience to students' knowledge, confidence and willingness to act. The design showed real change: knowledge of ways to act and willingness to act grew beyond what age alone would explain, while confidence did not grow significantly. It also showed that one teaching style changed while another didn't, and that open discussion mattered most. For educators, the study is a model for evaluating long-term teaching change: follow the same learners, measure their actual experience, and compare with a baseline group.