As human consumption of natural resources continues to increase, sustainable education and resource management are key to avoiding major conflicts during economic development. Sustainable development (SD) focuses on three dimensions: improving social conditions, solving environmental problems, and reducing economic inequality. Education for sustainable development (ESD) is an especially important facet of SD, but the interdisciplinary nature of ESD can result in teachers feeling as though they lack the necessary skills or resources to properly execute it. For that reason, this study aimed to better understand how teachers combined different subjects in ESD curriculum and how teachers perceived the promotion of student understanding in the three dimensions of SD.
This study was part of a larger multi-case study focused on ESD in Norway. Researchers examined curriculum units from 14 schools participating in an ESD-focused program called the Sustainable Backpack Program (SBP). SBP aims to increase student and teacher development of SD competencies by supporting curriculum creation and acting as a learning network for professional development. The 14 participating schools represented 10 of the 18 counties in Norway, and all schools had participated in SBP for at least three years. At each school, teachers designed an interdisciplinary ESD curriculum unit for 5th-7th grade students and then reported on their unit after completion. The study data were drawn from teachers' final reports, which described: the subjects that were part of the project; the competence aims; the promotion of student's understanding of SD; and the description of curriculum unit, including the methods, teaching, and student activities. Researchers asked the teachers clarifying questions as needed, then completed content analysis to identify statements related to each realm of SD: environmental, social, and economic.
Researchers found that all curriculum units had a focus of natural science, while social studies themes were present in 71% of units. However, there was not much mention of the economic aspect of SD. Although half mentioned economics, teachers described it in general and vague terms. The curriculum units included competence aims from other subjects to varying degrees: Norwegian language (57%), math (64%), food and health (43%), arts (29%), PE (36%), English (7%), and Christianity, religion, philosophy of life and ethics (CRPE) (7%). All units linked natural science to their local community and promoted student investigation, either through natural science, social studies, or digital tools. Investigations also connected to language skills through presentations and writing texts, although there was evidence of untapped potential in this area.
The researchers thought that the teachers could have offered more challenging opportunities for reflection and critical thinking, especially in the areas of the Norwegian language subject and CRPE. More focus on competence aims from these areas could make the units more cognitively challenging and engaging for students. The researchers thought the lack of this aspect could be due to lack of time and/or the shifting of school priorities toward subject competencies and basic skills rather than interdisciplinary work.
The study had limitations. It included a small sample size of only Norwegian schools participating in a specific ESD program, which limits the generalizability of the results. In addition, the study was based on teacher reports, so it represents only one perspective on the curriculum units and any omissions would not be known.
The researchers recommend that teachers continue to craft interdisciplinary curriculum units focused on the three dimensions of SD. Within SBP, they used the data to encourage a more varied approach to teaching and that teachers consider the unused potential in different subject areas, especially through critical thinking and exploration. The researchers also recommend future research into how teachers can become more comfortable teaching controversial topics.
The Bottom Line
Sustainable development (SD) is key to solving issues with resource management and extraction. SD has three dimensions: improving social conditions, solving environmental problems, and reducing economic inequality. This study aimed to better understand how teachers combined different subjects in SD curriculum and perceived the promotion of student understanding in the three dimensions of SD. The study focused on SD curriculum units at 14 middle schools as reported by teachers. Researchers found that all units included natural science, 71% included social studies, and 7% included economics, addressing two of the three SD dimensions. Many also included other subject areas, although Norwegian language and life/ethics studies represented areas of untapped potential which could offer more challenging opportunities for reflection and critical thinking. The researchers recommend continued integration of interdisciplinary aims into education for SD and further research into how teachers can become more comfortable teaching controversial topics.