A review of curricular updates in technology subjects for students in Ireland

Sustainability is a popular topic in business, politics, and education around the world. There has been an increase in environmental education and sustainability curricula in public and private schools, but some researchers question the effectiveness, implementation, and intended outcomes of the curricula. Specifically, education for sustainable development (ESD) in an internationally-recognized set of educational standards that is typically taught in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects. However, some researchers are concerned that STEM fields do not traditionally provide the space for students to reflect upon sustainability learning materials and topics. Reflection has been considered by researchers as a critical component to the success of building a sustainable future in an increasingly complex intersection of environmental, economics, and society. For this study, the researchers reviewed updated technology education syllabi in Ireland to determine how ESD was integrated into the curricula and to shed light in the way STEM fields may or may not reconceptualize teaching methods for students to fully immerse themselves in ESD reflection.

The Irish education system follows the leading ESD policies set forth by the United Nations and European Union. In 2014, the country developed a six-year strategy to revise ESD in their schools, especially in lower secondary levels, and to update the syllabi to incorporate better ESD practices in STEM subjects. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment is the statutory body that conducts all curricular changes in Ireland. This Council is comprised of 22 stakeholders that include industry representatives, parents, teachers' unions, and other key educational leaders. When revising the ESD curricula in technology education, a subject-specific focus group of diverse representatives was put together to make the final updates for implementation in classrooms. The researchers hypothesized the complex politics behind curriculum changes have led to a weak reflection of necessary ESD in technology education to promote critical change and long-lasting sustainability, and instead included too many technological innovations for sustainability that ignored the core issues.

The researchers reviewed three curricula for lower second-level schools (12- to 15-year old students) in Ireland that underwent updates for sustainability for the 2019-2020 academic year. These curricula were for applied technology, engineering, and wood technology. Based on the literature surrounding ESD, the researchers named three types of sustainability in educational practice that include the facets of environment, value of environment, and sustainability. These three types build upon each other, with the third type being the most ideal. Type one, "symbolic acknowledgement,” or the "empty signifier,” views the environment as separate to the subject, values the environment as a resource to meet basic human needs, and treats sustainability as something to be reflected upon. Type two, "mutual flourishing,” or "weak anthropocentrism,” views the environment through the subject, includes the intrinsic value of the environment in addition to it as a resource to humans, and treats sustainability as a balance between human and non-human success. Type three, "radical reconceptualization,” views the environment as greater than the sum of its parts, takes a holistic approach to valuing the environment, and teaches sustainability through different critical pedagogies to fully understand the extent of sustainable development. The researchers used this framework to measure the three updated curricula.

One marker of ESD integration was the use of terms such as "environment” and "sustainability” in the curriculum. The applied technology curricula mentioned environment nine times, and sustainability only twice. The researchers concluded the technology curricula was a type one "symbolic acknowledgement” because it did not incorporate the impact of technology on sustainability within the larger contexts of society such as politics, economics, and culture. In the engineering curricula, sustainability was mentioned four times and was most often paired with environment. The researchers concluded this syllabus was type two "mutual flourishing,” because although there was still a lack of tying the larger social contexts into technology, there was evidence of encouraging students to develop and use technology to create a better future in which humans and the environment can thrive. In the wood technology syllabus, sustainable and sustainability appeared six times and environment nine times. There was also a specific section called Environment and Sustainability in the wood technology curricula that connected ESD and sustainability to the social and economic contexts of deforestation and raw materials management. The researchers concluded this syllabus was a type two "mutual flourishing” because of the forward-looking notions that technology can solve environmental issues while maintaining environmental and human nature harmony.

Overall, the researchers identified three key findings. First, the premise that technology is applied to society largely remained in the ESD curricula among all three subjects. When the broader contexts of society such as politics, economics, and culture are not considered in depth, this can lead to disjointed and less sustainable technological solutions. Second, there was no definition of sustainability in the curricula, which can inhibit students from fully conceptualizing the purpose of technological solutions for sustainable development. Finally, there was very limited improvement of ESD between the former subjects' syllabi and the new syllabi created by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. The researchers suggested these key findings were likely the result of the challenges inherent to curriculum updates, the tendency to introduce incremental changes as opposed to one extensive change, and the lack of critical understanding of sustainability.

There were limitations to this study. The researchers chose to focus on ESD specifically in technology, though ESD can be applied to all STEM subjects. Second, the Irish education system is unique. Further, these circumstances may not apply to public or private education systems in other countries. Therefore, the results are not generalizable.

Based on the findings in this study, the researchers suggested symbolic acknowledgement was most prevalent in the curricular changes because of the general reluctance of people on the Council to implement curricular changes, misunderstanding of the scale and complexity of sustainability, lack of resources on sustainability and current limits of sustainable knowledge. They asserted that until radical change becomes the norm of society and in education, only small changes will continue to happen for ESD. For example, a lesson might ask students to consider whether the product is needed in society rather than just thinking how to manufacture a product in a sustainable way. Finally, the researchers recommended the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment outline a plan to include a more diverse and interdisciplinary group of stakeholders when making curricular changes. The researchers shared it is critical to instituting stronger curricular changes to include sustainability. Specifically, this group should include younger voices and those from underserved areas that experience unsustainable practices on an everyday basis.