Research on environmental education and education for sustainable development is an expanding field in educational research in Europe, as well as worldwide. With EERA celebrating 20 year, and the Decade for Education on Sustainable Development (DESD) in its final year, it is possible to make a halt for discussions of the present with perspectives of both the past and the future. Based on empirical findings on Eco-School teachers’ and instructors’ views on the appropriateness of including different sustainability-promoting actions in their teaching practices, this paper will discuss actions in relation to the Action Competence perspective, and tensions that manifests in educational settings between educational ideals of socialisation and educational ideas of liberal autonomy (Bildung), as well as, what is seen as private matter and what it is seen as part of the educational commission.

From the perspective of Action Competence, and the educational ideal of Bildung, it has been claimed, as one of the dominating standpoints in the academic ESD-debate concerning the purpose of sustainability-promoting actions in education, that the actions are there, not to solve the unsustainability problems in the world, but to educate the students. The importance in ESD of learning critical decision taking in choices of actions as a citizen in a democratic society, nationally and globally has been stressed. The study is based on the premise that the inclusion of actions in teaching practices depends on teachers’ choices of lecturing, which to some degree is in turn dependent on their experience during teacher training, and explores Eco-School teachers’ and instructors’ views on the appropriateness of including different sustainability-promoting actions in teaching. As the importance of action for sustainability is highlighted in the Eco-Schools’ curricula, there are incitements for teachers at Eco-Schools to consider the inclusion of different sustainability-promoting actions in their teaching, either in terms of information and discussions about possible actions or in terms of student participation in actions.

However, critique has been raised from the perspective of the need for education not to neglect the urgency of solving sustainability issues. Also, the Action Competence perspective, although based on a Bildung perspective, has been criticised for being just another form of socialisation. In addition to this, the liberal ideal of autonomy has been questioned.

This paper will discuss how Eco-School teachers and instructors relate to different forms of actions, indirect/direct and individual/collective, that may take part in the private or the public sphere and be seen as personal or political. In relation to this, the Action Competence perspective will be discussed in perspectives of the present, past and future and the tensions that manifests in educational settings between educational ideals of socialisation and educational ideals of liberal autonomy (Bildung), as well as, what is seen as private matter and what it is seen as part of the educational commission.

Almers, E. (2013). Pathways to Action Competence for Sustainability - Six Themes. Journal of Environmental Education, 44(2), 116-127. Barrett, M. J. (2006). Education for the environment: action competence, becoming and story. Environmental Education Research, 12(3-4), 503-511. Bauman, Z. (2001). The Individualized Society. Cambridge: Polity. Beck, U. (1998). World Risk Society. Cambridge. Cambridge: Polity. Biesta, G. (2007). The education-socialisation conundrum or 'Who is afraid of Education?'. Utbilding & Demokrati [Education & Democracy], 16(3), 25-36. Bohman, J. (2005). Rights, cosmopolitanism and pulic reason. Interactive universalism in The Claims of Culture. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 31(7), 715-726. Breiting, S., & Mogensen, F. (1999). Action Competence and Environmental Education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 29(3), 349-353. Englund, T. (1986). Curriculum as a political problem : changing educational conceptions, with special reference to citizenship education. Uppsala: Diss. Uppsala University. Habermas, J. (2008). Between Naturalism and Religion. Cambridge: Polity. Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Paantheon Books. Jensen, B. B. (2002). Knowledge, Action and Proenvironmental Behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 325-334. Jensen, B. B. (2004). Environmental and health education viewed from an action-oriented perspective: a case from Denmark. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(4), 405-425. Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The Action Competence Approach in Environmental Education. Environmental Education Research, 3(2), 163-178. Öhman, J. (2008). Environmental ethics and democratic responsibility: A pluralistic approach to ESD. In J. Öhman (Ed.), Values and Democracy in Education for Sustainable Development - Contributions from Swedish Research (pp. 19-32). Malmö: Liber. Papastephanou, M. (2008). Philosophical Presuppositions of Citizenship Education and Political Liberalism. In J. Arthur, I. Davies, & C. Hahn, The SAGE Handbook of Education for Citizenship and Democracy (pp. 40-56). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: SAGE. Sennett, R. (1993). The Fall of Public Man. London: Faber and Faber. Short, P. C. (2009). Responsible Environmental Action: Its Role and Status in Environmental Education and Environmental Quality. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 7-21. Vare, P., & Scott, W. (2007). Learning for a Change: Exploring the Relationship Between Education and Sustainable Development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(2), 191-198.