In this paper, we will present the first findings from a newly started four years long project financed by the Swedish Research Council, about preschool teaching for sustainable development. More specifically, we will present the work that teachers and researchers are doing together in the project, when formulating didactical dilemmas to elaborate on further. The aim of the first part of the study is to investigate what didactical dilemmas preschool teachers experience while teaching for sustainability and the next step is to explore what didactical models can help them develop their teaching. In this paper we concentrate on the first part of the project.

The number of studies on sustainable development in preschool has expanded in recent years (Hedefalk et al., 2015; Caiman & Lundegård, 2015; 2018). However, there are still few studies investigating the teaching currently taking place at preschools around the world (Hill et al. 2014; Hedefalk et al. 2015; Somerville & Williams 2015). Previous research has focused on environmental issues (Hedefalk et al., 2015; Green, 2015; Somerville & Williams, 2015), which has a long tradition in Swedish preschool. More researchers now emphasize the importance of creating new forms of education to handle complexity and uncertainty in the challenges that sustainability issues contain (Sterling, 2009; Wals et al., 2009). One example is to use children’s imagination to create solutions to sustainable problems (Caiman & Lundegård, 2015). Although children's own thoughts and interests govern the teaching content of preschool, studies show that education for sustainability (ESD) often involves the sharing of facts and / or attitudes and behaviors considered sustainable by the teacher (Hedefalk, 2014; 2018). The consequence of the predefined teaching method is that children's own perceptions of sustainable development might be overshadowed.

Furthermore, research show a tension between those who believe that education does not belong in preschool as there is a risk that it will be at the expense of play and care and those who prioritize teaching as part of the assignment (Swedish Schools Inspectorate 2018; Jonsson, Williams, & Pramling Samuelsson, 2017). The School Inspectorate's final report finds that the pedagogical work in many preschools in Sweden is not sufficiently targeted and that teaching thus becomes unclear. This provides poorer conditions for development and learning (2018 p. 7). Didactical decisions about teaching and specifically teaching for sustainable development is apparently an urgent question for preschool teachers today.

In the present study, we investigate what didactical dilemmas appear when a group of preschool teachers plan, execute and evaluate their teaching for sustainable development. These preschool teachers might have different views on children, learning and teaching, and therefore experience different kinds of dilemmas and concerns (cf.  Hedefalk, 2014; Ingerman & Wickman, 2015; Sundblad et al., 2018). We use John Deweys (1925/1958) pragmatism to investigate meaning making by observing actions among the teacher group. We also use Ludvig Wittgensteins (1969/1992) way of exploring how humans use different forms of language.

Research question we have at this stage in the project is:

What didactical dilemmas can we detect in preschool teachers conversations about ESD?

The approach we use to analyze the interviews with the preschool teachers is developed by PO Wickman and Leif Östman (2002) and is inspired by Dewey (1925/1958) and Wittgenstein (1969/1992). The method, PEA (practical epistemological analysis) has been used in a number of teaching and learning studies. We use theories from these two philosophers to investigate problematic situations also called “gaps” when preschool teachers plan and evaluate ESD. Gaps are understood as uncertainty or doubt among the teachers. The gaps are visible when the teachers show the action of hesitation. When a teacher is not certain about something there is a need to fill the gap to be able to continue the discussion about ESD. By finding these gaps and the way the teacher fills the gaps, we can explore didactical dilemmas among the preschool teachers. The interviews are recorded and performed both with individual teachers and in groups. The interviews include general questions about the teachers' view of the teacher assignment and on sustainable development, as well as potential obstacles and opportunities with the teaching of sustainable development. We conduct initial interviews in the spring of 2019 with 5-7 preschool teachers during two occasions. During these interviews we ask questions about the preschool teachers' didactic dilemmas and how they work with these in preschool. In the spring of 2020 we conduct interviews again. In 2020 we enter the second cycle of the project. When we start the second cycle, the teachers have developed their teaching together with the researchers, tried it out, evaluated the outcome and might have experienced new dilemmas. The interviews are recorded and transcribed.

The first, and thus far very preliminary results of the study show that preschool teachers deal with different kinds of dilemmas related to ESD, as for example how to find the balance between telling the children facts about the environment and teach them (in one way or another) how to act in relation to it, but also that they are interested in developing their teaching in relation to these issues. Another dilemma is dealing with when it is suitable to provide children with relevant facts and content knowledge in order to fertilize the learning progression further. A risk is identified by the participants related to the pedagogical paradox; on one hand, children need to be educated in order to come up new solutions and questions on the topic but on the other hand, if teachers guide and lecturing to a large extent, the children’s possibilities to explore and grow are reduced. A third dilemma is how to engage all the children and the ability to keep their engagement.

Caiman, C & Lundegård, I (2015). Pre-school children’s agency in learning for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 437-459. Caiman, C. & Lundegård, I. (2018). Young children’s imagination in science education and education for sustainability. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(3), 687–705. Dewey, John (1925/1958): Experience and Nature. New York: Dover. Green, C (2015). Toward Young Children as Active Researchers: A Critical Review of the Methodologies and Methods in Early Childhood Environmental Education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 46(4), 207-229. Hedefalk, M (2014). Förskola för hållbar utveckling. Förutsättningar för barns utveckling av handlingskompetens för hållbar utveckling. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala universitet. Hedefalk, M, Almqvist, J & Östman, L (2015). Education for sustainable development in early childhood education: a review of the research literature. Environmental Education Research, 21(7), 975-990. Hedefalk, M (2018). Diskurser om undervisning för hållbar utveckling på ett förskollärarprogram. Utbildning & Demokrati, 2, 37-58. Hill, A, Emery, S, Nailon, D, Dyment, J, Getenet, S & McCrea, N (2014). Exploring how adults who work with young children conceptualise sustainability and describe their practice initiatives. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 39(3), p 14-22. Ingerman, Å. & Wickman, P-O (2015). Towards a teachers’ professional discipline. In P. Burnard, B.-M. Apelgren, & N. Cabaroglu (Eds.), Transformative teacher research: In theory and practice for the C21st, (pp. 167-179). Rotterdam: Sense Publishing. Jonsson, Williams & Pramling Samuelsson (2017). Undervisningsbegreppet och dess innebörder uttryckta av förskolans lärare. Forskning om undervisning och lärande 1(5) 90-109. Swedish Schools Inspectorate [Skolinspektionen] (2018). Förskolans kvalitet och måluppfyllelse – ett treårigt regeringsuppdrag att granska förskolan. Regeringsrapport 2015:3 364. Somerville, M & Williams, C (2015). Sustainability education in early childhood: An updated review of research in the field. Early childhood, 16(2), 102-117. Sterling, S (2009). Ecological intelligence. Viewing the world relationally. In: A. Stibbe (Ed.), Handbook of sustainability literacy: Skills for a changing world (77–83). Foxhole: Green Books. Sundberg, B., Areljung, S., Due, K., Ekström, K., Ottander, C. & Tellgren, B. (2018). Opportunities for and obstacles to science in preschools: views from a community perspective. International Journal of Science Education 40(17): 2061-2077 Wals, A, der Hoeven, & Blanken (2009). The acoustics of social learning: Designing learning processes that contribute to a more sustainable world. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers. Wickman, Per-Olof & Östman, Leif (2002): Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623. Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1969/1992): Om visshet. Stockholm: Thales.