The call for education which can contribute to a sustainable future has resulted in what one might call a worldwide ‘Education for sustainable development’ (ESD) era (Wals & Benavot, 2017; Qvortrup & Rasmussen, 2020; Mogren & Gericke, 2017). Although the ESD era has been under establishment since the 1980s (Læssøe 2020), attention to ESD has gained momentum in recent years, linked to the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (UN 2015), which are a high priority on the educational policy agenda (UNESCO 2015, 2017).

The core of the ESD era is the idea that a sustainable future can be achieved if people are properly educated. However, while there is much agreement on this idea, there is less agreement on what it means more precisely to educate for a sustainable future and how it can be done. A number of newer studies show that ESD challenges schools and teachers (Mogren & Gericke 2017; Atmaka 2017). Evans (2020) highlights that “sustainability is a term that is heavily tossed around and often misrepresented” (p. 818) and several points at that the promotion of sustainability leads to concerns in education, which is linked to a generally resent of intrusions by academics (Scott and Gough, 2007; Evans 2020). Huckle and Wals (2015) show that ESD initiatives often are driven by committed and idealistic teachers who do not always have a clear notion of ESD. Adding to this, both Læssøe (2020) and Bonnett (2007) suggest that ESD are most disseminated in natural sciences subjects focusing on facts regarding environmental issues. However, as argued by Wals (2011), such fact-focused teaching does not necessarily engage students in critical thinking and constructive acting for a sustainable future. As advocated by UNESCO (2015): “Given the multidisciplinary nature of ESD, it should be integrated by governments into all levels and types of education, and across the curriculum”. Evans (2016, 2020) argues that change towards sustainability requires a disruption and reorientation of existing curriculum, pedagogical and managerial systems. It has been proposed that successful implementation of ESD into curricula and school practice strongly depends on how competent and committed teachers are in terms of sustainability (Frisk and Larson, 2011; Bürgener & Barth 2018) and thus the future of ESD is suggested to depend on teacher education programmes (Atmaka 2017; Evans 2020). However, Evans (2020) emphasizes that many teacher educators consider sustainability not to be relevant to the work they do.

By involving future teachers and teacher educators in video clubs, the paper will gain insight into multidisciplinary perceptions of ESD and the troubles that teacher education programs face. 

The research question of this paper is:

How do future teachers perceive ESD, and which challenges and paradoxes of teacher education programs emerge, when future teachers are engaged in a multidisciplinary video club discussion on the nature of ESD?

Theoretically this paper is founded on systems theory as it was developed by the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann ([1984] 2000). Luhmann describes modern society as functionally differentiated into social systems where each system maintains a function in society. The function of the educational system is to educate students for the future, a future that, however, remains unknown. Drawing on Koselleck (2004 [1979]), Luhmann (2000 [1984]) suggests to understand teachers’ observations as a feature of the present that is linked to both past and future through their experiences and expectations. Thus, by engaging with teachers’ experiences and expectations, we draw a Prognosis of future as it is established in a conceptual unity of their Space of experience and Horizon of expectation (Koselleck, 2004 [1979]).

The paper investigates teachers’ perceptions of ESD and their expectations for and experiences of ESD teaching, drawing on phenomenologically methodology oriented towards discovering the meaning of human experience (Osborne, 1990). The philosophical foundation is Husserl and his concept of intentionality (Husserl, 2014). This concept accentuates that we are not observing the world from outside, since we are already existing co-constitutionally with our world (Osborne, 1990). Methodically, the paper draws on video clubs (Sherin & van Es. 2009), where video club refers to meetings in which teacher educators watch and discuss excerpts of video-tapes. The video-tapes show recordings of 15 teacher education students, representing different subjects conversations (three video recordings with five participants in each). We will ask the teacher education students to engage with open questions such as ‘What does sustainability mean to you?’, ‘Does the school need to educate for/with/towards sustainability? Why / why not?’, ‘What is sustainability in your subject?’, ‘Is the UN's Global Goals the same as, part of or different from ESD? Why / why not?’. The aim of posing such open questions is to have the students to open up for perspectives that may disrupt and reorient existing curriculum and pedagogical systems. We show the videos to teacher educators and have them reflect on them, while considering their own perception of ESD. The material is analysed through a condensation of meaning, focussing on what Luhmann (2000; 1992) has suggested as three dimensions of meaning: time, case and sociality. “Sucht man für eine Beschreibung der Zukunft nach Anhaltspunkten in dem, was gegenwärtig intellektuell á la mode ist und als akzeptabel bzw. unakzeptabel erscheint, dann ist es eine mögliche Strategie, eine sachliche, eine soziale und eine zeitliche Sinndimension zu unterscheiden” (Luhmann, 1992, p. 137). The three dimensions help us to spot emerging challenges and paradoxes in case of ESD in teacher education.

This paper aims at understanding the multidisciplinary nature of ESD and the potentials and barriers identified by future teachers and teacher educators in different subjects and developing a conceptual framework for reflecting these issues in primary school. Furthermore, it aims at contributing to the discussion of how to engage future primary school teachers to involve themselves in teaching for sustainable development. The study will include different perspectives from different subjects, different teacher approaches, etc. on ESD. This is a prerequisite for creating change / development. Furthermore, we will discuss our empirical findings towards Luhmann's perspectives on the unavoidable normative starting points for education. This includes theoretical points on moral and moralizing, since Luhmann has emphasized, that there may be a challenge in the fact that “moralizing polarize” (Luhmann 1991), for “morality repels, it hates and complicates the resolution of conflicts ”(2000, p. 280) and:“ all morality ultimately relates to the question of whether and under what conditions people intend or despise each other ”(2000, p. 280 ). Such points can constitute an important starting point for making it possible in the future to work with the normative ESD focus on non-normative ways in future educational practices. As a further perspective, the paper supplies knowledge on the use of video clubs as ways of working with ESD issues in teacher education programmes. In a review on video viewing in teacher education and professional development programmes, Gaudin & Chalier (2015) for a number of reasons. As one of several points, they suggest that videos give some authenticity to theoretical discussions and to the discussions of the translation of theory into practice. Another interesting result is found in Navin (2018), who shows that the use of video recordings stimulate teacher students’ self-reflection.

Atmaca, Ç. (2017). Effects of contextual factors on ESD in teacher education. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 8(2), 77-93. Bonnett, M. (2007). Environmental education and the issue of nature. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(6), 707-721. Bürgener, L., & Barth, M. (2018). Sustainability competencies in teacher education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 821-826. Evans, N. (2020). What Ought to Be Done to Promote Education for Sustainability in Teacher Education? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 54(4), 817-824. Evans, N. (2019). Teacher Education and education for sustainability. Learning to Embed Sustainability in Teacher Education, 7-21. Frisk, E., Larson, K.L., 2011. Educating for sustainability: competencies & practices for transformative action. J. Sustain. Educ. 2. Gaudin & Chalier (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational Research Review 16, 41-67 Huckle, J., & Wals, A. E. (2015). The UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development: business as usual in the end. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 491-505. Husserl, E. (2014). Ideas for a pure phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy: First book: General introduction to pure phenomenology. Hackett Publishing. Koselleck, R. (1979). 2004. Futures past: On the semantics of historical time. Luhmann, N. (1992). Beobachtungen der moderne. Springer-Verlag. Luhmann, N. (1991). Risk: a sociological theory. New Brunswick. Luhmann, N. (2000). Sociale systemer: grundrids til en almen teori. Hans Reitzel. Læssøe, J. (2020). Bæredygtighedsbegrebet og uddannelse. Frydenlund Academic. Mogren, A., & Gericke, N. (2017). ESD implementation at the school organisation. Environmental Education Research, 23(7), 972-992. Navin, L. (2018). Does Seeing Matter? Exploring Pre-service Teachers’ Use of Self-Video. Osborne, J. W. (1990). Some basic existential-phenomenological research methodology for counsellors. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 24(2). Qvortrup, A., & Rasmussen, H. F. (2020). Udviklinger I uddannelsessystemets hensigt. Dafolo. Scott, W., & Gough, S. (2007). Universities and sustainable development: The necessity for barriers to change. Perspectives, 11(4), 107-115. Sherin, M., & Van Es, E. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers' professional vision. Journal of teacher education, 60(1), 20-37. UN (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations, New York UNESCO (2015). Rethinking Education. Towards a global common good? Wals, A. E. (2011). Learning our way to sustainability. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 5(2), 177-186. Wals, A. E., & Benavot, A. (2017). Can we meet the sustainability challenges? The role of education and lifelong learning. European Journal of Education, 52(4), 404-413.