Responsibility can be understood as “taking on” the consequences of one's own actions,
to which the human being, as a freely acting person, feels internally obliged, since he has
to attribute it to his or her own volitional decision ”(Regenbogen / Meyer 1998 : 698).
The question of how to deal responsibly with people and the environment is of particular
importance due to the enormous consequences of action and the global threat to (human) life
(Jonas 1979). In various pedagogical approaches, such as education for sustainable development,
“responsible behavior” on the part of schoolchildren is a prominent pedagogical goal.
Responsibility has also advanced to a new basic concept, a new key
category of ethics (Höffe 1989; Benzhaf 2002). A closer look at the above definition reveals
the meaning that this term can have for sustainable education; ultimately, sustainable education
aims at the assumption of responsibility for the environment and society by the individual,
as emphasized in philosophical responsibility concepts (Jonas 1979, Taylor 1997, Ahrend 2018). In the tradition of transcendental-critical pedagogy, Alfred Petzelt examines responsibility,
the literal sense of responsibility. At Petzelt it is precisely the creation of the relationship
between knowledge and attitude that is incumbent on everyone himself, which he describes
as responsibility (ibid. 2018). It is precisely here that there seems to be an important starting
point for the integration of a reflective pedagogical concept of responsibility in the concept of
transformational education, which makes it possible to counter the danger of functionalist
shortening (Potthast 2016). In terms of content, questions about the significance of climate changes, social processes,
the question of how the relationship between humans and nature and between humans can
be shaped are twofold. They are complex in terms of both content and ethics
(Bögeholz & Barkmann 2005). Responsibility can be understood as “taking on” the consequences of one's own actions, to which the human being, as a freely acting person, feels internally obliged, since he has to attribute it to his or her own volitional decision ”(Regenbogen / Meyer 1998 : 698). The question of how to deal responsibly with people and the environment is of particular importance due to the enormous consequences of action and the global threat to (human) life (Jonas 1979). In various pedagogical approaches, such as education for sustainable development, “responsible behavior” on the part of schoolchildren is a prominent pedagogical goal. Responsibility has also advanced to a new basic concept, a new key category of ethics (Höffe 1989; Benzhaf 2002). A closer look at the above definition reveals the meaning that this term can have for sustainable education; ultimately, sustainable education aims at the assumption of responsibility for the environment and society by the individual, as emphasized in philosophical responsibility concepts (Jonas 1979, Taylor 1997, Ahrend 2018). In the tradition of transcendental-critical pedagogy, Alfred Petzelt examines responsibility, the literal sense of responsibility. At Petzelt it is precisely the creation of the relationship between knowledge and attitude that is incumbent on everyone himself, which he describes as responsibility (ibid. 2018). It is precisely here that there seems to be an important starting point for the integration of a reflective pedagogical concept of responsibility in the concept of transformational education, which makes it possible to counter the danger of functionalist shortening (Potthast 2016). In terms of content, questions about the significance of climate changes, social processes, the question of how the relationship between humans and nature and between humans can be shaped are twofold. They are complex in terms of both content and ethics (Bo-geholz & Barkmann 2005) and require a reflective approach to the normative-ethical dimension of the human-environment relationship (Applis 2012; Felzmann & Laub 2019).

The normative complexity requires a reflective approach to the normative-ethical dimension of the human-environment relationship (Applis 2012; Felzmann & Laub 2019).From a didactic point of view, access through responsibility reveals special potentials and challenges. The following questions are focussed: - What potentials and what difficulties does the integration of the concept of responsibility in didactical reflexions have? In the existing discussion about education for sustainable development or transformational education, the fundamental challenge of educational action and thinking between freedom / self-determination and an upbringing on certain values ​​that cannot be easily resolved (Rekus 1993, Potthast 2016). - What challenges are revealed in analyzing lesson sequences on sustainable education. Pedagogical and didactic challenges in dealing with responsibility are particularly evident at the teaching level (excessive demands on students, privatization of responsibility (Budke et al. 2016), preservation of the school's shelter (Reinhardt 2014), scope of responsibility contexts) - The theoretical argumentation will be followed by empirical results of two research projects, that focus on the perception pupils have accoring to their own responsability and the conceptualisation of responsability of teachers

Expected outcomes on the theoretical level will focus the paedagocical challenges in dealing with the concept of responsability in school. The didactical perspective will show, that a main requirement is a reflexicve integration of ethical dilemmata and ways to work with their complexity. The contribution will present results from two different research projects, that give first impressions of the challenges for undergrade pupils, and the perspective of teachers. Both are based on qualitative methods (documentary analysis) (Mayring 2000).

Ahrend, Hannah (2018): Was heißt persönliche Verantwortung in einer Diktatur? München: Piper. Applis, S. (2012): Wertorientierender Geographieunterricht im Kontext Globales Lernen. Weingarten. Banzhaf, Günther (2002): Philosophie der Verantwortung. Entwürfe, Entwicklungen, Perspektiven, Heidelberg: Winter. Bögeholz, S., & Barkmann, J. (2005). Rational choice and beyond: Handlungsorientierende Kompetenzen für den Umgang mit faktischer und ethischer Komplexität. In R. Klee, A. Sandmann, H. Vogt (Hrsg.), Lehr- und Lernforschung in der Biologiedidaktik (S. 211-224). Innsbruck: Studienverlag (Forschungen zur Fachdidaktik, Band 7). Budke, A.; Kuckuck, M. & Wienecke, M. (2016): Realisierungen der Politischen Bildung im Geographieunterricht. In: Ku-ckuck, M. & Budke, A. (Hrsg.): Politische Bildung im Geographieunterricht. Stuttgart: Steiner,155-165 Felzmann, D., & Laub, J. (2019). Ethisches Urteilen im Geographieunterricht fördern. Praxis Geographie, 49(10), 2-10. Höffe, Otfried (1989): Schulden die Menschen einander Verantwortung? In: Lampe, Ernst-Joachim (Hrsg.): Verantwortlichkeit und Recht. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, S. 12-35. Mayring, P. (2000): Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim. Jonas, Hans (1979): Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technische Zivilisation, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Petzelt, Alfred (2018): Grundzüge systematischer Pädagogik. Freiburg: Lambertus. Potthast, Thomas: Berufsethos für Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, Ethik in den Wissenschaften und die Frage der Werte-Orientierung – kritische Überlegungen. In: Cramer, Colin, Martin Drahmann & Fritz Oser (Hrsg.) Ethos: Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf den Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerberuf. In Memoriam Martin Drahmann. Waxmann. Münster 2019: 143-151. Reinhardt, S. (2014). Moralisches Lernen. In Sander, W. (Hrsg.): Handbuch politische Bildung. Schwalbach, S. 329-340. Regenbogen, Arnim/Meyer, Uwe (1998): Wörterbuch der philosophischen Begriffe. Hamburg: Meiner. Rekus, J. (1993). Bildung und Moral. Zur Einheit von Rationalität und Moralität in Schule und Unterricht. Weinheim, Mün-chen: Juventa. Taylor, Paul W. (1997): Die Ethik der Achtung für die Natur, in Birnbacher, Dieter (Hrsg.): Ökophilosophie. Stuttgart: Reclam: S. 77-116.