In the course of various UN programs (UN Decade for Sustainable Development, Sustainable Development Goals), education is addressed as a central factor for the sustainable transformation of economy and society (Venkataraman, 2009). Extended education and all-day schools seems to be particularly relevant for this area, since on the one hand there are extended time and opportunity spaces as a supplement to classical teaching and on the other hand there are synergies in terms of content, since the usual goals and methods of extended education seem to be predestined for topics and forms of action of education for sustainable development (e.g. Stoltenberg & Burandt, 2014).

If the context-input-process-outcome model of school quality (e.g., Ditton, 2000) is used, the question of the quality of extended education arises in addition to contextual factors (endowment of resources and structural factors), pedagogical process quality, and impact: What should be the topics of Extended Education? Klafki (e.g. 1985/2007) sees epoch-typical key problems (such as the climate crisis or global social inequality) as the central content and the contribution to solving these problems as the central category of general education. Supplemented by the concept of leisure needs, this results in a model for the content quality for extended education. If Klafki's model is supplemented accordingly, six dimensions of general education in all-day schools emerge: In addition to pragmatic educational goals (literacy, etc.) and subject instruction, aesthetic goals and play, epoch-typical key problems (e.g., Sustainable Development Goals of the UN) and leisure needs (e.g., recreational needs or participation needs) would have to be added. This has numerous implications for the context-input-process-output-outcome model of Ditton (2000), since in view of the complexity and magnitude of these educational goals, teaching and extended education would have to be increasingly thought of together. Also - following this way of thinking - school processes are connected to global processes of sustainable development, which brings numerous implications about the task of school and general education (which Klafki subsumes under the concerns of self-determination, co-determination and solidarity).

Subsequently, it appears relevant whether the factor of content quality in the sense of global-social problems is, first, conscious or important to educators and, second, whether indications of this educational dimension are already reflected in pedagogical processes - based on the state of research that much is known about the equipment and professional impact of all-day schools, but little about the processes. The following research question was pursued: How does the integration of epoch-typical key problems in all-day schools relate to other educational dimensions on the level of intentions and processes?

Therefore, a for the federal state of Vienna (Austria) representative study (Loparics, 2022) was conducted. The study is supplemented by qualitative data (interview and observation) to target the process level.

In the survey teachers and recreational educators (N=405) were asked about their basic and action-guiding intentions. In addition to some information about the profession (teacher, leisure educator, principal), participants were asked to first assess how important various content dimensions (basal educational goals such as writing and arithmetic, leisure needs such as contemplation and recreation, play and movement, creativity, subject content, and epoch-typical key problems) were considered to be in order to obtain values for goal intention (as distinct from action intention, Gollwitzer, 1993). Subsequently, the intention to act was queried by asking the participants to allocate 100 % of their work time to the six educational dimensions, which allows an implicit ranking. In addition, measures of correlation were calculated, and it was found that there do not seem to be any systematic correlations with regard to epoch-typical key problems, i.e., all persons involved give little importance to epoch-typical key problems compared to other educational dimensions in terms of basic or action guiding intention. The study is supplemented by qualitative data (interviews and observation) to target the process level. For this purpose, expert interviews with seven of the leading persons participating in the survey were asked about measures and contexts at the institution level and analyzed using content analysis by extraction (Gläser & Laudel, 2010). In addition, one day of instruction was observed in three all-day schools (additional observations had to be cancelled due to Corona restrictions). The qualitative data indicate that schools that set structural measures on the level of the institution in relation to the implementation of epoch-typical key issues (e.g., specific committees or in-school training) also set more educational opportunities on the process level (in the sense of extended education, Stecher et al., 2018).

The results show that, in comparison, teachers and leisure time educators consider topics of sustainable development far less important than other dimensions of general education (subject content, leisure time needs, etc.). This indicates that - if schools and education are indeed to play a central role in the sustainable transformation of society - teachers and leisure educators would not only need methodological support in implementation, but there would first of all need to be a discourse on the weighting of different educational goals and their synergies. How could everyday processes in the classroom and extended education offerings be linked to sustainable development content? What do corresponding offers look like and what is their additional value? It is also necessary to consider what development processes at the level of the whole school and its management look like in the sense of the whole institution approach (e.g. Forssten Seiser et al., 2022), if sustainable development goals are to be pursued. However, the qualitative results indicate potentials to further establish the topics, especially when working with specific school development tools. It is evident that in order to establish sustainable development issues in schools in general and especially in all-day schools, further efforts in teacher training and school development as well as innovative didactic models are necessary to achieve the required competencies and attitudes among students.

Ditton, H. (2000). Qualitätskontrolle und Qualitätssicherung in Schule und Unterricht. Ein Überblick zum Stand der empirischen Forschung. In A. Helmke, W. Hornstein, & E. Terhart (Eds.), Qualität und Qualitätssicherung im Bildungsbereich: Schule, Sozialpädagogik, Hochschule (pp. 73–92). Beltz. Forssten Seiser, A., Mogren, A., Gericke, N., Berglund, T., & Olsson, D. (2022). Developing school leading guidelines facilitating a whole school approach to education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2151980 Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2010). Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (4. Auflage). VS Verlag. Gollwitzer, P.M. (1993). The volitional benefits of planning. In Gollwitzer, P.M. & Bargh, J.A. (Eds.), The psychology of action. Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 287–312). Guilford. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=2ahUKEwiYqM7Fu57mAhVipIsKHcJZDRIQFjABegQIBRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F37367746_The_Volitional_Benefits_of_Planning&usg=AOvVaw2x5cl345NNgLpBWoU66Ka_ Gollwitzer, P.M., & Bargh, J.A. (Eds.). (1993). The psychology of action. Linking cognition and motivation to behavior. Guilford. Klafki, W. (1985). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik: Zeitgemäße Allgemeinbildung und kritisch-konstruktive Didaktik (6. Auflage). Beltz Verlag. Loparics, J. (2022). Epochaltypische Schlüsselprobleme als Qualitätskriterium für Ganztagsschulen (1. Auflage). Waxmann. Opaschowski, H. W. (1996). Pädagogik der freien Lebenszeit (3., völlig neubearb. Aufl). Leske + Budrich. Stecher, L., Maschke, S., & Preis, N. (2018). Extended Education in a Learning Society. In N. Kahnwald & V. Täubig (Eds.), Informelles Lernen (pp. 73–90). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-15793-7_5 Venkataraman, B. (2009). Education for Sustainable Development. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(2), 8–10. https://doi.org/10.3200/ENVT.51.2.08-10