One point of departure in this paper is an awareness that we are living in the Anthropocene era. Based on this, education, including science education, needs to be re-visioned. Since the first use of the term by Hurd in 1958, many different definitions of scientific literacy have been put forward. One and a half decade ago Roberts (2007) suggested two visions of scientific literacy and science education. To simplify, Vision I can be described as science without society (internal view), whereas Vision II is about contextual application of scientific knowledge in life and society (external view). As a complement to the two well-spread visions by Roberts, a Vision III has been suggested (e.g. Aikenhead, 2007; Yore, 2012; Liu, 2013; Sjöström & Eilks, 2018). This paper tries to systemize what different scholars have meant with the three different visions, especially focusing on Vision III. Furthermore, the paper elaborates on different ways in how the three visions relate to each other. The three visions are also discussed in relation to curriculum theory (e.g. Deng, 2020) and different curriculum emphases, educational-philosophical frameworks, and worldview perspectives.

Recently, Valladares (2021) discussed different interpretations of scientific literacy, including Vision III. She started discussing fundamental and derived senses of scientific literacy (part 2 of her paper) as well as Vision I and Vision II (part 3). After that follows a part (part 4) about Vision III; it has the heading “A Transformative Vision of Scientific Literacy”. She writes (2021, p. 565): “This new vision integrates three innovative aspects: 4.1: a fusion of the fundamental and derived senses of scientific literacy (Yore, 2012); 4.2: an introduction of the notions of science engagement and participation (Liu, 2013); and 4.3: the inclusion of a political and emancipatory agenda aligned with values such as equity and social justice (Santos, 2009).” With reference to Liu (2013, p. 29), Siarova et al. (2019) describe Vision III as: ”Scientific engagement – social, cultural, political, and environmental issues”. According to Tan (2016, p. 6), Yore (2012) interprets a Vision III-scientific literate person as one who: “1) understand core ideas through scientific inquiry, 2) have fundamental scientific principles rooted by critical thinking skills and 3) participates from a scientific perspective in socioscientific issues.” Siarova et al. (2019, p. 15) regard Vision III as “the broadest interpretation of scientific literacy”. It can, according to them, be explained as: science embedded in society and societal issues; action in the form of scientific engagement in various social, cultural, political, and environmental issues and contexts; and means to prepare students to become informed, responsible and active citizens and therefore it is needed by all students.

Recently, Salinas et al. (2022, p. 9) described Vision III as: “Implies a politicized and action-based (e.g., climate change activism) knowledge aiming at promoting the development of critical thinking for dialogic emancipation and socio-eco justice. This vision emphasizes transdisciplinarity and sustainability; is oriented towards praxis and action”. This conference paper asks if this is a exhaustive description of Vision III and, if not, what needs to be added?

“Bildung” is a central concept in central European/Scandinavian educational theory. It has a long and multifaceted history of ideas including for instance humanistic values and the ideas of critical-democratic citizenship. In this paper Vision III of scientific literacy and science education, as it is presented in the international literature, is examined. Furthermore, implications of a Vision III-view on Bildung and teachers’ didactical choices are discussed.

The method used in this paper is a systematic search and review of the literature and those publications referring to key publications, mainly those contributing to conceptualization of Vision III. Based on the found literature, the questions and aims of the paper are discussed and a multifaceted view of Vision III is elaborated on.

Vision I has a structure of science- and/or a scientific skills-emphasis and Vision II an everyday life- and/or a decision making-emphasis. Finally, a reconsidered Vision III can be seen as having an ethico-socio-political- and a relational-existential-emphasis. All three visions have A and B versions. These can be described as: structure of science-emphasis (Vision IA), scientific skills-emphasis (Vision IB), everyday life-emphasis (Vision IIA), decision making-emphasis (Vision IIB), ethico-socio-political-emphasis (Vision IIIA), and relational-existential-emphasis (Vision IIIB). There are at least three different ways in how the three visions can be seen as relating to each other: (a) parallel complementary visions, (b) leveled visions – with increased sophistication, and (c) Vision III bridges Vison I and II from critical perspectives. The Vision III-version suggested by Sjöström and Eilks (2018) can be seen as synonymous to an eco-reflexive Bildung-orientation. It integrates cognitive and affective domains and includes philosophical-moral-existential alternatives (see also: Sjöström, 2018) as well as politicization to address complex socio-scientific issues. From such a perspective Vision III can be seen as synonymous to critical science education for sustainability. If there is time, some examples of “didaktik models” grounded in European didactics (Ligozat, Klette & Almqvist, 2023) and a Vision III-view will be presented. How these models can support teachers in their didactical choices will also be mentioned. The paper presentation will be finished with a suggestion of a novel and multifaceted way of viewing Vision III, that is, main elements of a reconsidered Vision III, including not only socio-eco-engagement and participation for transformation and a better world, but also for instance a deep understanding of science and its processes, wonder and appreciation of the living world, indigenous science, transdisciplinarity, intersectionality perspectives, futures thinking, and responsible science knowing-in-action.

Aikenhead, G. S. (2007). Expanding the research agenda for scientific literacy. In C. Linder et al. (eds.) Promoting scientific literacy: Science education research in transaction (pp. 64-71). Uppsala University. Deng, Z. (2020). Knowledge, content, curriculum and Didaktik: beyond social realism. Routledge: London & New York. Ligozat, F., Klette, K., & Almqvist, J. (eds.) (2023). Didactics in a changing world: European perspectives on teaching, learning and the curriculum. Cham: Springer. Liu, X. (2013). Expanding notions of scientific literacy: a reconceptualization of aims of science education in the knowledge society. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (eds.), Science education for diversity – Theory and practice (pp. 23-39). Dordrecht: Springer. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. Salinas, I., Guerrero, G., Satlov, M., & Hidalgo, P. (2022). Climate change in Chile’s school science curriculum. Sustainability, 14(22), 15212. Santos, W. L. D. (2009). Scientific literacy: a Freirean perspective as a radical view of humanistic science education. Science Education, 93(2), 361-382. Siarova, H., Sternadel, D. & Szönyi, E. (2019). Research for CULT Committee – Science and Scientific Literacy as an Educational Challenge. European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/IPOL_STU(2019)629188 (visited September 26, 2022) Sjöström, J. (2018). Science teacher identity and eco-transformation of science education: comparing Western modernism with Confucianism and reflexive Bildung. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 147-161. Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2018). Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of Bildung. In: Y. Dori, Z. Mevarech, D. Baker (eds.), Cognition, Metacognition, and Culture in STEM Education – Learning, Teaching and Assessment (pp. 65-88). Cham: Springer. Tan, P. (2016). Science education: defining the scientifically literate person. SFU Educational Review, 9. https://doi.org/10.21810/sfuer.v9i.307 Valladares, L. (2021). Scientific literacy and social transformation. Science & Education, 30(3), 557-587. Yore, L. D. (2012). Science literacy for all: More than a slogan, logo, or rally flag! In K. C. D. Tan & M. Kim (eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research (pp. 5-23). Dordrecht: Springer.