In the context of the Anthropocene, schools have an important role to play in fostering societal creativity to develop sustainable solutions. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) takes up the challenge as it aims to empower young people to think and act for societal transformation towards sustainability (Sterling, 2011). Since the 2000s, the implementation of ESD, although its increasing presence in study plans, has faced various challenges related to productivist conceptions of education, school structure (curricula or disciplinary approaches for example), or the nature of the subjects worked on (Curnier, 2021). For example, in the curriculum of the French-speaking part of Switzerland, ESD is present in a transversal way and in a weak sustainability perspective. There are no constraints in its application and its teaching is not systematic. Nevertheless, many teachers have already taken up the subject, others would like to do so, but the proposed teacher training is not yet consolidated (Kyburz-Graber et al., 2013; Baumann & al, 2019). Moreover, research in the field still provides little support for the operationalisation of ESD, as it lacks empirical data (Shephard, 2022). Action research is a way of filling this gap between theory and practice, and a type of research with underlying paradigms coherent with those inherent to ESD.

In education, action research is defined as collaborative research that aims to share practices between researchers and practitioners to transform reality and reflect on this transformation (Sanchez & Monod-Ansaldi, 2015). The collaborative dimension of this type of research aims to make competencies explicit related to professional practices and to mediate between the research community and the community of practice (Morrissette, 2013). The process of such research ‘with’ is intended to be democratic in the definition, construction and analysis of the object of study among the participants. In addition to the scientific contribution, this type of research also seeks to strengthen the capacities of all participants, including teachers. Therefore, action research has a democratic and empowerment aim (Gayford, 2003), in adequation with the participatory nature of ESD. In theory, action research therefore aims to build a genuine partnership between the research and school communities, but in practice issues have been identified in the literature, such as asymmetrical power relations or complex facilitation roles for the researcher (Martin & Clerc-Georgy, 2017; Monceau & Soulière, 2017).

In this contribution, two case studies of action research illustrate different kinds of partnerships. One kind gathers partners within education, teachers of various school subjects and school levels working together with the researcher on didactic ‘thinking tools’ that empower teachers to plan and implement a transformative and action-oriented ESD. The other gathers pedagogical experts, field specialists and teachers to co-create, with the researcher, a lesson plan on rivers planning combining geography and ESD. The diversity in the first partnership lies in the various school subjects and levels, including an interdisciplinary aspect and the idea of a curricular progression, whereas the diversity in the second partnership lies in the very different nature of the involved partners, including a transdisciplinary knowledge construction. In this contribution, we will firstly identify the roles of the different partners in the action research process, with a special focus on the researchers. Secondly, we will analyse the opportunities and challenges that arise from these partnerships in order to improve possible synergies while implementing an ESD that enables societal transformation towards sustainability.

We have conducted respectively two qualitative researches. Nadia Lausselet has combined interviews, diaries and days of collective work with secondary school teachers on a set of didactic “thinking tools”. Anne-Sophie Gavin has conducted individual and collective interviews with field specialists (academics, a politician, people working in national, regional and municipal water services, a fisherman, a member of an association) and pedagogical experts (in the field of geography, ESD, outdoor education and creativity) to gather contextual and didactic knowledge on rivers planning. Then, she set up collective working sessions with six secondary geography teachers to create the lesson plan. We both analysed our data through thematic analysis (Paillé & Mucchielli, 2012) and analysis of interactions between participants (Mondada, 2005) in order to point out the role of participants, the dynamic between them and related issues for action research in ESD.

Within the two case studies, results showed that the expectations of the various participants towards the research-action process are not the same. Nevertheless, they all aimed at a similar goal what education was concerned. The various expectations that came up during the research-action process, were made explicit and were dealt with progressively. This process oriented approach and oriented to a shared overall aim, here a transformative ESD, helped to tend towards a genuine partnership. The latter is characterised by a common willingness to share and empower each other to improve ESD practices. The diversity of the partners was considered as a richness, although some tensions arose while negotiating ways of structuring the lesson plan, for example. However, the tensions were not a matter of the diversity of types of partners, but of diverse personalities among teachers. The self-critical posture adopted by the participants helped overcome this. In these situations, the role of the researcher was found to be central to the partnership, as she coordinates, facilitates working sessions, shares the power and provides feedback. In the transdisciplinary partnership, the researcher has taken on the role of mediator between contextualised expert knowledge and teachers, giving access to up-to-date knowledge on an ESD topic to teachers, knowledge that is evolving too fast to be present in an accurate way in textbooks . Based on the analysis of two kinds of partnerships for ESD, this contribution will synthesise hindering and supportive features that can be worked on so as to take the most of actions research processes within a transformative ESD.

Baumann, S., Lausselet, N. & Pache, A. (2019). L'EDD dans la formation des enseignant.e.s. Etat des lieux-juillet 2019. Swissuniversities: Bern. Curnier, D. (2021). Vers une école éco-logique. Lormont : Le Bord de l'eau. Gayford, C. (2003). Participatory Methods and Reflective Practice Applied to Research in Education for Sustainability. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8(1), 129-142. Kyburz-Graber, R., Nagel, U., & Gingins, F. (2013). Demain en main : enseigner le développement durable : 9e - 11e HarmoS - Cycle 3 du PER. LEP. Martin, D., & Clerc-Georgy, A. (2017). La lesson study, une démarche de recherche collaborative en formation des enseignants? Phronesis, 6(1-2), 35-47. Monceau, G., & Soulière, M. (2017). Mener la recherche avec les sujets concernés: comment et pour quels résultats? Éducation et socialisation. Les Cahiers du CERFEE(45). Mondada, L. (2005). Chercheurs en interaction: comment émergent les savoirs (Vol. 28). Collection le savoir suisse. Morrissette, J. (2013). Recherche-action et recherche collaborative: quel rapport aux savoirs et à la production de savoirs? Nouvelles pratiques sociales, 25(2), 35-49. Paillé, P., & Mucchielli, A. (2012). L'analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales. Armand Colin. https://www.cairn.info/l-analyse-qualitative-en-sciences-humaines--9782200249045.htm Sanchez, É., & Monod-Ansaldi, R. (2015, 2015/09/30/). Recherche collaborative orientée par la conception. Un paradigme méthodologique pour prendre en compte la complexité des situations d’enseignement-apprentissage. Éducation et didactique, 9(vol. 9, n°2), 73-94. https://doi.org/10.4000/educationdidactique.2288 Shephard, K. (2022). On the educational difference between being able and being willing. In Competences in education for sustainable development (pp. 45-52). Springer. Sterling, S. (2011). Transformative learning and sustainability: Sketching the conceptual ground. Learning and teaching in higher education, 5(11), 17-33.