Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is regarded as one of the main drivers for a sustainable future. Embedding ESD within schools should be the focus of research, practice, and policy (UNESCO, 2020). While there is a growing body of empirical studies on its effects on teaching practices and student outcomes (Boeve-de Pauw et al., 2015; Olsson, 2018), research on the role of schools as organizations in ESD is still lacking, especially in contrast with the literature in educational management and school effectiveness (Creemers and Kyriakides, 2008; Teddlie and Reynolds, 2006; Verhelst et al., 2022; Verhelst et al., 2021). With the Whole School Approach gaining importance for embedding ESD in schools (Bosevska and Kriewaldt, 2020; Sasaki et al., 2023; Wals and Mathie, 2022), the need for a clear understanding of schools organizational functioning is even more evident.

Despite the approval of the school organization’s importance by more and more ESD scholars (Mogaji and Newton, 2020; Mogren, 2019; Scott, 2013; Verhelst et al., 2020), the characteristics that shape such an organizational context are still not very well documented in the international research literature (Kuzmina et al., 2020; Verhelst et al., 2020). Seeing that ESD is strongly shaped by the context wherein it is practiced, there is a strong need for a comparison of ESD within different geographical and cultural contexts (Kopnina and Meijers, 2014). While some frameworks on ESD within the school organization were developed based on insights from educational effectiveness research and school improvement research (Mogren et al., 2019; Verhelst et al., 2020), the generalizability of these frameworks across different contexts is still limited (Verhelst et al., 2021). Moreover, seeing that the general field of educational management and administration tends to be predominantly situated in the Anglo-American research traditions (Hallinger and Kovačević, 2019), cross-cultural comparisons pose a unique challenge, necessitating a deeper exploration to discern the applicability and cultural nuances of these frameworks.

In this presentation, we seek to address this scholarly gap by scrutinizing the complexities of ESD in Flemish and Japanese school organizations, offering a nuanced insight to discern the transferability and cultural intricacies of the implementation of ESD in school organizations. The theoretical framework at the base of this comparison is the framework for an ESD-effective school (Verhelst et al., 2020). The framework describes eight interconnected characteristics on a contextual and a central level, that have been connected to students’ outcomes in ESD (Verhelst et al., 2022). At the contextual level, sustainable leadership and school resources are situated. Sustainable leadership—defined by the adept adjustment of leadership styles considering holism, pluralism, and action orientation—combined with the school's resources, shapes the environment wherein six central characteristics manifest. These include Pluralistic Communication (fostering recognition and dialogue among diverse viewpoints), Supportive Relations (cultivating positive connections within the school and with external partners), Democratic Decision-Making (involving all relevant stakeholders in decision-making processes), Shared Vision of the School (cultivating a unified understanding of ESD and the school's commitment to it), Adaptability (responding effectively to internal and external demands or opportunities for change), and Collective Efficacy (believing that collective efforts positively impact students' ESD learning outcomes). Importantly, these characteristics collectively embody the ESD culture and organizational values, with their interrelated nature meaning that each can influence the others.

Our study aims to examine the factors contributing to the effectiveness of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Japanese and Flemish schools. Our primary research question is as follows: "To what extent and in what ways are school characteristics perceived and valued as instrumental traits in facilitating ESD in Japanese and Flemish schools?"

This study builds on two qualitative data sets collected in Flanders and in Japan. To obtain an apt sample, we used purposive sampling (Patton, 2015). Via collaboration with educational organizations with expertise in ESD in both Japan and Flanders, suitable schools were identified. Data were gathered via semi-structured interviews, which allowed for interaction between the researcher and the participant (Patton, 2015). While this technique offers a systematic way of asking questions, it did not eliminate the opportunity to discuss relevant information that was not included in the interview guide (Patton, 2015). To mitigate the impact of social desirability, we explicitly communicated to all participants that the interviews were not designed to assess the school's performance. The Japanese data was collected in 2020 among 10 teachers from ESD promoting schools in Yokohama city, 3 primary schools and 3 secondary schools. The Flemish data was collected in 2019 among 12 teachers across nine schools: six primary schools and three secondary schools. The recordings were transcribed and translated for analysis. After a process of reading and rereading, the transcripts were coded in NVivo (version 12 pro). A coding tree was used to deductively code the data (Benjamin and William, 1999). This coding tree was constructed based on the framework for an ESD-effective school (Verhelst et al., 2020). This coding tree was the basis for the comparison of the two samples. The data from both Japanese and Flemish teachers was analyzed via selective coding, specific fragments were assigned to the coding tree. Subsequently, a combination of selective and open coding was used to go through the data again, until saturation (Cohen et al., 2011). Using peer examination when constructing the coding tree and multiple researchers for analyzing the data, the internal validity of this study was addressed (Cohen et al., 2011). Moreover, during both the development of the coding tree and the coding process itself, attention was devoted to the linguistic and conceptual understandings between research partners (Troman and Jeffrey, 2007). To check the reliability of the data analysis, we double coded 10% of the data to calculate the interrater reliability. After the coding was finalized, we looked for differences between Flemish and Japanese respondents with regards to cultural and context specific differences or similarities.

In this submission, we present preliminary findings of our ongoing research on the perception of school characteristics as instrumental traits in enhancing the efficacy of ESD between Japanese and Flemish schools. We look forward to refining and augmenting these findings as our research advances, and we welcome valuable insights and feedback from the conference attendees. In the following, we briefly discuss what we expect to find in our analyses. Seeing that cross-cultural qualitative research knows many challenges related to the conceptual equivalence across contexts and languages (Troman and Jeffrey, 2007), our explorative comparison of the Japanese and Flemish perspectives attempts to establish a foundation of mutual understanding in future comparative research. Nevertheless, this first explorative inquiry aims to identify any potential differences or similarities in the views of the Flemish and Japanese respondents regarding the conceptual framework of an ESD-effective school. These potential differences could help in understanding how ESD is operationalized in school organizations that have a completely different cultural background. In this we could identify factors related to the organizational system, the curricula, and cultural perceptions regarding ESD. Identifying these potential differences can help researchers understand cultural nuances of ESD within the school organization. Our aim is to contribute to the documentation of factors influencing the organizational implementation of ESD, taking into account the nuanced geographical and cultural contexts that shape schools and educational practices. Through this research, we endeavor to shed light on the contextual variations in the embodiment of ESD characteristics, fostering a more comprehensive and culturally sensitive perspective on sustainable education.

Benjamin and William (1999). Doing Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications. Boeve-de Pauw, Gericke, Olsson and Berglund (2015). "The effectiveness of education for sustainable development." Sustainability. Bosevska and Kriewaldt (2020). "Fostering a whole-school approach to sustainability: learning from one school’s journey towards sustainable education." IRGEE. Cohen, Martin, McCulloch, O'Sullivan, Manion, Morrison and Bell (2011). Data Analysis: Coding and Content Analysis. Research Methods in Education. Routledge. Creemers and Kyriakides (2008). The Dynamics of Educational Effectiveness: a Contribution to Policy, Practice and Theory in Contemporary Schools. Routledge. Hallinger and Kovačević (2019). "A Bibliometric Review of Research on Educational Administration: Science Mapping the Literature, 1960 to 2018." RER. Kopnina and Meijers (2014). "Education for sustainable development (ESD): Exploring theoretical and practical challenges." International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. Kuzmina, Trimingham and Bhamra (2020). "Organisational Strategies for Implementing Education for Sustainable Development in the UK Primary Schools: A Service Innovation Perspective." Sustainability. Mogaji and Newton (2020). "School Leadership for Sustainable Development: A Scoping Review." JSD. Mogren (2019). Guiding Principles of Transformative Education for Sustainable Development in Local School Organisations: Investigating Whole School Approaches through a School Improvement Lens. Doctoral thesis, Karlstad University. Mogren, Gericke and Scherp (2019). "Whole school approaches to education for sustainable development: a model that links to school improvement." EER. Olsson (2018). Student Sustainability Consciousness : Investigating Effects of Education for Sustainable Development in Sweden and Beyond Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary, Karlstad University. Patton (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Integrating theory and practice. Los Angeles, Calif., SAGE Publications. Sasaki, Yonehara and Kitamura (2023). "The influence of the whole school approach on implementing education for sustainable development in Japan." PROSPECTS. Scott (2013). "Developing the sustainable school: thinking the issues through." The Curriculum Journal. Teddlie and Reynolds (2006). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. Routledge. Troman and Jeffrey (2007). "Qualitative data analysis in cross‐cultural projects." Comparative Education. UNESCO (2020). Education for sustainable development: a roadmap. Verhelst, Vanhoof, Boeve-de Pauw and Van Petegem (2020). "Building a conceptual framework for an ESD-effective school organization." JEE. Verhelst, Vanhoof, De Maeyer, Sass and Van Petegem (2022). "Enabling effective education for sustainable development: Investigating the connection between the school organization and students’ action competence." JEE. Verhelst, Vanhoof and Van Petegem (2021). "School effectiveness for education for sustainable development (ESD): What characterizes an ESD-effective school organization?" EMAL. Wals, and Mathie (2022). Whole School Responses to Climate Urgency and Related Sustainability Challenges. Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation. Springer Singapore.