Reference to the Sustainable Development Goals (UN, 2015), especially SDG 4 on ensuring “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”, is more frequent in discourses on inclusive education (Resch et al., 2021). However, Heigl et al. (2022, p. 19) emphasize the need for further research on the intersections of inclusion and sustainability. Based on their situational analysis on these intersections in schools in Austria, teachers are in a central position between the school structure and teacher training, which are interrelated with regard to the curriculum. On the policy level, teachers are positioned as “powerful change agents” with regard to the SDGs (UNESCO, 2017, p. 51). Previous work on teacher agency underlines the need for taking into account the situatedness (e.g. Riveros et al., 2012), for instance, with regard to teachers’ way of negotiating restrictive policies in their daily “on-the-ground decisions” in classrooms (Wessel Powell et al., 2019, p. 171). As with regard to different understandings of inclusive education, their specific situatedness on local levels (Clairborne & Balakrishan, 2020) as well as “backlash against this idea(l)” (Powell, 2023, p. xxii) emphasize the need for „critical reflection and engagement in dialogue about complex social issues that are intertwined between the local and the global“ (Niemczyk, 2019, p. 4).

Linking inclusion to the overall aim which is also reflected in the SGDs of “achieving equity and attaining social justice in divergent contexts” (Powell 2023: xxii), we understand inclusive education as “a commitment to critical pedagogy” (Erevelles, 2014, p. x). Drawing on a theoretical framework based on social justice-oriented teaching, critical literacy, diversity and inclusive education (e.g. Everelles, 2014; Ortaçtepe Hart 2023; Vasequez et al., 2019; Zygmont & Clark, 2015), this paper focuses on exploring the intersections of inclusive education, social justice education and sustainability education in teacher education. Situated in specific contexts, developing teacher education for inclusion, social justice and sustainability needs to consider the global issue of the “lack of diversity within the teaching profession” (Heinz et al., 2022, p. 229). This implies addressing exclusion and (missing) representation while opposing essentialisation by building “critical awareness of teacher education and schools as sites of cultural practice” (Heinz et al., 2022, p. 229-230). This can be linked to Catarci’s (2021) perspective on “an educational approach to sustainability for everyone” which emphasizes the need for critical reflection, especially among those who represent majority positions to “allow them to become aware of the major critical issues of the contemporary world (migratory dynamics, armed conflicts, climate change, etc.) through a perspective of global citizenship” (p. 4-5).

This paper aims to explore challenges and possibilities in developing teacher education for inclusion, social justice and sustainability focusing on relationalities of the global and local or the ‘glocal’ (Luke, 2004) in the field of internationalization at home and digital learning formats. With an increased focus on shifting to digital or hybrid learning formats following the Covid-19 pandemic (Li & Xue, 2023), the relevance of internationalization at home (e.g. Beelen & Jones 2015) is emphasized in terms of sustainability. Focusing on possibilities of internationalization at home in teacher education is important for making international experiences accessible to all teacher candidates, particularly those who often face barriers to participating in a study-related stay abroad based on their financial or care-related situation (Rachbauer & Plank, 2021, p. 125).

Based on an interdisciplinary research and teaching collaboration between scholars from midwestern US and German universities in the field of literacy and language education, social studies education, English language teaching and inclusive education, this paper aims to contribute to understanding overall “complexities of ‘situatedness’” (Clarke, 2005, p. xxviii).

This paper draws on situational analysis (Clarke, 2005; Clarke et al., 2018, 2022) as a ‘starting and connecting point’ (Keller, 2012, p. 13) to explore challenges and possibilities of developing teacher education for inclusion, social justice and sustainability, particularly focusing on relationalities of the global and local in the field of internationalization at home and digitalization. With regard to the interpretative approach, Clarke et al. (2018, p. 349) claim to move „toward rather than away from differences and complexities” and, therefore, they argue for “tools that enable us to see differences clearly, handle them analytically, and represent them in fathomable ways that can travel”. In accordance with Grounded Theory approaches by Charmaz (2006) as “relentlessly critical and oriented towards social justice” (Clarke et al., 2021, p. 357), situational analysis aims for an enhanced understanding concerning the “varied perspectives” (Clarke et al., 2022, p. 20), bringing together different kinds of data. Along these lines, we analyze intersections of inclusion, social justice and sustainability in teacher education with particular focus on internationalization at home and digital learning formats by drawing on policy papers, on global (e.g. UNESCO, 2017) and local level (e.g. for different national contexts: Springob et al., 2023), research papers and papers reporting on curricular or course development in this field. Situational analysis highlights “sustained and enhanced reflexivity of the researcher“ (Clarke et al., 2022, p. 20), by thus, including critical reflections on the researcher’s situatedness and positionality. This focus seems particularly promising with regard to the intersectional, interdisciplinary approach of this paper as well as to the research and development of teacher education, as we are involved not only as scholars researching on the topic ‘teacher education’, but also as teacher educators. For our analysis of complex relationalities of the global and local, this allows us to acknowledge and discuss the situatedness of attempts of developing teacher education for inclusion, social justice and sustainability, particularly in the field of internationalization at home. The relevance of considering this situatedness becomes evident, for instance, with regard to the use of sustainability as an umbrella term across faculties: While this strengthens transdisciplinary approaches, challenges for critical approaches arise in neoliberal university contexts (e.g. Campbell, 2020) and in the light of current reactionary responses. Therefore, we draw on shared experiences, students’ products and written feedback from a transcultural collaborative online seminar, while situating these experiences in the broader global and local discourses.

We present results of our ongoing situational analysis (Clarke et al., 2018, 2022) on developing teacher education for inclusion, social justice and sustainability in the field of internationalization at home and digital learning formats, focusing on discourses based on policy, research and conceptual papers. Discussing relationalities of the global and local (conceptualized as ‘glocal’), we take a closer look at relevant positions (not) taken as well as differences in the situation. Our findings refer to overlaps as well as missing links between policies and initiatives focusing on inclusion and social justice, sustainability, internationalization and digitalization. Concerning internationalization at home, potentials of tackling barriers for students’ international experiences (Rachbauer & Plank, 2021, p. 125), as well as challenges in the context of digital divides and different experiences of digital learning formats (Iwen et al., 2021) arise. Referring to the intersection of inclusion and sustainability, Heigl et al. (2022, p.19) point to the need for further knowledge and development of teacher training, emphasizing “a way that encourages (future) teachers to deal with both topics tailored to their own school structures”. By thus, “(future) teachers will be enabled to see that their action matters” (Heigl et al., 2022, p. 19). In the joint transcultural online seminar, we noticed a discrepancy between an overall awareness of social justice issues and a tendency of ‘reverting’ to a focus on the ‘mechanics’ of teaching. In this case, the situatedness of specific course requirements of teacher education curricula (Pugach et al., 2020) raises further questions for developing teacher education across the continuum and (our) roles as/of teacher educators in strengthening critical pedagogy and reflective practice based on “intersectionality-driven instruction” (Pugach et al. 2021: 237) across disciplines. Following on this perspective, this paper strengthens transdisciplinary perspectives on inclusive, social justice and sustainability education.

Beelen, J. & Jones, E. (2015). Redefining Internationalization at Home. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi & P. Scott (Eds.), The European Higher Education Area. (pp. 59–72 ). Campbell, F. K. (2020). The violence of technicism: Ableism as humiliation and degrading treatment. In N. Brown & J. Leigh (Eds.), Ableism in Academia. (pp.202–224). Catarci, M. (2021). Intercultural Education and Sustainable Development. Social Sciences, 10(1), 24. Clarke, A. E., Friese, C. & Washburn, R. S.(2018). Situational analysis. Clarke, A. E., Washburn, R. & Friese, C. (2022). Introducing Situational Analysis.In Eaed. (Eds.), Situational Analysis in Practice (pp.5-36). Erevelles, N. (2014). Forword. In D. Lawrence-Brown & M. Sapon-Shevin (Eds.), Condition Critical. (pp. ix-xi). Heigl, J., Müller, M., Gotling, N. & Proyer, M. (2022). Justice, What a Dream! Mapping Intersections of Sustainability and Inclusion. Sustainability, 14(9), 5636. Heinz, M., Keane, E., & Mc Daid, R. (2022). Charting Pathways towards a More Diverse, Equitable and Inclusive Teaching Profession. In E. Keane, M. Heinz, & R. Mc Daid (Eds.), Diversifying the Teaching Profession (pp.226–240). Iwen, I., Fritsche, K., & Schroth, E. (2022). Digitale Hochschullehre und soziale Ungleichheit. Zeitschrift für Diversitätsforschung und -Management, 7, 77–81. Keller, R. (2012). Vorwort. In Clarke, A. E. (2012). Situationsanalyse. (pp.11–14). Li, J., & Xue, E. (2023). Exploring the Epistemology of Internationalization at Home: A Scoping Review Approach. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 55(3), 356–365. Ortaçtepe Hart, D. (2023). Social Justice and the Language Classroom. Powell, J. W. (2023): Foreword. In B. Amrhein & S. Naraian (Eds.), Reading Inclusion Divergently (pp. xxi–xxiii). Pugach, M. C., Matewos, A. M. & Gomez-Najarro, J. (2021). Disability and the Meaning of Social Justice in Teacher Education Research. Journal of Teacher Education, 72(2), 237–250. Resch, K., Proyer, M., & Schwab, S. (2021). Aktuelle Beiträge zur inklusiven Schule in Österreich, Deutschland und der Schweiz. In K. Resch, K.-T. Lindner, B. Streese, M. Proyer, & S. Schwab (Eds.), Inklusive Schule und Schulentwicklung (11-18). Springob, J. et al. (2023). Sustainability in teacher education around the world. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22099.45609 UNESCO (2017). Education für Sustainable Development Goals. Learning Objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444 Vasquez, V. M., Janks, H., Comber, B. (2019). Critical Literacy as a Way of Being and Doing.Language Arts 95, 5, 300-311. Wessel Powell, C., Buchholz, B. A. & Brownell, C. J. (2019). Polic(y)ing time and curriculum. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 18(2), 170–187.