Education plays a crucial role in preparing new generations for global challenges, as outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2015). There is broad consensus that education should help learners develop competencies for a more sustainable future (UNESCO, 2020). The call by Audrey Azoulay, Director-General of UNESCO, underlines the urgency of action-oriented education: “It’s time to mainstream … education with an action-oriented approach that helps young people understand their power to make a difference” (UNESCO, 2024). This highlights the need to equip primary school teachers with the competencies required to foster such transformative learning processes. However, many teachers are still insufficiently prepared in this area (Boeve-de Pauw et al., 2022; Rieckmann, 2019).

Teachers and teacher educators experience challenges in designing education that strengthens social engagement and participation, particularly in relation to sustainability issues (Van Poeck et al., 2023). Within teacher education, students should be able to develop competencies in Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), aimed at fostering knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes that contribute to a more sustainable society (UNESCO, 2020). Sustainability is broadly defined through five interrelated pillars: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership (Rahm et al., 2025). Teacher education can play a key role in promoting ESD in primary education (Rieckmann, 2019).

Like other young people, student teachers often experience emotions such as concern, anxiety, and paralysis when confronted with complex societal issues, such as climate change and inequality of opportunity (Ojala, 2016). Professional action competence for ESD enables (prospective) teachers to channel these emotions into action. A professionally action competent teacher is committed, demonstrates confidence in their own abilities, and possesses the pedagogical knowledge and skills required to teach ESD (Sass et al., 2022).

An individual’s values play an important role in sustainable behavior and influence so-called environmentally significant behavior (ESB), defined as behavior that has direct consequences for the quality of the natural environment (Stern, 2000). Three value orientations - egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric- are considered relevant in the literature for understanding environmental awareness and intentions (De Groot et al., 2008). These value orientations may function as an important moderator of variation in the development of professional action competence among student teachers.

Teacher education has a crucial role in stimulating teachers’ professional action competence; research shows that many teachers experience difficulties in implementing ESD (Sass et al., 2022; Boeve-de Pauw et al., 2022). This PhD research explores how the professional action competence for ESD of student teachers develops over a three-year period during their study. It examines which factors related to coursework, internships, and social experiences are associated with this development, and what role students’ value orientations play. The study will also clarify which subject-didactic design principles contribute to strengthening the professional action competence of student teachers. The aim is to optimize teacher education in order to better prepare future student teachers and the primary school pupils they will teach, for the challenges of their time.

This PhD research addresses the following main questions: How to enhance student teachers professional action competence in ESD? And the following sub-questions: 1. (a) How does the professional action competence of student teachers develop throughout their teacher education, and (b) how are aspects of coursework, internships, and other social experiences related to this development? 2. How does student teachers’ value orientation (egoistic, altruistic, biospheric) influence the development of their professional action competence during their teacher education? 3. Which subject-didactic design principles for ESD create the conditions for teacher education that enhance the professional action competence of student teachers?

This PhD research follows pre-service primary teachers over a period of three years and adopts an explanatory sequential mixed methods design (Creswell, 2015), in which quantitative and qualitative methods complement one another. The study comprises four complementary sub-studies that together provide insight into the development of professional action competence in ESD among student teachers and how this competence can be strengthened. Study 1 consists of a scoping review conducted following the PRISMA-ScR framework and focuses on subject-didactic design principles and effective approaches in ESD that strengthen the professional action competence of student teachers. It builds on earlier studies on ESD competencies. The results inform Study 3 and contribute to sub-question 3. Study 2 examines the development of professional action competence among student teachers through a quantitative longitudinal analysis of a cohort of 200 students, starting in the academic year 2026–2027. Within the programme, students learn to design and implement ESD in their internship classrooms in primary education. Data collection uses two validated instruments; Professional Action Competence in Education for Sustainable Development (PACesd) (Sass et al., 2022), measuring professional action competence in ESD and Value Orientations Scale (VOS) (De Groot et al., 2008), measuring value orientations. Exploratory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis identify latent dimensions of professional action competence, and SEM and latent growth models analyse its longitudinal development, including the role of values and study, internship, and social experiences. This addresses sub-question 1. Study 3 includes two qualitative sub-studies: cross-sectional interviews across cohorts and a three-year longitudinal focus group study. Together, they examine the development of professional action competence (sub-question 1) and students’ value orientations (sub-question 2). Study 4 develops a student typology, based on integrated quantitative (Study 2) and qualitative (Study 3) data, to formulate subject-didactic design principles for ESD. Using a person-centred, cluster-based approach enriched with qualitative insights, it links developmental patterns in professional action competence and value orientations. Together with Study 1, it informs coherent ESD design principles, addressing sub-question 3 and guiding implementation in teacher education. A sounding board of teacher educators and field partners refines the student typologies and ESD design principles through ongoing, practice-based input.

As this PhD project is currently in its initial phase and conducted by a teacher educator within the teacher education programme, the study is expected to generate both theoretical and practical contributions. Developed in close collaboration with supervisors and the teacher education programme, the research aims to identify student typologies in the development of professional action competence and to formulate subject-didactic design principles for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). By integrating these insights, the project is expected to strengthen the professional action competence of pre-service primary teachers, enabling them to integrate ESD effectively into their teaching practice and thereby contribute to meaningful and sustainable learning for future generations. The longitudinal design and close integration with the teacher education programme, offers methodological innovations that provide insight into student development and the underlying influencing factors. Furthermore, by connecting developmental psychology and educational sciences, the study is expected to offer both theoretical advancement and practical guidance, thereby enriching the scientific evidence base on professional action competence in education. In addition, the project seeks to address a persistent gap in ESD research: while policy and curriculum frameworks increasingly emphasize action competence, empirical insights into how this competence develops in teacher education remain limited. By tracing student teachers’ development over time, the study aims to make the process of becoming an action-competent teacher more transparent and theoretically grounded. The findings are expected to inform curriculum design within teacher education programmes, support teacher educators in scaffolding transformative learning processes, and contribute to international discussions on preparing teachers for sustainability transitions. Ultimately, the project aspires to bridge the gap between normative ambitions of ESD and the everyday realities of classroom practice.

1.Boeve-de Pauw, J., Olsson, D., Berglund, T., & Gericke, N. (2022). Teachers’ ESD self-efficacy and practices: A longitudinal study on the impact of teacher professional development. Environmental Education Research, 28(6), 867–885. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2042206 2.Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Pearson. 3.De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2008). Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmentally significant behavior: How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations. Environment and Behavior, 40(3), 330–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506297831 4.Howard, M. C., & Hoffman, M. E. (2018). Variable-centered, person-centered, and person-specific approaches: Where theory meets the method. Organizational Research Methods, 21(4), 846–876. 5.Ojala, M. (2016). Facing anxiety in climate change education: From therapeutic practice to hopeful transgressive learning. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 21, 41–56. 6.Rahm, L., Cookson, T. P., & Azcona, G. (2025). People, planet, prosperity, peace, partnerships (5 Ps). In F. Biermann, T. Hickmann, Y. Kang, C.-A. Sénit, & Y. Sun (Eds.), Essential concepts for implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (pp. 113–124). Routledge. 7.Rieckmann, M. (2019). Education for sustainable development in teacher education: An international perspective. Environmental Education Research, 25(1), 33–48. 8.Ritchie, J., Spencer, L., & O’Connor, W. (2003). Carrying out qualitative analysis. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 219–262). SAGE Publications. 9.Sass, W., Claes, E., Boeve-de Pauw, J., De Maeyer, S., Schelfhout, W., Van Petegem, P., & Isac, M. M. (2022). Measuring professional action competence in education for sustainable development (PACesd). Environmental Education Research, 28(2), 260–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1976731 10.Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. 11.United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations. 12.UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO. 13.UNESCO. (2024). Education and climate change: Learning to act for people and planet. UNESCO. 14.Van Poeck, K., Vandenplas, E., & Östman, L. (2023). Teaching action-oriented knowledge on sustainability issues. Environmental Education Research, 30(3), 334–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2167939 15.Van Staa, A., & Evers, J. (2010). ‘Thick analysis’: Strategie om de kwaliteit van kwalitatieve data-analyse te verhogen. Kwalon, 15(1), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.5117/2010.015.001.002