Science teachers' views on student competences in education for sustainable development

IF 4.5 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Tuba Stouthart, Dury Bayram, Jan van der Veen
{"title":"Science teachers' views on student competences in education for sustainable development","authors":"Tuba Stouthart,&nbsp;Dury Bayram,&nbsp;Jan van der Veen","doi":"10.1002/tea.22021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this study, Q methodology was used to identify 16 secondary school physics, chemistry, and biology teachers' views on competences in education for sustainable development (ESD). Our data collection instrument was grounded in the <i>GreenComp</i> competence framework developed by the European Commission. We captured three different viewpoints through by-person factor analysis. The largest group, with nine science teachers, prioritized promoting evidence-based instruction while avoiding the political, ethical, or value-laden dilemmas inherent in sustainability issues. While they advocated addressing <i>critical thinking</i> and <i>system thinking</i>, their reasons for avoiding the dilemmas varied. Some teachers feared that addressing such dilemmas might lead to preaching their own values to students, while others felt unprepared or believed that science should remain objective and value-free. The second largest group, with four science teachers, emphasize <i>promoting nature</i> and its well-being above all other competences. Unlike the dominant group, this group of science teachers held themselves responsible for encouraging students to care for nature and to change their attitudes to behave more sustainably. The third group of teachers stood out by advocating fostering <i>collective action</i> in science education. While all teachers agreed on the importance of promoting foundational scientific knowledge, they also agreed on excluding politics from science education. This stance was influenced by internal factors, such as their perception of science as empirical, their perceived role as transmitters of scientific knowledge, and a lack of expertise. In total, 12 out of the 16 teachers who participated in our study suggested that subjects such as history are more suitable for addressing certain ESD competences. Additionally, external factors, such as the role of parents and assessments, were cited as potential reasons to dismiss certain ESD competences in science education.</p>","PeriodicalId":48369,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","volume":"62 6","pages":"1617-1653"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/tea.22021","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.22021","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this study, Q methodology was used to identify 16 secondary school physics, chemistry, and biology teachers' views on competences in education for sustainable development (ESD). Our data collection instrument was grounded in the GreenComp competence framework developed by the European Commission. We captured three different viewpoints through by-person factor analysis. The largest group, with nine science teachers, prioritized promoting evidence-based instruction while avoiding the political, ethical, or value-laden dilemmas inherent in sustainability issues. While they advocated addressing critical thinking and system thinking, their reasons for avoiding the dilemmas varied. Some teachers feared that addressing such dilemmas might lead to preaching their own values to students, while others felt unprepared or believed that science should remain objective and value-free. The second largest group, with four science teachers, emphasize promoting nature and its well-being above all other competences. Unlike the dominant group, this group of science teachers held themselves responsible for encouraging students to care for nature and to change their attitudes to behave more sustainably. The third group of teachers stood out by advocating fostering collective action in science education. While all teachers agreed on the importance of promoting foundational scientific knowledge, they also agreed on excluding politics from science education. This stance was influenced by internal factors, such as their perception of science as empirical, their perceived role as transmitters of scientific knowledge, and a lack of expertise. In total, 12 out of the 16 teachers who participated in our study suggested that subjects such as history are more suitable for addressing certain ESD competences. Additionally, external factors, such as the role of parents and assessments, were cited as potential reasons to dismiss certain ESD competences in science education.

Abstract Image

科学教师对可持续发展教育中学生能力的看法
本研究采用Q方法对16名中学物理、化学和生物教师对可持续发展教育(ESD)能力的看法进行了调查。我们的数据收集工具基于欧盟委员会制定的GreenComp能力框架。我们通过个人因素分析捕获了三种不同的观点。最大的小组有9名科学教师,他们优先促进循证教学,同时避免可持续性问题固有的政治、道德或价值困境。虽然他们主张解决批判性思维和系统思维,但他们避免困境的原因各不相同。一些老师担心解决这种困境可能会导致向学生宣扬自己的价值观,而另一些老师则感到措手不及,或者认为科学应该保持客观和无价值。第二大群体有四名科学教师,他们强调促进自然及其福祉高于所有其他能力。与占主导地位的群体不同,这群科学教师认为自己有责任鼓励学生关爱自然,并改变他们的态度,以更可持续的方式行事。第三组教师主张在科学教育中培养集体行动。虽然所有教师都同意促进基础科学知识的重要性,但他们也同意将政治排除在科学教育之外。这种立场受到内部因素的影响,例如他们认为科学是经验性的,他们认为自己是科学知识的传播者,以及缺乏专业知识。在参与我们研究的16位教师中,总共有12位认为历史等科目更适合解决某些可持续发展教育的能力。此外,外部因素,如家长的角色和评估,被认为是排除某些可持续发展教育在科学教育中的能力的潜在原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Journal of Research in Science Teaching EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
19.60%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, the official journal of NARST: A Worldwide Organization for Improving Science Teaching and Learning Through Research, publishes reports for science education researchers and practitioners on issues of science teaching and learning and science education policy. Scholarly manuscripts within the domain of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching include, but are not limited to, investigations employing qualitative, ethnographic, historical, survey, philosophical, case study research, quantitative, experimental, quasi-experimental, data mining, and data analytics approaches; position papers; policy perspectives; critical reviews of the literature; and comments and criticism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信