Mapping Education for Sustainability in the Nordic Countries

Mapping Education for Sustainability in the Nordic Countries

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) covers a broad range of elements under the UNSDG’s 12 and 4. Prevalent to sustainable consumption and production is that which pertains to ‘sustainable lifestyles’, with the influence of education on sustainable lifestyles being extensive. This report considers a variety of different variables in compulsory education systems in the Nordic countries, assessing how sustainability is treated at all levels, from national policy to school curricula and teacher education.

Sustainable Education or Education for Sustainable Development?

What is initially highlighted, and very important to consider here, is the difference between Sustainable Education and the “less radical” Education for Sustainable Development. An “education for something” as described in the report and by Sterling (2001) leaves the conventional, unsustainable, education paradigm intact. This is that in which individuals learn to “uncritically reproduce norms” and rewards conformity, hence doing little to aid the shift to sustainable lifestyles. Sustainable Education, on the other hand, employs three different orders of learning: the cognitive domain (knowledge and understanding); the domain of intention and action; and the affective domain – where students are encouraged to challenge entrenched norms in the third domain. This transformative way of thinking is suggested as a prerequisite for the movement towards sustainability. The interplay between these three ways of thinking can be represented by a Venn diagram.

Figure 1. The three domains of learning. Sterling (2014)

Hence, special attention is paid in this report to those parts of policy and curricula that encourage thinking in multiple domains. 

Takeaways:

Policy:  

• All countries in the Nordic region have legislation stating sustainability is an explicit concern for compulsory education, with the exception of Denmark which treats sustainability implicitly through the importance of human interaction with nature.
• Often seen tensions between the subjective, humanistic view of sustainability education and the objective, science-based understanding “might not be as prevalent in the Nordic countries as in many other parts of the world” (van Poeck et al., 2016). With this said, however, it seems the scientific perspective is still given more consideration. This might suggest that learning only in the first domain continues to be the norm.
• The concept of Bildung, where education is treated as the moral, social, and cultural development of an individual, is exhibited in educational policy in Denmark, Sweden, and Finland

Pedagogical Practice:

• In all countries, teaching practices exhibited an explicit understanding of social responsibility, social learning, and citizenship.
• Furthermore, excepting Iceland, the approach to learning was found to encourage real-world action and to promote behaviour change. This employs the third domain of learning and hence has strong ramifications regarding the transition to sustainable lifestyles.
• When linked to sustainability education, however, although educational policy highlights sustainability as a key concern, this is considered superficial, when looking at actual pedagogical practices. Teacher preparation for sustainability education is described as “often better addressed in political rhetoric than in educational reality”.

Curricula:

• No countries explicitly mention the UNSDG’s with regards to their sustainability education.
• Finland, Norway, and Iceland cover sustainability values and attitudes in their curricula, whereas Denmark and Sweden do not.
• All countries have sustainability themes incorporated into their traditional subjects as well as stand-alone education for sustainability, this is likely to encourage thinking outside of silos and if applied correctly could support critical thinking in the second domain.

The Nordic perspective.

This report finds both positive views of ESD but also difficulties to overcome in the movement towards a truly sustainable education. It suggests that the shared Nordic culture and lifestyle leads to many similarities in education, the most notable of which is a focus on lifelong learning and Bildung. These pedagogical elements have the capacity to foster thinking in multiple domains and hence accelerate the transition to sustainable lifestyles. However, it is clear that in many cases the link between this form of education and sustainability is either weak or non-existent when considering pedagogical practices and curricula. It could be asserted that ESD, rather than sustainable education, continues to preside in the Nordic countries. It is clear to see that with regards to sustainable lifestyles there are great benefits to be found in further coupling the moral and social elements of education with ESD.  

Sources:

Sterling, Stephen (2001). Sustainable education: Re-visioning learning and change. Cambridge: Green Books

Sterling, Stephen (2014). “At variance with reality”: How to re-think our thinking. Journal of Sustainability Education, 6, May. Available from http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/content/at-variance-with-reality-how-tore-think-our-thinking_2014_06/

van Poeck, Katrien, Goeminne, Gert & Vandenabeele, Joke (2016). Revisiting the democratic paradox of environmental and sustainability education: Sustainability issues as matters of concern. Environmental Education Research, 22(6), 806–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2014.966659