Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Towards a sustainable future with education?

Towards a sustainable future with education? The call for a kind of education which can contribute to a sustainable future has resulted in the “education for sustainable development” (ESD) campaign. What is implied here is that a sustainable future can be achieved if people are properly edu- cated. ESD ignores the current, popular perception that the future is non-shapeable and determined regarding sustainability issues; ESD presupposes a necessary understanding of a future that can be formed. The logic of standard education supports the perception of a future non-shapeable through the promotion of competencies designed for flexibility. Nevertheless both systems still conceive of education mainly as training, closing down the future. In this contribution, I argue that ESD needs to take current educational systems and today’s society with their non-sustainable future-building practices into account, because otherwise ESD would not make any difference to the educational and societal status quo. My main objective is to show that education must be thought of as something other than just training: considering education predominantly as subjectification holds the possibility for open and alternative futures. In this article, I discuss the potentials of this understanding (and the notion of an open future) for education with a view to sustainability. I explicitly address an interdisciplinary audience with the aim of raising awareness that education is more than training. Keywords Environmental sustainability education · Education for sustainable development · Educational theory · Future education · Future perceptions Introduction: futures in education as “futures for the present.” If the future is the same as the present or can be predicted with any certainty, then it would Education and the future are inseparably intertwined. It seem to be not so difficult to decide what the next genera- is impossible to think about educational matters without tion should best be equipped with. However, if the future making references to the future. Our understanding of is presumed to be uncertain, which is ultimately the case, future determines, for example, what knowledge and which then the necessary knowledge and skills are not that easy skills are considered to be important for the next genera- to determine. tion. Regarding sustainability issues, it makes a difference Future in education is more than a mere temporal cat- whether sustainability is thought as a concrete aim which egory: future is a symbol of “something better” (Milojević can be reached through technical innovation and efficiency, 2005). Future ought to (and can) always be better than the or whether it is more a normative direction which needs to past; so in that sense it is different from the present. Future be determined democratically. Futures in education deter- is understood as something which belongs to the next gen- mine decisions in the present and thus can be understood eration; they should have a better future than the present (Pfeiffer 2007). Thus, future needs to be understood as open, not determined, where one has the freedom to shape one’s Handled by David Löw Beer, Institute for Advanced Sustainability own future. So future in education is strongly related to Studies, Germany. freedom (Biesta 2010). This understanding became possible after Enlightenment, at a time when humanism—the notion * Anne-Katrin Holfelder of human freedom and progress—became the dominant per- anne-katrin.holfelder@iass-potsdam.de spective, and when the development of a better society was Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies, Berliner Str. the main ideal. Education should make this ideal realizable 130, 14467 Potsdam, Germany Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 Sustainability Science through active engagement of the individual with his or her is not considered as the result of human actions, it is reduced (human and non-human) environment. This means, further, to being just something we react to. In both cases, education that the notion of future in education is always considered is a means, a qualification which can be reached. And in as a result of human actions (Bokelmann 1969), but it is both cases, the understanding of education contradicts the not understood as radically open, that is, shapeable in the importance we attach to self-determination and openness. sense to design a better future, something that would be In this contribution, I discuss the meaning of an open closer to the ideal of a humane world. The future should be future for education in the context of sustainability. The obliged to promote and support values such as democracy importance of education as a main contributor to a sustain- and self-determination. This ideal of a humane future should able future is omnipresent. I take the worldwide “education be understood as a guiding principle, one that imposes clear for sustainable development” campaign as an example for limitations on non-humane developments, rather than as a how education is discussed predominantly, with regard to realistically achievable objective. Hence future, based on a sustainability (part II). I argue that a broader perspective humanistic understanding of education, is a guiding nor- on future making practices in society and institutions must mative idea and less a prediction of a certain development be acquired. The leading question in the discourse is more (ibid.). Education has been considered as something which often, “How can we close the knowledge–action gap?” Edu- is free of any direct purpose or external will but, at the same cation in that context is often referred to as a “tool” or “rem- time, clearly normative: it should help to bring society closer edy” which can bring about a better future if used correctly. to an idealized humane future. Postmodern and postcolonial What is missing is the integration of our current understand- theories made us aware of the contingency of society and ing of future in educational institutions (part III) and society the problematic linear understanding of time and progress, (part IV). Our current understanding of future in present-day as well as a teleological understanding of future (Milojević educational institutions and of future practices in society 2005). From a normative point of view, we must be aware stands in opposition to the idealized notion of future in ESD that a teleological understanding of future is problematic in and thus sustainability. I argue that these notions need to education today; however, what we should hold on to is the be explicitly addressed in designing ESD; otherwise ESD close connection between future and freedom (Biesta 2010), would do nothing beyond paying lip service to sustainability future as a symbol for shapeability, openness, change and while continuing to foster the current non-sustainable status self-determination. quo. In the final section (part V), I will discuss how educa- On closer observation of society and educational prac- tion can be conceived in the context of sustainability as this tice, the described idealized picture of education seems dif- pertains to an understanding of future as open. This open- ficult to maintain. Especially institutionalized education is ness is a necessary assumption when thinking about social far from being free of external influences (e.g., the educator change (Sandford 2013). I argue for an understanding of or society’s interests). The promise of a better future has education, which considers education as more than qualic fi a - been shattered because of a number of severe global crises. tion or training (for reaching a pre-defined aim). Motivated Future in post-modern societies has come to be understood, by the observation that education in public and political dis- instead, as uncertain and contingent. But which understand- cussions is often regarded as a solution to non-sustainability, ing of future should serve today as the reference point for I want to address an interdisciplinary audience. educational decisions? It would be conceivable to adhere to some desired vision of the future but also to adhere to a future forecasted from the present dominant perception of Education for a sustainable future it. Those two different perceptions of “futures for the pre- sent” mark the parameters within which education occurs in Agenda 21 initially mentioned education as one important education programs as well as in the public discourse. The contribution to sustainable development. This resulted ulti- future understandings give information about how education mately in the ESD campaign, initiated by UNESCO and is perceived: education could be considered as a means to promoted worldwide during the UN Decade of education approach a specific end; it could also be seen as a means to for sustainable development beginning in 2005. Education respond to a given situation in the future. Neither viewpoint takes the idea of future in education seriously. In the first case, future is not understood as open and left to the next This means that I am compelled to condense and simplify some of the discussion. generation. Education serves rather as an instrument for I use the term “Education for Sustainable Development” for efforts attaining some specified objective. In the second case, future in education which refer to the political call for sustainable develop- ment. I do not integrate (often already much longer existing) educa- This distinction and the following analysis of futures in education tional approaches which are highly relevant with regard to sustain- need to be understood analytically. ability. Here, I rather use “education in terms of sustainability”. 1 3 Sustainability Science (mainly understood as enabling the learner to acquire certain environmental education (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). competencies) is supposed to make a significant contribution But the hope of creating a better future through educa- to sustainable development. The ESD program is a highly tion seems to rest on the development of more innovative ambitious one; it implies the hope of actually making a sus- and alternative methods and the focus on competencies. tainable future: This “new orientation” tries to improve the negative image of environmental education which is still burdened with ESD is an essential contribution to all efforts to having an image of being indoctrination and instrumen- achieve the SDGs, enabling individuals to contribute talisation (cf. Jickling and Sterling 2017). In addition, to sustainable development by promoting societal, eco- the lack of success of environmental education is often nomic and political change as well as by transform- attributed to its focus on catastrophes. According to the ing their own behaviour. ESD can produce specific promoters of ESD, however, shifting this focus to compe- cognitive, socio-emotional and behavioural learning tencies would be one plausible response to this criticism. outcomes that enable individuals to deal with the par- The claim is that competencies combine the openness to ticular challenges of each SDG, thus facilitating its reflect on values with one’s own viewpoint in conjunction achievement. In short, ESD enables all individuals to with the focus on actions. This focus on actions is further contribute to achieving the SDGs by equipping them strengthened by an orientation toward a positive vision with the knowledge and competencies they need, not (Haan 2006). only to understand what the SDGs are about, but to In the academic discussion of ESD, this euphemistic engage as informed citizens in bringing about the nec- promotion of a politically set program is contested: It is essary transformation (UNESCO 2017). still criticized for reasons of instrumentalisation (Kopnina The aim of the campaign has been to educate people so 2012; Dahlbeck 2014; Sund and Öhman 2013; Bonnett that they acquire competencies and learn to think and behave 2004). These scholars stress the point that setting a sus- in a sustainable way. ESD is a wide-ranging project that tainable future as a clear, realistic goal in education (and, concerns all types of education (formal and non-formal, in so doing, determining exactly what constitutes sustain- general and specialized vocational), all disciplines, and able action) is not the right approach. Rather, sustainable persons of any age. It goes beyond imparting knowledge development should be considered as a process in which or raising awareness. Its main focus is on fostering sustain- citizens need to take an active part. Therefore the focus of able behavior, in private and non-private contexts. In the education should be on the promotion of critical thinking academic milieu, the call to foster sustainable behavior was and reflecting (Jickling and Wals 2008 ; Öhman and Öst- mainly answered by determining what the necessary com- man 2008). Scholars raising this criticism often refer to the petencies for so doing must be. Among the more important continuation of the developmental paradigm in ESD, which proficiencies are systems-thinking competence, anticipatory sees development as technological progress and economic competence, normative competence, strategic competence, growth, and thus reproduces societal foundations that are interpersonal competence and critical thinking (Wiek et al. considered to be the cause of the crisis and not as its solu- 2011; Rieckmann 2013). In general, competencies are under- tion (Bonnett 2004). Humans are able to control and manage stood as a combination of cognitive skills and abilities as crises via science and technology (Kopnina 2014); learners well as the motivational, volitional, and social readiness to are addressed as consumers, reflecting a neoliberal economic solve problems responsibly in a variety of situations (cf. understanding of the human being as one more component Weinert 2001). Consequently, competencies are not based in a market-dominated and market-controlled society (Selby on any specific knowledge content, but rather more oriented 2006). Huckle and Wals (2015) even concluded that ESD toward questions of how the acquisition of the required com- failed to challenge neoliberalism, accusing ESD of being petencies can be made possible. Many scholars stress the “misplaced idealism” (ibid., p. 492). The need for the active point that innovative learning (enabling students to acquire integration of pluralistic views and alternatives is further competencies) is indispensable for ESD (e.g. Gidley 2012). highlighted (Kopnina 2012). The meaning and understand- ESD clearly exceeds the goal to impart knowledge and ing of education in various ESD approaches is tightly con- raise awareness; it is about a variety of learning outcomes nected to the underlying notion of (a sustainable) future: If a that are conceived as a contribution to societal transfor- sustainable future is assumed to be attainable through tech- mation. The success of education in accordance with the nical innovation, efficiency and different consumer habits— logic of the political call will be determined by the extent which is the case for the dominant sustainable development to which sustainable development goals (SDGs) are real- paradigm—the needed knowledge and skills can be defined ized. This ambitious and all-embracing objective is sur- quite precisely (cf. Kopnina 2014). Future is then something prising because of the gap between knowledge, awareness, forecastable and calculable. If the concrete form of a sustain- and action, something that is well-known from decades of able future needs to be negotiated in society, participation 1 3 Sustainability Science and decision-making skills become more important aims in make sense of and function well in this world, indi- education. viduals need for example to master changing technolo- The presented critique on ESD is based on normative gies and to make sense of large amounts of available arguments. I would like to expand the discussion of educa- information. They also face collective challenges as tion in terms of sustainability by integrating structural and societies—such as balancing economic growth with empirical arguments into it. So far, success or limitations environmental sustainability, and prosperity with are discussed mainly on the individual psychological level. social equity. In these contexts, the competencies that ESD (like all education) is clearly a project about the future. individuals need to meet their goals have become more My objective here is to draw to the special attention of my complex, requiring more than the mastery of certain readership that a human being is socialized in particular way, narrowly defined skills” (OECD 2005, p. 4). depending on the society of which he or she is a part and The leading questions for defining competencies were the on the particular school system in which he or she is edu- following: “What do individuals need in order to function cated, with its established future practices. It is therefore well in society as they find it; what competencies do they important that we have a look at how the future is perceived need to find and to hold down a job; what kind of adaptive in current educational systems (part III) and Western devel- qualities are required to cope with changing technology?” oped societies (part IV). My argument is that if ESD really (ibid., p. 6) In this description, a clear assumption about wants to contribute to societal transformation in the direction the future is made. There seems to be no doubt the world is of sustainability, the preconditions for so doing need to be becoming increasingly more complex and that current prob- addressed and, at the same time, the limitations of educa- lems are worsening. The future is understood as uncertain tion beyond the knowledge-action gap need to be recognized and fast-changing, which justifies the importance attached (part V). to flexibly applicable competencies. The OECD names nor - mative issues (“democratic values and achieving sustainable development” are considered as “shared values”) which are Education for an uncertain future not specified in greater detail. The OECD document says that “competence is also an important factor in the ways that Since at least two decades, education policies have been individuals help to shape the world, not just to cope with it” influenced increasingly by actors outside the traditional (ibid., p. 6), whereby “shaping the world” seems to be less a education system, such as the IMF, World Bank and OECD goal than it is a useful side effect. A clearer statement about (Robertson and Dale 2009; Walker 2009). Educational sys- what is desirable and what the links between agency and tems in many OECD countries have undergone a change coping might be is missing. toward an output-orientation with a focus on competencies. On the explicit level the focus on competencies is justified With the PISA study (first conducted in 2000), the OECD for the sake of the learners; on the implicit level, justifica- defined what is regarded as important competencies (in tion of the selected competencies is criticized for following mathematics, text understanding, science, and financial liter - the neoliberal logic of the market aiming to create a flexible acy) worldwide. In addition to subject-related competencies, future worker. Education is shaped increasingly by market the OECD also developed competencies which are consid- principles such as competitiveness and producing human ered as important for “a successful life and a well-function- capital to fulfill the needs of a global economy (Milojević ing society” (Rychen and Salganik 2003). With its Defini- 2005; Rizvi and Lingard 2009; McCarthy et al. 2009; Hursh tion and Selection of Competencies Program (DeSeCo), 2010). Education has become an investment which needs the OECD defined key competencies important for all indi- to pay off, in accordance with cost–benefit considerations viduals in globalized modern societies (OECD 2002). Key (Sandford 2013). Although the idea underlying PISA ini- competencies are “acting in heterogeneous groups,” “acting tially was to evaluate societal participation, the study instead autonomously,” and “interactive use of mediums and tools.” sparked competition (Steffens 2007). The defined competencies are based on the following depic- The task of education on this understanding is first of all tion of the future: to make the acquisition of defined competencies possible. “Globalisation and modernisation are creating an This task is strongly connected to “objective” knowledge increasingly diverse and interconnected world. To (Andreotti 2014, p. 23) not only in terms of content, but also in terms of pedagogy. Pedagogy has become increasingly evidence-based, requiring validation for certain methods (Biesta 2007). Future is understood as uncertain in the sense Competence in the context of PISA is defined as “the necessary prerequisites for meeting complex demands” (OECD 2001). A solely that it does not seem possible to shape it actively. In keeping cognitive notion of competence is used here; motivational and voli- with this understanding of future, learners are perceived as tional aspects (cf. Weinert 2001) are not included. 1 3 Sustainability Science passive recipients of knowledge, delivered to an uncertain on those categories, most studies of young people refer future. Montuori (2012) speaks of “reproductive educa- primarily to probable futures. Images of future society are tion” because, on this understanding, the aim of education limited to likely outcomes which follow current paths and is to make students adapt rather than to allow them to create logics, in other words, which mirror the present. Although (ibid., p. 65). Milojević (2005) criticizes the failure to ques- awareness of the possibilities for change can be stated, a tion whether the globalized future perceived today is “the connection between probable futures and preferable futures future” (ibid., p. 64); this “taken-for-granted future” means is missing. The “real world” and the “ideal world” are differ - that other visions are obscured or made invisible and their entiated when discussing sustainability-related topics (Zeyer proponents silenced (ibid.). Sandford (2013) describes this and Roth 2011). Although sustainability is considered as a neoliberal economic vision as empty one because present desirable goal, real changes to improve things are thought demands are merely extended into the future. Teaching and to be possible only in an “ideal world,” that is, one in which schooling speak more the language of competitive excel- morality constitutes the basis for actions. In the “real world,” lence, a practice which narrows learners’ prospects and their neoliberal market logic and unmitigated self-interest domi- view of the future considerably, instead of offering different nate and are thought to be unavoidable. As both worlds are possibilities (Hutchinsons 2002, p. 57). Amsler and Facer disconnected from each other, there can be no hope of any (2017) call the neoliberal and outcome-oriented shift in improvement. The future is largely perceived as predeter- Western school systems as an “anticipatory regime” which mined and unsustainable (Holfelder 2017). Young people stifles imagination and experimentation. On this understand- often express feelings such as helplessness or hopelessness ing the future is not a place of possibilities, but rather one (Ojala 2017). of foreboding, creating anxiety and necessitating control ESD focuses mainly on society in general and therefore (ibid.). The future as something non-shapeable and without more distant futures, rather than an individual’s personal any alternatives is also a dominant societal perception which future—something that is likely due to the educational sys- I will turn to in the next section. tem’s separation of disciplines. Distant futures are viewed as static images which can be described from an outside perspective (Carabelli and Lyon 2016). Such visions of the A narrowed future: empirical consideration future are considered to be modified copies or a reflection of the present because they reproduce society’s current prob- In fact, humans constantly look to the future, and cre- lems (Eckersley 2002). Research on youth futures indicates ate mental images of what the future might be like. that societal or distant future is distinguished from one’s own These self-created images emerge as hopes, fears, and or the near future (Cook 2015; Eckersley 2002). But it is expectations, and thus influence what people feel is not the case that visions of societal, economic or ecological worth doing in the present and are among the causes futures do not influence individual, personal futures; there is of present behavior (Liu and Lin 2016, p. 81). just no linear connection between them. This also explains why young people can be pessimistic about the societal, Looking ahead to the future is inherently human; it is especially the environmental, future but still be optimistic considered to be an important aspect of decision making about their own (e.g. Rubin 2013; Jenkins and Pell 2006). I and behaviour. Those “futures for the present” are of inter- follow Carabelli and Lyon (2016) in arguing that it is impor- est vis-à-vis educational concerns, and they are researched tant to discuss both futures—the distant and the near—for widely in the field of environmental education and ESD. obtaining a more complete idea about how young people ori- But a negative image of, and pessimistic attitude toward, the ent themselves vis-à-vis the future and its challenges. Thus societal and environmental future is almost always inherent I would like to point to some sociological studies regarding in most of these studies conducted in western societies (e.g. young people and future directions in Western societies. In Hicks 2012; Eckersley 2002). These studies stress the point contrast to the distant future, the near future is explored by that most young people are aware of (and concerned about) reconstructing the practices of young people as they engage the environmental situation, but that they are not optimis- with it. tic about change or improvement. One way to distinguish Future is perceived as uncertain and rapidly changing, among various mental images of the future is to differentiate affecting how people orientate themselves in time (Woodman between expected (probable), promised (possible), and pre- 2011). Woodman (2011) found a relatively present-centered ferred (positive visions of) futures (Eckersley 2002). Based orientation to the future in his observations of young people from Australia. Concentration on the short term which is perceived as shapeable is considered as one practical way of The critique that the neoliberal influence forecloses future possi- dealing with this uncertainty. Cook (2015) describes similar bilities is also made explicitly for ESD and environmental education findings in her overview of youth studies researching the (Schindel Dimick 2015; Derby et al. 2015; Hursh et al. 2015). 1 3 Sustainability Science individual’s own future: one’s own, long-term future turns One main task of education is thus to encourage and sup- out to be of significantly less interest than the immediate or port the coming generation in shaping its own future toward short-term future. Brannen and Nilsen (2002) name three the ideal of a democratic and just society. different types of future orientation among European youth. The political call for ESD emphasizes the possibility of (1) The future is deferred or postponed; what counts is the creating a better world through education. With this in mind, present. (2) In accordance with the model of adaptability, future is clearly understood to be a result of human action, what happens in the future depends on oneself. Future itself that is, the promise of a certain future (a sustainable one) can is not predictable; it is perceived as uncertain. Young peo- be fulfilled under the condition that all people are educated ple, mainly those in higher education, consider it their task in a certain way. This understanding of ESD means that edu- to be prepared for the future labor market. But they do not cation is understood as training to obtain a qualification. perceive themselves as active because “their emphasis is less It follows the dominant educational paradigm in Western on mastering their routes through the labor market and more systems, namely, that education should equip learners with on negotiating its vagaries” (ibid., p. 527). (3) Another way competencies which are deemed useful for a fast-changing of dealing with the future is to concentrate on “short-term and uncertain future. The underlying justification for this projects” in which it is considered to be an extension of the is a “taken-for-granted” future which “reinforce[s] the present. This type of orientation is found more often among status quo, in many cases by attempting to use education young people with fewer economic and social resources. as an agency in colonizing technologically and economi- Leccardi (2012) describes similar orientations. Either the cally deterministic futures” (Gough 1990, p. 308). Future is young people follow the model of adaptability and flexibility something which you cannot shape but which acts on you; (“future without a project”); or they concentrate on “short- it is a threat (Facer 2013) rather than something formable term projects” in which the future is considered to be an which would give individuals an alternative other than sub- extension of the present. Social relations, security and trust mission. The OECD selected competencies reproduce and (in societal institutions) seem to be important factors for support this currently prevalent notion of a deterministic planning and engaging with a longer term future (Heggli future. The OECD’s selected competencies are undoubtedly et al. 2013; Cook 2015). When the future is perceived as important ones, but they are not inherently tied to specific complex, one may be overwhelmed by too many choices; moral values. They are merely means which can be used to the future becomes something overpowering. Coping strate- achieve any end. E.g., the competence to think systemically gies are the avoidance of responsibility, accepting things (in can be used in warfare but also for carbon-reduced transport the long-term future) as they are, or concentrating solely on systems. Referring to the future as taken-for-granted (per- one’s own immediate future where a more positive impact ceived in the present as passive and non-shapeable) can only is perceived (Cook 2015). What all of these studies have in result in adaption, whereby change (or initiating it) would common is that the future is not seen as something one acts be not possible. In both cases—for ESD and the educational on, but rather as something which acts upon oneself. system—future is perceived as a narrowed predetermined path. And in both cases, a specific notion of educability is evoked. A picture is sketched which considers human Thinking education as more than training beings as closed entities able to learn anything if just the right methods are selected. This is in line with the increas- All education springs from images of the future and all ingly evidence-based understanding of education wherein education creates images of the future. Thus all educa- the basic question is “what works” or “what is effective” tion, whether intended or not, is a preparation for the and not “what is it effective for ” (Biesta 2010). The belief future. Unless we understand the future for which we in educability, and with it the idea of an educable identity, are preparing, we may do tragic damage to those we is reproduced when the question of how to overcome the teach. Unless we understand the powerful psychologi- knowledge-action gap is raised, instead of asking what is cal role played by images of the future in motivating and should be the contribution of education in terms of sus- – or de-motivating – the learner, we cannot effectively tainability. The presented empirical findings show that the overhaul our schools, colleges or universities, no mat- majority of young people do consider the future as non- ter what innovations we introduce (Toffler 1974). shapeable, a response which is considered to be passive. At most they see their own, near future as shapeable. But this The quotation pleads for carefulness in taking a defined idea of future is opposed to an understanding of education image of the future for justifying certain decisions in edu- cation. In favor of the next generation, Toffler argues for a diverse and thus open understanding of future in education Gough distinguishes “tacit,” “token” and “taken-for-granted” because the future belongs to the succeeding generation. futures. 1 3 Sustainability Science connected to freedom (described in the introduction) and “experience and experiment of the possibility of the impos- it is contrary to what is needed for socioecological trans- sible” (ibid., p. 163). Education especially can be one site formation. Those educational approaches especially, which for such experimentation. Unlike politics where there is are motivated by the idea of social change, must be based pressure to act, education does not require a final decision on the notion of an open future (Sandford 2013). Without which excludes other future possibilities. What else, if not it, change is inconceivable. Thus a closed perception of the education, can serve as the venue for such experimentation? future must be one of the main tackling points for education While politics is, in principle, totalizing, dividing, with a view to sustainability. As long as education is seen spatial (applying certain rules and not others to the only as a “tool” for attaining a certain future, and the success future, no matter how temporary and contingent these of education is measured only according to how well the may be), education can be in principle inventionalistic promoted competencies are used, the demand for an open (using the interplay of otherness to arrive at new rules) future is undermined. (Osberg 2010, p. 164). I would like to raise awareness to the fact that education is more than just training or qualification. I consider Bies- Before any misunderstandings arise, I do not mean that ta’s (2010) distinction between three overlapping domains there is something wrong with education conceived and as useful in discussing this: qualification, socialisation, practiced as qualification. There is only something wrong and subjectification. The last domain emerged during the when this is the only accepted understanding of it. My objec- Enlightenment and is strongly related to the notion of free- tive is to show the difficulties for educational theory and dom. Subjectification is understood as an active process practice in terms of sustainability, within the logic of cur- whereby an individual becomes a subject through his or her rent systems, and to raise awareness that education must and engagement with his or her (human and non-human) envi- can be conceived differently. Of course, it is questionable ronment. Subjectification, contrary to socialisation, is not the whether this idealized demand is possible within Western integration into pre-existing orders. In fact, it allows the indi- school systems or even within a society grounded on many vidual to reflect on existing orders and power relations. Con- non-sustainable patterns. But one cannot expect to bring cal- sequently education actually includes a societal dimension, culable results from education deemed merely qualification; although this focus is often ignored (not only by considering education needs to be understood more as an offering than learning as an individual process, but also in missing the as a technique. This brings me to the next point, namely, chances presented by group processes). For Biesta (2010), accepting the limits of education. subjectification has the potential to bring something new Education is increasingly understood as an evidence- into the world and to the discourse because of the general based effort. This is the technocratic version of educa- acceptance of the idea that every human being is unique. He tion. The “how” is the dominantly discussed question, also makes a case for democracy because, fundamentally, not the “why” (Biesta 2007, 2010). Biesta (2007) claims democracy implies plurality and difference. The condition that, despite prevailing practice, education ought not to be for opening alternative futures is the freedom to think and thought of as something similar to medical science because act differently (cf. Osberg 2010), which is not given when education is more complex than mere physical interaction; underlying societal structures, norms, rules and logics (e.g. education (even in qualification-based settings) is a symbolic economic growth and competitiveness) are considered as interaction (Biesta 2007). Thus, the uncertainty and non-cau- “natural” and immutable (see “A narrowed future: empirical sality of educational processes must be a fundamental point consideration” section). But even on this understanding, it in devising educational processes (ibid.). Education must be is not enough to merely inject new or different versions of grounded in the “idea of an authentic human being” (Bon- futures (Facer 2013). Facer (2013) and Osberg (2010) both nett 2017, p. 87)—a human being which is a social being plead for a qualitative shift and the integration of uncertainty and dependent on fellow human beings as well as on societal of the future into educational approaches: “Taking care of structures. Accepting learners as social beings would mean the future” (Osberg 2010, p. 163) means that we should take taking them seriously and attempting to comprehend their the incalculability of the future into account, and treat it as a views. A resulting, sustainability-relevant question would starting point for shapeability (Facer 2013). Even providing be then, “How can education strengthen learners as human different visions would be a “form of denial of the unknown” beings and support them in seeing the future as something (ibid., p. 161). Osberg (2010) stresses, instead, the point of Masschelein (2011) points out to the initial meaning of school Biesta sees this initial idea still as closed, because there is a con- which “means first of all `free time´” (ibid., p. 102). Free time means crete picture of an ideal human being. Still, he considers the connec- “time of study, thought and exercise. (…) Scholè, however, is the tion of freedom and education as valid. time without destination and without aim or end.” (ibid., p. 103). 1 3 Sustainability Science shapeable although it is uncertain?” rather than, “How can addition to proposing different views and interpretations of certain competencies for an externally determined future be the world, demonstrating that the current form of capital- acquired?” Taking learners seriously and seeing education ism and a neoliberal understanding of the world is not a as something beyond qualification would also mean teach- “naturally occurring” phenomenon, but one that has been ing them to reflect on their own educational surroundings. historically and culturally evolved (and thus could have In the concrete case of sustainability, this means to reflect been and could be different). In academics, it is widely on the situation that a normative collective goal is being accepted that ESD needs to present the complexity of, and promoted among young learners at school—an institution a pluralistic view on, problems. Kopnina (2012) warns that in a system where individual performance is the measure of an emphasis on this “pluralistic view” harbors the dan- achievement. It is questionable whether the mere promise of ger of sustaining dominant political ideologies, because a theoretical possibility for change is sufficient motivation mainly those who have (socioeconomic and political) for transforming a pessimistic society. So here, one must be power and voice will be represented. Education holds the cognizant of the structures and the limits to education. possibility to give the voiceless a voice. This also includes It is not possible to discern at present how a project such consideration of different concepts of nature. But, with the as ESD can work in the best way. This would also not be shift from environmental education to ESD, alternative desirable because education is a prospective project and approaches declined (Jickling and Sterling 2017; Sauvé human beings are neither predictable nor absolutely con- 1996; Kopnina 2012; Hampson 2012); the anthropocentric trollable. Still, as an illustration, I would like to share some view became dominant, wherein nature is considered only thoughts on how the abstract and theoretical critique could as an exploitable resource. One could argue that accept- be integrated into educational practice. ance of a broad demand for ESD (in all types of schools To reiterate, the first point (or rather the prerequisite) and across subjects) has only been possible with an uncon- for education in terms of sustainability is to take the target tested idea of ESD, similar to the manner in which sustain- group seriously. Simply establishing a normative principle able development itself is uncontested. Which brings me as an educational pretext that the future is shapeable (as to my final point on the discourse within ESD. A discus- is done in the case of ESD) does not take the concerns of sion about the idea of sustainability per se is crucial: it next generation sufficiently into account (because most of is not enough to confine the discussion to competencies them do not believe that the future is shapeable). Bonnett’s as the output of ESD, because the focus on competencies notion of action competence—“being effective in the real leaves the question open as to which contents are selected. world” (2004, p. 143)—is crucial. But this can be accom- Competencies such as systems thinking or critical think- plished only through real-world projects (cf. Wiek et al. ing are open to different interpretations of sustainability 2011). I consider current societal norms, structures and because they are only framed by a weak idea of it. Thus logics as one main of the reasons for precluding a shape- the continuation of coal mining, for example, can be con- able-future option (see Amsler as well as Kaufmann et al. sidered sustainable because mining is only problematic for in this issue). Education in sustainability must take into the ecological dimension. A stronger (and more norma- account explicitly societal and institutional conditions, and tive) understanding of sustainability would exclude coal address them; otherwise it will reproduce and strengthen mining from sustainable practices. Without this stronger current, non-sustainable conditions (cf. Löw Beer 2018). notion of sustainability, which accepts that there are criti- Of course, such underlying structures will hardly be cal ecological limitations that must be addressed, the cru- changed by education alone (especially by institutional- cial potential of education is missed because, under the ized education), but at least education affords the oppor - weaker notion, nearly every status quo can be defended tunity to make learners cognizant of these structures and as sustainable. ESD often lacks a direct reference to a conditions and provides them with a platform to reflect on sustainability concept or, respectively, sustains a prob- them. In keeping with this approach is the notion of offer - lematic non-sustainable notion of society (see “Education ing different views and interpretations of the present. As a for a sustainable future” section). Without a consensus guiding idea, education should enable learners to think and on certain views and clear objectives, the understanding imagine concepts for alternative futures (Bateman 2012; of sustainability and justice within ESD is left open to Montuori 2012; Hutchinsons 2002). This is strongly con- any and every interpretation. One approach to this might nected to historical awareness (Amsler and Facer 2017; be to define or determine exactly which contents need to Andreotti 2014). How we view the future depends on how be discussed or considered in ESD. Sustainability-related we see the past and the present (Kool 2017). A clarifi- abstract values such as (social and economic) justice or cation of the historical developments leading up to the democracy are relatively easy to agree on. The challenge current situation would be one contribution to encourag- is to discuss them in terms of concrete real-world situa- ing belief in the possibility for change. This includes, in tions. Defining or determining content could be a starting 1 3 Sustainability Science Bateman D (2012) Transforming teachers’ temporalities. Futures point for initiating discourse among educators about the 44:14–23. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.003 concretization of a sustainability concept in ESD. Biesta G (2007) Why “what works” won’t work. Educ Theory 57:1–22. https ://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00241 .x Biesta G (2010) Good education in an age of measurement. Routledge, London Conclusion Bokelmann H (1969) Zukunft—ein Bestimmungsmoment erzie- herischen Handelns. Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche How we understand the future influences how we think Pädagogik 45:173 about education. The prevalent view today is that the future Bonnett M (2004) Retrieving nature. Education for a post-humanist age. Blackwell, Malden is uncertain and non-shapeable (in terms of societal change), Bonnett M (2017) Sustainability and human being: towards the hid- a view which is supported by the decision of modern educa- den centre of authentic education. In: Jickling B, Sterling S tional systems to promote flexibly applicable competencies. (eds) Post-sustainability and environmental education. Palgrave Standardly, education means, therefore, mainly to prepare Macmillan, Cham, pp 79–91 Brannen J, Nilsen A (2002) Young people’s time perspectives. Soci- ourselves for this contingency. In contrast, the ESD cam- ology 36:513–537. https ://doi.org/10.1177/00380 38502 03600 paign promotes the idea that a sustainable future is possible if people are educated in a certain way. It assumes that peo- Carabelli G, Lyon D (2016) Young people’s orientations to the future. ple consider the societal future as shapeable, an assumption J Youth Stud 19:1110–1127. https ://doi.or g/10.1080/13676 261.2016.11456 41 that ignores the prevailing societal perception. But ESD also Cook J (2015) Young adults’ hopes for the long-term future. J Youth follows a similar understanding of what education ought Stud 19:517–532. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13676 261.2015.10839 to be: namely, it is conceived as training for achieving a specific aim. In both cases, future is a closed concept; the Dahlbeck J (2014) Hope and fear in education for sustainable develop- ment. Crit Stud Educ 55:154–169. https://doi.or g/10.1080/17508 kind of future the learners should be educated for is already 487.2013.83946 0 prescribed and, to that extent, immutable. This implies a Derby M, Piersol L, Blenkinsop S (2015) Refusing to settle for pigeons shortsighted view of the individual and of education itself, and parks. Environ Educ Res 21:378–389 which misses the real potentials of education for the desired Eckersley R (2002) Future visions, social realities, and private lives: young people and their personal well-being. In: Gidley J, Inayatul- societal transformation. But if education is also conceived of lah S (eds) Youth futures. Comparative research and transforma- as a form of subjectification, educational approaches would tive visions. Praeger, Westport, pp 31–41 be oriented towards the individuals’ formability and crea- Facer K (2013) The problem of the future and the possibilities of the tivity. In the context of ESD this would mean to support present in education research. Int J Educ Res 61:135–143 Gidley J (2012) Evolution of education. From weak signals to rich and enable learners’ self-efficacy with regards to the societal imaginaries of educational futures. Futures 44:46–54 future. Subjectification-based education would also mean Gough N (1990) Futures in Australian education: tacit, token and taken education as a platform for experimentation and critique for granted. Futures 22:298–310. https ://doi.org/10.1016/0016- (e.g., of societal conditions but also of the sustainability 3287(90)90149 -C Haan G (2006) The BLK ‘21’ programme in Germany. Environ Educ concept itself). Where else, if not in education, is it possi- Res 12:19–32. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 62050 05263 62 ble to reflect collectively on current societal conditions and Hampson G (2012) Eco-logical education for the long emergency. to consider alternatives, without having to engage in some Futures 44:71–80. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.009 immediate action? Education as a platform for experimenta- Heggli G, Haukanes H, Tjomsland T (2013) Fearing the future? Young people envisioning their working lives in the Czech Republic, tion and critical thinking requires us to think of the future Norway and Tunisia. J Youth Stud 16:916–931. https ://doi. as open and, at the same time, it has the potential to open up org/10.1080/13676 261.2013.76668 2 alternative futures for us to pursue. Hicks D (2012) The future only arrives when things look dangerous. Futures 44:4–13. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.002 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Crea- Holfelder A-K (2017) Orientierungen von Jugendlichen zu Nachhaltig- tive Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat iveco keitsthemen. Springer, Wiesbaden mmons.or g/licenses/b y/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu- Huckle J, Wals A (2015) The UN Decade of Education for Sustain- tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate able Development: business as usual in the end. Environ Educ credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Res 21:491–505. https://doi.or g/10.1080/13504622.2015.10110 84 Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Hursh D (2010) The long emergency: educating for democracy and sustainability in our global crisis. In: DeLeon A, Wayne Ross E (eds) Critical theories, radical pedagogies, and social education. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, pp 139–150 References Hursh D, Henderson J, Greenwood D (2015) Environmental education in a neoliberal climate. Environ Educ Res 21:299–318. https://doi. org/10.1080/13504 622.2015.10181 41 Amsler S, Facer K (2017) Contesting anticipatory regimes in educa- Hutchinsons F (2002) Cultural mapping and our children´s futures: tion: exploring alternative educational orientations to the future. decolonizing ways of learning and research. In: Gidley J, Inayatul- Futures 94:6–14. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2017.01.001 lah S (eds) Youth futures. Praeger, Westport, pp 53–64 Andreotti V (2014) Critical literacy: theories and practices in develop- ment education. Policy Pract Dev Educ Rev 14:12–32 1 3 Sustainability Science Jenkins E, Pell R (2006) “Me and the environmental challenges”: a Complexity theory and the politics of education. Sense Publish- survey of English secondary school students’ attitudes towards ers, Boston, pp 157–170 the environment. Int J Sci Educ 28:765–780. https ://doi. Pfeiffer U (2007) Kontinuität und Kontingenz. Klinkhardt, Bad org/10.1080/09500 69050 04983 36 Heilbrunn Jickling B, Sterling S (2017) Post-sustainability and environmental Rieckmann M (2013) The global perspective of education for sus- education. In: Jickling B, Sterling S (eds) Post-sustainability and tainable development: a European-Latin American study about environmental education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp 1–11 key competencies for thinking and acting in the world society. Jickling B, Wals A (2008) Globalization and environmental education: Environ Educ Res 19:257–258. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 looking beyond sustainable development. J Curric Stud 40:1–21. 622.2012.69754 7 https ://doi.org/10.1080/00220 27070 16846 67 Rizvi F, Lingard B (2009) Globalizing education policy. Routledge, Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act envi- London ronmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behav- Robertson S, Dale R (2009) The world bank, the IMF and the possi- ior? Environ Educ Res 8:239–260. https: //doi.org/10.1080/13504 bilities of critical education. In: Apple M, Au W, Gandin L (eds) 62022 01454 01 International handbook of critical education. Routledge, New Kool Richard (2017) If the past is a foreign country, what is the future? York, pp 23–35 The necessity of understanding the past, confronting the present, Rubin A (2013) Hidden, inconsistent, and influential. Images of and envisioning the future. In: Corcoran P, Weakland J, Wals A the future in changing times. Futures 45:38–44. https ://doi. (eds) Envisioning futures for environmental and sustainability org/10.1016/j.futur es.2012.11.011 education. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp Rychen DS, Salganik LH (eds) (2003) Key competencies for a suc- 141–150 cessful life and a well-functioning society. Hogrefe & Huber, Kopnina H (2012) Education for sustainable development (ESD). Cambridge The turn away from ‘environment’ in environmental education? Sandford R (2013) Located futures: recognising place and belonging in Environ Educ Res 18:699–717. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 narratives of the future. Int J Educ Res. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j. 622.2012.65802 8 ijer.2013.02.007 Kopnina H (2014) Future scenarios and environmental education. Sauvé L (1996) Environmental education and sustainable development: J Environ Educ 45:217–231. https ://doi.or g/10.1080/00958 a further appraisal. Can J Environ Educ 1:7–34 964.2014.94178 3 Schindel Dimick A (2015) Supporting youth to develop environmental Leccardi C (2012) Young people’s representations of the future and the citizenship within/against a neoliberal context. Environ Educ Res acceleration of time. A generational approach. Diskurs Kindheits- 21:390–402. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 622.2014.99416 4 und Jugendforschung 7:59–73 Selby D (2006) The firm and shaky ground of education for sustain- Liu S-C, Lin H-S (2016) Envisioning preferred environmental futures. able development. J Geogr Higher Educ 30:351–365. https ://doi. Exploring relationships between future-related views and envi-org/10.1080/03098 26060 07174 71 ronmental attitudes. Environ Educ Res 24:80–96. https ://doi. Steffens G (2007) Pädagogik aus neoliberaler Perspektive. In: Bier - org/10.1080/13504 622.2016.11805 04 baum H, Euler P, Feld K, Messerschmidt A, Zitzelsberger O (eds) Löw Beer D (2018) Teaching and learning ecosystem assessment and Nachdenken in Widersprüchen. Büchse der Pandora, Wetzlar, pp valuation. Ecol Econ 146:425–434. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.ecole 115–125 con.2017.12.014 Sund L, Öhman J (2013) On the need to repoliticise environmental and Masschelein J (2011) Experimentum Scholae: the world once more … sustainability education. Environ Educ Res 20:639–659. https :// but not (yet) finished. Stud Philos Educ 30:529–535doi.org/10.1080/13504 622.2013.83358 5 McCarthy C, Pitton V, Kim S, Monje D (2009) Movement and stasis Toffler A (1974) Learning for tomorrow. The role of the future in edu- in the neoliberal reorientation of schooling. In: Apple M, Au W, cation. Vintage Books, New York Gandin L (eds) International handbook of critical education. Rout- UNESCO (2017) Learning for sustainable development goals. http:// ledge, New York, pp 36–50unesd oc.unesc o.org/image s/0024/00247 4/24744 4e.pdf, checked Milojević I (2005) Educational futures. Routledge, on 30 June 2018 Abingdon-on-Thames Walker J (2009) The inclusion and construction of the worthy citizen Montuori A (2012) Creative Inquiry. Confronting the challenges of through lifelong learning. A focus on the OECD. J Educ Policy scholarship in the 21st century. Futures 44:64–70. https ://doi. 24:335–351. https ://doi.org/10.1080/02680 93080 26692 76 org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.008 Weinert FE (2001) Concept of competence: a conceptual clarification. OECD (2001) Den fi ition and selection of competencies: theoretical and In: Rychen DS, Sagalnik LH (eds) Definition and selection of conceptual foundations (DeSeCo). Background paper. http://www. competencies—theoretical and conceptual foundations. Hogrefe oecd.org/educa tion/skill s-beyon d-schoo l/41529 556.pdf, checked & Huber, Kirkland, pp 45–65 on 30 Aug 2018 Wiek A, Withycombe L, Redman C (2011) Key competencies in sus- OECD (2002) Definition and selection of competencies (DESECO): tainability: a reference framework for academic program develop- theoretical and conceptual foundations. Edited by OECD. http:// ment. Sustain Sci 6:203–218 www.oecd.org/pisa/35070 367.pdf, checked on 6 Feb 2016 Woodman D (2011) Young people and the future. Young 19:111–128. OECD (2005) The definition and selection of key competencies. Execu-https ://doi.org/10.1177/11033 08817 74228 7 tive summary. https://www .oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf . Accessed Zeyer A, Roth W-M (2011) Post-ecological discourse in the making. 30 Aug 2018 Public Underst Sci 22:3–48. https://doi.or g/10.1177/0963662510 Öhman J, Östman L (2008) Clarifying the ethical tendency in educa-39494 9 tion for sustainable development practice: a Wittgenstein-inspired approach. Can J Environ Educ 13:57–72 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to Ojala M (2017) Hope and anticipation in education for a sustain- jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. able future. Futures 94:76–84. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.futur es.2016.10.004 Osberg D (2010) Taking care of the future? The complex responsi- bility of education and politics. In: Osberg D, Biesta G (eds) 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Sustainability Science Springer Journals

Towards a sustainable future with education?

Holfelder, Anne-Katrin
Sustainability Science , Volume OnlineFirst – May 6, 2019
Download PDF
10 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/towards-a-sustainable-future-with-education-9Tlape6MOM

References (94)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 by The Author(s)
Subject
Environment; Environmental Management; Climate Change Management and Policy; Environmental Economics; Landscape Ecology; Sustainable Development; Public Health
ISSN
1862-4065
eISSN
1862-4057
DOI
10.1007/s11625-019-00682-z
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The call for a kind of education which can contribute to a sustainable future has resulted in the “education for sustainable development” (ESD) campaign. What is implied here is that a sustainable future can be achieved if people are properly edu- cated. ESD ignores the current, popular perception that the future is non-shapeable and determined regarding sustainability issues; ESD presupposes a necessary understanding of a future that can be formed. The logic of standard education supports the perception of a future non-shapeable through the promotion of competencies designed for flexibility. Nevertheless both systems still conceive of education mainly as training, closing down the future. In this contribution, I argue that ESD needs to take current educational systems and today’s society with their non-sustainable future-building practices into account, because otherwise ESD would not make any difference to the educational and societal status quo. My main objective is to show that education must be thought of as something other than just training: considering education predominantly as subjectification holds the possibility for open and alternative futures. In this article, I discuss the potentials of this understanding (and the notion of an open future) for education with a view to sustainability. I explicitly address an interdisciplinary audience with the aim of raising awareness that education is more than training. Keywords Environmental sustainability education · Education for sustainable development · Educational theory · Future education · Future perceptions Introduction: futures in education as “futures for the present.” If the future is the same as the present or can be predicted with any certainty, then it would Education and the future are inseparably intertwined. It seem to be not so difficult to decide what the next genera- is impossible to think about educational matters without tion should best be equipped with. However, if the future making references to the future. Our understanding of is presumed to be uncertain, which is ultimately the case, future determines, for example, what knowledge and which then the necessary knowledge and skills are not that easy skills are considered to be important for the next genera- to determine. tion. Regarding sustainability issues, it makes a difference Future in education is more than a mere temporal cat- whether sustainability is thought as a concrete aim which egory: future is a symbol of “something better” (Milojević can be reached through technical innovation and efficiency, 2005). Future ought to (and can) always be better than the or whether it is more a normative direction which needs to past; so in that sense it is different from the present. Future be determined democratically. Futures in education deter- is understood as something which belongs to the next gen- mine decisions in the present and thus can be understood eration; they should have a better future than the present (Pfeiffer 2007). Thus, future needs to be understood as open, not determined, where one has the freedom to shape one’s Handled by David Löw Beer, Institute for Advanced Sustainability own future. So future in education is strongly related to Studies, Germany. freedom (Biesta 2010). This understanding became possible after Enlightenment, at a time when humanism—the notion * Anne-Katrin Holfelder of human freedom and progress—became the dominant per- anne-katrin.holfelder@iass-potsdam.de spective, and when the development of a better society was Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies, Berliner Str. the main ideal. Education should make this ideal realizable 130, 14467 Potsdam, Germany Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 Sustainability Science through active engagement of the individual with his or her is not considered as the result of human actions, it is reduced (human and non-human) environment. This means, further, to being just something we react to. In both cases, education that the notion of future in education is always considered is a means, a qualification which can be reached. And in as a result of human actions (Bokelmann 1969), but it is both cases, the understanding of education contradicts the not understood as radically open, that is, shapeable in the importance we attach to self-determination and openness. sense to design a better future, something that would be In this contribution, I discuss the meaning of an open closer to the ideal of a humane world. The future should be future for education in the context of sustainability. The obliged to promote and support values such as democracy importance of education as a main contributor to a sustain- and self-determination. This ideal of a humane future should able future is omnipresent. I take the worldwide “education be understood as a guiding principle, one that imposes clear for sustainable development” campaign as an example for limitations on non-humane developments, rather than as a how education is discussed predominantly, with regard to realistically achievable objective. Hence future, based on a sustainability (part II). I argue that a broader perspective humanistic understanding of education, is a guiding nor- on future making practices in society and institutions must mative idea and less a prediction of a certain development be acquired. The leading question in the discourse is more (ibid.). Education has been considered as something which often, “How can we close the knowledge–action gap?” Edu- is free of any direct purpose or external will but, at the same cation in that context is often referred to as a “tool” or “rem- time, clearly normative: it should help to bring society closer edy” which can bring about a better future if used correctly. to an idealized humane future. Postmodern and postcolonial What is missing is the integration of our current understand- theories made us aware of the contingency of society and ing of future in educational institutions (part III) and society the problematic linear understanding of time and progress, (part IV). Our current understanding of future in present-day as well as a teleological understanding of future (Milojević educational institutions and of future practices in society 2005). From a normative point of view, we must be aware stands in opposition to the idealized notion of future in ESD that a teleological understanding of future is problematic in and thus sustainability. I argue that these notions need to education today; however, what we should hold on to is the be explicitly addressed in designing ESD; otherwise ESD close connection between future and freedom (Biesta 2010), would do nothing beyond paying lip service to sustainability future as a symbol for shapeability, openness, change and while continuing to foster the current non-sustainable status self-determination. quo. In the final section (part V), I will discuss how educa- On closer observation of society and educational prac- tion can be conceived in the context of sustainability as this tice, the described idealized picture of education seems dif- pertains to an understanding of future as open. This open- ficult to maintain. Especially institutionalized education is ness is a necessary assumption when thinking about social far from being free of external influences (e.g., the educator change (Sandford 2013). I argue for an understanding of or society’s interests). The promise of a better future has education, which considers education as more than qualic fi a - been shattered because of a number of severe global crises. tion or training (for reaching a pre-defined aim). Motivated Future in post-modern societies has come to be understood, by the observation that education in public and political dis- instead, as uncertain and contingent. But which understand- cussions is often regarded as a solution to non-sustainability, ing of future should serve today as the reference point for I want to address an interdisciplinary audience. educational decisions? It would be conceivable to adhere to some desired vision of the future but also to adhere to a future forecasted from the present dominant perception of Education for a sustainable future it. Those two different perceptions of “futures for the pre- sent” mark the parameters within which education occurs in Agenda 21 initially mentioned education as one important education programs as well as in the public discourse. The contribution to sustainable development. This resulted ulti- future understandings give information about how education mately in the ESD campaign, initiated by UNESCO and is perceived: education could be considered as a means to promoted worldwide during the UN Decade of education approach a specific end; it could also be seen as a means to for sustainable development beginning in 2005. Education respond to a given situation in the future. Neither viewpoint takes the idea of future in education seriously. In the first case, future is not understood as open and left to the next This means that I am compelled to condense and simplify some of the discussion. generation. Education serves rather as an instrument for I use the term “Education for Sustainable Development” for efforts attaining some specified objective. In the second case, future in education which refer to the political call for sustainable develop- ment. I do not integrate (often already much longer existing) educa- This distinction and the following analysis of futures in education tional approaches which are highly relevant with regard to sustain- need to be understood analytically. ability. Here, I rather use “education in terms of sustainability”. 1 3 Sustainability Science (mainly understood as enabling the learner to acquire certain environmental education (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). competencies) is supposed to make a significant contribution But the hope of creating a better future through educa- to sustainable development. The ESD program is a highly tion seems to rest on the development of more innovative ambitious one; it implies the hope of actually making a sus- and alternative methods and the focus on competencies. tainable future: This “new orientation” tries to improve the negative image of environmental education which is still burdened with ESD is an essential contribution to all efforts to having an image of being indoctrination and instrumen- achieve the SDGs, enabling individuals to contribute talisation (cf. Jickling and Sterling 2017). In addition, to sustainable development by promoting societal, eco- the lack of success of environmental education is often nomic and political change as well as by transform- attributed to its focus on catastrophes. According to the ing their own behaviour. ESD can produce specific promoters of ESD, however, shifting this focus to compe- cognitive, socio-emotional and behavioural learning tencies would be one plausible response to this criticism. outcomes that enable individuals to deal with the par- The claim is that competencies combine the openness to ticular challenges of each SDG, thus facilitating its reflect on values with one’s own viewpoint in conjunction achievement. In short, ESD enables all individuals to with the focus on actions. This focus on actions is further contribute to achieving the SDGs by equipping them strengthened by an orientation toward a positive vision with the knowledge and competencies they need, not (Haan 2006). only to understand what the SDGs are about, but to In the academic discussion of ESD, this euphemistic engage as informed citizens in bringing about the nec- promotion of a politically set program is contested: It is essary transformation (UNESCO 2017). still criticized for reasons of instrumentalisation (Kopnina The aim of the campaign has been to educate people so 2012; Dahlbeck 2014; Sund and Öhman 2013; Bonnett that they acquire competencies and learn to think and behave 2004). These scholars stress the point that setting a sus- in a sustainable way. ESD is a wide-ranging project that tainable future as a clear, realistic goal in education (and, concerns all types of education (formal and non-formal, in so doing, determining exactly what constitutes sustain- general and specialized vocational), all disciplines, and able action) is not the right approach. Rather, sustainable persons of any age. It goes beyond imparting knowledge development should be considered as a process in which or raising awareness. Its main focus is on fostering sustain- citizens need to take an active part. Therefore the focus of able behavior, in private and non-private contexts. In the education should be on the promotion of critical thinking academic milieu, the call to foster sustainable behavior was and reflecting (Jickling and Wals 2008 ; Öhman and Öst- mainly answered by determining what the necessary com- man 2008). Scholars raising this criticism often refer to the petencies for so doing must be. Among the more important continuation of the developmental paradigm in ESD, which proficiencies are systems-thinking competence, anticipatory sees development as technological progress and economic competence, normative competence, strategic competence, growth, and thus reproduces societal foundations that are interpersonal competence and critical thinking (Wiek et al. considered to be the cause of the crisis and not as its solu- 2011; Rieckmann 2013). In general, competencies are under- tion (Bonnett 2004). Humans are able to control and manage stood as a combination of cognitive skills and abilities as crises via science and technology (Kopnina 2014); learners well as the motivational, volitional, and social readiness to are addressed as consumers, reflecting a neoliberal economic solve problems responsibly in a variety of situations (cf. understanding of the human being as one more component Weinert 2001). Consequently, competencies are not based in a market-dominated and market-controlled society (Selby on any specific knowledge content, but rather more oriented 2006). Huckle and Wals (2015) even concluded that ESD toward questions of how the acquisition of the required com- failed to challenge neoliberalism, accusing ESD of being petencies can be made possible. Many scholars stress the “misplaced idealism” (ibid., p. 492). The need for the active point that innovative learning (enabling students to acquire integration of pluralistic views and alternatives is further competencies) is indispensable for ESD (e.g. Gidley 2012). highlighted (Kopnina 2012). The meaning and understand- ESD clearly exceeds the goal to impart knowledge and ing of education in various ESD approaches is tightly con- raise awareness; it is about a variety of learning outcomes nected to the underlying notion of (a sustainable) future: If a that are conceived as a contribution to societal transfor- sustainable future is assumed to be attainable through tech- mation. The success of education in accordance with the nical innovation, efficiency and different consumer habits— logic of the political call will be determined by the extent which is the case for the dominant sustainable development to which sustainable development goals (SDGs) are real- paradigm—the needed knowledge and skills can be defined ized. This ambitious and all-embracing objective is sur- quite precisely (cf. Kopnina 2014). Future is then something prising because of the gap between knowledge, awareness, forecastable and calculable. If the concrete form of a sustain- and action, something that is well-known from decades of able future needs to be negotiated in society, participation 1 3 Sustainability Science and decision-making skills become more important aims in make sense of and function well in this world, indi- education. viduals need for example to master changing technolo- The presented critique on ESD is based on normative gies and to make sense of large amounts of available arguments. I would like to expand the discussion of educa- information. They also face collective challenges as tion in terms of sustainability by integrating structural and societies—such as balancing economic growth with empirical arguments into it. So far, success or limitations environmental sustainability, and prosperity with are discussed mainly on the individual psychological level. social equity. In these contexts, the competencies that ESD (like all education) is clearly a project about the future. individuals need to meet their goals have become more My objective here is to draw to the special attention of my complex, requiring more than the mastery of certain readership that a human being is socialized in particular way, narrowly defined skills” (OECD 2005, p. 4). depending on the society of which he or she is a part and The leading questions for defining competencies were the on the particular school system in which he or she is edu- following: “What do individuals need in order to function cated, with its established future practices. It is therefore well in society as they find it; what competencies do they important that we have a look at how the future is perceived need to find and to hold down a job; what kind of adaptive in current educational systems (part III) and Western devel- qualities are required to cope with changing technology?” oped societies (part IV). My argument is that if ESD really (ibid., p. 6) In this description, a clear assumption about wants to contribute to societal transformation in the direction the future is made. There seems to be no doubt the world is of sustainability, the preconditions for so doing need to be becoming increasingly more complex and that current prob- addressed and, at the same time, the limitations of educa- lems are worsening. The future is understood as uncertain tion beyond the knowledge-action gap need to be recognized and fast-changing, which justifies the importance attached (part V). to flexibly applicable competencies. The OECD names nor - mative issues (“democratic values and achieving sustainable development” are considered as “shared values”) which are Education for an uncertain future not specified in greater detail. The OECD document says that “competence is also an important factor in the ways that Since at least two decades, education policies have been individuals help to shape the world, not just to cope with it” influenced increasingly by actors outside the traditional (ibid., p. 6), whereby “shaping the world” seems to be less a education system, such as the IMF, World Bank and OECD goal than it is a useful side effect. A clearer statement about (Robertson and Dale 2009; Walker 2009). Educational sys- what is desirable and what the links between agency and tems in many OECD countries have undergone a change coping might be is missing. toward an output-orientation with a focus on competencies. On the explicit level the focus on competencies is justified With the PISA study (first conducted in 2000), the OECD for the sake of the learners; on the implicit level, justifica- defined what is regarded as important competencies (in tion of the selected competencies is criticized for following mathematics, text understanding, science, and financial liter - the neoliberal logic of the market aiming to create a flexible acy) worldwide. In addition to subject-related competencies, future worker. Education is shaped increasingly by market the OECD also developed competencies which are consid- principles such as competitiveness and producing human ered as important for “a successful life and a well-function- capital to fulfill the needs of a global economy (Milojević ing society” (Rychen and Salganik 2003). With its Defini- 2005; Rizvi and Lingard 2009; McCarthy et al. 2009; Hursh tion and Selection of Competencies Program (DeSeCo), 2010). Education has become an investment which needs the OECD defined key competencies important for all indi- to pay off, in accordance with cost–benefit considerations viduals in globalized modern societies (OECD 2002). Key (Sandford 2013). Although the idea underlying PISA ini- competencies are “acting in heterogeneous groups,” “acting tially was to evaluate societal participation, the study instead autonomously,” and “interactive use of mediums and tools.” sparked competition (Steffens 2007). The defined competencies are based on the following depic- The task of education on this understanding is first of all tion of the future: to make the acquisition of defined competencies possible. “Globalisation and modernisation are creating an This task is strongly connected to “objective” knowledge increasingly diverse and interconnected world. To (Andreotti 2014, p. 23) not only in terms of content, but also in terms of pedagogy. Pedagogy has become increasingly evidence-based, requiring validation for certain methods (Biesta 2007). Future is understood as uncertain in the sense Competence in the context of PISA is defined as “the necessary prerequisites for meeting complex demands” (OECD 2001). A solely that it does not seem possible to shape it actively. In keeping cognitive notion of competence is used here; motivational and voli- with this understanding of future, learners are perceived as tional aspects (cf. Weinert 2001) are not included. 1 3 Sustainability Science passive recipients of knowledge, delivered to an uncertain on those categories, most studies of young people refer future. Montuori (2012) speaks of “reproductive educa- primarily to probable futures. Images of future society are tion” because, on this understanding, the aim of education limited to likely outcomes which follow current paths and is to make students adapt rather than to allow them to create logics, in other words, which mirror the present. Although (ibid., p. 65). Milojević (2005) criticizes the failure to ques- awareness of the possibilities for change can be stated, a tion whether the globalized future perceived today is “the connection between probable futures and preferable futures future” (ibid., p. 64); this “taken-for-granted future” means is missing. The “real world” and the “ideal world” are differ - that other visions are obscured or made invisible and their entiated when discussing sustainability-related topics (Zeyer proponents silenced (ibid.). Sandford (2013) describes this and Roth 2011). Although sustainability is considered as a neoliberal economic vision as empty one because present desirable goal, real changes to improve things are thought demands are merely extended into the future. Teaching and to be possible only in an “ideal world,” that is, one in which schooling speak more the language of competitive excel- morality constitutes the basis for actions. In the “real world,” lence, a practice which narrows learners’ prospects and their neoliberal market logic and unmitigated self-interest domi- view of the future considerably, instead of offering different nate and are thought to be unavoidable. As both worlds are possibilities (Hutchinsons 2002, p. 57). Amsler and Facer disconnected from each other, there can be no hope of any (2017) call the neoliberal and outcome-oriented shift in improvement. The future is largely perceived as predeter- Western school systems as an “anticipatory regime” which mined and unsustainable (Holfelder 2017). Young people stifles imagination and experimentation. On this understand- often express feelings such as helplessness or hopelessness ing the future is not a place of possibilities, but rather one (Ojala 2017). of foreboding, creating anxiety and necessitating control ESD focuses mainly on society in general and therefore (ibid.). The future as something non-shapeable and without more distant futures, rather than an individual’s personal any alternatives is also a dominant societal perception which future—something that is likely due to the educational sys- I will turn to in the next section. tem’s separation of disciplines. Distant futures are viewed as static images which can be described from an outside perspective (Carabelli and Lyon 2016). Such visions of the A narrowed future: empirical consideration future are considered to be modified copies or a reflection of the present because they reproduce society’s current prob- In fact, humans constantly look to the future, and cre- lems (Eckersley 2002). Research on youth futures indicates ate mental images of what the future might be like. that societal or distant future is distinguished from one’s own These self-created images emerge as hopes, fears, and or the near future (Cook 2015; Eckersley 2002). But it is expectations, and thus influence what people feel is not the case that visions of societal, economic or ecological worth doing in the present and are among the causes futures do not influence individual, personal futures; there is of present behavior (Liu and Lin 2016, p. 81). just no linear connection between them. This also explains why young people can be pessimistic about the societal, Looking ahead to the future is inherently human; it is especially the environmental, future but still be optimistic considered to be an important aspect of decision making about their own (e.g. Rubin 2013; Jenkins and Pell 2006). I and behaviour. Those “futures for the present” are of inter- follow Carabelli and Lyon (2016) in arguing that it is impor- est vis-à-vis educational concerns, and they are researched tant to discuss both futures—the distant and the near—for widely in the field of environmental education and ESD. obtaining a more complete idea about how young people ori- But a negative image of, and pessimistic attitude toward, the ent themselves vis-à-vis the future and its challenges. Thus societal and environmental future is almost always inherent I would like to point to some sociological studies regarding in most of these studies conducted in western societies (e.g. young people and future directions in Western societies. In Hicks 2012; Eckersley 2002). These studies stress the point contrast to the distant future, the near future is explored by that most young people are aware of (and concerned about) reconstructing the practices of young people as they engage the environmental situation, but that they are not optimis- with it. tic about change or improvement. One way to distinguish Future is perceived as uncertain and rapidly changing, among various mental images of the future is to differentiate affecting how people orientate themselves in time (Woodman between expected (probable), promised (possible), and pre- 2011). Woodman (2011) found a relatively present-centered ferred (positive visions of) futures (Eckersley 2002). Based orientation to the future in his observations of young people from Australia. Concentration on the short term which is perceived as shapeable is considered as one practical way of The critique that the neoliberal influence forecloses future possi- dealing with this uncertainty. Cook (2015) describes similar bilities is also made explicitly for ESD and environmental education findings in her overview of youth studies researching the (Schindel Dimick 2015; Derby et al. 2015; Hursh et al. 2015). 1 3 Sustainability Science individual’s own future: one’s own, long-term future turns One main task of education is thus to encourage and sup- out to be of significantly less interest than the immediate or port the coming generation in shaping its own future toward short-term future. Brannen and Nilsen (2002) name three the ideal of a democratic and just society. different types of future orientation among European youth. The political call for ESD emphasizes the possibility of (1) The future is deferred or postponed; what counts is the creating a better world through education. With this in mind, present. (2) In accordance with the model of adaptability, future is clearly understood to be a result of human action, what happens in the future depends on oneself. Future itself that is, the promise of a certain future (a sustainable one) can is not predictable; it is perceived as uncertain. Young peo- be fulfilled under the condition that all people are educated ple, mainly those in higher education, consider it their task in a certain way. This understanding of ESD means that edu- to be prepared for the future labor market. But they do not cation is understood as training to obtain a qualification. perceive themselves as active because “their emphasis is less It follows the dominant educational paradigm in Western on mastering their routes through the labor market and more systems, namely, that education should equip learners with on negotiating its vagaries” (ibid., p. 527). (3) Another way competencies which are deemed useful for a fast-changing of dealing with the future is to concentrate on “short-term and uncertain future. The underlying justification for this projects” in which it is considered to be an extension of the is a “taken-for-granted” future which “reinforce[s] the present. This type of orientation is found more often among status quo, in many cases by attempting to use education young people with fewer economic and social resources. as an agency in colonizing technologically and economi- Leccardi (2012) describes similar orientations. Either the cally deterministic futures” (Gough 1990, p. 308). Future is young people follow the model of adaptability and flexibility something which you cannot shape but which acts on you; (“future without a project”); or they concentrate on “short- it is a threat (Facer 2013) rather than something formable term projects” in which the future is considered to be an which would give individuals an alternative other than sub- extension of the present. Social relations, security and trust mission. The OECD selected competencies reproduce and (in societal institutions) seem to be important factors for support this currently prevalent notion of a deterministic planning and engaging with a longer term future (Heggli future. The OECD’s selected competencies are undoubtedly et al. 2013; Cook 2015). When the future is perceived as important ones, but they are not inherently tied to specific complex, one may be overwhelmed by too many choices; moral values. They are merely means which can be used to the future becomes something overpowering. Coping strate- achieve any end. E.g., the competence to think systemically gies are the avoidance of responsibility, accepting things (in can be used in warfare but also for carbon-reduced transport the long-term future) as they are, or concentrating solely on systems. Referring to the future as taken-for-granted (per- one’s own immediate future where a more positive impact ceived in the present as passive and non-shapeable) can only is perceived (Cook 2015). What all of these studies have in result in adaption, whereby change (or initiating it) would common is that the future is not seen as something one acts be not possible. In both cases—for ESD and the educational on, but rather as something which acts upon oneself. system—future is perceived as a narrowed predetermined path. And in both cases, a specific notion of educability is evoked. A picture is sketched which considers human Thinking education as more than training beings as closed entities able to learn anything if just the right methods are selected. This is in line with the increas- All education springs from images of the future and all ingly evidence-based understanding of education wherein education creates images of the future. Thus all educa- the basic question is “what works” or “what is effective” tion, whether intended or not, is a preparation for the and not “what is it effective for ” (Biesta 2010). The belief future. Unless we understand the future for which we in educability, and with it the idea of an educable identity, are preparing, we may do tragic damage to those we is reproduced when the question of how to overcome the teach. Unless we understand the powerful psychologi- knowledge-action gap is raised, instead of asking what is cal role played by images of the future in motivating and should be the contribution of education in terms of sus- – or de-motivating – the learner, we cannot effectively tainability. The presented empirical findings show that the overhaul our schools, colleges or universities, no mat- majority of young people do consider the future as non- ter what innovations we introduce (Toffler 1974). shapeable, a response which is considered to be passive. At most they see their own, near future as shapeable. But this The quotation pleads for carefulness in taking a defined idea of future is opposed to an understanding of education image of the future for justifying certain decisions in edu- cation. In favor of the next generation, Toffler argues for a diverse and thus open understanding of future in education Gough distinguishes “tacit,” “token” and “taken-for-granted” because the future belongs to the succeeding generation. futures. 1 3 Sustainability Science connected to freedom (described in the introduction) and “experience and experiment of the possibility of the impos- it is contrary to what is needed for socioecological trans- sible” (ibid., p. 163). Education especially can be one site formation. Those educational approaches especially, which for such experimentation. Unlike politics where there is are motivated by the idea of social change, must be based pressure to act, education does not require a final decision on the notion of an open future (Sandford 2013). Without which excludes other future possibilities. What else, if not it, change is inconceivable. Thus a closed perception of the education, can serve as the venue for such experimentation? future must be one of the main tackling points for education While politics is, in principle, totalizing, dividing, with a view to sustainability. As long as education is seen spatial (applying certain rules and not others to the only as a “tool” for attaining a certain future, and the success future, no matter how temporary and contingent these of education is measured only according to how well the may be), education can be in principle inventionalistic promoted competencies are used, the demand for an open (using the interplay of otherness to arrive at new rules) future is undermined. (Osberg 2010, p. 164). I would like to raise awareness to the fact that education is more than just training or qualification. I consider Bies- Before any misunderstandings arise, I do not mean that ta’s (2010) distinction between three overlapping domains there is something wrong with education conceived and as useful in discussing this: qualification, socialisation, practiced as qualification. There is only something wrong and subjectification. The last domain emerged during the when this is the only accepted understanding of it. My objec- Enlightenment and is strongly related to the notion of free- tive is to show the difficulties for educational theory and dom. Subjectification is understood as an active process practice in terms of sustainability, within the logic of cur- whereby an individual becomes a subject through his or her rent systems, and to raise awareness that education must and engagement with his or her (human and non-human) envi- can be conceived differently. Of course, it is questionable ronment. Subjectification, contrary to socialisation, is not the whether this idealized demand is possible within Western integration into pre-existing orders. In fact, it allows the indi- school systems or even within a society grounded on many vidual to reflect on existing orders and power relations. Con- non-sustainable patterns. But one cannot expect to bring cal- sequently education actually includes a societal dimension, culable results from education deemed merely qualification; although this focus is often ignored (not only by considering education needs to be understood more as an offering than learning as an individual process, but also in missing the as a technique. This brings me to the next point, namely, chances presented by group processes). For Biesta (2010), accepting the limits of education. subjectification has the potential to bring something new Education is increasingly understood as an evidence- into the world and to the discourse because of the general based effort. This is the technocratic version of educa- acceptance of the idea that every human being is unique. He tion. The “how” is the dominantly discussed question, also makes a case for democracy because, fundamentally, not the “why” (Biesta 2007, 2010). Biesta (2007) claims democracy implies plurality and difference. The condition that, despite prevailing practice, education ought not to be for opening alternative futures is the freedom to think and thought of as something similar to medical science because act differently (cf. Osberg 2010), which is not given when education is more complex than mere physical interaction; underlying societal structures, norms, rules and logics (e.g. education (even in qualification-based settings) is a symbolic economic growth and competitiveness) are considered as interaction (Biesta 2007). Thus, the uncertainty and non-cau- “natural” and immutable (see “A narrowed future: empirical sality of educational processes must be a fundamental point consideration” section). But even on this understanding, it in devising educational processes (ibid.). Education must be is not enough to merely inject new or different versions of grounded in the “idea of an authentic human being” (Bon- futures (Facer 2013). Facer (2013) and Osberg (2010) both nett 2017, p. 87)—a human being which is a social being plead for a qualitative shift and the integration of uncertainty and dependent on fellow human beings as well as on societal of the future into educational approaches: “Taking care of structures. Accepting learners as social beings would mean the future” (Osberg 2010, p. 163) means that we should take taking them seriously and attempting to comprehend their the incalculability of the future into account, and treat it as a views. A resulting, sustainability-relevant question would starting point for shapeability (Facer 2013). Even providing be then, “How can education strengthen learners as human different visions would be a “form of denial of the unknown” beings and support them in seeing the future as something (ibid., p. 161). Osberg (2010) stresses, instead, the point of Masschelein (2011) points out to the initial meaning of school Biesta sees this initial idea still as closed, because there is a con- which “means first of all `free time´” (ibid., p. 102). Free time means crete picture of an ideal human being. Still, he considers the connec- “time of study, thought and exercise. (…) Scholè, however, is the tion of freedom and education as valid. time without destination and without aim or end.” (ibid., p. 103). 1 3 Sustainability Science shapeable although it is uncertain?” rather than, “How can addition to proposing different views and interpretations of certain competencies for an externally determined future be the world, demonstrating that the current form of capital- acquired?” Taking learners seriously and seeing education ism and a neoliberal understanding of the world is not a as something beyond qualification would also mean teach- “naturally occurring” phenomenon, but one that has been ing them to reflect on their own educational surroundings. historically and culturally evolved (and thus could have In the concrete case of sustainability, this means to reflect been and could be different). In academics, it is widely on the situation that a normative collective goal is being accepted that ESD needs to present the complexity of, and promoted among young learners at school—an institution a pluralistic view on, problems. Kopnina (2012) warns that in a system where individual performance is the measure of an emphasis on this “pluralistic view” harbors the dan- achievement. It is questionable whether the mere promise of ger of sustaining dominant political ideologies, because a theoretical possibility for change is sufficient motivation mainly those who have (socioeconomic and political) for transforming a pessimistic society. So here, one must be power and voice will be represented. Education holds the cognizant of the structures and the limits to education. possibility to give the voiceless a voice. This also includes It is not possible to discern at present how a project such consideration of different concepts of nature. But, with the as ESD can work in the best way. This would also not be shift from environmental education to ESD, alternative desirable because education is a prospective project and approaches declined (Jickling and Sterling 2017; Sauvé human beings are neither predictable nor absolutely con- 1996; Kopnina 2012; Hampson 2012); the anthropocentric trollable. Still, as an illustration, I would like to share some view became dominant, wherein nature is considered only thoughts on how the abstract and theoretical critique could as an exploitable resource. One could argue that accept- be integrated into educational practice. ance of a broad demand for ESD (in all types of schools To reiterate, the first point (or rather the prerequisite) and across subjects) has only been possible with an uncon- for education in terms of sustainability is to take the target tested idea of ESD, similar to the manner in which sustain- group seriously. Simply establishing a normative principle able development itself is uncontested. Which brings me as an educational pretext that the future is shapeable (as to my final point on the discourse within ESD. A discus- is done in the case of ESD) does not take the concerns of sion about the idea of sustainability per se is crucial: it next generation sufficiently into account (because most of is not enough to confine the discussion to competencies them do not believe that the future is shapeable). Bonnett’s as the output of ESD, because the focus on competencies notion of action competence—“being effective in the real leaves the question open as to which contents are selected. world” (2004, p. 143)—is crucial. But this can be accom- Competencies such as systems thinking or critical think- plished only through real-world projects (cf. Wiek et al. ing are open to different interpretations of sustainability 2011). I consider current societal norms, structures and because they are only framed by a weak idea of it. Thus logics as one main of the reasons for precluding a shape- the continuation of coal mining, for example, can be con- able-future option (see Amsler as well as Kaufmann et al. sidered sustainable because mining is only problematic for in this issue). Education in sustainability must take into the ecological dimension. A stronger (and more norma- account explicitly societal and institutional conditions, and tive) understanding of sustainability would exclude coal address them; otherwise it will reproduce and strengthen mining from sustainable practices. Without this stronger current, non-sustainable conditions (cf. Löw Beer 2018). notion of sustainability, which accepts that there are criti- Of course, such underlying structures will hardly be cal ecological limitations that must be addressed, the cru- changed by education alone (especially by institutional- cial potential of education is missed because, under the ized education), but at least education affords the oppor - weaker notion, nearly every status quo can be defended tunity to make learners cognizant of these structures and as sustainable. ESD often lacks a direct reference to a conditions and provides them with a platform to reflect on sustainability concept or, respectively, sustains a prob- them. In keeping with this approach is the notion of offer - lematic non-sustainable notion of society (see “Education ing different views and interpretations of the present. As a for a sustainable future” section). Without a consensus guiding idea, education should enable learners to think and on certain views and clear objectives, the understanding imagine concepts for alternative futures (Bateman 2012; of sustainability and justice within ESD is left open to Montuori 2012; Hutchinsons 2002). This is strongly con- any and every interpretation. One approach to this might nected to historical awareness (Amsler and Facer 2017; be to define or determine exactly which contents need to Andreotti 2014). How we view the future depends on how be discussed or considered in ESD. Sustainability-related we see the past and the present (Kool 2017). A clarifi- abstract values such as (social and economic) justice or cation of the historical developments leading up to the democracy are relatively easy to agree on. The challenge current situation would be one contribution to encourag- is to discuss them in terms of concrete real-world situa- ing belief in the possibility for change. This includes, in tions. Defining or determining content could be a starting 1 3 Sustainability Science Bateman D (2012) Transforming teachers’ temporalities. Futures point for initiating discourse among educators about the 44:14–23. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.003 concretization of a sustainability concept in ESD. Biesta G (2007) Why “what works” won’t work. Educ Theory 57:1–22. https ://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00241 .x Biesta G (2010) Good education in an age of measurement. Routledge, London Conclusion Bokelmann H (1969) Zukunft—ein Bestimmungsmoment erzie- herischen Handelns. Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche How we understand the future influences how we think Pädagogik 45:173 about education. The prevalent view today is that the future Bonnett M (2004) Retrieving nature. Education for a post-humanist age. Blackwell, Malden is uncertain and non-shapeable (in terms of societal change), Bonnett M (2017) Sustainability and human being: towards the hid- a view which is supported by the decision of modern educa- den centre of authentic education. In: Jickling B, Sterling S tional systems to promote flexibly applicable competencies. (eds) Post-sustainability and environmental education. Palgrave Standardly, education means, therefore, mainly to prepare Macmillan, Cham, pp 79–91 Brannen J, Nilsen A (2002) Young people’s time perspectives. Soci- ourselves for this contingency. In contrast, the ESD cam- ology 36:513–537. https ://doi.org/10.1177/00380 38502 03600 paign promotes the idea that a sustainable future is possible if people are educated in a certain way. It assumes that peo- Carabelli G, Lyon D (2016) Young people’s orientations to the future. ple consider the societal future as shapeable, an assumption J Youth Stud 19:1110–1127. https ://doi.or g/10.1080/13676 261.2016.11456 41 that ignores the prevailing societal perception. But ESD also Cook J (2015) Young adults’ hopes for the long-term future. J Youth follows a similar understanding of what education ought Stud 19:517–532. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13676 261.2015.10839 to be: namely, it is conceived as training for achieving a specific aim. In both cases, future is a closed concept; the Dahlbeck J (2014) Hope and fear in education for sustainable develop- ment. Crit Stud Educ 55:154–169. https://doi.or g/10.1080/17508 kind of future the learners should be educated for is already 487.2013.83946 0 prescribed and, to that extent, immutable. This implies a Derby M, Piersol L, Blenkinsop S (2015) Refusing to settle for pigeons shortsighted view of the individual and of education itself, and parks. Environ Educ Res 21:378–389 which misses the real potentials of education for the desired Eckersley R (2002) Future visions, social realities, and private lives: young people and their personal well-being. In: Gidley J, Inayatul- societal transformation. But if education is also conceived of lah S (eds) Youth futures. Comparative research and transforma- as a form of subjectification, educational approaches would tive visions. Praeger, Westport, pp 31–41 be oriented towards the individuals’ formability and crea- Facer K (2013) The problem of the future and the possibilities of the tivity. In the context of ESD this would mean to support present in education research. Int J Educ Res 61:135–143 Gidley J (2012) Evolution of education. From weak signals to rich and enable learners’ self-efficacy with regards to the societal imaginaries of educational futures. Futures 44:46–54 future. Subjectification-based education would also mean Gough N (1990) Futures in Australian education: tacit, token and taken education as a platform for experimentation and critique for granted. Futures 22:298–310. https ://doi.org/10.1016/0016- (e.g., of societal conditions but also of the sustainability 3287(90)90149 -C Haan G (2006) The BLK ‘21’ programme in Germany. Environ Educ concept itself). Where else, if not in education, is it possi- Res 12:19–32. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 62050 05263 62 ble to reflect collectively on current societal conditions and Hampson G (2012) Eco-logical education for the long emergency. to consider alternatives, without having to engage in some Futures 44:71–80. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.009 immediate action? Education as a platform for experimenta- Heggli G, Haukanes H, Tjomsland T (2013) Fearing the future? Young people envisioning their working lives in the Czech Republic, tion and critical thinking requires us to think of the future Norway and Tunisia. J Youth Stud 16:916–931. https ://doi. as open and, at the same time, it has the potential to open up org/10.1080/13676 261.2013.76668 2 alternative futures for us to pursue. Hicks D (2012) The future only arrives when things look dangerous. Futures 44:4–13. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.002 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Crea- Holfelder A-K (2017) Orientierungen von Jugendlichen zu Nachhaltig- tive Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat iveco keitsthemen. Springer, Wiesbaden mmons.or g/licenses/b y/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu- Huckle J, Wals A (2015) The UN Decade of Education for Sustain- tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate able Development: business as usual in the end. Environ Educ credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Res 21:491–505. https://doi.or g/10.1080/13504622.2015.10110 84 Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Hursh D (2010) The long emergency: educating for democracy and sustainability in our global crisis. In: DeLeon A, Wayne Ross E (eds) Critical theories, radical pedagogies, and social education. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, pp 139–150 References Hursh D, Henderson J, Greenwood D (2015) Environmental education in a neoliberal climate. Environ Educ Res 21:299–318. https://doi. org/10.1080/13504 622.2015.10181 41 Amsler S, Facer K (2017) Contesting anticipatory regimes in educa- Hutchinsons F (2002) Cultural mapping and our children´s futures: tion: exploring alternative educational orientations to the future. decolonizing ways of learning and research. In: Gidley J, Inayatul- Futures 94:6–14. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.futur es.2017.01.001 lah S (eds) Youth futures. Praeger, Westport, pp 53–64 Andreotti V (2014) Critical literacy: theories and practices in develop- ment education. Policy Pract Dev Educ Rev 14:12–32 1 3 Sustainability Science Jenkins E, Pell R (2006) “Me and the environmental challenges”: a Complexity theory and the politics of education. Sense Publish- survey of English secondary school students’ attitudes towards ers, Boston, pp 157–170 the environment. Int J Sci Educ 28:765–780. https ://doi. Pfeiffer U (2007) Kontinuität und Kontingenz. Klinkhardt, Bad org/10.1080/09500 69050 04983 36 Heilbrunn Jickling B, Sterling S (2017) Post-sustainability and environmental Rieckmann M (2013) The global perspective of education for sus- education. In: Jickling B, Sterling S (eds) Post-sustainability and tainable development: a European-Latin American study about environmental education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp 1–11 key competencies for thinking and acting in the world society. Jickling B, Wals A (2008) Globalization and environmental education: Environ Educ Res 19:257–258. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 looking beyond sustainable development. J Curric Stud 40:1–21. 622.2012.69754 7 https ://doi.org/10.1080/00220 27070 16846 67 Rizvi F, Lingard B (2009) Globalizing education policy. Routledge, Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act envi- London ronmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behav- Robertson S, Dale R (2009) The world bank, the IMF and the possi- ior? Environ Educ Res 8:239–260. https: //doi.org/10.1080/13504 bilities of critical education. In: Apple M, Au W, Gandin L (eds) 62022 01454 01 International handbook of critical education. Routledge, New Kool Richard (2017) If the past is a foreign country, what is the future? York, pp 23–35 The necessity of understanding the past, confronting the present, Rubin A (2013) Hidden, inconsistent, and influential. Images of and envisioning the future. In: Corcoran P, Weakland J, Wals A the future in changing times. Futures 45:38–44. https ://doi. (eds) Envisioning futures for environmental and sustainability org/10.1016/j.futur es.2012.11.011 education. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp Rychen DS, Salganik LH (eds) (2003) Key competencies for a suc- 141–150 cessful life and a well-functioning society. Hogrefe & Huber, Kopnina H (2012) Education for sustainable development (ESD). Cambridge The turn away from ‘environment’ in environmental education? Sandford R (2013) Located futures: recognising place and belonging in Environ Educ Res 18:699–717. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 narratives of the future. Int J Educ Res. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j. 622.2012.65802 8 ijer.2013.02.007 Kopnina H (2014) Future scenarios and environmental education. Sauvé L (1996) Environmental education and sustainable development: J Environ Educ 45:217–231. https ://doi.or g/10.1080/00958 a further appraisal. Can J Environ Educ 1:7–34 964.2014.94178 3 Schindel Dimick A (2015) Supporting youth to develop environmental Leccardi C (2012) Young people’s representations of the future and the citizenship within/against a neoliberal context. Environ Educ Res acceleration of time. A generational approach. Diskurs Kindheits- 21:390–402. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13504 622.2014.99416 4 und Jugendforschung 7:59–73 Selby D (2006) The firm and shaky ground of education for sustain- Liu S-C, Lin H-S (2016) Envisioning preferred environmental futures. able development. J Geogr Higher Educ 30:351–365. https ://doi. Exploring relationships between future-related views and envi-org/10.1080/03098 26060 07174 71 ronmental attitudes. Environ Educ Res 24:80–96. https ://doi. Steffens G (2007) Pädagogik aus neoliberaler Perspektive. In: Bier - org/10.1080/13504 622.2016.11805 04 baum H, Euler P, Feld K, Messerschmidt A, Zitzelsberger O (eds) Löw Beer D (2018) Teaching and learning ecosystem assessment and Nachdenken in Widersprüchen. Büchse der Pandora, Wetzlar, pp valuation. Ecol Econ 146:425–434. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.ecole 115–125 con.2017.12.014 Sund L, Öhman J (2013) On the need to repoliticise environmental and Masschelein J (2011) Experimentum Scholae: the world once more … sustainability education. Environ Educ Res 20:639–659. https :// but not (yet) finished. Stud Philos Educ 30:529–535doi.org/10.1080/13504 622.2013.83358 5 McCarthy C, Pitton V, Kim S, Monje D (2009) Movement and stasis Toffler A (1974) Learning for tomorrow. The role of the future in edu- in the neoliberal reorientation of schooling. In: Apple M, Au W, cation. Vintage Books, New York Gandin L (eds) International handbook of critical education. Rout- UNESCO (2017) Learning for sustainable development goals. http:// ledge, New York, pp 36–50unesd oc.unesc o.org/image s/0024/00247 4/24744 4e.pdf, checked Milojević I (2005) Educational futures. Routledge, on 30 June 2018 Abingdon-on-Thames Walker J (2009) The inclusion and construction of the worthy citizen Montuori A (2012) Creative Inquiry. Confronting the challenges of through lifelong learning. A focus on the OECD. J Educ Policy scholarship in the 21st century. Futures 44:64–70. https ://doi. 24:335–351. https ://doi.org/10.1080/02680 93080 26692 76 org/10.1016/j.futur es.2011.08.008 Weinert FE (2001) Concept of competence: a conceptual clarification. OECD (2001) Den fi ition and selection of competencies: theoretical and In: Rychen DS, Sagalnik LH (eds) Definition and selection of conceptual foundations (DeSeCo). Background paper. http://www. competencies—theoretical and conceptual foundations. Hogrefe oecd.org/educa tion/skill s-beyon d-schoo l/41529 556.pdf, checked & Huber, Kirkland, pp 45–65 on 30 Aug 2018 Wiek A, Withycombe L, Redman C (2011) Key competencies in sus- OECD (2002) Definition and selection of competencies (DESECO): tainability: a reference framework for academic program develop- theoretical and conceptual foundations. Edited by OECD. http:// ment. Sustain Sci 6:203–218 www.oecd.org/pisa/35070 367.pdf, checked on 6 Feb 2016 Woodman D (2011) Young people and the future. Young 19:111–128. OECD (2005) The definition and selection of key competencies. Execu-https ://doi.org/10.1177/11033 08817 74228 7 tive summary. https://www .oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf . Accessed Zeyer A, Roth W-M (2011) Post-ecological discourse in the making. 30 Aug 2018 Public Underst Sci 22:3–48. https://doi.or g/10.1177/0963662510 Öhman J, Östman L (2008) Clarifying the ethical tendency in educa-39494 9 tion for sustainable development practice: a Wittgenstein-inspired approach. Can J Environ Educ 13:57–72 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to Ojala M (2017) Hope and anticipation in education for a sustain- jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. able future. Futures 94:76–84. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.futur es.2016.10.004 Osberg D (2010) Taking care of the future? The complex responsi- bility of education and politics. In: Osberg D, Biesta G (eds) 1 3

Journal

Sustainability Science – Springer Journals

Published: May 6, 2019

There are no references for this article.