Note: The UNI4ST project was intended to run from January 2020 until December 2023 (half-time). However, due to the Individual Fellow winning a grant from the European Research Council with a required time commitment of 60%, this Fellowship has been terminated end of September 2021 after only 21 out of the intended 48 months.
Drawing on a review of literature about STs, about dramaturgical analytical frameworks, and about didactical analytical frameworks, we developed an analytical toolbox for empirical investigations of how (university) education can serve as a driver for STs. Theoretically, the toolbox is inspired by transactional pragmatism. Its key methodological principles are: opening-up the black box of learning processes; including a focus on teaching practices; securing openness for empirical surprises through well-chosen analytical methods; generating patterns and categorisations out of analyses of specific practices, and potentiality for developing analytical models and tools into practical didactical models and tools. The toolbox contains 5 methodologies, each consisting of a well-chosen combination of analytical models and methods, that can be employed to investigate different aspects of (university) education as a driver for STs: one for investigating the influence of teaching practices on the transition potential of learning; one for investigating the learning and teaching of action-oriented knowledge; one for investigating the teaching and learning of high-quality argumentation; one for analysing reflections on disturbed habits; and one for analysing the co-creation of teaching in the making. For each methodology, we specify the ‘object of knowledge’ that is addressed by it, the ‘object of study’ that can be empirically investigated with it, the kind of data collection required, and the analytical procedure to be followed.
The methodologies have been tested in pilot studies, discussed with peers, and fine-tuned afterwards. The pilot studies have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic and the earlier termination of the Fellowship, which led to a smaller set of primary data and a shift in focus from the performance to the preparation of lessons. Nevertheless, they allowed us to create empirically grounded knowledge on how (university) education can contribute to STs through an empirical analysis of how learning in view of STs can be facilitated; an empirical analysis of how university education can contribute to learning action-oriented knowledge; and an empirical analysis of how university education can improve the quality of students’ argumentation, how teachers can assess this, and how teachers can be supported to revise their teaching practice in response to the assessment.
We formulated the following pathways for future research: applying and further developing the ‘methodology for analysing reflections on disturbed habits’ to empirical studies of university education on sustainability issues; further developing the ‘methodology for investigating the learning and teaching of action-oriented knowledge’ into a framework that takes into account that equipping students to cope with sustainability issues also involves other-than-cognitive – i.e. ethical, political, practical, emotional, aesthetical, bodily, etc. – dimensions; applying the ‘methodology for analysing the co-creation of teaching in the making’ to a variety of Lesson Design Workshops (see below) in order to gain in-depth insight in how didactic research can be optimally employed to support teachers to cope with professional challenges; and applying the ‘methodology for investigating the influence of teaching practices on the transition potential of learning’ in a variety of settings and contexts – both in formal education and in non-formal learning environments – in order to find patterns and identify guidelines for fruitfully facilitating learning in view of STs.
