Confucianism provides a specific view on the world held by many people living in several Asian societies. It offers views on humans and nature that generally differ from other traditional or Western modern views. The paper presents a systematic analysis of the literature in education with a focus on science education about the connection of Confucianism with education for sustainability. It suggests a framework for how education for sustainability can be operated in the foreground of Confucian societies taking concepts from the international literature into consideration. This critical review provides justification for a stronger reflection about how to include ideas from Confucianism into education for sustainability in the teaching and learning of science. It suggests that Confucian thinking offers a rich and authentic context for science learning in Confucian societies and and also provides a chance to reflect on views of humans, nature, and science in science education in other societies, potentially contributing to the development of more balanced and holistic worldviews.

Reflekterande kommentar till temanumret ”Kraftfull professionskunskap i ämnesundervisning”.

”Lärarnas vetenskap” har getts olika namn såsom pedagogik, utbildningsvetenskap, didaktik och pedagogiskt arbete. Artikelförfattaren föredrar didaktik som namn.

Didaktik, inkluderande ämnesdidaktik, kan ses som lärarnas centrala kunskapsområde (bl.a. Sjöström & Tyson, 2022). Kärnan i didaktik är didaktiska teorier och modeller. Didaktiska teorier för lärarprofessionen liksom didaktiska modeller kan ses som en brygga mellan teoretiska perspektiv å ena sidan och undervisningspraktik å andra sidan. Didaktiska modeller bidrar med teorigrundade lärarprofessionsstöd för informerade och reflekterade (ämnes)didaktiska val. De kan även ses som ”organisatör” och förmedlare av ”kraftfull professionskunskap”. Det är dock först vid användningen och i mötet med erfarenheter och praktik som professionskunskapen blir del av ett kraftfullt professionskunnande.

Artikeln innehåller en niofältstabell/karta över ”lärarnas vetenskap”. Ämnesdidaktik, som finns i centrum av tabellen och som fokuserar på innehåll i relation till undervisning, får näring av andra områden av ”lärarnas vetenskap” såsom läroplansteori, lärandeteori, pedagogisk filosofi, utbildningssociologi och metodik.

A point of departure in this paper is an awareness that we are living in the Anthropocene era. Based on this, education, including science education, needs to be re-visioned. Several scholars have suggested a Vision III of scientific literacy and science education as a complement to the well-spread two visions first suggested by Roberts in 2007. As suggested in this paper, the three different visions can be related to different educational-philosophical frameworks, worldview perspectives, and curriculum emphases. Vision I has a structure of science- and/or a scientific skills-emphasis and Vision II an everyday life- and/or a decision making-emphasis. Finally, a reconsidered Vision III can be seen as having an ethico-socio-political- and a relational-existential-emphasis. Different views of the relationship between the three different visions will be elaborated on in the paper. One way of seeing it is as Vision III being based on Vision II, which in turn builds on Vision I (e.g. Guerrero & Torres‐Olave, 2022). The Vision III-version suggested by Sjöström and Eilks (2018) can be seen as synonymous to eco-reflexive Bildung-oriented and critical science education. It integrates cognitive and affective domains and includes philosophical-moral-existential alternatives (see also: Sjöström, 2018) as well as politicization to address complex socio-scientific issues. “Bildung” is a central concept in central European/Scandinavian educational theory. It has a long and multifaceted history of ideas including for instance humanistic values and the ideas of critical-democratic citizenship. Vision III-driven science education can also be connected to other contemporary conceptualizations such as futures literacy, socio-ecojustice, agency, environmental humanities, and planetary health. It is with other words about a critical science education for sustainability. The paper will be finished with a suggestion of a novel and multifaceted way of viewing Vision III, that is, main elements of a reconsidered Vision III.

One point of departure in this paper is an awareness that we are living in the Anthropocene era. Based on this, education, including science education, needs to be re-visioned. Since the first use of the term by Hurd in 1958, many different definitions of scientific literacy have been put forward. One and a half decade ago Roberts (2007) suggested two visions of scientific literacy and science education. To simplify, Vision I can be described as science without society (internal view), whereas Vision II is about contextual application of scientific knowledge in life and society (external view). As a complement to the two well-spread visions by Roberts, a Vision III has been suggested (e.g. Aikenhead, 2007; Yore, 2012; Liu, 2013; Sjöström & Eilks, 2018). This paper tries to systemize what different scholars have meant with the three different visions, especially focusing on Vision III. Furthermore, the paper elaborates on different ways in how the three visions relate to each other. The three visions are also discussed in relation to curriculum theory (e.g. Deng, 2020) and different curriculum emphases, educational-philosophical frameworks, and worldview perspectives.

“Bildung” is a central concept in central European/Scandinavian educational theory. It has a long and multifaceted history of ideas including for instance humanistic values and the ideas of critical-democratic citizenship. In this paper Vision III of scientific literacy and science education, as it is presented in the international literature, is examined. Furthermore, implications of a Vision III-view on Bildung and teachers’ didactical choices are discussed.

In this article, we elaborate on the construct ChemoKnowings as subject-specific powerful knowings for chemical agency in the Anthropocene era. Related to constructs such as critical chemical literacy, ChemoCapabilities, and eco-reflexive chemical thinking, we unpack the construct as an example of Carlgren’s powerful knowings, which relates Young’s powerful knowledge to the idea and tradition of Bildung. It means powerful knowledge containing embodied and relational (or tacit) dimensions. ChemoKnowings can therefore be described as embodied and relational knowledge in and about chemistry – (critical) chemical knowledge that matters meaningfully to the student, connecting them to themselves and the world, and conferring an ethical compass. By situating the teaching of ChemoKnowings within a vision for chemistry teaching as a part of a world-centered vision for schooling in the Anthropocene, ChemoKnowings are viewed as having the capacity to mobilise an ethico-socio-political action, that is, chemical agency. By focusing on student transformation of content for ChemoKnowings and integrating elements of a theoretical didaktik model for eco-reflexive chemistry education, we develop a vision-oriented didaktik model for ChemoKnowings. More generally, we argue that didaktik models for supporting teachers’ consideration of student transformation of content for powerful subject-knowings are an important part of general subject didaktik. We present in the article vignettes that detail personal accounts for each of the three authors describing examples of chemistry-specific knowings that matter meaningfully to each of us, and which articulate our own embodied ethico-socio-political actions as students, teachers, researchers, and consumers. Inspired by Klafki’s didaktik analysis, we end the article by proposing four areas of questions that the teacher can use in guiding their preparation and transformation of the content they bring into the classroom for promoting students’ ChemoKnowings, and thus Bildung in the 21st century.

Didaktik för bildning kräver didaktisk forskning och etisk klokhet, kreativitet och praktisk skicklighet. Fokus för bildningsdidaktik är ett ständigt sökande efter kunskapens och livets meningsfullhet samt en vilja till individuellt och kollektivt ansvarstagande. En sådan värdegrundsförankrad didaktik behöver genomsyra hela lärarutbildningen och skolan om vi ska möta de utmaningar som antropocen, människans tidsålder, ställer oss inför.

Hur kan lärarutbildningen dra nytta av didaktiska teorier och analyser? Jesper Sjöstrom och Ruhi Tyson menar att lärarutbildningens alla delar bör förhålla sig till didaktiska teorier och modeller med målet att stödja professionella lärare i att skapa meningsfull och forskningsförankrad undervisning, inte minst för bildningens skull.

Bildung is an old and complex concept with at least five historical elements (e.g. Sjöström & Talanquer, 2018; Sjöström & Tyson, 2022). A socio-political dimension is the most recent. As an educational concept it emerged in Germany in the mid eighteenth century (Horlacher, 2016). Especially in Germany and Scandinavia conceptions of Bildung became the general philosophical framework to guide both formal and informal education. At least five versions/traditions of Bildung can be identified (Sjöström et al., 2017) and will be described in the presentation. Based on such previous conceptualizations of Bildung, I will elaborate on a contemporary understanding of Bildung for our Anthropocence epoch. A Bildung view is always connected to values, visions and worldviews as well as identity (e.g. Sjöström, 2018). In focus in the presentation will be what I and co-authors have called eco-critical-reflexive Bildung (e.g., Sjöström, Eilks & Zuin, 2016; Sjöström, 2018). It emphasizes especially the socio-political dimension of Bildung and can be seen as an educational meta-theory for (subject) education in our Anthropocence epoch (see also e.g. Kvamme, 2021; Taylor, 2017). Based on such a meta-theory it is interesting to discuss which consequences it has for (subject) Didaktik, didaktik models and educational practice more generally (see e.g. Sjöström & Tyson, in press; for chemistry Didaktik, as an example, see: Herranen, Yavuzkaya & Sjöström, 2021 and Yavuzkaya, Clucas & Sjöström, manuscript). Or formulated in other words: How does a Bildung-oriented Didaktik for our Anthropocene Epoch look like and which theory- and practice-based didaktik models (in a broad sense) need to be developed via Bildung-didactic modelling?

Boken ger en bred introduktion till lärares centrala kunskapsområde – didaktiken.

För detta är bildningsperspektiv avgörande, samt perspektiv som fokuserar på elevers upplevelser av undervisningens meningsfullhet, dess bidrag till djupare insikter och omvärldsförståelse samt dess förankring i skolans värdegrund och kunnande i antropocen – människans tidsålder.

Boken behandlar frågor om exempelvis hur man kan överbrygga klyftan mellan allmän- och ämnesdidaktik, hur man kan utveckla pedagogisk och moralisk fantasi samt kommunikationens roll. Det handlar om lärares förmåga att göra insiktsfulla och kloka didaktiska val.

DIDAKTIK FÖR LÄRANDE OCH BILDNING fokuserar på att förbinda didaktisk teoribildning (inklusive läroplansteori) med didaktisk praktik för att verkligen se till bildande lärande: hur didaktisk analys, didaktiska modeller och didaktiska fallstudier kan berika lärares planering, genomförande av undervisning samt bedömningsarbete till stöd för bildning.

This paper presents the research behind the formulation of a new didaktik model on waste and material resources in preschool. The research was part of an extensive collaborative R&D programme, involving close to 300 preschool teachers/managers and researchers, to build systematic knowledge on what may characterize teaching in preschool based on scientific grounds and proven experience. The guiding question in this specific study was what it can look like to teach sustainability issues in preschool. The teaching examined in the study was informed by the concept of didaktik as well as by pragmatic theory. Using the methodological approach of abductive analysis, a new didaktik model was designed. This process of generating a new didaktik model is part of didaktik modelling, a focus of the paper.

Compared to Anglo-American instructional design, European Didaktik has focused much more on content and relevance. This presentation is based on concepts such as disciplinary literacy, powerful knowledge, Bildung, sustainability education and didaktik models (Sjöström, 2019; Sjöström, Eilks & Talanquer, 2020), as well as on their interrelationships. Recent ideas of didaktik models supporting eco-reflexive Bildung (Herranen et al., 2021), ChemoKnowings (Herranen et al., 2021; Yavuzkaya et al., 2022) and chemical agency (Yavuzkaya et al., 2022) will be presented and discussed. Eco-reflexive Bildung-oriented chemistry/science education should, in addition to (a) transformative subject knowledge, emphasize both (b) scientific processes – NOS (Nature of Science) – and (c) societal contexts – STSE (Science-Technology-Society-Environment) (Sjöström, Eilks & Zuin, 2016). In practice, this would mean including more philosophical, ethical and socio-political perspectives in chemistry/science education, and the focus should be on meaningfulness, problematization, understanding uncertainties and balancing the benefits and risks of science and technology.

I en tid av krig och kriser, faktaresistens och polarisering, behövs mer än någonsin en skola med bildning som vision.

Kommentar til Jette Reuss Schmidt og Jens Dolin: “Refleksioner over naturfaglig dannelse og kompetence – på baggrund af et forskerseminar”, MONA, 2022(3).

Vision III för naturvetenskaplig allmänbildning (critical scientific literacy) betonar moraliska-filosofiska-existentiella-politiska alternativ och socio-politisk handlingskompetens.

Since teaching in Swedish preschool was regulated in the Education Act 2010, preschool teachers have appeared to struggle with the concept of “teaching” in their day-to-day practices.This paper is based on a collaborative R&Dprogramme involving preschool teachers and researchers aimed to build knowledge of what can characterize teaching in preschool.The research was carried out in 40–44 preschools/preschool departments in eight municipalities in Sweden between 2018 and 2020. The method was based on a praxiographic approach where preschool teachers tried out different theory-informed teaching arrangements, including didaktik, variation-theory, post-structural gateway and pragmatic perspective. The material for the article consisted of 350 co-plans, 305 co-evaluations and 35 hours of video. Analysis was based on a didaktik premise and can be methodologically described in terms of abductive analysis. Theory-informed teaching arrangements have been tried out and shown to support teachers in conducting teaching in the complex reality that is based on scientific grounds and proven experience. In summary, the analysis is merged in a communicable entity through the concept of “multivocal didaktik modelling”.

In this Round Table-discussion we (Sjöström & Yavuzkaya) will put some “meta-didaktik models” on the table and based on them open up for discussing the role of Science|Environment|Health-issues in Bildung, its potential implications for Subject Didaktik (Subject-Specific Education) and how it can be explored in research studies. One of the models will be a recently published vision-oriented didaktik model for promoting powerful knowings and agency in science education (Yavuzkaya, Clucas and Sjöström, 2022). Some other models will be selected from a new Swedish textbook on Didaktik for Bildung (Sjöström & Tyson, 2022) and translated to English. We will start by short conceptualisations of Bildung and Didaktik, followed by a short presentation of the first selected “meta-didaktik model” followed by all round table-participants discussing it in relation to S|E|H-issues. This is then repeated for other meta-models, as many as there is room for.

Subject didactics has contact points to (1) other educational sciences such as pedagogy, pedagogical work, general didactics and education studies, (2) the school subject / subject area, and (3) practical teaching (Sjöström, 2018a). This model is only one of several different ways to understand subject didactics as a knowledge field (Cramer & Schreiber, 2018). Comparative studies of different areas of subject didactics are usually referred to as "comparative subject didactics" (e.g., Ligozat & Almqvist, 2018). I am interested in such studies as well as in what unites different subject didacts, i.e. what can be called "general subject didactics" (see e.g. Hopmann, 2007; Kansanen, 2009; Sjöström, 2018a). Wolfgang Klafki’s (2000/1958) five question areas about the subject matter and teaching are applicable on all subject areas. They deal with the structure and relevance of the content and implications for teaching and learning in and about the subject. Generally, I would argue that there are two main types of subject didactics, splitting all subject-specific didactic areas. The first type is empirical-analytical and is emphasizing the scientific side (in a quite narrow sense). The other type is humanistic-aesthetic and is – in addition to empirical-analytical aspects – also emphasizing philosophical-ethical and practical-aesthetic aspects of didactics. I would claim that Klafki’s Bildung-oriented didactics belongs to this second type. At the conference I will present a general model for humanistic subject didactics. It is helpful as a tool when reflecting about different aspects of subject didactics from humanistic perspectives for a specific subject area. The model consists of three reflection levels/areas as well as both socio-cultural-historical perspectives and worldview perspectives in a broad sense. An integrative worldview is especially interesting from a sustainability perspective (Hedlund-de Witt, 2014), and also an eco-reflexive approach (Sjöström, 2018b).

The Anthropocene makes visible the global challenges we are facing by highlighting the state of the planet, the human impact on Earth systems, and our unsustainable ways of living. Considering chemistry and chemistry education in relation to the Anthropocene provides an opportunity to challenge and rethink chemistry education. We utilized the concept Bildung towards self-determination, participation, and solidarity, which takes students as active participants in public debates in the process of democracy. In this study, we turn to pre-service teachers as a part of this rethinking process since such attempts start with teachers, even with teacher training. In this study, we utilize the transdisciplinary perspectives of pre-service upper secondary Science Studies teachers and aim to investigate their views on why, what, and how to teach in and about chemistry in relation to the Anthropocene. Focus group interviews were conducted with three groups of participants. Initial findings of thematic analysis revealed the themes, such as, teachers as citizens, the Anthropocene and transdisciplinarity, possible obstacles while integrating the Anthropocene in chemistry lessons.  

Didaktik models may look different, but have in common that they support teachers when reflecting on, answering and/or are practicing teaching based on the didactic questions: why, what, and how to teach a certain content for a certain group of learning subjects (e.g. Lunde & Sjöström, 2021; Sjöström, 2019a; Vallberg Roth et al., 2021). Didaktik models are useful in both planning and evaluation of teaching as well as in-action, and constitute the basis for teachers’ professional judgment and reflection. How can we better understand what Didaktik models are, different types and their usability in different contexts? And how can we better understand the concept of “didactic modelling” both in terms of research and teaching praxis? This latter concept can be given both the meaning of working systematically with Didaktik models in teaching practice as well as in didactic (collaboration) research, both theoretically and empirically (Sjöström, 2019a). Therefore, we propose a multidimensional understanding of didactic modelling based on a humanistic, Bildung-oriented, Didaktik-tradition (Hopmann, 2007). Examples will especially be given from the collaboration-research-project, Fundif (scientific leader: Ann-Christine Vallberg Roth), which is about teaching in preschool and has been going on 2018-2021 (Vallberg Roth et al., 2021). Several different examples will be given on Didaktik models, for example from Fundif. Also a new model for how Didaktik models can be understood as a bridge between (educational) theories and teaching practice will be presented. Often used synonyms for Didaktik models are tools, instruments, frameworks, compasses and thought figures. It is common with illustrated models, but also with such that are only described with words or presented in a table. Didaktik models often has both a theoretical-philosophical grounding and an empirical-analytical one. Examples of Didaktik models are: didactic questions, Klafki's questions, the Berliner model, didactic triangles, didactic relationship models, Herbart’s didactic tact, Schwab's degrees of freedom, organizing purposes and knowledge emphases (e.g. Lunde & Sjöström, 2021; Sjöström, 2019a; Vallberg Roth et al., 2021; Wickman et al., 2020). Also some content/discipline-specific Didaktik models will be described, mainly related to chemistry and sustainability issues (e.g. Sjöström, 2019b; Sjöström, Eilks & Talanquer, 2020; Herranen, Yavuzkaya & Sjöström, 2021).

Compared to Anglo-American instructional design, European Didaktik has focused much more on content and relevance. This presentation will address why, what and how to teach in and about chemistry, as an example of a school subject. It will elaborate on concepts such as disciplinary literacy, powerful knowledge, Bildung, sustainability education and didaktik models (Sjöström, 2019; Sjöström, Eilks & Talanquer, 2020), as well as on their interrelationships. The goal is to explain what can be meant with powerful (chemical) knowings and eco-reflexive Bildung, as well as the characteristics of didaktik models aiming at those two. Eco-reflexive Bildung-oriented chemistry/science education should, in addition to (a) transformative subject knowledge, emphasize both (b) scientific processes – NOS (Nature of Science) – and (c) societal contexts – STSE (Science-Technology-Society-Environment) (Sjöström, Eilks & Zuin, 2016). In practice, this would mean including more philosophical, ethical and socio-political perspectives in chemistry/science education, and the focus should be on problematization, understanding uncertainties and balancing the benefits and risks of science and technology. In addition to these three legs, Hodson (2003) has suggested socio-political actions as a fourth leg. It is about promoting students’ critical and active engagement in socio-scientific problems and those often involves complex environmental and health issues. In the presentation, corresponding didaktik models – and especially such focusing socio-chemical issues, will be elaborated on. This will be done based on different curriculum ideas as well as philosophical ideas. Recently, Carlgren (2020) problematized the related concept of powerful knowledge and instead suggested powerful knowings. This concept emphasizes that disciplinary knowledge is embedded in actions. It is about “knowledge-as-a-means-for-cultivation-of-human-powers” (p. 324). The presentation will highlight ideas about relevant, transformative and powerful (chemical) knowings for sustainability and related educative practices. Examples will be given from two ongoing PhD projects (Clucas and Yavuzkaya).

Många forskare menar att vårt samhälle kan betecknas som ett risksamhälle. Frågor om risk kopplar till flera olika skolämnen och inte minst till de naturvetenskapliga. En nyforskningsartikel presenterar en didaktisk modell som visar på riskbegreppets komplexitet och som hjälper lärare att behandla det på ett fylligt och mångsidigt sätt i sin undervisning.

Schenk, L., Hamza, K. M., Enghag, M., Lundegård, I., Arvanitis, L., Haglund, K., & Wojcik, A. (2019). Teaching and discussing about risk: seven elements of potential significance for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 41(9), 1271-1286.(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2019.1606961)

This contribution focuses on characteristics of teaching for sustainability in Swedish preschools. The study is part of a much broader R&D programme where in total almost three hundred preschool teachers/managers collaborate with a researcher group to which we belong. The participants (N=170) were asked to answer a question in an e-mail-questionnaire about their views on sustainability teaching. On average a participant answered with 28 words, but obviously there was a big span, from 1 to 339 words in a single answer. In the word material (consisting of about 4800 words in total) we looked for common and prominent words, words used only low-frequently or not at all, and other patterns. We identified nineteen words that were used about 20 times or more. Among these words were: sorting, environment, material, recycle, water, food, sustainable development, and compost. More qualitatively we also looked for patterns/traces based on the three main didactic questions: Why? What? and How?. Based on these and other results we will discuss what can be meant with didactic modelling for sustainability in preschool. In the presentation we will also compare the preschool teachers’/managers’ views on sustainability teaching with their corresponding views on teaching about science, technology and health.

Didaktiska modeller kan fungera som en resurs för att reflektera och kommunicera kring didaktiska frågeställningar som dyker upp i planering, genomförande och utvärdering av undervisning. De kan även tillhandahålla en begreppsapparat som kan synliggöra saker som man som lärare annars inte lika lätt skulle ha uppmärksammat. I forskarskolan NaNo har begreppet didaktiska modeller spelat en central roll. Den tillkom utifrån tanken att förena ämnesdidaktisk forskning med lärares kunnande till en vetenskap för lärare.

The aim of this theoretical paper is to develop and present a didaktik model that embeds chemistry education into Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) using an eco-reflexive approach. A didaktik model is a tool to help educators make decisions and reflect on why, what, how, and/or when to teach. The model presented here is a revised version of the Jegstad and Sinnes model from 2015. It was systematically developed based on a critical analysis of the previous ESD (Education for Sustainable Development)-based model. This process is part of what is called didactic modeling. The revised model consists of the following six categories: (i) socio-philosophical framing; (ii) sustainable schooling and living; (iii) critical views on chemistry's distinctiveness and methodological character; (iv) powerful chemical content knowledge; (v) critical views of chemistry in society; and (vi) eco-reflexivity through environmental and sustainability education. As in the model by Jegstad and Sinnes, the eco-reflexive didaktik model seeks to support chemistry educators in their sustainability-oriented educational planning and analysis, but from a more critical perspective. Based on an eco-reflexive Bildung approach, one additional category-socio-philosophical framing-was added to the revised model. This is because the previous model does not take sufficient account of worldview perspectives, cultural values, and educational philosophy. The eco-reflexive didaktik model is illustrated with boxes, and it is suggested that all categories in these boxes should be considered in holistic and eco-reflexive chemistry education. The purpose of such education is to develop students' ChemoKnowings.

Rapporten baseras på forskningsdelen i ett forsknings- och utvecklingsprogram som syftar till att, i samverkan mellan förskollärare, ledare och forskare, beskriva och vidareutveckla kunskap om vad som kan känneteckna undervisning i förskola. Undervisning studeras i relation till vetenskaplig grund och beprövad erfarenhet. Forskningsdelen genomförs i mellan 40 till 44 förskolor/avdelningar belägna i åtta svenska kommuner, mellan åren 2018 och 2021. Sammantaget har 10 671 personer samtyckt att med­verka i forskningsdelen av programmet, varav 8 447 barn/vårdnadshavare och 2 224 förskollärare, barnskötare, rektorer, biträdande rektorer, chefer och övriga. Metoden kan beskrivas i termer av en ”praxiografisk samverkansmetod” som avser analys av registrerad praktik. Designen utgörs av parallella och prövande serier av teoriinformerade under­visningsupplägg där didaktik kombinerats med olika innehålls- och lärandeinriktningar. I samverkansforskningen inkluderas didaktiskt, variations­teoretiskt, poststrukturellt och pragmatiskt informerat undervisningsupplägg. Vidare inkluderar undervisningsuppläggen teorier med anknytning till innehåll, såsom musik och digital teknik, matematik och programmering, naturvetenskap, däribland kemi, samt rörelse, hälsa och hållbarhet. Materialet består av 473 samplaneringar, 444 sam­värderingar och 35,5 filmtimmar från genomförd undervisning. Analysen är didaktiskt orienterad och kan beskrivas i termer av abduktiv analys – en strategi för att kunna sluta sig till en nyanserad praktikteoretisk tolkning av vad som kan känneteckna undervisning i förskola. Resultatet indikerar flerstämmiga spår relaterade till didaktiska modeller i de teoriinformerade undervisningsuppläggen. Sammantaget fogas analysen samman och prövas i en kommunicerbar helhet genom konceptet ”flerstämmig didaktisk modellering”. Konceptuell replikering och upprepning av prövandet av konceptet i två FoU-program har inneburit att vi rört oss från en relativt vag aning om vad det kunde innebära till en allt tydligare och precisare innebörd genom framväxt av modeller och begrepp i relation till alltmer tillförlitliga forskningsresultat. Utfall i skriftliga frågor om undervisning, organisation, ledarskap och sambedömning, åren 2018 och 2021, tyder på delvis utvidgat och preciserat yrkesspråk, med spår av ett utvecklat professionellt och didaktiskt omdöme, inkluderat spår av flerstämmiga vetenskapliga grunder och beprövade erfarenheter. Samman­taget kan samverkans­forskningens kunskaps­utvecklande bidrag beskrivas i termer av teoriinformerad praktikutveckling och praktikgrundad koncept- och teoriutveckling.

Forskningen presenteras också på följande websidor: 

https://mau.se/forskning/projekt/flerstammig-didaktisk-modellering/ 

https://www.ifous.se/flerstammig-undervisning-i-forskolan/

Given the state of our planet in relation to human impact on the nature, the Anthropocene makes visible the global challenges we have been facing and unsustainable ways we are living in. Even though the scientific work in relation to Anthropocene is highly dependent on chemistry concepts, chemistry education is weakly connected to environment, society, nature and philosophy of science in its current state. Instead, instructional approaches still tend to introduce fundamental chemistry concepts in a quite isolated way. Even though there seems to be an increase in context-based approaches, there is a strong need for ecological, ethical, and philosophical framing. This contribution is based on a developing PhD project, which aims to reconceptualize chemistry education in the Anthropocene. In order to address this aim, several studies are being developed. One of these studies focuses on science teachers’ views on teaching and didactic questions in relation to the Anthropocene. In this contribution, preliminary findings will be presented. 

Bildning som ideal öppnar upp för meningsfullt lärande, kreativitet och etiskt-kritiskt handlande, skriver Jesper Sjöström och Ruhi Tysoni i en replik på Jakob Billmayers text om bildning som problematiskt begrepp.

A subject in school is a construction and way to organize knowledge in the curriculum (Örbring 2021). The curriculum can, in turn, be viewed at different levels (Doyle 1992) or in different arenas (Wahlström 2014). At the programmatic level, school subjects are constructed in writing through various actors and decisions. In this process, the actors make choices and evaluate the knowledge that each subject must contain. Science Studies (“naturkunskap”) is a subject in the Swedish upper secondary school which is a complex construction that draws content from several different academic disciplines. The purpose of this study is to investigate how science studies were constructed on a programmatic level in the 2011 curriculum, and what values ​​of knowledge were made by different actors (or stakeholders) in this process. The theoretical starting point is curriculum theory in terms of levels (Doyle 1992), arenas (Wahlström 2014) and pedagogical device (1990) and vertical and horizontal knowledge (Bernstein 1990; 1999). Also relevant are theories regarding knowledge in school subjects, such as those by Deng and Luke (2008) and Carlgren (2020). Furthermore, Klafki’s Didaktik analytical questions will be applied (e.g. Sjöström & Eilks 2020). The method is qualitative and draws inspiration from an earlier study of geography education (Örbring 2020). This study consists of analyses of documents from the process of making the steering documents for the curriculum, such as minutes, drafts, comments, meeting notes and working materials. A content analysis will be made of these documents, found in the archives of the National Agency for Education. Expected findings are about describing how the Science Studies subject was constructed, what knowledge is included, as well as whether there were/are different values, traditions and conflicts in the subject. Our hypothesis and preliminary analysis – based on reading of the syllabus as well as own experience – is that in Science Studies there is a subject identity tension between being a natural science subject (based on biology, chemistry, physics and earth science) and a societal- and environmental-oriented social science subject (based on themes such as sustainable development, energy and health issues). Related to this tension is the question of what role the Science Studies subject has in the Swedish education system. Science Studies can be seen as a continuation of the science subjects in compulsory school, or alternatively, a value-oriented interdisciplinary subject. In the presentation we will especially focus on the implications of the curriculum and Didaktik analysis for teachers and teaching.

Didaktik models can help us as educators to be aware of and reflect about all aspects of teaching and learning, including curricular and assessment issues (Sjöström, Eilks & Talanquer, 2020). For example they can be about the purpose of (chemical) education and corresponding choices of relevant content and contexts. Furthermore, they can also help us to reflect about implicit worldviews, ideologies and discourses in (chemical) teaching. One such model (Sjöström & Talanquer, 2014), aiming at humanistic and critical-reflexive chemistry teaching, is based on Mahaffy’s (2004) tetrahedron and has Johnstone’s (1993) triangle (macro; submicro; symbolic) in the bottom. In Mahaffy’s model, the top of the tetrahedron represents the human element, including both relevant contexts and productive practices. In the developed model, the top of the tetrahedron is subdivided into different levels: (0) pure chemistry (Johnstone’s triangle); (1) applied chemistry; (2a) socio-historical chemistry; (2b) socio-scientific chemistry; (3a) socio-cultural chemistry; and (3b) socio-political chemistry. By moving up in the tetrahedron we can expand our views of chemistry teaching, from a traditional focus on disciplinary content to also including aspects of the nature and culture of chemistry, the role of chemistry in society and critical perspectives, where the traditional discourse of chemistry is problematized (Sjöström, 2007). Essential questions for socio-political chemistry include value-centered issues of relevance to our global challenges. Among problematizing perspectives it is important to include different philosophical considerations, such as ontological, epistemological and ethical perspectives (Marcelino, Sjöström & Marques, 2019). Chemical thinking, learning, knowing and actions based on such views take moral-philosophical-existential-political alternatives into consideration and can be discussed based on current ideas on eco-reflexive Bildung and (chemical) education (Sjöström, Eilks & Zuin, 2016; Sjöström & Talanquer, 2018). A new didaktik model for socio-eco-reflexive chemistry education (Herranen, Yavuzkaya & Sjöström, 2021) will be highlighted at the symposium.

Bildung is an old and complex concept with at least five historical elements. A socio-political dimension is the most recent. As an educational concept it emerged in Germany in the mid eighteenth century. Especially in Germany and Scandinavia conceptions of Bildung became the general philosophical framework to guide both formal and informal education. How is the concept of Bildung used in the international science education literature? At least five versions/traditions of Bildung can be identified and will be described in the lecture. These will be related to different worldviews and philosophies of science education, such as different visions of scientific literacy. Especially the potential of eco-critical-reflexive Bildung, emphasizing the socio-political dimension, will be elaborated on as an educational meta-theory for science education in our Anthropocence epoch.

Indigenous knowledge provides specific views of the world held by various indigenous peoples. It offers different views on nature and science that generally differ from traditional Western science. Futhermore, it introduces different perspectives on nature and the human in nature. Coming basically from a Western perspective on nature and science, the paper analyzes the literature in science education focusing on research and practices of integrating indigenous knowledge with science education. The paper suggests Didaktik models and frameworks for how to elaborate on and design science education for sustainability that takes indigenous knowledge and related non-Western and alternative Western ideas into consideration. To do so, indigenous knowledge is contextualized with regards to related terms (e.g., ethnoscience), and with Eastern perspectives (e.g., Buddhism), and alternative Western thinking (e.g., post-human Bildung). This critical review provides justification for a stronger reflection about how to include views, aspects, and practices from indigenous communities into science teaching and learning. It also suggests that indigenous knowledge offers rich and authentic contexts for science learning. At the same time, it provides chances to reflect views on nature and science in contemporary (Western) science education for contributing to the development of more balanced and holistic worldviews, intercultural understanding, and sustainability.

Under senare år har det blivit allt vanligare med hållbarhets- och samhällsfrågor i NT-klassrummen. Vad elever redan gör och vad de vill göra i framtiden för att förbättra världen kan användas för att utveckla sådan undervisning. En ny forskningsstudie visar hur engagemanget i hållbarhetsfrågor kan se ut hos starkt nv-inriktade elever.

This paper focuses on characteristics of science teaching in preschool. Science in general is in focus, but a special interest is put on what may characterize chemistry teaching in preschool. The study is part of a much broader R&D programme where in total almost three hundred preschool teachers/managers collaborate with a researcher group to which we belong. The participants (N=177) were in the autumn 2018 asked to answer a question in an e-mail-questionnaire about their views on science/chemistry teaching in preschool. On average a participant answered with 30 words, but obviously there was a big span, from 1 to 444 words in a single answer. In the word material (consisting of about 5400 words in total) we looked for common and prominent words, words used only low-frequently or not at all, and other patterns. We identified eighteen words that were used about 30 times or more. Among these words are: experiment, water, animal, plant, nature, forest, explore, examine, phenomenon, and baking. Low frequently used words were categorized in seven categories, among them chemistry. The words atom, molecule and particle could not at all be found in the word material. More qualitatively we also looked for patterns/traces based on the three main Didaktik questions: Why? What? and How?. Statements from the preschool teachers/managers were categorized in seven categories. In the discussion and forthcoming studies we will relate science/chemistry teaching in preschool both to the recently revised curriculum for the Swedish preschool and to other content areas and more general theories and ideas on what may characterize teaching in preschool.

Over several decades, there have been many calls to transform chemistry education in order to promote learning and engaging students in chemistry. For example, conceptual understanding research gave its place to developmental approaches, namely, learning progressions. However, a lot of researchers stated the need for context-based approaches to make chemistry education more meaningful and relevant for students. Socio-scientific issues (SSI) oriented chemistry education, for example, can be considered as a contextual framing. However, this approach tended to offer more things to know, instead of providing a context for the students to engage in critical discussions about ecological, economic, and societal dimensions (Gilbert, 2016) of chemical pursuits. In consequence, this contribution aims to provoke a discussion on how chemistry education can be reframed in the Anthropocene and problematize systems thinking as a way of the Anthropocene aware chemistry education. It is argued that there is a need for rethinking chemistry education in the complex societies stemming from a noticeable human impact on chemical, biological, and geological systems in the Earth (Mahaffy, 2014). Acknowledging that human factor is responsible from the changes in the Earth systems more than before, we are being driven to an uncertain and a complex future (Guyotte, 2020; Stratford, 2019). Considering the role of chemistry in the global challenges, chemistry education is suggested to adopt a humanized approach including the role of human activity, socio-scientific issues, benefits-costs-risk analysis of chemical activities, e.g. by utilizing a cross disciplinary approach (Zowada et al., 2019). In addition, involving in chemical pursuits as scientists or citizens, requires taking quality of life and preserving environment into consideration (Sjöström & Talanquer, 2018). 50 In this presentation, systems thinking is problematized as a way of addressing global challenges through chemistry education and conceptualized as a way of acting on material world through sustainability perspective and decision-making processes (Mahaffy, Matlin, Whalen, & Holme, 2019). It is aimed to develop knowledge through the questions which living in a complex, uncertain era made visible: How can chemistry education be reconceptualized in the Anthropocene? How can systems thinking be infused in chemistry education?

Didaktik är ett för lärare centralt praktik-teoretiskt kunskapsområde. Området har en lång historia inom akademin, men har aldrig slagit igenom vare sig inom akademin eller i skolan. Det är dags att ändra på det – gör didaktik till huvudområde inom lärarutbildning, på samma sätt som vårdvetenskap är huvudområde inom sjuksköterskeutbildning.

The decisions and actions that chemistry educators make regarding why, what, how, and when to teach certain content or implement a specific instructional activity are often guided, but also constrained, by explicit or implicit "didaktik models". These types of models direct our attention and actions when designing curricula, planning for instruction, or assessing the learning process. They also give educators a professional language when talking or reflecting about teaching and learning. When used systematically, didaktik models support the implementation of research-based instructional practices and are helpful in the professional development of educators. In this essay, we describe, analyze, and discuss the nature and utility of didaktik models in chemistry education and argue that it is critical for chemistry educators to recognize and reflect on the types of models that guide their work.

Under flera decennier har forskare inom naturvetenskapernas didaktik undersökt hur aktuella samhällsfrågor kan få betydelse i naturvetenskapsundervisningen. Flera olika inriktningar har vuxit fram, där undervisningens syfte och genomförande skiljer sig åt. Det handlar om allt från att samhällsfrågorna endast bidrar med ett sammanhang, där elever relativt förenklat tillämpar naturvetenskapliga kunskaper, till att undervisningen syftar till att lägga en grund för global handlingskompetens. I den här artikeln beskriver vi några olika inriktningar med exempel på hur de kan omsättas i undervisningspraktiken. Därmed vill vi synliggöra överväganden man som lärare kan behöva göra när man vill använda samhällsfrågor i sin nv-undervisning.

Bildung is a complex educational concept that has connections to both the Enlightenment and Romanticism. It has its roots in the late eighteenth century in Germany and has had a central place in educational philosophy and policy in central and northern Europe since then. In the history of education, one can identify at least five educational theories with reference to the basic ideas of Bildung: (a) Wilhelm von Humboldt’s classical Bildung, (b) liberal education, (c) Scandinavian folk-Bildung, (d) democratic education, and (e) critical-hermeneutic Bildung. In this chapter, we discuss the development of the concept of Bildung as a humanistic theory and its relevance for science education. We show how Bildung, when it comes to science education among other disciplines, emphasizes both personal subjectification and skills for socio-political action. In doing so, we relate contemporary interpretations of Bildung to issues of scientific literacy, education for sustainability, and transformative learning.

This paper aims to discuss complexity as a key feature for understanding the role of science knowledge in environmental and health contexts – a core issue in Science|Environment|Health pedagogy. Complex systems are, in principle, not predictable. In different contexts, ephemeral mechanisms produce different, sometimes completely unexpected results. The “art of decision making” in complex contexts is to take scientific knowledge into account, but to interpret its meaning in terms of concrete complex contexts. This is illustrated by four empirical studies on Science|Environment|Health issues, presented midway through this paper. The findings underscore the importance of introducing complexity issues into science education. Not only are all the grand health and environmental challenges of our times highly complex, but there is also evidence that introducing complexity into science education may motivate many students for science learning and change practice in science classrooms. Truly appreciating the role of complexity in Science|Environment|Health pedagogy is likely to raise future citizens who understand the delicate relation between predictability and uncertainty and to empower them for wise decisions about societal and personal well-being.

Bildung is the German and international term for an educational-philosophical key idea (e.g. Horlacher, 2016). In the German/Danish/Norweigan Didaktik-tradition the notion of Bildung is central. Especially Klafki (2000) has been central in consolidating this relationship. He identified two main orientations in the understanding of the concept of Bildung: material and formal Bildung, respectively. Furthermore, he also argued for a position mixing these two views and called it categorical Bildung. More recently, for example Kemp (2005) applied the thinking of Klafki on ideas about our latemodern society. Furthermore, he discussed views of the “world citizen”. In teaching practice Didaktik-models can be used both as tools for analysis and as tools in planning of teaching (e.g. Jank & Meyer, 2003). Klafki developed Didaktik-models for Bildung-oriented Didaktik. For the science subjects (especially chemistry) professor Ingo Eilks from University of Bremen with coworkers have formulated and empirically evaluated a framework for socio-critical and Bildung-oriented science teaching (e.g. Marks et al., 2014). I myself have together with especially Eilks further elaborated on the Bildung-concept in relation to the science subjects (e.g. Sjöström, 2013; Sjöström et al., 2017). Much of this thinking – about the curriculum subjects’ relationship to sustainability issues, democracy, citizenship etc. – is relevant beyond science education (Sjöström, 2018). In this paper I will take my thinking and writing about Bildung-oriented science education as a point of departure and suggest core ideas that are common for several curriculum subjects. By making such a pendulum – from the general ideas by Klafki and Kemp, to discussing and empirically evaluating its implications on a specific curriculum subject (area), and then back to elaborating on the general views of it – I think it is possible to more in detail understand and problematize Bildung-perspectives in different curriculum subjects. It can also contribute to the discussion about the educated citizen in our latemodern knowledge and risk society.

This paper focuses on characteristics of science teaching in Swedish preschools in 2018. Science in general is in focus, but a special interest is put on what may characterize chemistry teaching in preschool. The study is part of a much broader R&D programme where in total almost three hundred preschool teachers/managers collaborate with a researcher group to which we belong. The participants (N=177) were asked to answer a question in an e-mail-questionnaire about their views on science/chemistry teaching in preschool. On average a participant answered with 30 words, but obviously there was a big span, from 1 to 444 words in a single answer. In the word material (consisting of about 5400 words in total) we looked for common and prominent words, words used only low-frequently or not at all, and other patterns. We identified eighteen words that were used about 30 times or more. Among these words are: experiment, water, animal, plant, nature, forest, explore, examine, phenomenon, and baking. Low frequently used words were categorized in seven categories, among them chemistry. The words atom, molecule and particle could not at all be found in the word material. More qualitatively we also looked for patterns/traces based on the main three didactic questions: Why? What? and How?. Statements from the preschool teachers/managers were categorized in seven categories. In the presentation we will also relate science/chemistry teaching in preschool to more general theories and discussion on what may characterize teaching in preschool.

Artikeln beskriver ny forskning kring det didaktiska reflektionsverktyget CoRe (Content Representations) och behandlar även verktygets grund i Pedagogical Content Knowledge(PCK). Det sistnämnda myntades av Shulman i mitten av 1980-talet och kan översättas till pedagogisk innehållskunskap. CoRe kan användas både för undervisningsplanering och för att identifiera och utveckla lärares PCK. Det hjälper dem att göra detaljerade beskrivningar av svaren på de didaktiska frågorna i relation till bärande idéer (Big Ideas) inom ett specifikt ämnesområde. En CoRe består av åtta reflektionsfrågor. I slutet av artikeln jämförs CoRe-frågorna med Klafkis fem frågeområden för en bildningsorienterad ämnesundervisning. Utifrån denna jämförelse föreslås en vidgad syn på såväl CoRe som PCK.

Bildung is the German and international term for an educational-philosophical key idea. In the German/Danish/Norweigan Didaktik-tradition the notion of Bildung is central. Especially Klafki (2000) has been central in consolidating this relationship. He identified two main orientations in the understanding of the concept of Bildung: material and formal Bildung. Furthermore, he also argued for a position mixing these two views and called it categorical Bildung. More recently, for example Kemp (2005) applied the thinking of Klafki on ideas about our latemodern society. Furthermore, he discussed views of the “world citizen”. In teaching practice Didaktik-models can be used both as tools for analysis and as tools in planning of teaching (e.g. Jank & Meyer, 2018). Klafki developed Didaktik-models for Bildung-oriented Didaktik. For the science subjects (especially chemistry) professor Ingo Eilks from University of Bremen with coworkers have formulated and empirically evaluated a framework for socio-critical and Bildung-oriented science teaching (e.g. Marks et al., 2014). I myself have together with especially Eilks further elaborated on the Bildung-concept in relation to the science subjects (e.g. Sjöström, 2013; Sjöström et al., 2017). Also, for chemistry, I together with professor Vicente Talanquer from University of Arizona recently discussed the consequences of sustainability ideas on chemical thinking and action (Sjöström & Talanquer, 2018). Such perspectives – about the curriculum subjects’ relationship to sustainability issues, democracy, citizenship, action etc. – is relevant beyond chemistry and science education (Sjöström, 2018). In this paper I will take my thinking and writing about Bildung-oriented science education as a point of departure and suggest core ideas that are common for most curriculum subjects. Such ideas can inform our understanding of Bildung-oriented general subject-Didaktik. The latter can be seen as the meeting point between different research areas of subject-Didaktik (Sjöström, 2017; 2018). When Didaktik-models are formulated, used and/or developed it is called didactic modelling. In this paper focus is on Didaktik-models and didactic modelling in support of the development of categorical Bildung-perspectives in curriculum subjects and – as a consequence – the development of eco-reflexive Bildung for citizenship (Sjöström et al., 2016). Implications for research in subject-Didaktik will also be discussed.

In northern Europe and Scandinavia, there is a tradition called Didaktik. It can be seen as both the art of teaching and as the “science for teachers”, helping us teachers answering didactic questions about WHY?, WHAT? and HOW? to teach (and support learning). Many areas of subject-specific Didaktik have in recent decades evolved from mainly practice-based methodology to quite independent research areas. This applies, for example, to the field of science-Didaktik (i.e., Science Education). Part of this field has a special interest in educational activities for socio-ecojustice. For instance, it can include complex issues used in teaching to build bridges across different curriculum subjects, among them STEM-subjects, in support of sustainability, reflexive Bildung and socio-political activism. The focus in this paper is on so-called didactic models and modelling aiming at actions for socio-ecojustice. In particular, the paper presents a model for eco-reflexive Didaktik, an example of a didactic model. Didactic modelling is the name for the processes when didactic models are used and developed, often by researchers in collaboration with practitioners. The didactic model in focus here is based on philosophical ideas and orientations, such as holism, critical realism, egalitarianism, altruism, reconstructionism and critical pedagogy.

In central and northern Europe, Didaktik is sometimes seen as the professional science of teachers. In its humanistic version it has a strong connection to the Bildung concept. This theoretical paper focuses didactic (Didaktik) models and modelling in science education, and especially those models aiming at contributing to a sustainable world. Which benefits and limitations do they have? Didactic models can help teachers in their didactic choices and have the possibility to give them a professional language when talking about didactical dilemmas (sometimes related to sustainability issues). Furthermore, they can be used in the design, action and analysis of teaching, but also for critical meta-reflection about teaching traditions. When used systematically they can help in teacher professional development and have potential to contribute to research-informed teaching. Several examples will be given on didactic models and modelling in science education for sustainability, e.g., relevance models, content models, models for improved practice, and models for how to work with didactic models in practice, e.g. via teacher-researcher collaborations. The highlighted and problematized models include concepts such as relevance, visions of scientific literacy, humanized science education, problem-oriented approaches, sustainability in science education, eco-reflexivity, and action research.

Ämnesdidaktik är ett kunskapsområde där utbildningsvetenskaplig forskning möter ämnesinnehåll och skolpraktik. Det kan sägas vara lärarnas vetenskap och syftar till att hjälpa dem att göra informerade didaktiska val i relation till ämnesundervisning. Så kallad didaktisk modellering är en central del av ämnesdidaktisk forskning och praxis. Det innebär att arbeta systematiskt med didaktiska modeller i praktiken. Utgångspunkten är en eller flera didaktiska modeller som utvecklas, prövas och/eller förfinas. Två helt grundläggande didaktiska modeller är de didaktiska frågorna (varför? vad? hur? etc.) respektive den klassiska didaktiska triangeln (lärare-ämnesinnehåll-elev), men det finns många fler, både övergripande och detaljerade, schematiska och verbala, abstrakta och konkreta, och allmänna och ämnesspecifika. Denna text ger exempel på didaktiska modeller av betydelse för NT-lärares forskningsbaserade undervisning.