The concept of Action Competence (AC) has been interpreted in different ways in various domains of the educational sciences. Given the rising scholarly attention to AC, these diverse interpretations are problematic because they hinder a common understanding of the concept among scholars. We unravel the interpretation of AC as a competence of people versus that of an educational approach. We call the latter education for sustainable development (ESD), and discuss the approach as predominantly being a subjectification model of education. Furthermore, we offer an updated and refined generic definition of action competence as a competence of people. To this end, we develop an ecology of psychological concepts that underpin AC. We present a theoretical perspective based on the concepts of “action” and “competence”, for stronger consideration of AC as a competence of people. We relate this generic concept of AC to concepts such as commitment, passion, knowledge, and self-efficacy for solving controversial problems. Finally, we introduce the specific concept of “Action Competence in Sustainable Development” (ACiSD) to articulate the competence of people to engage in solving sustainability issues.

Policymakers have pinpointed the importance of living in a more sustainable society. Education for Sustainable Development aims at developing future citizens competent to take actions in order to cope with Sustainable Development issues. The instructional design that teachers apply in class play a crucial role in students’ learning. This study is a conceptual analysis based on a narrative review of the literature in the field of Environmental Education/Education for Sustainable Development. It makes use of the CLIA-model (Competence, Learning, Intervention, Assessment), developed by De Corte, Verschaffel and Masui in 2004 to prescribe how a powerful learning environment in Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) could be developed. In particular, the study focusses on the Intervention component. Holistic, pluralistic as well as action-oriented teaching in Education for Sustainable Development are thought to be effective in cultivating students’ action competence. This paper presents first the Action-oriented ESD framework. This framework consists of five components: (a) action-taking, b) students’ leadership in their learning and teaching, c) peer interaction, (d) community involvement and e) interdisciplinarity. We then integrate the Action-oriented ESD framework with Holism and Pluralism into the Holism-Pluralism-Action-orientation in the ESD framework. Integrating holistic, pluralistic as well as action-oriented teaching in ESD is highly important in theoretical discussion as well as in instructional design. The Holism-Pluralism-Action-orientation ESD framework addresses the lack of an integrated conceptual framework in the field of ESD. This framework is motivated by a growing consensus on the importance of these three approaches in ESD teaching. The Holism-Pluralism-Action-orientation in ESD Framework is based on more than three decades of efforts to define knowledge on Environmental Education/Education for Sustainable Development teaching and on the rich and growing body of research on effective ESD teaching.

In this paper, we explore how students’ engagement varies in different STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) learning environments. More specifically, we focus on the significance of a learning environment applying an integrated STEM (iSTEM) approach and the significance of STEM learning environments’ student-centredness. Moreover, we explore the relative importance of different student-centred principles (lesson plan and implementation, communicative interactions, student-teacher relationships) for students’ engagement in the STEM learning environment. Applying a mixed-method approach, we draw from observational data of 24 STEM lessons in combination with data from seven focus groups with 67 grade 9 students. The quantitative findings, based on the observational data, show that a learning environment applying an iSTEM approach seems to support students’ engagement. Further investigation made it clear that the student-centredness in this learning environment is especially significant. Regarding the specific student-centred principles, all principles had a significant impact on students’ engagement. The focus group data make clear that, besides student-centredness, the integrative aspect and the use of authentic real-world problems in iSTEM can also be engaging for students. These results indicate that iSTEM is a good practice to engage students in the STEM learning environment, as it facilitates teachers’ implementation of a general student-centred approach.

Eco‐schools aim to improve the environment through direct and indirect effects. Direct effects are those that result from the implementation of an environmental management system. Indirect effects are educational gains. The current study examines the effectiveness of eco‐schools concerning three student outcomes: (1) environmental knowledge, (2) environmental attitudes, and (3) environmental affect. The study includes 1287, 10–12‐year‐olds from 59 schools (38 eco‐schools and 21 control schools). Multivariate multilevel regression analyses show that eco‐schools mainly influence their students' environmental knowledge; they do not influence environmental affect. Eco‐school students, furthermore, have equal preservation attitudes and lower utilization attitudes, as compared to control‐school students. The implications of these results for research and practice are discussed.