Turkish Preservice Teachers' Tendencies Toward Education for Sustainability in Their Practicum

• In Event: Consequential Teacher Environmental and Sustainability Education Research: From the Margins to Mainstream "Truth"

Abstract

In this study, we focused on Turkish early childhood education pre-service teachers (ECEPTs)’ understandings and pedagogical approaches related to EfS. To explore this, we examined their implementation of EfS during the practicum, both in terms of which aspects of EfS were implemented and the frequency of allocating space to EfS issues in their activity plans. Furthermore, we investigated any implementation challenges, critical aspects of EfS practices, the relationships with mentor teachers and academic mentors, and ECEPTs' understandings. This study is informed by critical theory (CT) as commonly applied in EfS research (Wals, 2012; Wals et al., 2017). Moreover, Biesta’s (2011) three categories—qualifications, socialization, and subjectification— Aspelin’s (2015) category of extistentialization, and Ärlemalm-Hagsér’s (2017) explanations, which are reinterpreted in terms of how these categories applied to EfS in HE has shaped this study’s theoretical background. We employed a multiple case study design, exploring connected cases (Stake, 2006) under the scope of qualitative research. We investigated two purposefully distinct cases: University A was a “green” campus in a large city, with initiatives to increase members’ awareness of environmental protection and sustainability issues, whereas University B was a newly established campus in a small city with limited sustainability facilities.14 students-7 students from each university case study site- participated in the study. Initially, 22 practicum activity plans for each ECEPT were examined via content analysis; then, the students were individually interviewed about the plans and their implications. Subsequent analysis indicated negligible differences between University A and B student activity plans regarding quality (aspects of EfS) and quantity (frequency of EfS activities). The students self-reflected about their EfS understandings and implementation. Additionally, they remarked that academic mentors’ and mentor teachers’ stances influenced them either positively or negatively during their workplace-based learning. They also pointed to the absence of a whole-institution approach, not only at the practicum school but also at the university level. Although EfS is not a new issue in higher education (Wals and Blewitt, 2010), the studies targeting ECEPT are not at the desired level (Davis & Davis, 2020; Ärlemalm-Hagsér, 2017). There is some research (e.g.,Lasen et al. 2017) on ECEPTs’ experiences and reflections about EC learning settings’ EfS practices while there are almost no studies about the analysis of ECEPTs’ EfS implementations. As Hopwood (2007) emphasized, if we are to comprehend how EfS learning takes place and its outcomes, we must give weight to the role of the learner as an active agent in EfS. Moreover, Ärlemalm-Hagsér and Elliott (2017) proposed that there is a need to research “(1) critical studies; (2) education contexts; (3) transformational pedagogies; and (4) ECEfS theoretical concepts and understandings” (p. 268). Hence, this study focused on ECEPTs’ understandings and pedagogical approaches related to EfS within the critical perspective.

Author

• Sule Alici, Ahi Evran University
  Presenting Author