Keywords

FormalPara Key Message

This chapter contributes to raising awareness of potential noninclusive blind spots in the implementation of WSAs and offers suggestions that can, at best, serve as inspiration for future research and school development practices. It invites to deal with the question of to which extent WSAs are limited from the outset by discrepancies between education systems, policies, and governance, and at the same time from school practices. It reinforces inclusive pedagogy in ESD to make WSAs accessible for all learners.

1 Introduction

One overall task of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) might be to prepare the young generation—regardless of the socioeconomic and cultural background, (dis)ability, race, or sexual orientation—for current and future sustainability-related challenges. However, to ensure the achievement of transformative education for sustainable development and thus to encourage participation by all learners, an inclusive approach is needed. Precisely because of the high complexity of sustainability issues and the greater proximity to sustainability issues among some learners than others, ESD in practice is often accompanied by exclusion mechanisms (Ideland & Malmberg, 2014; Jordt Jørgensen et al., 2020; O’Donoghue & Roncevic, 2020).

Against this backdrop, there has been increased discussion of ESD and inclusive education in recent years, but the two concepts have been discussed and promoted separately and from different angles. It is thus unsurprising that there has been little research into the development of a common perspective that combines ESD and inclusive education with practical experience of inclusion-oriented ESD and that there is, therefore, a research gap (Rončević & Rieckmann, 2024; Vierbuchen & Rieckmann, 2020; Böhme, 2019). Instead of the sometimes also commonly used term “inclusive ESD,” we use the term “inclusion-oriented ESD.” This is to emphasize that the aim is to use principles of inclusion and inclusive education, such as differentiation of goals, in ESD and thus to make it more accessible to all learners.

Embedding ESD for all learners effectively within formal education goes way beyond the classroom. A whole school approach (WSA) can thus help mainstream inclusive education for all (Hue & Karim, 2022) and thus can conclusively mainstream inclusion-oriented ESD within the formal school system and beyond (all areas of school development, as well as [preservice] teacher training and community-based activities). However, although a WSA is aimed at all learners per se, it does not necessarily reach all learners. It is therefore a matter of revealing exclusion mechanisms and further developing ESD and thus also the WSA with pedagogical approaches from inclusive education.

Against the background that a WSA to implementing ESD from the perspective of inclusive education is a desideratum—both in research and in practice—we conducted expert interviews to gain insights into different perspectives and experiences with regard to success factors, and to discuss the WSA through the lens of inclusion-oriented ESD. To this end, 11 experts (six from Germany and five from outside of Germany) were interviewed. This chapter will highlight requirements for WSAs and ways of implementing ESD for all learners, regardless of special needs, and focus on the development of competences to address the challenges of the twenty-first century.

2 Inclusion-Oriented ESD

Approaches to ESD that explicitly and effectively seek to be truly inclusive of all learners are not widely used in the context of formal education. Rather, ESD, on the one hand, and inclusive education, on the other, have been discussed and put into practice separately from each other. While inclusive education emphasizes the goal of participation by all learners and promotes diversity, ESD focuses on strengthening competences through participation in—and contribution to—sustainable development (Böhme, 2019). However, ESD and inclusive education have extensive and normative overlaps in their approaches and should, therefore, not be considered separately from each other: for both concepts, the ideas of empowerment, human rights, human development, and social justice are central (Vierbuchen & Rieckmann, 2020; Böhme, 2019; Böhme & Führing, 2014). Inclusion-oriented ESD is characterized by inclusive practices (based on inclusive pedagogy) within heterogeneous learning environments.

Learning environments, and teaching and learning methods in ESD, need to meet all learners’ individual needs. As reflected in the “living schools” concept, ESD can act as a catalyst to reconnect students with nature; when students interact with other living things, it helps them realize that they can develop agency and have a positive impact on the world through their compassion and actions. This environmental lens also provides an opportunity for the seamless infusion of human health and well-being, indigenous perspectives, social justice, diversity, and inclusion into our daily learning culture (Cuthbert, 2020).

To make ESD more assessable for all learners, it is important to take a closer look at the concept of inclusive education itself. It is a field that has led to contradictory discussions. In empirical research, the concept of inclusion is often understood as the teaching of children with special educational needs and those without in mixed groups (Grosche, 2015). However, this understanding falls far too short (Grosche, 2015; Ainscow, 2007; Göransson & Nilholm, 2014; Hinz, 2002; Wocken, 2014); it often leads to the denouncing of the broader understanding of inclusion to avoid any risk of stigmatization (Wocken, 2010), which may result from the differentiation of learners with disabilities from those without. On the other hand, some argue that a differentiated diagnostic perspective may provide a decisive basis for any (inclusive) pedagogical initiatives in teaching and support (Neumann & Lütje-Klose, 2020; Ricken & Schuck, 2011). This broader understanding of inclusion reinforces a fundamentally individualizing perspective within process-oriented and support-focused diagnostics (support needs of highly vulnerable students and those with special risk factors) in an inclusive school (Lindmeier & Lütje-Klose, 2018). An inclusive school that takes this perspective provides process-oriented support for learners with so-called special needs, for example, differential cognitive competences, deafness and difficulty with hearing, issues with vision and visual perception, and gifted learners, by making targeted adaptations to teaching methods and learning objectives. Groups of learners with special learning needs are in themselves highly heterogeneous: cognitive competences, for instance, can refer to a particular dependence “on understandable and simplified language, clear structures and small amounts of exercises” (Engagement Global and bezev, 2017, p. 14). Adaptations also need to be made for gifted learners and stimuli provided to address their individual abilities and strengthen their competences. Similarly, deaf and hard-of-hearing learners also represent a very wide group, ranging from those whose first language is sign language (e.g., deaf learners with deaf parents) to those with mild to moderate hearing loss; teaching approaches will vary immensely for different types of learners within groups characterized by specific learning needs. The challenge or potential for conflict that arises is that the promotion of special education within inclusive learning environments can lead to the stigmatization of learners with special needs. The challenge here is to balance inclusive education and special needs education in such a way that support for learners with special needs is provided when needed—in an inclusive learning environment. Consequently, inclusion-oriented ESD can never fit within a one-size-fits-all pedagogical approach. Instead, the focus is on individualization and contextualization of learning.

However, certain criteria may help with the planning and adapting of inclusion-oriented ESD. It is helpful to address some basic questions in the first instance (Vierbuchen & Rieckmann, 2020): how heterogeneous is the group regarding special learning needs? What structural or learning support is required? How should the learning environment and teaching materials be designed to enable all learners to participate in the learning process?

We refer to the broader understanding of inclusion, namely, the principle of diversity that encompasses all individual abilities, cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, sexual orientation, religion, gender, language, and ethnicity. In this way, ESD aims to avoid the reproduction of stereotypes, especially on the part of the so-called Global North with regard to the Global South, for example, in schoolbooks and learning materials—to ensure that interaction is fair, nondiscriminatory, and cross-cultural. If we understand inclusion as a process that espouses the principle of diversity with the aim of providing an excellent education for all learners, (inclusive) education will be focused much more strongly on the individualization of content and teaching methods. This of course also includes people with special learning needs. Here, inclusion is process-oriented and offers diagnostics focusing on support within inclusive schools; it requires adaptations to be made to ensure learners with so-called disabilities can access and participate in education and to ensure that all learners receive the best educational support for their individual (learning) needs. Activities, materials, methods, and approaches need to be adapted to take individual learning needs into account (bezev, 2017), for instance by providing tactile materials and additional audio material for blind learners; by adding subtitles to video material and by using sign language for deaf or hard-of-hearing learners; and by shortening task lengths and differentiating teaching methods and subject matter for learners who require assistants (due to cognitive difficulties).

Implementing ESD for all learners is also characterized by the need for a variety of teaching and learning methods, such as self-discovery learning, action- and solution-oriented learning; the use of different (digital) media; and so on. This approach can attract criticism. ESD mostly promotes more open learning and teaching methods, which in inclusive learning environments can be challenging for certain types of learners (Vierbuchen & Rieckmann, 2020). Learners who require a more defined or structured approach, or more detailed guidance to enable them to engage openly and independently with sustainability issues could quickly become overwhelmed by a more open and self-guided approach to learning. The guiding principle could, therefore, be to be as inclusive as possible and to provide adaptations and assistance where necessary. O’Donoghue and Rončević (2020) highlight the principles of inclusive pedagogy as developed by Kullmann et al. (2014) on the basis of the work of Klafki (2007), such as acceptance of the individuality of all learners, integration of the teaching of individualized curricula, adaptation of content, adaptive teaching, co-teaching, cooperation between teachers, and cooperation with students to create communities. To make these principles more effective in the classroom and a reality for all, they should be shared by all involved with schools (teachers, school administrators, parents, students, and others) and communicated to the locales in which the schools are situated. This also applies to ESD, which can achieve its goals and approaches only if it goes beyond specific learning environments and reaches out to individuals who are not directly engaged with schools.

It quickly becomes clear that ESD needs to go beyond the classroom to ensure that inclusion is not limited to classroom settings. Values such as appreciation of diversity and a fair and sustainable environment need to be reflected upon and experienced by all stakeholders throughout the school. Consequently, inclusion-oriented ESD takes broader areas and a broader range of stakeholders into consideration, going beyond teachers and learners and reaching out to municipalities and communities where schools are located, parents, and/or local NGOs, so that inclusion-oriented ESD does not end either at the door of the classroom or at the school gates. This points to the importance of a whole school approach to inclusion-oriented ESD.

3 Whole School Approach to Inclusion-Oriented ESD

A whole school approach (WSA) can be understood as an approach to ESD that “calls for sustainable development to be integrated throughout the formal […] curriculum in a holistic manner, rather than being taught on a standalone basis” (Hargreaves, 2008, p. 1). Specifically, the WSA can “advocate […] active and participatory learning, a hallmark of ESD, and call […] for the entire school, including students, educators and administrators, to be actively engaged in working towards a sustainable school with ESD fully integrated into the curriculum as the driving factor” (ibid.). WSAs can promote the creation of “structured environments and modifications, [which] will be most effective if implemented consistently across the school in both classroom and general school environments” (Roberts & Webster, 2020, p. 5).

The WSA does not provide a given structure to be followed or a blueprint for a sustainable school in itself, but it offers direction to help individual schools evaluate their practices and formulate guidelines and challenges to help develop new practices and activities aimed at achieving greater sustainability (Mathar, 2014). Although WSAs “must be closely related to schools’ own quality assurance culture in education” (Mogren et al., 2019, p. 3, see also Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009; Scott, 2009, 2013), several action-based processes for implementing WSAs (UNESCO, 2014) have also been described (Gough, 2005; Behinderung und Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (bezev), 2019; Greenpeace, 2021). Some studies summarize the qualities required to deliver WSAs: according to Gough (2005), they require coherence, policies, transparency, practice, and continuing professional development. Mogren and Gericke (2017) conclude that the key aspects include collaborative interaction, school improvement, student-centered education, cooperation with the local community, and proactive leadership.

Mogren et al. (2019) introduce Sherp’s model of school improvement and identify four aspects of school organization (holistic concept, routines and structures, professional knowledge creation, and practical pedagogy). Regarding professional knowledge creation, Mogren et al. (2019, p. 5) point out that this “is important for developing new understanding of learning and teaching, so it is strongly linked to critical reflection in education and understanding different values that underpin different views of reality.” Furthermore, they argue that disruptions in everyday life indicate that, in general, education and teaching practices are not appropriate to current circumstances in the world or the community and should be adapted. In particular, consideration of the community seems to be of great significance for the impact and efficacy of WSAs. Wals and Benavot (2017, p. 7) argues that “to ensure pro-environmental outcomes, schools must be embedded in their communities, seeking to influence not only the views and actions of learners who walk their halls, but also the decisions made by policy makers in government and business to ensure that they have the long-term interests of their citizens and the planet in mind.” Another aspect is the integration of local communities, local cultures, and knowledge that can ensure a WSA is implemented successfully and that therefore also “encourage learning beyond the classroom, across groups and ages, creating spaces for diversity that supports the learning process” (Kemper, 2021, p. 7). Integrating local and cultural communities may also help learners understand their local environment and relate their education to it (Kemper, 2021). Integrating cultural and local knowledge or engaging with indigenous communities, for instance, benefits not only local learners but also all who relate to the local environment and can therefore become a “catalyst for action” (Hargis et al., 2021, p.12; cf. Restoule & Chaw-win-is, 2017). Sherp’s model of school improvement may be of great benefit, enabling schools to contextualize by providing the flexibility to incorporate current and local concerns and to work toward sustainable learning and actions.

The abovementioned call for greater contextualization could also contribute to this. The idea of contextualizing can also be used to understand the learning needs of individual learners, who are part of the school community. When considering inclusion-oriented ESD at the level of school structures, the Index for Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2019) offers a helpful way to incorporate inclusion within ESD practices and WSAs. The Index for Inclusion, a tool for the development of inclusive schools, has been used to support the review and development of schools and as a resource for promoting a systemic approach to inclusive schools; its tools (questions and indicators) also integrate aspects of sustainability. The Index for Inclusion places three dimensions at the center of school development, namely, “creating inclusive cultures,” “establishing inclusive structures,” and “developing inclusive practices” (see Table 8.1): “Cultures reflect relationships and deeply held values and beliefs. Changing cultures is essential for sustainable development” (Booth & Ainscow, 2019, p. 23).

Table 8.1 Dimensions of school development (Booth & Ainscow, 2019, Index for Inclusion)
Full size table

The questions and indicators of the three dimensions of inclusive school development help schools contextualize their ESD practices, using a WSA to introduce inclusion-oriented ESD and to empower and encourage all learners, regardless of their individual abilities, to take action to move their school community toward sustainability. The principles of inclusive pedagogy can help extend ESD practices and ensure that teaching and learning methods meet the individual needs of all learners as well as taking the learners’ (cultural) context into account; they can also empower learners to engage with sustainability issues. The following excerpt of quality criteria as suggested by Reich (2014) can assist with the introduction of principles of inclusive pedagogy (Table 8.2).

Table 8.2 Approximate translation [authors’ own] of an excerpt from quality criteria for inclusive pedagogy by Reich (2014)
Full size table

A core element of inclusion-oriented ESD in the context of a WSA is establishing an inclusive culture (Index for Inclusion by Booth & Ainscow, 2019) and a culture of sustainability (Mathie & Wals, 2022) in schools. Hence, aspects of an inclusion-oriented WSA should be viewed and questioned through the lenses of both ESD and inclusive education, taking into account all areas and aspects of school—for instance, school buildings, school environment, classroom settings, management, all stakeholders (learners, educators, parents, social workers, and principles), and, of course, the teaching and learning culture. However, the question remains as to how WSAs take account of inclusive education.

4 Research Design

The research takes an exploratory approach to finding answers to the following questions: how can WSAs contribute to the implementation of inclusion-oriented ESD? What are the key success factors and what are the greatest challenges? To identify answers, leading question-based expert interviews were conducted based on Gläser and Laudel’s interview guide (2010), gathering data about the experts’ understanding of and expertise in inclusion-oriented ESD in the context of WSAs.

Prior to data collection, the methodological procedure for the expert interviews was approved by the University of Vechta Ethics Committee. The experts were selected according to the following criteria: published research in the field of inclusion-oriented ESD and/or WSAs; teaching experiences in formal education in the field of inclusion-oriented ESD and/or WSAs; and institutional engagement, for instance in teacher training institutions or education ministries, in the field of inclusion-oriented ESD and/or WSAs. We approached 13 experts from three groups via email. First, the results of a scoping literature review on inclusive ESD (Rončević & Rieckmann, 2024) enabled us to identify experts who had already published on the broader notion of inclusion-oriented ESD and/or WSAs. Second, we approached the international multi-stakeholder ESD Expert Net, which has members from India, Germany, Mexico, and South Africa (one author of this chapter has been a member of the ESD Expert Net since 2012). Some network members’ work takes a critical view of ESD and its more inclusive approaches, for example, in the context of post-colonialism or indigenous knowledge. This targeted enquiry also led to the recommendation of another expert, whom we were able to include in the group of interviewees. Third, drawing on the authors’ experiences in the field of inclusion-oriented ESD in Germany, we approached experts on the basis of the criteria described above. Ultimately, 11 experts agreed to participate in the interviews. Of the eleven (seven women, four men), five came from the academic sector (although at least two of these also undertook work for teacher training institutions or education ministries). Two experts worked in an education ministry, a further three in schools (one school principal and two teachers (with one of the teachers also working at an education ministry)), and one in a governmental teacher training institute. The experts came from Germany, India, Mexico, and South Africa; more than 50% of the interviewees were based in Germany. The reason for the overrepresentation of Germany was that the authors of this chapter also conduct most of their research/work on inclusion-oriented ESD in Germany. Additionally, there has been a particularly lively exchange on inclusive ESD in Germany in recent years, which has been presented in at least two special issues on inclusion and ESD in peer-reviewed journals (Journal for International Educational Research and Development Education (2020) and Journal Disability and International Development (2015)). The expert interviews were conducted in June and July 2022 and recorded using the Zoom video-call program. The interview length varied from 25 to 55 min. A guide was used to conduct the interviews. The Mytrint program was used for transcription. For the purposes of qualitative content analysis, deductive categories were created, using the questions from the guide. The two deductive created categories were understanding of inclusion-oriented ESD and of a WSA, and the challenges and opportunities of a WSA for inclusion-oriented ESD. Next, inductive categories were formulated in seven phases following the approach of Kuckartz and Rädiker (2022):

  1. 1.

    Establishing the assessment category

  2. 2.

    Identifying and coding text passages relevant to the assessment category

  3. 3.

    Assembling coded segments from the assessment category on a case-by-case basis

  4. 4.

    Formulating expressions of the assessment category and assigning reference points, changing the definition and number of expressions if necessary

  5. 5.

    Evaluating and coding all material

  6. 6.

    Simple category-based evaluation

  7. 7.

    Complex qualitative and quantitative correlation analyses, and visualizations

The transcripts were coded by inductive subcategory (phases 2–4). Coding was undertaken by one of the authors and categorizations discussed and adjusted by both authors (phases 5–7). MAXQDA software was used for the purposes of coding.

5 Results

The 11 experts (hereafter referred to as E1, E2, E3, … E11) described their understanding of inclusion-oriented ESD and how it should be implemented in schools and explained how WSAs contribute to the delivery of inclusion-oriented ESD. Both the challenges and the opportunities of implementing inclusion-oriented ESD in the context of a WSA were discussed.

The authors identified three different subcategories (Table 8.3), which shed more light on the interviewees’ understanding of inclusion-oriented ESD. Building on this understanding, the experts were asked about the key success factors and the greatest challenges at a structural level. Six categories were identified on the basis of their answers.

Table 8.3 Categories of inclusion-oriented ESD
Full size table

5.1 Understanding of Inclusion-Oriented ESD in Schools

5.1.1 All Means All

ESD has been described as an inherently inclusive approach and is very close to inclusion and inclusive education (E2, E5, E6, E7, and E11). And if we take Sustainable Development Goal 4.7 seriously, then “we don’t really need to talk about inclusive ESD, because this type of education simply states that all learners should be taken along” (E2). The same interviewee also mentioned that it was important to emphasize again and again that ESD is an inclusive approach (E2). Another interviewee stated that inclusion-oriented ESD was composed of two major fields: inclusion and sustainability, and that education was the binding link (E8). Inclusion-oriented ESD actually means considering the special needs of every child and every adolescent (E8) and trying to get all learners on board, meeting every learner where they are and enabling everyone to participate and to shape a sustainable and fair future (E2).

5.1.2 Participation

Participation in the context of inclusion-oriented ESD was also highlighted by the interviewees. One interviewee (E7) pointed out that ESD places a great deal of emphasis on the possibility of making one’s own decisions and taking action on one’s own behalf, while another interviewee (E3) mentioned that the inclusive aspects tend to emphasize the idea of working together and the concept of “all means all,” regardless of the presence of different socioeconomic backgrounds and differently abled learners in the same school (E5). This means that all lessons, and school life in general, must be designed accordingly (E1), and support in the development of materials and strategies to promote inclusiveness should be provided in order to engage all and ensure they can participate (E4).

5.1.3 Contextualizing

To achieve inclusion-oriented ESD, the most important strands that pedagogic practices must consider are the different contexts of the learners themselves and also the different contexts of education systems (E3), such as “the locality of the school, the life experience of the students, and the region’s cultural heritage and indigenous knowledge” (E10). On the one hand, there is the curriculum, and on the other, diverse learners and their individual (life) experiences and contexts. To build bridges and connect the curriculum to learners’ lives, “[…] we use our methods and materials, and our understanding of our students’ different contexts and spaces, and we’ve got this curriculum that we need to use to engage them, to prepare them to become these capable individuals, capable, forward-thinking, capable of taking forward our world view, of taking forward our world-orientated learning and curricula […]” (E3).

5.2 Success Factors and Challenges for Inclusion-Oriented ESD

According to the interviewees, there are certain aspects of the WSA that stand out as the most important. These include questions relating to resources, the education system as a whole, participation and self-efficacy, and teacher training programs. These are also the factors that present the greatest challenges for mainstreaming inclusion-oriented ESD in schools.

5.2.1 Resources

Teaching and learning materials and workload were identified as resources and highlighted as factors for success and, reflecting on the current status quo, as great challenges for mainstreaming inclusion-oriented ESD in schools.

Interviewees pointed out that it was very important to provide adequate teaching and learning materials, first to support the day-to-day practice of educators implementing inclusion-oriented ESD. Second, teaching and learning materials need to be designed in such a way as to relate to students’ lifeworlds (life experiences), take into account the teachers’ and students’ learning requirements, and develop students’ strengths and competences (E2). One interviewee (E5) explained that in her country, “the system is more, you know, textbook-oriented. And so, it’s extremely important within the [local] ecosystem to get stuff into the textbooks. And I think this is where the role played by textbook writers and teacher trainers is really important” (E5). So, inclusion-oriented ESD teaching and learning materials are important because they facilitate exploration beyond what is contained within the syllabus (E10). Accessibility and language learning material is another important aspect, for instance, for indigenous learners and non-native speakers. It would be of great benefit if content could also be made available in their (indigenous) languages. Furthermore, inclusion-oriented ESD materials must of course also reflect the special needs of learners, for example, difficulties with cognition, hearing, vision, or mental health (E1). This interviewee made more detailed suggestions, highlighting that for certain learners, if materials include texts, they should be shorter or simplified, or supported with audio tracks, and also be much more action-oriented and descriptive. That would be of great benefit both to educators and to learners. These kinds of materials would enable teachers who are not very familiar with inclusion-oriented ESD to approach the subject matter differently and provide them with support so that they do not have to start from scratch. Inevitably, however, the inclusion-oriented ESD approach would of course require them to adapt materials to their specific learning groups (E1).

5.2.2 Workload

Teachers’ ability to take inclusion-oriented ESD forward is often constrained. Giving them more time and greater flexibility would support their activities in this area. One interviewee (E6) reported that as a special education teacher, they only had a few working hours at their disposal to devote to individual learners with special needs. Learners with specific special needs hence do not receive full-time support in inclusive learning environments. Teacher shortages and the workload of individual teachers are even resulting in reductions in the support being made available to individual students with special needs. One interviewee indicated that they did not see any chance at all of promoting ESD in the current school environment (E6) due to the intense and heavy workload.

5.2.3 Education System

There are many options for implementing inclusion-oriented ESD at the organizational level in schools, be it through procurement, collaborations with extracurricular partners, the involvement of parents, and so on (E2). And still, the overall framework of the education system is simply still too rigid (E7), meaning that the legal requirements on which work in schools is based, such as decrees, are simply still too narrow and therefore only permit creative solutions within a narrow framework (E7). There is a need for policy to enable such creativity “because without that, nothing moves” (E5). The education system puts up barriers to inclusive educational approaches, and of course also to inclusion-oriented ESD, for example, performance assessments and grading (E6, E7, and E8). One interviewee stated that the system was somehow totally out of step with what would be required of them in the future. Another interviewee criticized standardized performance evaluations and the focus on certain subjects and skills, namely, language, communication, and mathematics (E9).

5.2.4 Education and Training: Teaching Competences

Teachers play a major role in taking inclusion-oriented ESD forward. Adequate teacher training is therefore key to the promotion of inclusion-oriented ESD, and this was highlighted by most of the interviewees (E2, E3, E5, E6, E7, E8, and E9).

One interviewee stated that this also meant having teachers who were appropriately trained to ensure that the (special) needs of all students were addressed as fairly as possible. This means that in general it is not sufficient to differentiate the training of teachers by types of school (high schools, special needs schools, or others) or by specific impairments and special needs. All teachers must have at least a basic understanding of disadvantage and disability across the board and of gifted learners (E8). In fact, an important focus of teacher education may simply be raising teacher awareness (E2). On the other hand, one interviewee highlighted that when teachers are aware of the contexts in which individual learners live, and in which schools are located, it is easier for this awareness to permeate the school. When teachers are unaware of these aspects, there are more challenges. There is an increasingly clear need for more focus on teacher competences relating to inclusion-oriented ESD.

5.2.5 Whole School Approach as a Driver

The whole school has to get on board (E4) with inclusion-oriented ESD, and a lot of different levels need to be considered (E2). Interviewees pointed out that a WSA could provide good guidelines and could also be reflected in everyday school life, across all subjects, and also in lesson design. A WSA can help make ESD inclusive and feasible for all (E2 and E4), while all areas of school must be looked at/into and reflected upon through the lenses of sustainability and inclusion; inclusion-oriented ESD has to be seen through. It’s not just an add-on (E4).

5.2.6 Participation and Self-Efficacy

To achieve real social transformation, more people are needed than the few who engage in climate activism, for example. A broad social consensus is required, and achieving that requires many more people from very different backgrounds. In order to identify how to reach all learners and enable them to engage in society, we need to address many more people than we have so far (E2). One interviewee stated that ESD placed much more emphasis on the potential to make decisions and to take action on one’s own behalf. In the past, this has not really been made clear in discussions about inclusive education (E7). Participation plays a huge role both for ESD and for inclusion (E11). Another interviewee (E4) raised questions that may help to ensure learner participations, such as, for whom is ESD accessible? So, to whom are activities offered, who is involved, to whom are activities adapted, and who is allowed to participate? Inclusion-oriented ESD ensures everyone is allowed to participate so that all learners can experience self-effectiveness and are able to contribute to change in the environment and for fellow human beings (E4 and E6). First and foremost, learning should reflect learners’ individual wishes and needs. This would encourage teachers to make lessons more experimental, with more intense learning but maybe with fewer subjects over a longer period (E8).

5.2.7 Attitude

Besides the complex and difficult conditions that may hinder the implementation of inclusion-oriented ESD in schools, the fundamental attitude of teachers toward inclusion-oriented ESD is of great importance: “if someone is motivated, I mean, everything falls into place” (E11). One interviewee stated that if the educators have an open attitude and are willing to implement and develop inclusion-oriented ESD, then it might be possible to overcome problems relating to teacher shortages in schools (E6).

5.3 WSA for Inclusion-Oriented ESD

A school based on inclusion-oriented ESD would look quite different from what schools often look like (E11). Three different subcategories (Table 8.4) were identified from the interviews to address the questions of how WSAs can help embed inclusion-oriented ESD and whether any aspects of WSAs would need to be expanded to take account of inclusion-oriented ESD. “[…] the whole school approach is a far more inclusive arena. But if you look at the whole school literature, it doesn’t extend to include the wider social politics of sustainability and social justice […]” (E10).

Table 8.4 WSA categories regarding inclusion-oriented ESD
Full size table

5.3.1 Whole School in Community Approach

“They just don’t pay enough attention to the socio-cultural dimension” (E10).

To involve all learners, “we need to consider the different contexts within our educational system” (E3). There is a need for teaching to balance science (scientific knowledge) and heritage (heritage knowledge) and to bring it into learning processes. This would engage education, which is culturally situated, which comes from a context, in that actual context (E9 and E10). Interviewees (E3, E9, and E10) thought that bringing in cultural knowledge would enable learners to relate much better to content, making it relevant to their life and improving their engagement with whole school processes aiming to achieve greater sustainability. Including cultural knowledge in learning processes allows school cultures to promote respect for all learners through the WSA. The WSA would monitor inclusion and encourage social justice because “you can’t have inclusion without respect.”

At the same time, schools can have an impact on the community, acting as “a mentor, a hub for a nearby community maybe” (E5). On the other hand, one interviewee (E2) described the boundaries of WSAs as being where the schools’ action ends. This can be due to education systems, which one interviewee (E7) described as rather rigid and to a certain extent slow-moving. Education systems and their policies are often not compatible with the localities in which schools are situated and do not always facilitate cooperation between schools and communities.

5.3.2 Structural Level

Interviewees (E1, E4, E5, and E6) described aspects that would need to be incorporated into WSAs at a structural level to enable inclusion-oriented ESD to be mainstreamed. For inclusion-oriented ESD, fundamental systemic changes are also needed in terms of governance. The core factors mentioned by interviewees were an established structure of support groups and a structure for capacity building. Support groups should include teachers with expertise in a wide range of special learning needs and teacher training.

5.3.3 Participation and Self-Efficacy

One interviewee (E8) described the WSA and its promotion in general as very difficult because schools operate within a very hierarchical, top-down system. This impedes the democratization of school activities from the ground up and thus compromises true participatory processes. At the same time, participation and self-efficacy—not only of learners but also of educators—were described as important aspects for—and promoted by—inclusion-oriented ESD within a WSA (E4, E5, and E8).

To establish participation as a core method in schools, one would first need to map stakeholders to determine their influence and the various levels of influence for getting the WSA going. Stakeholder mapping should include groups within the school and different external stakeholders, such as from the informal education sector (E9).

6 Discussion and Conclusion

This chapter explored the issues of how WSAs can contribute to the implementation of ESD from the perspective of inclusive education and what the key success factors and greatest challenges are. One important finding is that an overall school culture needs to be developed that ensures all stakeholders of a school community are involved so that all fields of activity contribute to the establishment of the values of inclusion and sustainability. A WSA is thus an excellent starting point for mainstreaming ESD inclusively, especially when it considers the participation from learners and their family and the wider community. Nevertheless, some aspects of inclusive education have been identified that are not yet effectively covered by this approach in the context of sustainability discourse. Although diversity and inclusion are often taken into consideration in ESD discourses, the WSA and how it is promoted in ESD literature does not pay sufficient attention to inclusive pedagogy in ESD practices or to school structures. Practices and structures in school development are also highlighted in the Index for Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2019) and are one of the three vectors for developing inclusivity within a school: inclusive cultures, inclusive practices, and inclusive structures. This study shows that a WSA aiming to achieve ESD for all learners (and thus not only for the particularly motivated or sustainability-affine learners, the already particularly competent learners, or those learners with particularly pronounced cognitive abilities, as is often the case in ESD practice to date) needs to give particular attention to inclusion and inclusive pedagogy in teaching and learning practices, as well as to structure. From the present study, a key to the ability of a WSA to promote inclusion-oriented culture in schools is teachers’ attitudes toward inclusive values and the sustainability of school processes. In addition to the teachers’ attitudes, the need for more attention to the competences of teachers with regard to inclusion-oriented ESD and the WSA itself becomes clear (cf. Vare et al., 2022). Teachers must be enabled not only to take into account the approaches of an inclusion-oriented ESD in their own lesson planning but also to consider other areas of school in the sense of a WSA at the same time so that ESD can develop to its full potential. This requires specific further teacher training.

This study sheds light on key features of WSAs when they include thoroughgoing community awareness. Interviewees emphasized the importance of schools’ practices considering individual learners, including their culture, language, beliefs, and environments. Teaching and learning practices need to connect with all learners’ backgrounds to make learning relevant for them and for the community. The study endorses the claims of Wals and Benavot (2017) and Kemper (2021) that schools must be embedded much more deeply in their communities and vice versa. To achieve this, we propose that WSAs should see learning processes, including content, as being part of both the community and learners’ environments.

Another finding of this study is that inclusion-oriented ESD repeatedly emphasizes the participation of all learners and that this promotes empowerment and self-reliance. The participation of other stakeholders within the whole school in community approach was also touched upon several times during the interviews. Further practice-based research is required to specify how participation of this nature can work when a WSA is paired up with inclusion-oriented ESD, and to reflect on classroom management and teaching and learning methods. A more differentiated examination of the aspect of participation would also appear necessary regarding inclusion-oriented ESD.

Interviewees emphasized that, in their understanding, ESD is by its very nature an inclusive approach that takes diversity into account. However, they also pointed out that it remains necessary to emphasize the inclusive aspect, since accessibility is not a matter of course in ESD practices. For this reason, aspects of inclusive pedagogy need to be added when the whole school in community approach is being applied to ESD. These may include the provision of support groups, and adaptable and flexible materials with easier-to-understand language, among other things. In addition, it will be important to strengthen inclusive school development processes to ensure accessibility across all levels in the school system and, furthermore, that inclusion becomes part of the ethos of a school.

Some of those interviewed pointed out that education systems often resist key aspects of inclusive education. This can be seen, for example, in the case of different types of schools in some regions, including special needs schools, grammar schools, and schools focusing on pupil performance and competence. As one expert stated, the impact of a WSA is limited when it comes to schools’ practice in the real world. It remains to be seen what the specific limitations of the WSA approach are, especially regarding inclusive pedagogy. It will be necessary to identify what structures are most effective at enabling change. Questions include the extent to which the WSA is limited from the outset by discrepancies between education systems, policies, and governance, on the one hand, and school practices, on the other. There is a need for further research to evaluate education systems, focusing on how much exclusion they are reproducing, to ensure inclusion-oriented ESD is accessible to everyone involved with schools.

This study covers insights from only a small sample of experts in the field of inclusion-oriented ESD and WSA and can at most serve as a stimulus for future research and for schools’ development practices. Even though the experts interviewed came from different regions of the world and brought perspectives from a wide range of professions—as teachers, researchers, or with experience of work within the ministry of education or teacher training institutions—the authors of this chapter are aware of the limitations arising from the small number of interviews undertaken. It is to be expected that there are many more experts from the fields of ESD and inclusive education around the globe who would have further specific suggestions for the truly inclusive implementation of WSAs in this context. However, at present we do not anticipate that such other experts would raise serious objections to the views expressed on WSAs by those interviewed for this study. A further limitation may be that experts from other educational contexts, such as environmental education, transformative education, peace education, or global citizenship education, would be able to contribute further aspects to a broader discussion on WSAs and inclusion-oriented ESD.