A Phronesian Strategy to the Education for Sustainable Development in Swedish School Curricula

BACKGROUND

The concept of sustainable development may be profound and frequently used in texts and a range of different documents belonging to various societal arenas, for example, in educational contexts or in international agreements, but it seems that the connotations of the concept vary in relation to the different domains where it is used. In the autumn of 2011 new school reforms were implemented in Sweden: one for compulsory school (Skolverket 2011) and one for upper-secondary school (Curriculum for the upper secondary school 2013). Not least in the new syllabuses of the subjects of social sciences—Geography, History, Religious Education and Civics—the concept of sustainable development is used as one of several foundational concepts, prescribed to anchor an education which seems to be interpretable in various terms.

When it comes to the new Swedish curriculum, it is, according to our interpretation, even here, within this specific context, possible to find a variation of interpretations existing side by side. The main interest in this article is not to criticize such an interpretative multitude as being, perhaps, unreasonable or even incoherent. There may very well exist pedagogical or philosophical reasons for arguing in that direction (Wals 2010). But our present aim is to find out and identify possible ways of conceiving how the concept of sustainable development in educational contexts may be developed in relation to perspectives bringing forth the relation between knowledge about the meaning of sustainable development and knowledge for sustainable development (Wals 2002).

Put in another way, our main interest is to investigate if and how the distinction between education about sustainable development, with a focus upon the highlighting of informational facts and relevant circumstances, leaving possible consequential decisions to the participating pupils; and education for sustainable development, where the aim is to, more or less explicitly, foster the pupils to a morally and socially motivated action competence. Perhaps, even, action practice may be used to characterize the curricular wordings regarding sustainable development in the new syllabuses. Our task is not to pay attention to the syllabuses as document constructs or products (Silverman 2010). On the contrary, with brief references to the syllabuses of Geography, History, Religious Education and Civics, we focus on the very concept, that of sustainable development and its interpretability. Our inquiry concerns the possible interpretations of the concept as well as the very doings of the concept in educational practice.

We will, in our analysis, choose Bernard Williams’s famous distinction between thin and thick concepts as a starting point, then continue by applying it to the concept of sustainable development and discuss theoretical and practical consequences in educational contexts with reference to the wordings of the syllabuses highlighted in the text. With this analysis, a phronesian strategy is suggested, which could be used to further develop or for the moment clarify the intended outcomes of the curriculum as far as sustainable development is concerned. Our intention is to point to the concept’s call for interpretation and a possible understanding of what it might be and what it could be doing in the syllabuses. The multitude of possible connotations, which is characteristic of a thick concept, together with its action-guidingness, make sustainable development open to interpretation and consequently a moral issue fostering some sort of practical knowledge and readiness to act. Given the thick concept of sustainable development, we would like to explore its implications for teaching and learning. The notion of phronesis is suggested as a pedagogical strategy to interpret and approach sustainable development in education.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A THIN OR THICK CONCEPT

By way of analysis Bernard Williams’s (Kotzee 2011) notion of thick and thin concepts will be applied to the concepts of sustainable development and knowledge respectively. The distinction between thick and thin is qualified by the fact that the thin concepts are purely descriptive or purely evaluative, whereas the thick are both descriptive and evaluative. Let us look at an example. The word thought (noun) is a thin concept, in that it conveys the lexical meaning only: ‘something that is thought as an individual act or product of thinking’ (Britannica Academic Edition). By contrast doctrine is a thick concept, which in addition to its lexical meaning carries evaluative connotations: ‘a principle or position in a system of belief’ (ibid.). In the latter case, the connotations are of political or religious implications. These connotations suggest that doctrine is not quite so good. A doctrine carries a negative connotation when it comes to reason. Your thoughts are not free and therefore not good. They can be made better. The concept conveys the idea that this particular way of thinking needs some improvement in order to become acceptable. Moreover, a concept such as right is a thin concept which is evaluative only. Without any reference to the world, it is a word that just tells you what the right thing to do is. Williams’s thick–thin model applied to the syllabuses of social sciences will approach a more comprehensive and somewhat altered concept of knowledge in general education, and in education for sustainable development in particular.

What would sustainable development, considered as a thin concept, refer to? First, it is worth noting that the concept considered as such would involve purely descriptive connotations, which would presuppose that it is possible to identify such non-evaluative aspects even though the concept in question is theory-laden, not only in the sense that it involves theoretical claims connecting to interpretations of what, and how, the world is to be understood. The concept of sustainable development is moreover theory-laden in the sense that political and ethical theories of various kinds are presupposed or implied, when the concept is used inside and outside the contexts of education. The concept is, to borrow a characterization used in Jickling, muddled (1994), since there are lots of theoretical sources that can be used when interpreting and implying the concept.

Second, this seems to indicate that the concept of sustainable development has to be interpreted as a thick one, fused as it is around more or less theoretical beliefs and associations. In being so, the concept seems to be expressing a dimension which is shaped by various ideas about how the world is to be understood. Kotzee (2011) labels this dimension world-guidedness: the concept in question is thought to convey something real and something true about the world, which has the capacity for guiding the believers to hold on to certain ideas. Kotzee (2011) separates this dimension from action-guidingness, which rather has a focus directed towards the practical consequences which are thought to follow from the supposed fact that the concept refers to something real, something true. Both dimensions are intimately connected to thick concepts.

Applied to the concept of sustainable development, the distinction in question seems to imply that sustainability refers partly to factual circumstances which could be verified by empirically investigating phenomena which are supposed to correspond to the connotation of the concept; partly to some practical consequences presumably following from such a correspondence. If, for example, the concept is defined as in a report from the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED 1987)—sustainable development is to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs—this means that the concept refers to a connection between present and future needs. At the same time this reference necessitates a practical consequence, namely that the recognition of the connection in question implies that the imbalance between present and future needs has to result in action for restoring the balance—or, put in another way, to engage in sustainable development.

Later on, we are going to use the concept of phronesis to bring the world-guidedness and the action-guidingness together within a holistic interpretation of the concept of sustainable development. This means that two processes have to be considered in relation to the use of the concept: a justification of belief (world-guidedness) and a justification of action (action-guidingness). On a theoretical level it may be important to keep the two types of justification separate, but in practice they are related to each other and they may not be wholly understood if they are kept apart. This holistic perspective is, as we shall see, founded in a phronesian approach which does not separate the existential dimensions in life between knowledge and ethics from believing and acting. The Aristotelian idea that the good life is a life which is led in accordance with man’s theoretical and practical capacities, that is to say, expressing a practical wisdom, could be used to approach the thick dimensions of the concept of sustainable development.

At the same time we have to remind ourselves that it seems somewhat strange to speak of this concept as thick without recognizing that both types of justification, the one related to belief and the one related to action, presuppose that at least some thin sense could be given to it. That is to say, if it is not possible to identify a descriptive sense of sustainability, however limited it may be, it seems challenging, to say the least, to get along with discussing or analyzing which of various competing claims for justification of belief and of action respectively, could be deemed the reasonable and criteriologically satisfying.

THE SYLLABUSES FOR SOCIAL SCIENCES IN THE NEW CURRICULUM

Social science deals with major, global issues as well as private issues for the individual, which have a large impact on how students develop to become active, responsible citizens in an including and sustainable society (Liljefors Persson 2013). In this article, we are going to concentrate our inquiry to the four syllabuses for the social sciences in the new Swedish curriculum for compulsory schooling. The reason is partly that the mandate of compulsory schooling is clearly formulated with reference to both a knowledge development and a value-oriented or value-based fostering with special regard do specific democratic values (Skolverket 2011: 7). Partly, the reason for this focus is also that the four syllabuses of the social sciences lie close to each other when it comes to subject content, at the same time as they highlight the social dimensions of the concept of sustainable development. Since these dimensions form one of several areas connected to the concept, it seems interesting to look closely at how the wordings of the four syllabuses relate to each other. If one finds divergent formulations of the concept here, this is in itself an interesting fact. It would, then, also be exciting to go further, relating this disparity to the interpretation of other relevant dimensions.

The pluralistic use of the concept raises problems which may be generalized with reference to the concepts of action competence and informative or factual knowledge. The pluralistic use of the concept relates both to the definition of the concept and to the action required by it. Which role is the concept of sustainable development intended to play in educational contexts? Are teachers thought to inspire pupils to reflect upon environmental problems, analyzing causes and strategies to handle these problems in a constructive way, anchoring a knowledge base about sustainable development, or are they also required to encourage young people to act, to practice their knowledge in relevant ways, to develop knowledge for sustainable development? In the previous Swedish curricula the intention of the syllabuses have been to prepare young people for full-fledged citizenship, in so much that the students will have the knowledge and tools in adult life to develop a readiness and willingness to live a life in accordance with sustainable development. However, what the inquiry is all about in the present text is whether the Swedish national curriculum of 2011, more or less suggests or indeed demands an action-oriented knowledge development. Liljefors Persson has compared the national curriculum of 2011 with the one of 1994 for the social sciences in Swedish compulsory schooling. A most striking feature in the recent curriculum is the notion of actingness. The students are required to be doubly active or acting actively [!] (Liljefors Persson 2013: 129, 139, 141).

Further, it may be noted that the concept of knowledge in the sustainable development paradigm is complicated. One strand of interpretation defines knowledge as legitimate justified belief. The Standard Analysis of knowledge is that S knows p if and only if,

p is true

With its genesis in ancient Greek philosophy, the Standard Analysis of knowledge was determined during the Enlightment with the appearance of empiricism as the sign of evidence in science (Gerson 2009). There have been several other and similar attempts to provide sufficient conditions for what it means to know something. However, Edmund Gettier challenged it in 1966 (Gettier 2012) by claiming that the truth condition in the Standard Analysis is not sufficient. Hirst defined disciplines as distinct forms of knowledge with their characteristic propositions and truth claims (Loeber 2007). The knowledge base in different disciplines presumably varies, and when complex issues such as sustainable development are addressed, transdisciplinary approaches are made. The approach goes beyond the epistemology and methodology of the discipline (Nicolescu 2002).

The complexity of the concept of knowledge in the sustainable development paradigm is doubly thick, as knowledge too is a thick concept. The justification of knowledge applied within various disciplines may vary, but knowledge as a thin concept will basically rely on an analytical and decontextualized justification of belief, similar to the Standard Analysis. One might argue that sustainable development is world-guided in some respect in education. In the four syllabuses at focus in this article, world-guidedness of sustainable development is highlighted within each field of interest. The national curriculum states that sustainability should be taught and presumably teachers act on sustainable development by teaching about it. The problem for school, however, is what we should teach? As Wals and Jickling argue: ‘Both the knowledge base and the value base of sustainability are variable, unstable and questionable’ (Wals 2002: 222).

A number of issues regarding the education for sustainable development need to be recognized. What is to be made of conflicting values and attitudes towards sustainability in society and among teachers? What drivers are there behind sustainable development in the curriculum? Is it the notion of the common good? Altruism? Is it society’s way of fostering a new generation to be environment friendly or are we leaving the initiative to the pupils and let them, through critical judgement, take a stance on the sustainability issue?

In the interpretative inquiry, it is unavoidable that the concept of phronesis as a foundation for highlighting the concept of sustainable development in relation to both theoretical and practical dimensions should be introduced and analyzed. Whatever results the inquiry will lead to, phronesian strategies will be relevant to consider in relation to both theoretical and practical matters. If the syllabuses are interpreted to prescribe either an education about or an education for sustainable development, it will be of great interest to try to elaborate how to apply the concept of phronesis and how to develop educational strategies in relation to this concept.

In previous Swedish curricula there has been a discussion of civic education, whether it be normative and political or objective, leaving it to the pupil to decide what to do with the acquired knowledge. In the cases where the curriculum has been normative, it has been a question of forming new pupils in accordance with the existing society. Even when the aim has been to provide a more liberal education, the focus has been on the transference of knowledge. The knowledge is taken for granted, whereas in this article we are inquiring into the concept of knowledge and by close-reading the curriculum will explore the varieties of knowledge that appear in the documents. What are the learning outcomes for the pupils and what are teachers supposed to teach in the context of sustainability?

THE WORDINGS OF THE SYLLABUSES

The syllabus of Geography starts with the statement that:

The conditions for life on Earth are unique, changeable and vulnerable. It is thus the responsibility of all people to use the Earth’s resources to support sustainable development. Interaction between people and their surroundings has given rise to many different living environments. Geography gives us knowledge of these environments, and can contribute to an understanding of people’s living conditions. (Skolverket 2011: 150)

As can be seen, the concept of responsibility is immediately introduced with reference to a perhaps universally referring obligation of all people to act in accordance with sustainable development. How is this moral obligation related to knowledge about relevant facts, relevant circumstances, relevant arguments canalizing the need for a reformed way of organizing societal and individual resources, with regard to demands thought to be anchorable in predictions concerning future developments, where various threats seem to be identifiable in relation to the ways we are now living our lives, organizing our societies?

One of the abilities that Geography education, according to the syllabus, is going to give pupils is the opportunity to develop a capacity to:

assess solutions to different environmental and development issues based on considerations concerning ethics and sustainable development. (Lgr11: 151)

Apparently, the prescription here seems to initiate studies which are directed to considerations related to ethics and sustainable development, which in turn seems to imply that some kind of analysis is thought to be performed, the results of which are unknown to the syllabuses’ intentions. The ethical dimension is profound and explicit—but it states nothing regarding specific moral claims concerning how to act in relation to the concept of sustainable development.

In the core contents, which have to be the object of teaching, it is, for year 4–6, stated:

Choices and priorities in everyday life can impact the environment and contribute to sustainable development.

have to be highlighted in the teaching (ibid.: 153).

ways in which vulnerable places can be identified, and how individuals, groups and society can reduce risk (ibid.: 154).

The impression is, according to our interpretation, that the syllabus for Geography clearly indicates that education focusing upon sustainable development is not only thought to be an education about, but also for, this theme. The pupils are not exclusively going to analyze and discuss the concept of sustainable development: the intention is also that they explore strategies for making theory into practice, to develop an action competence more or less ready for transforming reflection into action.

What about the wordings in the other three syllabuses mentioned?

Well, in the subject of Religion it is possible to identify some affinities regarding what is said about sustainable development as a part of the core contents for year 7–9:

Ethical concepts which can be linked to questions concerning sustainable development, human rights and democratic values, such as freedom and responsibility. (ibid.: 180)

Two differences may, however, be noted. First, the wordings in the syllabus of the subject of Religion do not explicitly prescribe any demands with reference to an action competence, ready to be put into practice. Rather they may be interpreted as pointing to an ethical relevance regarding questions falling under the theme of sustainable development. Second, the focus in the latter syllabus is, perhaps naturally, directed towards social societal dimensions, rather than environmental perspectives and details. Of course, there are all possibilities to involve such themes in the ethical projects which may be actualized within education in the subject of Religion, but they seem not to be given priority.

On the other hand, if one goes back in the syllabus and reads what is said under what is stated as the aim of the subject of Religion, one will find a final sentence in this paragraph where it is prescribed that the teaching of the subject ‘should also contribute to pupils developing their capacity to act responsibly in relation to themselves and their surroundings’ (ibid.: 176). Perhaps a reasonable interpretation would allow space for partly a principle dimension where sustainable development thought to be connected to ethical reflection and analysis, and partly a practical dimension where a need to contribute to young people’s ability to act in ethical matters, for example, when it comes to questions touching upon taking care of and protecting environmental surroundings, is to be preferred. And in that case, this syllabus seems to have many affinities with that of Geography regarding the wordings about sustainable development.

Looking to the syllabus of the subject of History, one will find pretty non-specified formulations which could include questions and perspectives related to sustainable development, not the least in those parts of the core contents where transformations between various historical contexts and ideals are in focus. When, for example, for year 7–9 it is stated:

How history can be used to understand how the age in which people live affects their conditions and values. (ibid.: 168)

This is, of course, a formulation which may very well serve as a fundamental base for studying various aspects connected to the analysis of sustainable development. On the other hand, nothing is indicated when it comes to the question about how to act practically. It seems that there are more strategies to go for when it comes to highlighting what sustainable development may mean in a historical context of education.

Speaking finally about the fourth of the subjects belonging to the social sciences, namely civics, it is, in the syllabus, stated in the introductory text about the aim of the education in the subject that

Through teaching the pupils are given the opportunity to develop an overall view of societal questions and social structures. In such an overall view, the social, economic, environmental, legal, media and political aspects are fundamental. (ibid.: 189)

Studying the wordings listing a range of various core contents, it is significant that questions concerning democracy and human rights, not the least in the perspectives related to children’s and young people’s lives, with reference to, for example, the Convention of the Rights of the Child, play a prominent role. Societal perspectives falling under the heading of the concept of sustainable development are, in fact, structuring much of the contents of the syllabus of the subject of civics. However, this does not mean that the concepts of action and action competence are clearly stated or made visible. Rather a reasonable interpretation seems to be that the focus is directed towards analytical training in relation to fundamental societal concepts and perspectives, approached as theoretical prerequisites for a critical analysis which the pupils, as a result of a personal choice may initiate and develop.

A PHRONESIAN EDUCATIONAL STRATEGY

Judging from the wordings of the syllabuses in social science school subjects, the knowledge that is to be taught by the teachers will give the pupils the opportunity to analyze and assess the world, but as far as action is concerned the pupils are still only in a standby mode. Therefore it can be relevant to bring in Aristotle’s notion of phronesis, practical wisdom, into our analysis. In his Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that people who have phronesis or practical wisdom, as Ross translates it, are those who can judge what is to be done and who, ‘can see what is good for themselves and what is good for men in general’ (Ross 350 BC). ‘Practical wisdom, then, must be a reasoned and true state of capacity to act with regard to human goods … [P]ractical wisdom deal[s] with things that are variable’, which is the case of the social sciences. Indeed, Bent Flyvbjerg has coined the term phronetic social science, which is designed to produce knowledge about how to act and understand in a particular context (Schram 2012). In his tripartite distinction of the concept of knowledge, Aristotle perceived phronesis to be superior to the other two distinctions, which are related to classical theory, especially of the natural sciences, namely episteme and techné. Where episteme and techné are about natural laws and generability, phronesis is contextualized and true in a particular situation.

A phronesian strategy could potentially entail that the pupils will keep a critical attitude to the justification of belief. The critical attitude will in turn provide the justification for doing, the so-called action knowledge. The pupils need to make practical decisions relying on the factual knowledge/content knowledge and competencies they have acquired under the guidance of the notion of the common good. Even in his most recent interpretation of Aristotle’s notion of phronesis, Flyvbjerg points out that the end of practical wisdom is to improve society. From an educational point of view it is a challenge to work with such a questionable concept. Any vision of the good life will be contestable (Wals 2002). From an educational point of view, a major concern will be what content knowledge should be given to, or acquired by the pupils. Sustainability as a thick concept will comprise contestant claims of knowledge. The very deliberation of the phronesian strategy will require action of the pupils and will be sensitive to the individual, who will identify him- or herself through this process as a voice respectful of and respected by others, with the aim to meet the demands that can be made on the good life in a particular culture, situation or other particular quality.

DISCUSSION

The position of sustainable development in the national curriculum is paramount. It is found in the general guidelines for education, the principles that should permeate all education. In this capacity, perhaps sustainable development does take on its thin shroud; the essence of sustainability is epitomized into a general principle for all education. A principle is what you will refer to in order to justify an action (Pring 2004). Thus, it is possible to interpret this as an implicit call for action, despite the fact that the wordings of the syllabuses do not explicitly correspond to it. Throughout the syllabus passages on the aim of the subjects of Geography, History, Religion and Civics, there is the idea of gift. Of the 13 sentences in the aim of Geography, seven contain the word give, as in teaching should give pupils knowledge or the pupils should be given the opportunity to develop knowledge. Give is used in the active as well as in the passive voice. The teacher gives knowledge to the pupil. At a first glance this might suggest that the pupils are the passive receivers of information, without any active or creative role in the process of developing knowledge. Furthermore, as a few sentences even use give in the passive voice—pupils are to be given—makes it seem even grimmer. On a closer look, however, it is made apparent that what is mainly given is the opportunity to develop knowledge. Presumably, there is a tension here in the syllabus. The traditional notion of education is that society through the institution of schools, via teachers, conveys content knowledge and a fixed set of norms to the pupils. A more modern notion is of course that the pupils take an active part in their learning and development of knowledge. The verbs in the aim (summarized in four or five sentences for each subject) of the syllabuses related to the pupils, mainly suggest activity of an analytical quality. The pupils are to analyze or make analyses (Geography 2(4); Religion 2(5); History 0(4); Civics 2(5)). In three of the four subjects, one of the aims is for the pupils to reflect over ethical issues, including sustainable development. Linguistically, a more active competence or concept of knowledge is not encouraged in the aims of the four syllabuses through the verbs: analyze, explore and analyze, make analyses, assess, reflect over, reason and discuss, use, critically examine, interpret and evaluate. It is of course interesting to see what it says in the syllabuses, but even more intriguing it is to see what the text does for teaching and learning about and through sustainable development; and indeed what it could do.

It seems reasonable to think that some sort of action knowledge or action competence, that the pupils can show in relationship to sustainable development is required. In the Swedish curriculum the syllabuses do not state exactly what the pupils should do. For example, the syllabus of Religion does not tell the pupils what a good life is, but pupils are required to reflect over such ethical issues as an individual. The notion of gift in the curriculum seems to be related to the art or method of teaching rather than a certain content knowledge. Where does that leave the pupils in relation to the moral issues of sustainable development? On the one hand, the pupils need to analyze, explore and critically examine the content knowledge in relation to sustainable development in order to justify his or her beliefs. On the other hand, the pupils need to know what to do, justify his or her actions. In this article, we would like to suggest that not only the justifications for believing or thinking should be part of the syllabus aims and in order to achieve this, but also the actual believing as a prerequisite for doing. We would like to think that a phronesian strategy could be beneficial and the understanding of sustainable development as a thick concept in order to simply keep an open, but critical attitude to the syllabuses, but also more instrumentally in curriculum development and practical teaching.

Sustainable development is indeed introduced as a thick concept in the syllabuses of social science school subjects. In the introduction to Geography it is stated that the conditions for life on Earth are changeable and vulnerable, which can be seen as a world-guided element. In addition, it is stated that it is the responsibility of all people to support sustainable development and thereby act in a way so that the risk of damage is limited. This statement places sustainable development in the field of thick concepts as it is action-guiding. There is a lot of ideology when it comes to sustainable development—but this ideology does not produce a practice—phronesis suggests that you act on your knowledge and you act wisely. Could it be that sustainable development as an ideology or even a principle is a thin concept and that a phronesian strategy will make the concept thicken? Will it make the concept of sustainable development differently clad and thick when applied to the individual school subject, narrated by its syllabus? Through the syllabus of the school subject, sustainable development becomes world-guided and action-guiding. The pupil will learn about the way of the world, the challenges that are out there and with this knowledge, he or she will gain action competence of various degrees. The fact that action knowledge or action competence is implicit in the syllabuses might call for a phronesian strategy to take the pupil from a state of awareness to an aptitude for action.

By letting pupils work with real societal dilemmas, such as environmental issues or the integration of immigrants, they will not only learn how to express their opinions, but will actively practise deliberation and get the opportunity to develop phronesis, understood as practical wisdom. As Aristotle indeed argues, s/he who deliberates well will develop phronesis. A time dimension of knowledge is recognized in phronesis, which deserves some attention. This is a dimension that qualifies knowledge as a thick concept. When do you know that you know, and how do we know that you know? Factual knowledge can be acquired at a particular point in time and thereby world-guidedness is attributed to it. In an educational situation, a student will be able to confirm his or her knowledge by taking part in a test. Phronesian knowledge or practical wisdom, by contrast, suggests a constant, always–already knowledgeable doing. Knowledge is what you strive for, but never achieve, through action, an action-guidingness. You know that you know what to do when you act with deliberation (Nussbaum 2012).

Phronesis, Aristotle states, refers to an ability, or a skill, which continuously has to be exercised, to be cultivated and developed, broadened and deepened (Ross 350 BC). No one is once and for all a master of this skill. Every human being meets during his or her life new situations and new problems which have to be faced and solved. Each such situation can create challenges which, in turn, make a request upon the subject to act thoughtfully, with regard to available knowledge and with care. Here he or she gets an opportunity to cultivate and develop his or her phronetic skills.

Beiner has interpreted phronetic knowledge production as commitment, collective, understanding of the other and reaches out beyond judgement to its impact upon the world. Action is an intrinsic quality of phronesis. If you have the knowledge to act, and for some reason you do not act accordingly, phronesis has not been acquired. Knowing is not sufficient, showing is required (Loeber 2007).

Jickling has called for a conceptual analysis of the concept of sustainability, because he claims that it is muddled. For instance, there seems to be no agreement among researchers what sustainable development and sustainability mean. Applying the thick and thin model on sustainable development might accommodate this lack of definition. Nevertheless, there seems to be a thin element of sustainable development which like good carries an action-guiding notion to any situation, but as we interpret sustainability in the syllabuses as a thick concept it will take on new meaning and definition within the school subject or discipline. It is rather the action-guidingness of the concept of sustainable development that we can all agree upon, but in different contexts and perhaps even within particular disciplines, there will be characteristically good and right solutions. The thickness of the concept is the only thin we are left with. Using sustainable development as a thin concept in educational curricula would suggest that, indeed, knowledge is given. The pupils are there to be given the knowledge they need to preserve the world as it is. This would not be so good since the world is under a lot of pressure from a sustainability perspective. The solutions to the problems are not given or known, because, the solutions belong to the future. There may be massive disagreement regarding the definition of sustainable development, but on an abstract level, there is, of course, a notion of the common good, the inclusion of all people on the planet. Despite the fact that the challenges for sustainable development are presented as a global concern in the syllabuses in terms of the planet’s vulnerability and the responsibility of all people to ‘support sustainable development’ (Skolverket [Swedish National Agency for Education] 2011), we will argue that the syllabuses concerning sustainable development favour an individualistic attitude and approach to problems in our world, which pedagogically could be questionable. It might be historically and morally motivated to introduce not only a more holistic worldview but also a more inclusive strategy for people in coming to grips with global challenges, such as poverty, illiteracy and environmental issues. As we have seen with the concept of action knowledge, the development of knowledge as a community or group process is only implicit in the syllabuses, but considering the scope and importance of the issues related to sustainable development and the potential solutions, whatever they may be, a curriculum developer might have more to offer.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion seems to be that the syllabuses of social sciences are all intended to involve a prescription according to which sustainable development has to be taught within the educational system. The syllabuses of Geography and Religion seem to combine theoretical perspectives with more or less explicit implications of practical and action-oriented educational methods and goals, while the two other syllabuses, those of History and Civics, seem to focus upon theoretical analyses with special references to societal concepts within the contexts of, for example, historical transformations of human conditions and present-day questions concerning democracy and human rights.

Williams’s two features of thick concepts: world-guidedness and action-guidingness, provide the cognitive and the moral justification for believing and doing or acting. The quality of good in a good action is action-guiding only, in so much that it does not tell you anything about the world. It is purely evaluative.

Do the pupils get an understanding of sustainable development in the present syllabuses? In several countries there is not enough of sustainable development in education. Civic education is framed as a new meta-school subject, and grading is being suggested as a measure to make sure that pupils are fostered into a way of thinking and living which will adhere to sustainability. There are, of course, major issues in this field of discussion which we have not been able to develop in the present article. However, a phronesian strategy to the education of sustainable development might be a way forward to meet the needs of society to better understand the human behaviour and human values that will have practical consequences for the quality of a good life, both personally and socially.

Although, sustainable development has been discussed from the perspective of four syllabuses in the Swedish curriculum, the issues raised in this article regarding the education about or for sustainable development, and the consequences of understanding sustainable development as a thin and a thick concept respectively, could be of some relevance to a number of national and international educators. The normativity underlying education for sustainable development is unavoidable as the national curriculum is a political document based on ideology. Nevertheless, applying a phronesian strategy to the education of sustainable development will mean that in addition to a critical awareness of the concept of sustainability, pupils will acquire action competence and action knowledge by actively engaging in moral dilemmas regarding how to make the world sustainable by increasing the welfare of himself or herself as an individual in balance with the welfare of others.