Microsoft Word juntunen väitös docx

Article IV
describes in detail how the phases of ESD in (basic) chemistry occur in relation to the socio-
cultural, science-ecological and future-economical dimensions. Students’ feelings, either 
those of empowerment or disempowerment, are consequences of these phases (Figure 5.). The 
three-phase ESD model is formulated by comparing the educational research on student 
empowerment in environmental education (Paloniemi and Koskinen, 2005) to the examples of 
teaching SSI controversies in chemistry lessons. In terms of opportunities for action, 
Paloniemi and Koskinen (2005) highlight the importance of involvement when promoting 
motivation, societal empowerment, creation of personal experiences, co-operative work and 
capability for action. Phases similar to those presented in Figure 5. can be seen in the 
conceptual framework for socio-critical, problem-oriented science teaching presented by 
Marks and Eilks (2009). The problem analysis and laboratory working stages of their 
framework could be included here in Phases 1 and 2. To conclude an SSI learning session, 
Marks and Eilks (2009) suggest using discussions and meta-reflection. Also, the 
categorisation of STSE perspectives proposed by Pedretti and Nazir (2011) includes similar 
elements to those presented in Figure 5. Their application and design-oriented education is 
similar to the chemistry context of the model presented here. Additionally, Pedretti and Nazir 
(2011) have recognised the historically-oriented and value-centred socio-eco justice 
categories.

---

18
 
Figure 5.
Three-phase presentation of teaching a socio-scientific issue to empower rather than 
disempower students in ESD in chemistry. Phase 1 includes the socio-cultural causes and 
background of an issue. Phase 2 presents the main chemistry aspects of the issue in relation to 
ecology. Phase 3 includes co-operative and value-driven discussions about the opportunities 
for action and sustainable or unsustainable future perspectives, possibly involving all three 
dimensions of sustainable development. 
Presently, the challenge is that chemistry is rarely associated with sustainability issues by the 
students (Tirri et al., 2012). This is due to the fact that teachers seldom consider ethics as part 
of chemistry and rarely teach environmental issues and action possibilities (Kuusisto et al., 
2012; Kärnä, Hakonen & Kuusela, 2012; Lymbouridou, 2011). The application of 
sustainability issues in chemistry lessons is rare in many countries as chemistry teachers lack 
knowledge and pedagogical skills related to novel ESD approaches (Burmeister, Schmidt-
Jacob & Eilks, 2013; Kärnä et al., 2012). More sustainable citizenship requires, for instance, 
chemistry education that enables the students to productively interact in groups around 
intellectual tasks (Hogan, 2002). The relevant teaching methods often involve cross-curricular 
inquiry (Colburn, 2000) and peer collaboration (Keys & Bryan, 2001).
This dissertation tries to answer the challenge by reviewing ESD in chemistry and designing a 
novel teaching approach. Holistic ESD in chemistry can involve ethical considerations, green 
chemistry and simplified LCA. This Section (3.2.) defines the educational background of 
green chemistry, sustainable development and environmental literacy. Socio-scientific issues, 
life-cycle thinking, inquiry based teaching and the argumentation approach as methods of 
ESD pedagogy for cross-curricular, context-based, socio-constructivist chemistry teaching are 
also framed in this Section. Perspectives on the challenges and opportunities posed by these 
concepts on the teacher and student levels are reviewed in Juntunen (2013) and summarised in 
Section 4.4. Based on these notions, a novel approach for chemistry education was developed 
during this dissertation.