Investigating student teachers’ responses to including sustainable development as part of their professional digital competence development

ABSTRACT

This article puts forward the case for the inclusion of sustainability as an element of teachers’ professional digital competence. Following this, the article explores student teachers’ reaction to a course on digital technologies and sustainability. An online survey was used to record the student teachers’ reactions to the course and how they felt its content would influence their future actions. The student teachers had limited prior knowledge of the topic, but almost all acknowledged its importance, particularly in raising their awareness of global inequality. The student teachers reported they would change their purchasing habits, although some acknowledged that it would be difficult. Most believed it would influence their teaching, but perceived curriculum demands and school expectations tempered their expectations of what they believed they could achieve.

KEYWORDS:

• Critical digital citizenship
• pre-service teacher
• educational technology
• sustainability
• education for sustainable development

Introduction

The need to develop professional digital competence within the teaching profession has arguably never been greater. While in the previous three decades, the use of digital technologies in education was seen largely as innovations on the periphery of schools’ practices, driven by enthusiastic pioneers, it is only recently that digital technology has become widely embedded. To use digital technology is therefore no longer seen as an experimental practice on the margins. Instead, it is seen as a necessity, particularly considering the rapid digital transformation of society. Digital technology use in schools is also driven by societal expectations for schools to keep abreast with contemporary digital technology use. Within the literature there are arguments for and against this rapid digital transformation. On one hand, it is seen as an inevitable progression towards an education system that better reflects the contemporary practices within society and the workplace. This perspective is supported by reference to twenty-first-century skills (Van Laar et al., 2017; Voogt et al., 2013) and an optimistic discourse about the transformative effects of digital technologies in education (Selwyn, 2016). On the other hand, concerns have been raised about the educational value of much of the technology that has been integrated into schools, and this has raised questions about what agendas have been served in this change process (Moltó Egea, 2014).

Regardless of the merits of this digital transformation, there is little doubt that teachers need to have the competence to respond to these changes, and a great deal of work has been undertaken in recent years exploring the different aspects of teachers’ digital competence (Ferrari, 2013; McGarr & McDonagh, 2019; Vuorikari et al., 2016). Over the years conceptions of teachers’ digital competence have moved from an exclusive focus on technical competence to a greater appreciation of the pedagogical skills required to integrate it within the classroom (Ala-Mutka, 2011). More recently, what it means to be digitally competent now includes ethical issues, normally captured under the term cyber-ethics (Engen et al., 2018). Within the broad area of cyber-ethics, topics such as well-being, privacy, information security, amongst others, are seen as critical. Digitally competent teachers must not only have an awareness of these ethical issues as practising professionals but are also expected to act as role models for the students who can then replicate their digital practices (Krumsvik, 2014). Hence teachers’ digital competence not only refers to their ability to use digital tools in teaching but also includes an awareness of the ethical issues associated with digital technology use.

Despite this broadening of what constitutes teachers’ professional digital competence to include cyber-ethics, the important issue of sustainability (and recognising issues related to sustainability in digital technology use) has been largely overlooked in this area. Within the literature relating to teachers’ professional digital competence, there is little if any mention of the topic. If understanding ethical issues related to digital technology use is an important aspect of digital competence, then it can be strongly argued that an awareness of the significant human and environmental impact digital technology production has across the globe is also a critical element of what it means to be digitally competent as this consumption of digital technologies raises ethical issues in relation to human exploitation and environmental degradation. Exploring aspects of digital technology production and exposing some of the exploitative practices and environmental impacts of the production, use and disposal of digital devices can raise some challenging questions for teachers, particularly undergraduate student teachers that are immersed in a digital world where digital devices form part of their identity and, by the time they enter university, are likely to have developed particular consumption habits related to digital technology devices. How student teachers respond to the discomforting reality of the production, use and disposal of digital technologies, which is often hidden from their view, merits investigation. With this in mind, this article explores student teachers’ reaction to a course on the topic of digital technologies and sustainability which drew on the topic of radical digital citizenship by Emejulu and McGregor (2019). The learning unit aimed to highlight the oppressive relations that are used to make new technologies possible, particularly the exploitation of natural resources and the treatment of workers, normally in poorer and less developed countries. The research particularly examined:

• What were the student teachers’ reactions to exposure to a course focusing on digital technology production, consumption and sustainability?

• In what way, if any, did the student teachers feel the programme would influence their future actions?

• To what extent, if any, did the student teachers consider it to be part of their responsibilities as future teachers?

As this article deals with two important areas within teacher education, sustainability and digital competence, which up to now have been largely addressed separately, the following sections will briefly outline the importance of these two areas within teacher education. It will firstly explore the dimensions of teachers’ digital competence and, following this, make the case for the inclusion of sustainability within the area of cyber-ethics, a core part of teachers’ professional digital competence.

Teachers’ professional digital competence

To be a digitally competent teacher involves many aspects, and what it entails has been the subject of debate for several years (Bawden, 2001, Ferrari, 2013; Hatlevik et al., 2015). Traditional notions of teachers’ digital competence tended to be quite technology centred. As time progressed, greater attention shifted to equipping teachers with the pedagogical skills to integrate technology in the classroom (Gudmundsdottir & Hatlevik, 2018). More recently, professional digital competence has encompassed a wider set of knowledge and attitudes centred around the wider societal implications of new technologies and the ethical issues they raise. This area has traditionally been known as cyber-ethics. While cyber-ethics encompasses the ethical issues associated with the design and operation of software, it also encompasses the importance of online ethical practices and awareness of the newly emerging issues brought about through digital technologies within society. In essence cyber-ethics is concerned with the person having awareness of the ethical issues associated with digital technology use, particularly in cyberspace (McDonagh et al., 2021). This includes issues related to online security, privacy, surveillance and data protection, and issues related to online welfare and the credibility of online sources. While all these aspects are critically important, there appears to be little concern about how these digital devices, such as laptops, tablets, phones and a plethora of peripheral digital devices, have been manufactured and the environmental, economic and human impact of their production and consumption. In other areas there is a significant focus on the environment and sustainability; ‘fast fashion’, for example, has come under the spotlight recently, but it seems the manufacture of personal digital devices has largely avoided a similar level of scrutiny. While students may learn about the ethical issues in relation to information security and privacy and develop an awareness of their rights as citizens and the rights of others when sharing data online, the rights of those involved in the production of the digital devices are frequently overlooked. Arguably cyber-ethics is viewed from a Western, end-user, consumer lens with little concern about issues beyond this bubble. Such an oversight highlights the need for cyber-ethics to encompass a broader awareness of these wider ethical issues. Emejulu and McGregor (2019) argued that instrumental conceptions of digital competency/literacy that reduce competence to the acquisition of skills to navigate the digital world fail to address the inherent inequality behind the production of such digital artefacts. They argue that present conceptions of technology (and educational technology) as neutral devices mask the highly political dimension of digital technology production and the undercurrents of power that drive their development. Digital devices are not neutral; they are products of a long-established materialist struggle to exploit natural resources from the poorer global south for the benefit of the more developed north (Knutsson, 2018). To address these inequalities, Emejulu and McGregor (2019) argued for a radical digital citizenship. They define this as

a process by which individuals and groups committed to social justice critically analyse the social, political and economic consequences of digital technologies in everyday life and collectively deliberate and take action to build alternative and emancipatory technologies and technological practices. (p. 140)

Emejulu and McGregor’s (2019) work has two significant implications for what should also be included within teachers’ professional digital competence (PDC). Firstly, it highlights the need for PDC to include an awareness and appreciation of the environmental impact of material extraction of resources, the manufacture of digital devices and the disposal of obsolete digital devices. Secondly, and more importantly, it highlights the need for PDC to also address issues around human exploitation involved in the production of digital devices. However, to some extent it could be argued that such additions do not go far enough. Whether technologies are more ethically sourced or utilise ‘greener’ materials is seen by some as missing the point and not addressing the fundamental problem of unsustainable production fuelled by a consumerist culture (Hornborg, 2009).

The teacher and education for sustainable development

These challenges point to the need to introduce issues of digital technology sustainability and its complex relationship with consumerism and exploitation in teacher education. This is particularly important as the extent to which they will have been exposed to these issues as part of their formal schooling will vary, and, when integrated into school, these issues are frequently integrated in an unproblematic way without recognising the complexity of the issue. Brennan and Widdop Quinton (2020) noted that serious sustainability work requires new forms of curriculum that disrupt entrenched thinking, but in many cases, sustainability is introduced into curricula in a tokenistic way and side-lined because of competing priorities (Barnes et al., 2017). This can lead to a superficial adoption where it becomes just another box to be ticked. This, according to Kuzich (2011), characterises much of education for sustainability in school curricula. Looking specifically at the issue of sustainability within the context of digital technologies, this superficial adoption can result in the cherry-picking of different issues to focus on as areas of concern, such as the recycling of batteries or old technology rather than more broadly exploring the entire economic and political architecture that supports an ever-expanding unsustainable digital technology industry. This reflects the concerns of others that sustainability issues tend to be viewed almost exclusively through the lens of the environment rather than a wider education for sustainable development framework (Gough, 2006; Henderson & Tilbury, 2004). Therefore, there is no guarantee that student teachers will have an understanding and awareness of such issues entering initial teacher education.

As a result, there are expectations on teacher education providers to equip student teachers with this important knowledge and skills (Vukelić & Rončević, 2021). It is not a case of simply providing student teachers with information on unsustainable practices. Instead, student teachers need ongoing exposure to issues related to sustainability, access to suitable materials and resources, and need to have the opportunity to question prevailing assumptions and hegemonies that are unsustainable (Wals & Kieft, 2010). This calls for approaches that adopt a more critical perspective around the sustainable development agenda and one that acknowledges and highlights the global relations of power (Sund & Pashby, 2018). Unfortunately, teacher education has largely been ineffective in developing this more critical perspective (Veintie & Hohenthal, 2021).

Highlighting the complexity of the issue of digital technology consumption and sustainability to student teachers can result in different responses. To those that have already begun to critically question this complex relationship between consumerism, digital technology development and exploitation, such information may resonate with existing beliefs and values. For others that enjoy the consumption of such products and for whom this consumption is tied to their identity, such information may be more challenging (Benn, 2004). Billig (1999) noted that awareness of these issues of exploitation can dimmish the pleasure obtained from the consumption of commodities, and as a result the consumer must ‘routinely not think about the labour relations involved in the production of what they are consuming’ (p. 318). There is the possibility that such information will be ignored or rejected if the message is perceived as a challenge to one’s identity or enjoyment of technologies or if it invokes feelings of unease. Previous work exploring students’ responses to issues related to sustainability has found that students can respond in various ways from despair, helplessness and anxiety to more proactive responses with a commitment to changing personal behaviour and contributing to wider societal change (Pihkala, 2017). When issues of human exploitation are raised as part of this, responses can vary from feelings of guilt (driven by a sense of responsibility for the inequalities) to a rationalisation of the status quo in an attempt to appease one’s conscience and absolve the self from the inequalities presented (St Clair, 2006). Mindful of these possible outcomes, the research study was interested in how student teachers responded to the learning unit introduced as part of this study.

Methodology

Background to the study

The research was undertaken in an Irish university offering a four-year bachelor’s programme in second-level teacher education. As part of the first year of the programme, the student teachers enrolled on a course exploring educational technology for teaching and learning. This 15-week course of approximately 120 hours consisted of two hours per week of lectures and two hours per week of digital technology labs. The remainder of the module was allocated to independent student project work and study. Addressing digital technologies in teacher education is an essential element for teacher accreditation in Ireland, and for that reason the module addressed a wide range of areas relevant for the student teachers’ preparation. The module also addressed cyber-ethics across five weeks of the programme exploring issues related to privacy, online security, well-being and data protection. As part of this section, the module also introduced the student teachers to the topic of Radical Digital Citizenship (Emejulu & McGregor, 2019). This included access to pre-recorded online lectures on the topic and selected readings. Mindful of the need to move beyond simply telling students about issues of sustainability and digital technologies and to further develop the students’ understanding of the topic, student teachers were also required to design and develop a short video resource (using Videoscribe software) on the topic of radical digital citizenship that they (as future teachers) could subsequently use in the future to teach the topic. This was a group exercise where student teachers were randomly allocated into groups of five. This task drew on social constructivist pedagogical principles in that it forced the students to collectively develop their own meaning of the concept and subsequently express this in the form of an educational resource for pupils. The task was introduced in the third week of the semester and the student teachers worked on the project over the following nine weeks, accessing supports and advice where necessary.

Research design

To capture the student teachers’ response to the learning unit, a questionnaire was administered on completion of the project. This online survey collected information on the student teachers’ sex and course of study and then contained a list of 12 statements where the student teachers were invited to respond to each one using a 5-point Likert scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. There were also four open-ended questions seeking further information, namely:

• What do you consider was the most important and beneficial element of this learning unit on Radical Digital Citizenship?

• What aspect of this learning unit on Radical Digital Citizenship do you feel was least beneficial?

• Do you feel this unit on Radical Digital Citizenship will change your purchasing habits when it comes to digital technologies? Explain.

• Will your knowledge of Radical Digital Citizenship influence your role as a teacher in the future? If so, in what way?

The study was given ethical approval by the faculty research ethics committee (2019_11_04_EHS). Participation in the study was voluntary. All student teachers were emailed with an information sheet on the study and invited to take part at the end of term. In order to ensure that they did not feel obliged to participate in the study and that participation was genuinely voluntary, a member of the teaching faculty not involved in the study sent the invitation email, and the information sheet stressed that the survey was anonymous. The student teachers consented to participate in the study by completing a tick box at the start of the survey if they decided to access the online link provided as part of the email.

Research participants

Three hundred and fifty student teachers were enrolled in the module with an average age of 19 years. A total of 87 student responses were received representing a 25% response rate. This response rate was considered good as students are frequently requested to complete online surveys related to course evaluations and feedback, and the response rates are usually lower (under 20%). These responses were almost equally split between male (45%) and female (55%) students. The higher proportion of males in this study was due to the percentage of teachers of technology subjects which have traditionally been male dominated. The respondent sample consisted of teachers specialising in a range of subjects including Languages, Physical Education, Computer Science, Mathematics, Science and Technology, although science and technology made up the largest numbers of the group, reflecting the ratio of student teachers in the overall population, as Table 1 highlights.

Table 1. Subject areas of participating students.

Subject areas of study	Number of respondents
Science	30
Technology Education	24
Physical Education	16
Languages	13
Mathematics & Computer Science	4

Analysis of the responses

The student responses were initially downloaded to a spreadsheet where duplicates caused by multiple submissions were firstly removed. Following this, descriptive statistics from the data were gleaned to address the key research aims, namely what were the student teachers’ views of the course content, was it likely to change their behaviour as reported by them and how would it influence their future role as teachers. The open-ended questions in the survey were thematically analysed following Braun and Clarke’s (2013) stages for thematic analysis to identify the main themes emerging mindful of the key research questions.

Results

Student teachers’ prior knowledge of sustainability and technology and RDC

The student teachers responded positively to the course and recognised its value, but the issues raised in the course around sustainability had not been brought to the vast majority of the student teachers’ attention before (only three of the 87 students indicated they had previous knowledge of the topic). This finding would suggest that one cannot assume student teachers have an understanding of issues related to digital technology and sustainability on entering teacher education programmes, thus strengthening the argument for its inclusion as part of their professional digital competence development.

In relation to their understanding of Radical Digital Citizenship (RDC), the student teachers reported having a very good understanding of the concept following the course, with all but one student either strongly agreeing or agreeing that they understood what RDC was. This reported understanding aligned with two statements included later in this list of Likert statements that aimed to assess their understanding through their agreement or disagreement with three statements related to RDC that were incorrect. In all three cases their high level of disagreement with the statements indicated that the group did have a good understanding of the concept as they were able to recognise incorrect information on the topic.

Perceived value of the course

One of the open-ended questions asked the student teachers to consider what the most important and beneficial element of the unit was. There were 72 responses to this open-ended question from the 87 student teachers. It was evident from their responses that the student teachers viewed the learning unit from different perspectives. The most common response to this question related to the value of the course in raising their awareness of human exploitation, with 13 references to this recorded. The two examples below highlight this new insight gained:

It was an extremely beneficial element of this unit. It got me to think about how and why I buy technology and the far-reaching impact that has on members of society. It has given me a chance to reconsider the impact that I have in the world. (Student no. 15)

It lifted the veil for me between production and consumption. I’m ashamed to say it, but I never thought about how technologies were produced, not to mention the human cost. The most important element was learning how this was affecting people, and opening my eyes to this. (Student no. 34)

The second most common was the insight the course provided in relation to digital technologies and the global supply chains, which was mentioned 10 times. Like the previous type of comments, these comments also highlight that the programme gave them a new insight into digital technology, but unlike the previous comments, these student teachers seemed to focus on the technology itself rather than the human costs of their manufacture.

Learning about what goes on in the background in order to produce products. (Student no. 70)

[the course was an] in depth study of the manufacturing process with regard to digital devices. (Student no. 25)

Six student teachers mentioned the value of the course in raising awareness of their own consumption and purchasing habits, while four student teachers made reference to the value of the programme in raising their awareness of the environmental impact on technology production. It would appear therefore that student teachers ‘took’ different messages from the course despite its focus on exploring consumption, exploitation and global inequality.

Influence on future actions

The second research question aimed to explore how the student teachers believed the course content and the associated activities would impact on them. As part of the list of statements, student teachers were asked if they felt partly responsible for the exploitation that they read about as part of the module and whether it made them feel uncomfortable. Their responses indicated that while they did feel partly responsible, with 79% either agreeing or strongly agreeing with this, less than half (48%) strongly agreed or agreed that exploring the topic made them feel uncomfortable.

Notwithstanding this, the student teachers did indicate that it was important to them as a person. Eighty-seven per cent of the student teachers indicated that they strongly agreed or agreed that it was important, and 71% agreeing or strongly agreeing that learning about the topic would change their behaviour. Specifically, 80% strongly agreed or agreed that it would make them think twice about purchasing new technologies, and when asked about their purchasing of digital technologies in an open-ended question, of the 75 student teachers that responded to this question, all but eight said it would change their purchasing habits, as the following examples highlight:

Yes. I was literally contemplating buying the new iPhone as I am due an upgrade even though my phone still works. However, I have changed my mind and have decided to wait until my own phone breaks or is no longer useful. (Student no. 30)

I will look more into products or try to get longer out of them, but ultimately, it’s hard to avoid not keeping up to date. (Student no. 12)

Yes, I will think twice when purchasing and not be just throwing things away when they don’t work. (Student no. 60)

Yes, as I am now more aware of why it’s important to try buy recycled phones where possible as it reduces carbon footprints. (Student no. 76)

Yes, as I have become more aware of the consequences of purchasing such technologies. I will think twice before purchasing technology again. (Student no. 87)

Despite claiming that it would change their purchasing habits, some student teachers also acknowledged that this reported change in behaviour was unlikely to be permanent, as the first example below highlights. Others went a step further and confessed (‘If I’m being honest’) that their purchasing habits would not change but that they would have a greater awareness of the issues addressed in the course:

I will for a time. I am probably going to change my consumption habits for a time, but I may revert back to my old ways. Because technology and marketing are getting better, and I will probably get sucked back in. (Student no. 15)

If I’m being honest, I’ll probably still make the very same purchases as I did, but this time I’ll just have the knowledge behind what I’m purchasing. (Student no. 53)

While I would say it’s unlikely to deter me from buying a digital device, I definitely would think more deeply about what the repercussions of buying one are. (Student no. 79)

The content of the course did appear to have an impact on the student teachers, as measured by their reported changes in their future behaviour. This was perhaps expected as the course content aimed, through the use of examples and visual imagery, to focus on the human element of digital technology production through the use of real-life cases and examples. The extent to which these intentions to change future behaviour actually results in changes in behaviour is another matter, as there has always been a ‘attitude–behaviour gap’ (Wiederhold & Martinez, 2018) in relation to sustainability issues.

Influence on the self as a teacher

The third research question aimed to explore whether the student teachers believed it would influence their roles as teachers. As student teachers in the first year of a four-year undergraduate programme, it must be noted that this question was not only asking the students to think forward and speculate about whether it would change their practice, but they also had no experience of teaching, so their responses here simply give an indication of their intent. That being said, 76% of the students either agreed or strongly agreed that the course got them thinking about how they could integrate RDC into their own teaching.

In the open-ended question asking whether knowledge of radical digital citizenship would influence their role as a teacher, 74 responses were received. Of these, nine (12%) claimed it would not influence their teaching. The other 65 responses (88%) all indicated that it would affect their teaching. Fourteen (21% of the ‘yes’ responses) referred to how it would influence their role as a teacher in ensuring they engaged in more sustainable practices related to using technology, but these responses were quite vague:

Yes, because I will use technology in such a manner that is both sustainable and useful in the classroom. (Student no. 33)

Yes. It will make me more conscious of how I use technology and why. (Student no. 39)

Yes, I think it will make me think critically about what technologies I use and how I can be more sustainable in acquiring and using them. (Student no. 74)

The vast majority of student teachers, 43 responses (66% of the ‘yes’ respondents), indicated that they would integrate it into their teaching to ensure their pupils would develop an understanding of the topic.

Yes, I will encourage my students to look into this topic and be more aware of their actions regarding digital technology. (Student no. 20)

Yes. It’s important to make children aware of the inequalities that exist in modern society. (Student no. 30)

I would like to make students aware of the behind the scenes of manufacturing devices, so they are more wise when buying devices. (Student no. 76)

Although I am a language teacher and this subject does not particularly apply to my subject, I feel that it is an important lesson that students need to be aware of. I would like to incorporate it into my lessons as a future teacher. I could even explore more into other subjects such as being critical about the food we eat, the clothes we wear etc. (Student no. 38)

The final comment hints at a challenge that was expressed by some student teachers and echoes the comments made by some that claimed it would not affect their teaching. This challenge is the tension between meeting the demands of teaching their own subject areas and introducing topics such as this (that are perceived as peripheral or not relevant) into their teaching. This suggests that the content is seen by some as venturing into an area beyond the scope of their subject area. This highlights the power of subject identities amongst second-level school teachers in Ireland and how responsibilities for issues such as these, which transcend subject boundaries, tend to be seen as other teachers’ responsibilities. The final comment also suggests that the unit has got the students to think beyond the exploitative practices with the digital technology arena and examine issues related to food consumption and fashion.

Discussion

Responding as consumers or citizens?

The student teachers’ exposure to this learning unit does appear to have helped them to critically look at their consumption of digital technology, but there is also the reality, acknowledged by some, that their consumption habits are deeply engrained and that any change to arise from the course is unlikely to be long-lasting. Given the central role digital technologies play in the lives of students, and the fact that by the time they have entered university they are likely to have developed particular consumption habits related to digital technology, changing their purchasing habits in relation to digital technology is a challenge. Benn (2004) for example, noted that consumption plays a strong role in the identity of young people:

Consumption as such has a significant impact on and meaning for the individual: it becomes a means by which human beings communicate and interact. Consumption is part of children’s and young people’s education and socialization, and plays a role in the development of identity and self-image. (Benn, 2004, p. 108)

Therefore, framing the problem as an issue related primarily to the consumption of digital technologies is likely to be met by a range of emotional responses such as fear, guilt, anger, vulnerability, anxiety and resistance if is seen as a threat to one’s identity (Boler, 2004). It is important that teacher educators recognise the role of consumption in the identity of the student teacher and move beyond a consumerist focus towards more critical perspectives focusing on global citizenship. In addition, an emphasis on personal consumer responsibility downplays the role of the wider global digital technology sector in creating demand and developing new products.

On reflection, the narrow consumer-centred focus of this course has arguably hindered the development of a more sophisticated response that would encourage them to take action beyond only changing their purchasing behaviours (McGregor, 2005). This raises questions about the effectiveness of the course of study and the extent to which it focused too much on production and consumption of digital technologies and not enough on political and economic global issues that underpin the digital corporate agenda. While their responses as consumers could be seen as a very powerful response to the challenge, particularly as consumer choice and purchasing power are the most powerful tools a consumer has in a capitalist market (McGregor, 2005), the absence of an emphasis on their role as citizens is in hindsight a drawback of this course as it has arguably foreclosed opportunities for student teachers to respond to the challenge at a more political level.

McGregor (2005) identified a typology of different types of consumer education ranging from consumer information approaches to more empowering approaches. She argued for a move from a critical approach to a more empowered approach where a critical awareness of students’ own consumption is replaced by an awareness of themselves as citizens rather than consumers who are unafraid to challenge the system. It is more than simply changing their consumption habits; it involves a deeper holistic change and understanding of the interconnectedness of their existence in the word. A more overtly political slant to such a unit would help student teachers consider this challenge from the perspective as a citizen and could potentially be more advantageous in the long run. The extent to which this can be achieved however can be curtailed by the need to ensure courses align with curriculum requirements.

The tensions of meeting curriculum requirements and integrating sustainability

As the findings indicate, the vast majority of the student teachers believed it would affect their teaching. A small number believed it would help them question their own use of technology, and the majority believed that it would influence what they taught to students. The student teachers could see the value of teaching their own pupils about the global inequalities presented in the learning unit. Some of the comments from this group, along with some of the comments from the student teachers who claimed it wouldn’t influence their teaching, appear to suggest that subject content requirements would stifle their ability to integrate it into their teaching as they perceived the topic beyond the scope of their own subject areas. This is one of the main challenges at the heart of addressing issues of sustainability in secondary education as it requires changes across the curriculum (Wals & Kieft, 2010) and for all teachers to contribute. But if it is perceived that it is being addressed across the curriculum, there may be less of an onus on some teachers to address it within their subject areas, potentially limiting pupils’ exposure to these important ideas.

There is an added dilemma for student teachers and newly qualified teachers who may wish to integrate issues related to sustainability within their teaching, but may feel the need to align with existing school practices to show their suitability to school management (Ó Gallchóir et al., 2018). In this environment, it is unlikely that newly qualified teachers would venture into integrating these areas within the subject areas if they are not seen as directly relevant to the subject and are seen to deflect attention from state examination preparation that many in Irish schools are primarily concerned with. They are also less likely in this environment to question school-wide policies in relation to digital technology expenditure on environmental or sustainability grounds – particularly if the school emphasises its ‘digital identity’. Normally they are expected to be competent and enthusiastic adopters of new technologies therefore to raise critical questions could threaten their career prospects.

The higher numbers of student teachers indicating that it would influence what they taught to students rather than how they would use digital technology may also indicate that they are more willing to teach about the issue in schools rather than change their own patterns of digital technology consumption. This may suggest that they saw the course as something to be taught to their students rather than something that had implications for their own use of digital technology. This points to the need for more activities for student teachers to reflect on the professional implications of such content on their own educational practice rather than seeing it as a ‘topic’ to be taught to students. The extent to which they recognised it as part of their professional digital competence is therefore debatable.

Limitations of the study

Before concluding it must be noted that this was a small-scale exploratory study that drew on student teachers’ self-reports in relation to the potential impact on them and their practice. Further work of this nature should be undertaken in other teacher education programmes to see if student teachers in different settings and jurisdictions respond in a similar way. Further research could also explore the extent to which the issues raised in the course do indeed influence their teaching while on school placement and explore the challenges they experience in attempting to integrate them into their subject areas as this research has only collated self-reports of potential impacts on their behaviour and practice. The role of consumption in the identity of young professionals, including student teachers, is also an area that requires further investigation, which may shed light on the reasons for student teachers’ responses to education for sustainable development topics.

Conclusion

This article has argued for the inclusion of sustainability as part of cyber-ethics which itself forms part of teachers’ professional digital competence. If cyber-ethics is concerned with the potential harmful effects of digital technology use on the self and others, then the inclusion of sustainability is justified given the harmful effects of digital technology consumption on others, particularly those in the developing world. This need is more pressing than ever when one considers that the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an intensity in debates over the connections between education and technology (Williamson et al., 2021) and is likely to result in even more digital technology expansion into the sector, raising more ethical issues for both schools and wider society. Therefore, the inclusion of issues of sustainability and digital technologies should form part of teacher education programmes aiming to develop teachers’ professional digital competence. That being said, while approaching the topic through their consumption of digital technology is perhaps the most accessible way to directly relate the topic to their own lives, this consumer emphasis deflects attention from the more important wider political issues that need to be considered from a citizenship viewpoint. Emphasising their role as global citizens, rather than consumers, is likely to result in a broader political response to the challenge as opposed to a narrow emphasis on purchasing that misses the wider issues at play. Greater attention should be afforded to empowering the student teachers as global citizens by emphasising their roles and responsibilities as global citizens and how they could respond politically to this issue rather than digital technology consumers.

While the case has been made in this article for the inclusion of sustainability issues as part of teachers’ professional digital competence, the issue of education for sustainable development is something that also needs to be integrated throughout the teacher education programme rather than being something that is ‘housed’ within particular modules or courses. The extent to which this can be integrated across the teacher education curriculum is largely dependent on the interest of other faculty members. It could be argued that if it is to influence the student teachers’ actual teaching practice, this sustained attention to issues of sustainability and global citizenship across their initial teacher education programme is required. Without such programme-wide interconnections, courses such as these reported in this study are likely to act no more than awareness raising opportunities.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the UBUNTU Network, a Department of Foreign Affairs and Irish Aid funded community of educators in post-primary Initial Teacher Education that work to support Global Citizenship Education (GCE).

Notes on contributors

Oliver McGarr

Oliver McGarr is a professor at the School of Education at the University of Limerick. His research and teaching interests are in the area of teacher education and digital technologies.