Positioning and repositioning in higher education: first year students engaging with the world

ABSTRACT

Sustainability is an important issue that we all face, including higher education students. We assert that the transition into the contemporary higher education context needs educators to plan transition pedagogy that engages students with the world during their studies, instead of solely using curriculum as preparation for the future world of work. To investigate this, we explored how students position themselves in relation to sustainability as part of an assessment task in a first-year university transition course and whether this type of assessment provides opportunities for students to experience subjectification. Drawing on Biesta’s ([2022]. World-Centred Education: A View for the Present. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group) conception of world-centred education, we applied a novel methodology based on dialogical self theory, developed by Hermans and Bartels ([2021]. Citizenship Education and the Personalization of Democracy. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://lccn.loc.gov/2020029653), to analyse the data comprising student reflections on an assessment item oriented toward current sustainability issues. Our findings suggest that when students interact with their peers and encounter challenging content, conflicting internal positions can lead to subjectification and an intention for further action on real-world issues from the commencement of their studies. We propose that the principles of opposition, cooperation and participation provide a practical framework for educators and course designers to purposefully designate space for students to explore positions and practise the generative dialogue needed for thinking and acting in the world as subjects now and in the future. In analysing students’ reported experience, our paper contributes to the discussion around implementing world-centred education and provides useful insight into how students engage with sustainability in higher education.

KEYWORDS:

• World-centred education
• sustainability
• position
• dialogical self theory
• climate change

Introduction

In the current political and social climate, there is a need for higher education to prepare students to address complex socioecological problems. Educators understand the need for critical thinking and attention to social and ecological justice to tackle these issues. Biesta (2022) advocates world-centred education, which allows students to act as active citizens and consider their place in the wider world. Tangney and Clifford (2018) propose introducing students to global perspectives by exploring values related to issues such as climate change and alternative ways of knowing. We refer to collective problems such as these as sustainability issues, reflecting the complex social, cultural, economic and educational practices contributing to exploitative relationships within society and with the non-human environment (Ryan and Tilbury 2013). In acknowledging concerns about using instrumentalist approaches to engaging students with real world issues (Mannion et al. 2011), we concur with Matheson and Sutcliffe (2018) and Van Poeck and Östman (2020) in encouraging students to explore creative approaches to issues of shared concern. However, there has been limited exploration of how first-year university students position themselves in relation to sustainability issues. To address this gap, this study investigates students’ self-positioning in relation to sustainability issues in a university transition course. Dialogical self theory (DST) (Hermans 2001; Hermans and Hermans-Konopka 2010) and Hermans and Bartels’ (2021) framework of opposition, cooperation, and participation for personalising democracy will be used to analyse student reflections data. Through this, we aim to gain insight into how first-year university students view their place in the world, and how universities can adjust their curriculum design to support students’ participation in the global conversation.

Conceptual frameworks

This study is situated at the nexus of two current concerns in higher education: opportunities for students to meet the world as subjects and the role of higher education in relation to disruptive sustainability issues. Drawing on the work of Gert Biesta (2022), the study is underpinned by theory related to three domains of purpose within education: qualification, socialisation and subjectification. The work of qualification relates to students acquiring knowledge and skills; socialisation to understanding values, cultures and conventions; and subjectification to ‘the formation of the student as a whole’ (40). Gaining a qualification and developing a professional identity are widely embraced in higher education, while subjectification is less understood and supported. Biesta argues that subjectification involves an interruption to a student’s thinking often identified by a moment in which they can say ‘I find myself in a situation where it’s up to me to figure out what do to which no one else can do in my place’ (54). So, while qualification is concerned with what a student has learned, subjectification addresses ‘what I will do with everything I have learned, and particularly what I will do when it matters’ (Biesta 2022, 61). For the purpose of subjectification, the curriculum may provide content ‘through which students can encounter the world and can encounter themselves and their desires, and can find forms to come into a relationship with their desires’, rather than mastery of the content (Biesta 2022, 72). Notably, determining a balance between one’s desires and one’s relationship with the world involves criticality, compassion, autonomy and an awareness of how one’s actions impact other people and places (Biesta 2015). Subjectification is therefore fundamental to a world-centred outlook and contributing towards a more sustainable future.

Research indicates that despite the prioritisation of qualification and socialisation in education, the experience of subjectification is highly valued by students across cultural contexts. For example, Ryökkynen et al. (2022) found that graduates receiving special needs support in vocational training in Finland identified individual empowerment as the most important aspect of their experience. By applying the lens of education purpose to community civics learning in Scotland, Cowell and Biesta (2016), demonstrated how learning and political agency can be expressed as subjectification or socialisation. While socialisation refers to fitting in with existing understandings and uses of place, subjectification involves the creation of new ways of living in relation to place. It is interesting to note ‘the absence of subjectification in educational policy does not necessarily mean that it does not occur in educational practice … opportunities are created by a small but strongly motivated group of teachers and taken up, on the whole enthusiastically, by students’ (James 2014, 115). Nonetheless, Biesta cautions that without purposeful design, subjectification ‘may happen for some and not others, or may only happen haphazardly’ (2022, 8).

The importance of providing opportunity for student subjectification, in addition to qualification and socialisation, has been broached in few fields of HE literature. Of particular interest for this study are investigations of student subjectification in sustainability education (Hasslöf and Malmberg 2015; Hesen, Wals, and Tauritz 2022; Van Poeck and Östman 2020). Not only do sustainability issues provide scope to question how we live our lives, but they also present authentic collective problems without predetermined answers (Van Poeck and Östman 2020). Despite the interdependence between balancing one’s desires in relationship with the world as a purpose of education, and sustaining that world, there is limited knowledge about how students experience the opportunity to engage with challenging sustainability issues, especially during transition to higher education. Are transition students solely focused on the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in their first year of university, that is, the domains of qualification and socialisation? Or are they open to exercising subjectification? To better understand how students position themselves in relation to an assessment task focused on a sustainability issue, we draw upon Dialogical Self Theory (DST).

Dialogical self theory

DST provides a particularly useful lens for analysing student voices engaging with disruptive sustainability issues because it entails ‘the personal experience of an inner dialogue and the tensions of indecision’ (Jasper et al. 2011, 5). According to Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010), internal dialogical ‘I-positions’ represent roles that individuals assume in various contexts, and the perceived positions taken by others (Hermans and Hermans-Konopka 2010). Dialogue between these internal positions can reveal different perspectives and experiences which can coexist even if they are conflicting (Hermans and Hermans-Konopka 2010). In relation to educational research, (Ligorio 2010) contends that a ‘fruitful relationship’ can be pursued in which ‘DST can enrich the analysis of the learning activity by inquiring into its dialogical nature’ (9). More pragmatically, Meijers and Hermans (2018) advocate the use of DST to bridge self-knowledge and productive dialogue between every level of the education system: students, educators, managers, employers, and politicians. Thus, they present DST as a tool to mobilise the self-positions needed for dialogical learning and innovation. DST aligns with this study’s focus on students’ encounters with real world issues because the theory views dialogue as fundamental to navigating uncertainty and achieving constructive change both within the self and society.

The role of uncertainty in DST is significant. Uncertainty disrupts the organisation of internal I-positions and can be associated with positive or negative feelings. For some individuals, uncertainty can produce feelings of anxiety and depression; for others, it may spark novelty and excitement. Following disruption, the self tries to create dialogical relationships with new positions to restore order and continuity in the self (Hermans 2022, 102). As explained by Fecho (2013, 119), when individuals encounter issues that affect them, they ‘try to make sense of contradictions posited by other belief systems that cause their own to wobble’. Clifton and Fecho (2018) illustrate how wobbles experienced by their research participants’ dialogical selves enabled them to consider various influences and re-position their I- and we-positions coherently, leading to constructive learning experiences. Therefore, the role of uncertainty in DST and its potential to lead to new insights from ‘wobbles’ is an integral factor in the growth and learning of individuals. For the purposes of this study, DST’s focus on I-positions provides a useful method for analysing student reflections on their learning, including experiences of subjectification.

Sustainability issues pose a challenging problem for individuals to grapple with, and their complexity and uncertainty can be overwhelming. Hermans and Bartels (2021, xxi) suggest that we consider the self as a micro-society that interacts with the macro-society by moving with changes and influencing society through the principles of opposition, cooperation and participation. These principles frame their application of DST for ‘personalising’ democracy.

Applying DST through principles for personalising democracy

According to Hermans and Bartels (2021), the principle of opposition requires a diversity of ideas and an openness to explore alternative positions; cooperation involves learning from one another and establishing coalitions; and participation may be driven by individual responsibility, group affiliation, compassion for others, or a sense of being part of the Earth. To constructively embody these principles, certain skills are required, such as empathic listening, attending to values, and depolarising opposition. Applied to the self, there must also be a space for internal dialogue between emotion and reason to enable personal growth (Hermans and Bartels 2021). In this way, we can navigate the complexity of sustainability issues and make meaningful changes at both the individual and societal levels. Meaningful action at the individual level may be expressed as subjectification, that is, how a student positions their ‘I’ in relation to what they have learned (Biesta 2022).

In light of Biesta’s (2022) call for world-centred education, and the gap in understanding how students experience meeting the world during transition to higher education, this paper investigates how first-year university students engage with sustainability issues indicative of world problems. It explores how students take up ‘what the world is asking from [them]’ (Biesta 2022, 91) through dialogue with themselves, educators, fellow students and the world. Drawing upon Hermans and Bartels’ (2021) approach to DST, we analyse students’ self positioning through dialogue with internal others. Situations of opposition allow for an interruption of the dominant I-positions creating uncertainty and presenting possibilities for broadening the position repertoire and learning from the experience. Interruptions can evoke a response where subjectification is experienced, or it may not – individuals are free to choose whether to extend their internal arrangement of positions. Situations requiring cooperation can also present challenges to an individual’s favoured I-position(s). Resolving a situation of opposition or one requiring cooperation allows individuals to respond from the perspective of an individual, a member of a social group, a human or an integral part of the Earth. Moving between these different outlooks to determine action appropriate for the individual suggests a process for students to bring their ‘I’ into play as a response to what the world is asking. Hence, this study was guided by the following questions:

1. How do first-year university students articulate their ‘meeting the world’ in the context of engaging with disruptive sustainability issues, and

2. How can curriculum be designed to allow opportunities for students to practice participation in the global conversation around sustainability issues?

Methodology

We take a constructivist approach to address the research questions which acknowledges that an individual's understandings of the world are constructed through discourse and negotiation with others (Merriam and Tisdell 2015). Consistent with other qualitative research concerned with a small sample of written reflections and comments, the claims from this study are limited rather than universal. Limitations include the number of student reflections volunteered for analysis, the specific course work context and the authors’ interpretation of results. Nevertheless, insights from samples of rich data presented in this paper may be of value for enhancing curriculum, teaching strategies and student learning experiences.

Context for the study

The context for this study was a whole of university transition course compulsory for first year students at the University of the Sunshine Coast, a regional Australian university. Over two semesters in 2017, 3442 students were enrolled in Communication and Thought (the course), across seven campuses. Nearly 90% were domestic students, and over half of these were the first members of their family to attend university.

The course was developed for the primary purpose of ‘providing students from all disciplines with essential skills and resources’ for academic success and facilitating a ‘sense of belonging’ (Adkins et al. 2015, 9). Drawing from transition literature, access to academic, social and personal supports were embedded in the curriculum. Consistent with Kift and Nelson’s (2005, 9) approach to transition pedagogy, the course also aimed to foster learners who could ‘reflect upon their personal and professional growth and transformation in terms of knowledge, skills and values acquired’. Relevant knowledge, skills and values were introduced in the context of communication theory. The first assessment task focussed on the benefits of feedback in the (generic) workplace. The second assessment task required students to explore the benefits of listening, questioning and feedback in their chosen future profession. The individual research and academic writing for these tasks aimed to develop skills useful for succeeding as a student.

Assessment task 3 provides data for this study. It required students to collaborate in groups of three or four to research a challenging sustainability issue, and to design and deliver a persuasive oral presentation on that issue. This task gave students the opportunity to explore values-based topics and to question their assumptions and those of their peers, as they worked through the task criteria. In semester one 2017, students chose from five topics related to social media and loneliness, the social impacts of sport, intercultural communication, Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledges, and climate change communication. In semester two, the topics were reduced to the latter three, aligning with the environmental and social domains of sustainability.

Coursework to support task 3 included theory related to group process and roles, and skills related to oral presentation. The task was assessed for aspects of qualification and socialisation, specifically, the quality of research, group cohesion in preparing the presentation, and the persuasiveness of the presentation.

Participants and data generation

The data for this study comes from two sources. First, students were invited through their tutorials and the course Blackboard site, to contribute brief structured reflections on their experience with their group presentation topics. During tutorials, project information sheets approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (approval no. A/17/943) were provided to students, and tutors showed a short video explaining the aims and scope of the authors’ study. Students were advised that should they choose to participate their reflections would be treated anonymously. They were asked to consider the three elements of the task on which they were assessed: academic research, group collaboration and oral presentation skills. Reflections from 14 students were subsequently emailed to the first author in response to these questions:

1. In what ways has your understanding of the topic you selected for task 3 changed as a result of your research, group work and presentation?

2. Do you think you will be taking any action based on what you learned about your task 3 topic?

Additional written comments on task 3 were accessed from a survey administered by the University Statistics and Information Unit, eliciting student evaluation on teaching and courses (SETAC). In addition to a standard suite of Likert-scale evaluations, one open question appropriate to the course was able to be included in the survey (see question 1 above). 149 students responded to this open question and their responses were provided to the research team as a PDF list of anonymous comments. Thus, 163 texts comprise the dataset, where ‘text’ denotes either a written reflection on the two questions emailed by students to the first author, or a response to an open question included in the SETAC survey. These 163 texts did not necessarily represent 163 different individuals, however, because both data sources required anonymity and some students may have responded to both. In the following analysis and discussion of findings, individual responses from written reflections are referenced with an ‘R-’ preceding a name, and comments from the SETAC survey are referenced with an ‘S-’ preceding a name. Illustrative statements are quoted verbatim, with only obvious typographical errors corrected. Non-gender specific pseudonyms have been assigned to research participants for the purposes of analysis and discussion of individual experiences.

Data analysis

Emailed reflections were de-identified and together with anonymous student comments from the SETAC survey, read several times by the first author to gain familiarity with the content. The texts were imported to NVivo software (QSR 2020) to assist with text management and analysis. Coding of texts was informed by Hermans’ (2022) personal position repertoire, theory related to personalising democracy (Hermans and Bartels 2021), and world-centred education (Biesta 2022), particularly the purpose of education. The coding categories are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. Coding categories.

Internal positions I as learner, student I as a person I as parent, spouse, daughter, son, child I as (future) professional My internal attribute I as questioning I am … adjective or other descriptor I as non-engaged/ non learning

Named Others My husband, wife, partner, spouse, mother, father, sibling My child My fellow task 3 group member(s), My classmates in COR109 or other course My teacher, tutor, lecturer A group in society to which I belong A group in society to which I DON’T belong A group in society I would like to belong to, e.g. future professional role, job A problematic person, entity or phenomenon The university Something in nature or environment

Valuation and affect Positive – fulfilled motivations Negative – frustrated motivations

Learning related ‘wobbles’ Uncertainty o Assumptions challenged or changed Conflict Taking action

Assumptions confirmed

Purpose(s) of learning Qualification o Skills, knowledge, program, degree Socialisation o Academic norms, expectations, group work, chosen discipline, program Subjectification o Personal responsible position or actions within a situation o Shift in perspective within discourse practice: epistemological, values, practice o Dismantling or rejecting available discourse practice; imagining alternative future possibilities

Relationship dynamics with Others – somebody or something Opposition Cooperation Participation

Source: Hermans (2001), Håkansson, Van Poeck, and Östman (2019), Hermans and Bartels (2021), Biesta (2022).

The process of coding was iterative. First, for each participant’s comments, all the utterances with first person pronouns and possessives were coded, then grouped into nodes with a common voice or internal position; for example, ‘I as learner’, ‘I as parent’, ‘my children’. A session of collaborative coding by the researchers established a basis for interpretating the texts and applying additional codes. Characterisations of these nodes were noted as node properties in NVivo. Coding continued to identify references to named others or third-person pronouns such as ‘a member of my group’, as well as expressions of valuation and affect. Subsequent independent coding was discussed and cross-checked within the research team for consistency. As themes in the data emerged, additional codes related to uncertainty, conflict, taking action and the education domains of qualification, socialisation and subjectification, were included. For example, the response to question one by R-Taz ‘I can also see how intercultural competence is a vital skill in nursing’ was initially coded as: I-statement, positive valuation, and named others – a future group I may belong to. In the next step, meta positions were identified, and relationships analysed with reference to processes of opposition, cooperation and participation. Thus, dynamic encounters in the field of I-positions were highlighted. For example, S-Kerry’s response to question one described the benefits of cooperation for the purpose of qualification and socialisation: ‘By working in a group, we all had different ideas on what to write, which as a result changed my thinking of the topic and helped me gather a better understanding of it to result in a better task submission overall’. Finally, examples of subjectification that emerged along with descriptions of uncertainty or conflict and resolution or an altered I-position, were identified, as illustrated in the response to question 2 shared by R-Nat: ‘This task has really ignited a passion within me … , to continue to learn about and advocate for the rights of Indigenous people and the rich and diverse knowledges they have to impart’.

Findings

Our findings are drawn from an analysis of both sources of data (163 texts) for responses to the first question which asks about changes in the student’s understanding of their topic as a result of their research, group work and presentation. Responses to the second question, regarding intentions for action, are drawn from the 14 written reflections only. The analysis indicates that students adopted I-positions while engaging with their group project, with some repositioning themselves as the task progressed. Reflections expressing uncertainty and experiencing opposition to their previously held positions reveal openness to changing position. Reflections expressing a higher number of I-positions also demonstrated the capacity to adopt a meta-position granting a broader perspective, and intention for further action in relation to their sustainability issue. Examples of student positioning are presented below with reference to the themes of opposition, cooperation, and participation.

Situations of opposition

Opposition to an individual’s position may be experienced as disruptive, and can be responded to by tolerating other positions, tolerating uncertainty, conflict between emotion and reason, developing other positions known as meta-positions, third positions and promoters; and by forming a coalition of positions (Hermans and Bartels 2021). Student reflections and feedback show a spectrum of tolerance and openness to change in relation to researching their topic or from working in a group.

Openness to the positions of other students in their group led to some students changing their positions.

… it changed my opinion completely on the topic and working in a group was the main reason for that. (S-Dom)

Listening to my partner and talking with her about her passions has encouraged me that yes, through knowledge and communication – truly – the belief about climate change can change. (S-Chris)

In addition to an encounter with difference, the capacity for changing positions is aided by having a sufficient array of alternative internal positions to move to (Hermans and Bartels 2021). For example, Brooke sticks to their original pre-task position. Other positions or uncertainty introduced by other students or the literature are not countenanced.

My understanding of this topic in terms of research, group work and presentation have not changed due to the fact that I have always had a strong stance about social media. (R-Brooke)

In contrast, R-Charlie reflected on many uncertainties posed by their topic and potential I-positions, before confirming their position on intercultural communication competence (ICC).

… as we researched the theory it became apparent that defining ICC would be difficult as there is much debate on what constitutes culture and competence. Where does culture end? what about atheism? are ‘gym junkie’, ‘sci-fi nerd’, etc. cultures? At what point is competence achieved despite offence being taken … after all not all bridges can be crossed. How does one avoid falling into stereotypical thinking?

I-positions based on an emotional response to a situation can be at odds with I-positions based on a reasoned response. Hermans and Bartels (2021) note that an internal dialogue between felt emotion and reason can motivate a restructuring of thoughts and repositioning, and even behavioural change. Emotions indicated in R-Sky’s narrative range from happy anticipation to a surprise conflict with another group member’s position on climate change. This student encountered the reality of communicating about climate change (their task 3 topic) within their own task group.

At first I was quite looking forward to the climate change topic our group chose for task 3 because I was (and still am) very passionate about solutions to the issue – actually why I decided to go to university. Getting into group discussions I quickly found that one of my group members was not a believer in climate change and what the assignment called for was group symbiosis. My first issue. I learnt quite quickly to discuss in a constructive way with her and because of our assignment topic ‘communication is the solution to climate change’ I had to find a way of communicating with someone who opposed a view I was so strong on. (R-Sky)

R-Sky goes on to report a learning experience in which emotion, confusion and reason resulted in a more nuanced position toward their topic and interaction with their group members.

At the start of the assignment I had a friend who was opposed to climate change and closed off. By the end of the assignment I had kept a friend that was now open to climate change and the solutions as part of the issue.

In situations of uncertainty, taking a step back from an array of I-positions to a meta-position, can allow connections to be seen and resolve conflict between I-positions (Hermans and Bartels 2021). For example, from the position of learner, R-Nat (Table 2) describes ‘connecting the dots’ in reaching a better understanding of their topic. R-Nat’s conflicting emotions of gratification and sadness are then transcended by an action-oriented coalition between the positions of gratified learner, human and future professional.

Table 2. R-Nat’s repositioning to a constructive coalition of positions.

I as learner (gratified)	… this task showed me that there was a wealth of knowledge, ideas and perspectives regarding Indigenous culture … My understanding of how Indigenous knowledge is being tapped into and shared throughout parts of Australia was broadened and I found learning about the different knowledges, as well as the ideologies surrounding the idea of ‘country’ fascinating. This helped me to understand that the notion of ‘country’ runs far deeper than just a physical place or land area. I believe this helped me to ‘connect the dots’ and really see some of the reasons behind why land is so vitally important to Indigenous people.
I as learner (sad)	I felt saddened knowing that I grew up, (possibly like many Australian children do) not learning or being taught about our first people and the intricate cultural values and wealth of knowledge they have to share. What I did know, came largely from media outlets that as I have come to see, did not portray Indigenous people or culture accurately.
I as human	this research topic expanded my understanding of social justice issues within society and even the ideas of the subtleties of white privilege present within Australian society and how this affects Indigenous people.
I as human	This task has really ignited a passion within me, to continue to learn about and advocate for the rights of Indigenous people and the rich and diverse knowledges they have to impart … from my research, I have seen that there was and still very much is an ‘us and them’ type mentality, which I want to try and help change!
I as future professional	In the degree I am currently studying, Bachelor of Nutrition and Dietetics, I am now thinking about the possibility of working with Indigenous peoples in this area and before this research task I would not have even given that idea a second thought.
Coalition of learner and human	I am now on my own journey to continue to learn about Indigenous culture and the knowledges they have to impart, especially in regards to my field of study.

Taking a meta-perspective to resolve conflict between two I-positions can also lead to a third position allowing the self to move forward. Constructing a third position requires self-insight about the positions in conflict and one position not dominating the other (Meijers and Hermans 2018). For example, R-Reza tells of being in awe of aspects of Australian Indigenous people’s culture (see Table 3). R-Reza also speaks from the position of a descendent of the colonising culture, expressing disgust at the treatment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Self-awareness of their conflicting internal positions is signalled by referring to the flip side of the experience. R-Reza goes on to express negative emotions accompanied by feelings of overwhelm and uncertainty about action. However, from this apparent impasse, a third more reasoned position emerges to address the question of action, that of a parent who can use their knowledge to educate their children about the Indigenous history of Australia. From that more empowered position, R-Reza repositions their citizen self from a place of frustration to one of taking the opportunity to actively voice concerns. Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010) note the importance of emotions in hindering (e.g. persistent anger) or facilitating (e.g. love) internal dialogical relationships. In R-Reza’s case, their position of passionate learner may have lent energy to their agency as a parent teaching their children respect and compassion. Similarly, the disgusted Australian of European descent position seemed to motivate the decision to act on opportunities for speaking out about government policy towards Australian First Nations people.

Table 3. R-Reza’s emotion–reason conflict and adoption of ‘third’ positions.

I as a learner	I am completely in awe of the traditional Indigenous ways of being in harmony with the earth and the ideology that we look after the land, and so it looks after us. I think Aboriginal communities had great structure and encouraged everyone to feel purposeful and part of a team, alongside establishing respect.
	I loved the spirituality aspect (that wasn't featured heavily in our presentation, but I got addicted to googling things!!).
I as an Australian of non-Indigenous heritage	The flip side is feeling disgusted that I am part of a ‘race’ that treated people so terribly, and continue to do so.
I as a citizen	… they disguise it as Government policy and infer that we are helping. Mostly I feel we are not, because ‘help’ doesn't seem to include any context that is relevant to Aboriginal custom, tradition or law. We are getting it SO wrong and my heart feels heavy … is that too much?  … I am wary of the way that Aboriginals are portrayed because I know we are not getting the whole truth.
I as a human	I feel it's almost so overwhelming I'm not sure what action I could take.
I as a parent – third position	I guess for now I'll be doing my best to start at home educating my own children about the Indigenous history of Australia and helping them to build respect and compassion...
I as an active citizen – third position	… [and] taking the opportunity to actively voice my concerns

Elements of cooperation

Cooperation with others was particularly relevant in this study, because after an initial period of creative conflict, student groups had to coordinate tasks to produce a cohesive presentation. Some students apparently drew on tutorials where effective communication techniques were practised, as stated by S-Jamie:

It also taught me to take a step back and allow others to have their say and explore ideas, and accept that not everything needs to be controlled by me.

At the individual level, attending to internal dialogue between different I-positions can lead to a commitment to take action, while constructive, task-oriented self-criticism can improve action outcomes (Hermans and Bartels 2021). In this regard, several students indicated their intention to take further action in relation to their topics.

I will use these techniques to inform people in my life about climate change from now on. (R-Sunny)

I can see how with more patience and giving them [people of other cultures] more time to speak, I can potentially form more meaningful relationships. (R-Taz)

However, some students providing course feedback commented that group work was unfair because not all members contributed equally, or that group work or the topics were not relevant to their university program.

Elements of participation

As discussed above, several students’ reflections demonstrate the usefulness of assuming a meta-position to move past conflicting I-positions. This flexibility allowed them to self-identify at a broader level, as human or part of the Earth. For example, at the individual level, R-Reza (Table 3) shares frustration as a learner and Australian of European descent. This conflict leads to taking up two other ‘third’ positions which allow action to be taken at the human level: teaching their children about Australian First Nations, and actively voicing concerns in the public sphere. For R-Nat (Table 2) a coalition of I-positions leads to a human perspective on learning more about, and possibly working with First Nations people in the future. Similarly, R-Taz (Table 4) describes a conflict between cognitively understanding the importance of communicating with individuals from other cultures for R-Taz’s future profession, and their actual behaviour of simply tolerating such interactions. Taking a human perspective (the right to be heard), R-Taz shifts the ‘other’ from an object to be tolerated, to a fellow subject, allowing the potential for Taz to also act as a subject in future encounters.

Table 4. R-Taz’s movement between levels of identity.

I as an individual	I realise how important it is for me to be patient and flexible [which is a] vital skill in nursing [that] gives you an advantage looking for work.
I as human	I had not thought about it as far as a human rights issue.
I as individual	I realise when I spoke to other people from different cultures, I was spending my time trying to politely get through the conversation.
I as a human	I can see how with more patience and giving them more time to speak, I can potentially form more meaningful relationships.

In contrast, R-Sky began and finished their reflection from their position as a part of the Earth:

I was quite looking forward to the climate change topic … why I decided to go to university … .

… I will continue to learn about and do what I can for the environment.

However, the conflict between R-Sky-as a part of the Earth and another member of their task group led R-Sky to identify as a human to make gains at the ecological level:

I learnt for our assignment and my own personal gain that climate change isn't a topic you can change someone’s view on overnight, that it takes time and not everyone is as receptive to the issue that you'd like them to be.

The theme of participation highlighted rich examples of subjectification arrived at by students working through processes of disruptive opposition and cooperation. The adoption of a meta-position appears key to expressing a stance responsive to what the world seemed to be asking of them in the context of their sustainability topic, as summarised in Table 5.

Discussion

This study sought to explore how first-year transition students engaged with sustainability issues, with the goal of understanding how they position themselves in relation to their learning which involved research, group work and oral presentation. At a conceptual level, the study aimed to explore the implications of Biesta’s (2022) theory of world-centred education through a novel application of DST developed by Hermans and Bartels (2021). Ultimately, the findings revealed that the students’ written reflections provided useful insights into how understandings changed (or didn’t) after engaging with a group oral presentation. The topics of climate change, Indigenous knowledges, and intercultural communication highlighted the uncertainties of socioecological issues and further exposed students to situations of opposition. The data demonstrate the importance of engaging in meaningful conversations about sustainability topics and how these can help to shape students’ relationships to important issues.

Table 5. Moments of subjectification.

R-Sky	I gained a valuable lesson too, something I knew before but never really understood – that not everyone actually understands each other and that time and proper communication can really change the minds of people and along with it the world.
R-Nat	This task has really ignited a passion within me … , to continue to learn about and advocate for the rights of Indigenous people and the rich and diverse knowledges they have to impart.
R-Reza	I guess for now I'll be doing my best to start at home educating my own children about the Indigenous history of Australia and helping them to build respect and compassion … [and] taking the opportunity to actively voice my concerns
R-Taz	I am now thinking about the possibility of working with Indigenous peoples in this area and before this research task I would not have even given that idea a second thought. I am now on my own journey to continue to learn about Indigenous culture and the knowledges they have to impart, especially in regards to my field of study.

The themes of opposition, cooperation and participation provide a valuable frame for understanding the dialogical self positions and principles of democratic practice in student group work. Some students experienced opposition within their task groups as part of the process of group development. However, many students also experienced internal dissonance between previously held beliefs or assumptions and new learnings about their sustainability topic. Some students demonstrated meta-positioning and repositioning to bridge the differences, resolve internal conflict and enable action. Such experiences of disruption, reflection and creative response echo van Poeck and Östman’s (2020) contention that real world sustainability issues are appropriate topics for meaningful student engagement. On a collective level, cooperation is clearly essential for addressing sustainability issues. As in democracy itself, ‘questions about how to engage with conflict’ (Biesta 2011, 93) are pervasive when considering issues such as climate change, Indigenous knowledges, and intercultural communication. While there may be points of agreement, the manner of progressing these goals is contested, providing an opportunity to practise respectful dialogue around different positions. Students discussed the importance of listening to others, recognising the diversity of good ideas, and ‘stepping back’ to create space for others to express themselves. This exercise in cooperation not only facilitates socialisation and subjectification, but also provides essential practice for real-world sustainability politics.

The theme of participation in this study was particularly interesting, as it highlighted rich examples of student subjectification through processes of opposition and cooperation. According to Hermans and Bartels (2021), participation is about responding from one or more different domains of identity inclusiveness, while Biesta (2022), explains that participation is related to existing as a subject through engagement with complex social and ecological systems. Our research suggests that the adoption of a meta-position is key to expressing a stance responsive to the world in the context of individual students’ sustainability topics and lived realities. In essence, this study highlights how participation is an important part of expressing identity and engaging with the world.

Building on Biesta's idea that educators should facilitate situations in which students have to ask themselves what the world is asking from them, the structure and content of the group presentation assessment task in this study demonstrates how the opportunity for students to practice various principles, such as opposition, cooperation and participation can be provided. Although these principles were not explicitly used to design the task, they were inherent in the task requirements for conducting research and presenting the results in a creative, collaborative presentation. Furthermore, tutorials provided practice in active listening, constructive feedback, assigning roles, and going through the different stages of group development in preparation for their own group work. Students were pointed to online folders of materials to guide them in finding credible sources. Finally, students performed self- and peer assessments on contributions to their group’s work, adding an element of accountability to their participation. The task elements were thus designed with the goals of qualification and socialisation in mind. However, by linking these skills to real-world sustainability issues, students were provided with the space to contemplate what the world may be asking of them and the option to engage with subjectification.

The potential to incorporate the principles of opposition, cooperation and participation more openly into the design and practice of first-year higher education is exciting. Hermans and Bartels (2021) advocate that these principles be used explicitly to build curricula focused on personal and societal democracy. We assert that these principles could be included in curricula to help students with group work, disruptive topics and to justify the importance of dialogue and uncertainty in our democracy. Group dialogue provides a means for students to negotiate internal and external positions, and to identify and value different viewpoints and uncertainty as part of the process of working through their own I-positions. It also makes tangible the connection of individual positions with collective views within our democracy.

Finally, making the educational value of working through uncertainty more visible to students could encourage them to persist despite their frustrations. It is equally important for students to be given time to reflect and make sense of content that causes them to ‘wobble’ in their thinking on important topics. Our findings have highlighted that exposing students to sustainability issues, which cross disciplinary boundaries, encourages students in their first year to take relevant and meaningful steps during their studies rather than focusing only on the future impact of their education.

Conclusion

This study explored how students experience the opportunity to engage with complex sustainability issues early in their university journey. We employed a novel method to investigate students’ internal positioning around engagement with sustainability issues in a whole-of university compulsory course. We embraced a conception of world-centred education that values not only the skills and knowledge needed for students’ chosen disciplines and future professions, but also practice in positioning as citizens in relation to climate change, Indigenous knowledges and intercultural competence. We proposed an approach to DST which highlights the processes of opposition, cooperation and participation, as a useful lens for analysing student reflections. Further application of this approach to DST is encouraged to explore factors supporting or obstructing students’ willingness to engage with these elements and the option for subjectification.

Our analysis demonstrates the importance of creating space for students to develop their own informed beliefs and take action on real world issues. Universities have taken steps to address some sustainability issues, such as incorporating sustainability principles into campus operations, graduate attributes and degree programs. However, more work needs to be done to address the ever-growing climate crisis and to ensure that First Nations knowledges and that of other cultures are included in collective responses. This further highlights the need for increased opportunities for students to explore the complexities of our world and how to effectively respond to them on both individual and collective scales.

We believe that in demonstrating an opportunity for meaningful engagement that can lead to real-world understanding and positive change in the world, the insights from this research will be of value to educators and institutions who are looking for ways to point their students toward exploring their own positions as citizens, humans and constituents of the Earth.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the students who contributed reflections for this research, and students who responded through the course evaluation survey. Your voice is valued. We also thank the coordinator, lecturers and tutors of COR109 for supporting and facilitating the collection of data. Thanks also go to the anonymous peer reviewers for their constructive comments on an earlier version of this article.

Disclosure statement

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