Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning as a means towards 2 Environmental Citizenship

: This paper draws on the meta-theory of Critical Realism providing a theoretical basis for the pedagogical approach of Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) in supporting Education for Environmental Citizenship (EEC). We argue that while there are different configurations of EEC, inducting citizens in decision-making needs to satisfy these criteria: (a) 17 relevant transdisciplinary knowledge, (b) a values orientation towards both the complexity of, and the necessity for a sustainable world, and (c) a confidence for, and commitment to socio-political action at indivdual and collective levels. In order to provide a rich perspective about how SSIBL has been operationalized in various national contexts through specific teacher professional development, we present four cases purposefully selected as exemplars from different European 22 countries (The Netherlands, Spain, UK and Cyprus). The four cases provide powerful scenarios to discuss different ways in which the SSIBL approach can be implemented in teacher education to 24 meet the criteria identified and thus promote informed and responsible action in relation to socio-25 environmental issues. The whole picture shows a consistent theoretical foundation and interesting 26 opportunities for teacher education, as a relevant strategy to prepare teachers in taking risks and 27 integrating SSIBL within school curricula to foster environmental citizenship.


32
In a recent interview Bill Gates opined that the coronavirus pandemic was a mere 33 episode compared with the existential threat to the planet posed by environmental 34 degradation [1]). Life on Earth has become one of the BBC flagship programs, and its 35 presenter, Sir David Attenborough, a global campaigner for environmental protection. At 36 the other end of the age scale, teenager Greta Thunberg has stirred people of all age 37 groups to take a position on excess consumerism. Pressure groups like Extinction 38 Rebellion have gathered popularity from many sections of the population. Likewise, more 39 than 94% of a sample of 27,881 EU citizens reported, in face-to-face interviews, that the 40 environment is personally relevant to them [2]. 'Sustainability' and 'Environment' have 41 now become key terms in socio-political action. 42 Environmental Education has gradually been incorporated into school curricula with 43 distinct philosophical approaches, some focusing on the importance of fundamental 44 change in practice (Education for Sustainability, EfS), some on the three pillars of 45 'economy', 'society' and 'environment' (Education for Sustainable Development, ESD) and 46 some which align Environmental Education more closely to science education [3]. 47 Whichever educational approach is adopted, they draw on common knowledge and skills: 48 a depth of scientific (including environmental) knowledge and an understanding of 49 citizenship action personally, socially and globally [4]. This type of Education for 50 Environmental Citizenship (EEC) has therefore become a central aspect of debate in recent 51 times, for instance through the ongoing European Network of Environmental Citizenship 52 [5,6] which raises the need for further theorization of EEC from an epistemological 53 perspective. 54 Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) has been placed within the 55 pedagogical landscape of EEC by the European Network for Environmental Citizenship 56 [6] We intend to provide a theoretical foundation to this pedagogical approach and to 57 discuss various learning scenarios developed in collaboration with teachers, to illustrate 58 how SSIBL has been operationalized in four different countries through teacher education. 59 The learning scenarios co-designed with teachers in the four different countries will be 60 discussed on the basis of the underlying values, the relevant transdisciplinary knowledge 61 mobilized and their potential to support responsible and informed socio-political action. 62 Therefore, the main objectives of the present work are: 63 1.
To provide an epistemological foundation for the SSIBL model, as a powerful 64 pedagogical approach to support education for environmental citizenship. 65 2.
To illustrate how the SSIBL pedagogy has been operationalized in four differ-66 ent countries through teacher education. 67 3.
To provide concrete co-designed learning scenarios to apply relevant transdis-68 ciplinary knowledge and a value-based orientation to develop commitment to environ-69 mental socio-political action at personal and communal levels.  71 One of the problems facing both science and environmental educators today is the 72 diverse approaches to epistemology. There are two distinct educational discourses (and 73 many intermediate ones). One argues that non-specialists have misconceptions about the 74 causes of environmental phenomena and that any action taken presupposes authoritative 75 scientific causal explanations, for example about atmospheric effects [e.g., [7][8][9][10]. For any 76 action to be effective, actors must understand the scientific explanations behind these 77 effects. Another discourse maintains that scientific and environmental knowledge is 78 derived and contextualized as a result of action; participants learn as they go along and 79 the 'knowledge-in-practice' they accrue is often used to answer specific questions, in other 80 words knowing-in-action [11][12]. These poles of research traditions reflect Simonneaux's 81 [13] hot and cold extremities of educational priorities. At the cold end is mastery of 82 'sedimented' knowledge in the promotion of technoscience; issues are drawn on to 83 illustrate or reinforce central scientific concepts. At the hot end, students understand the 84 need to recontextualize destabilized knowledge in dealing with controversial issues. 85 This spectrum is characterised in three teaching traditions in environmental and 86 sustainability education [14][15]. The fact-based tradition, consistent with the cold end of the 87 spectrum, relates most closely to the emphasis on scientific knowledge as a precursor to 88 solving problems. Scientific concepts are taught, and it is assumed they can be applied to 89 a particular issue. The environmental problems are mainly seen as ecological and 90 detached from a social context. This essentialist approach focuses on disciplinary 91 knowledge compared with the progressivism of the development of the individual [16].

Theoretical background
The second, normative tradition recognizes that human wellbeing is inseparable from 93 the sustainability of the planet, derived from a shared sense of the common good, and that 94 authoritative scientific knowledge can provide a guide to the best way of living. Problem-95 solving of this nature takes experience and attitudes into account; teaching strategies 96 might entail groups with different experiences using their knowledge to help solve a 97 problem. With its reliance on the authority of science it has connections to essentialism 98 with progressive approaches. 99 The third teaching tradition, the pluralistic tradition, is reconstructionist in that it 100 recognizes that social justice is intricately bound with problems of sustainability, that 101 science alone cannot provide solutions, but that a transdisciplinary approach is called 102 upon drawing on science, humanities, the arts as well as human experience in order to 103 address moral and political problems relating to the environment through democratic 104 participation and action [17]. It is this third teaching tradition that the Socio-Scientific 105 Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) pedagogical approach adheres to [18][19].  [18][19] conforms broadly to a pluralistic approach in that it is inquiry-driven 109 and identifies problems which need solving drawing on transdisciplinary methods in 110 seeking solutions to a variety of common problems associated with the uncertainties of a 111 post-normal world [20], i.e.one such as in the present COVID pandemic where facts are 112 uncertain, values in dispute such as the push or resistance to the global distribution of 113 vaccines, stakes are high in literal terms of life and death, and decisions urgent, for 114 example the need to trial vaccines before standard regulatory periods. Figure 1 115 demonstrates the approach behind SSIBL [19]. SSIBL was formulated through an EU 116 project, 'Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in Science 117 Education' (PARRISE), to bring to the fore transnational ideas, best instructional practices 118 and resources relating to learning about responsible innovation [21]. SSIBL links three 119 pedagogical approaches: a) Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE) which takes inquiry 120 as its starting point where knowledge can both be used and constructed, b) Socio-Scientific 121 Issues (SSI) in which inquiry takes place through examining social issues with a strong 122 scientific content such as sustainability, and c) Citizenship Education (CE), which focuses 123 on participatory learning and inquiry, with objectives consistent with democratic 124 practices. These ideas can be encompassed through inquiries which are directed towards 125 sustainable, socially desirable, and ethically acceptable outcomes [22]. The three pedagogical approaches and their interconnections illustrated in Figure 1 130 have been organized into three instructional phases formulating a practice-based model 131 that can be used by educators across age phases and with teachers. These instructional 132 phases consist of: 133 a) ASK, which focuses on posing authentic questions framed within particular SSI-134 based perspectives that can be investigated by students; 135 b) FIND OUT, which focuses on students enacting or carrying out different types of 136 socially responsible inquiries (structured, guided, open) [23] in order to collect evidence 137 and unveil different perspectives to answer their questions; and finally 138 c) ACT, which focuses on how active citizenship is enacted by students, who consider 139 the outcomes of their investigations and devise appropriate forms of action (e.g., 140 campaigning for climate action, writing to their local authorities) that can empower them 141 to contribute responsibly within their communities, at local, national or global levels [18- 142 19]. 143 In the following sections, we discuss how the theoretical framework of critical 144 realism [24] can provide the underlying epistemology for the SSIBL pedagogy within a 145 pluralist teaching tradition [25] which emphasizes transdisciplinarity, action and a values-146 oriented educational approach. This aims to address what we consider to be shortcomings 147 of the fact-based and normative teaching traditions, previously identified in 148 environmental and sustainability education [14][15][16][17]. Our focus on transdisciplinary 149 inquiry, action and values-orientation through SSIBL promotes the idea of human 150 emancipation in the context of sustainability, and fosters environmental citizenship. 151 By emancipation we draw on the praxis of actors making sense of their communal 152 lives and acting in ways which are consistent with their values, reason and experience 153 [26]. For the sake of illustration, it is possible to exemplify how emancipation might be 154 achieved. One approach might be for a student to learn from a more experienced and 155 wiser other, for example a teacher, and to act accordingly based on advice. Another way 156 might be a 'pragmatist' perspective [27] which is to make an efficacious decision based on 157 deciding rationally what are one's own best interests. The problem with the pragmatist 158 perspective is that actions might be based on false beliefs. A third position, and one which 159 is consistent with a critical realist approach, is that action takes place within a framework 160 of meanings: social discourse elaborates a social reality which offers itself open to critique, 161 hence an understanding of social science and the dialectic of reasons would underpin 162 SSIBL. is. It recognizes the difference between a real world, a realist ontology, and our knowledge 167 of it. Hence it differs from empiricism where data correlations conflate reality with 168 knowledge, and also from interpretivism because it recognizes a reality beyond 169 subjectivity [28]. In science domains, an important aspect of a critical realist (CR) approach 170 [24,25 ] is that explanations are mediated by the real world we live in, a world which is 171 an open system in scientific terms. 172 At some stage of their school lives pupils are taught about the Law of Falling Bodies 173 often accompanied by an apocryphal account of Galileo at the top of the Leaning Tower 174 of Pisa dropping two objects of very different masses at the same time and demonstrating 175 that they hit the ground simultaneously. But everyday experience suggests this is not the 176 case. Drop a lead weight and a feather at the same time and the lead weight will always 177 reach the ground first. It seems that everyday experience contradicts the validity of a 178 scientific law. This difference can be explained by the fact that the law only holds true in 179 an airless medium, a vacuum, and that air currents impede the fall of the feather. The 180 distinction drawn here is between what within CR would be considered as the closed 181 world of Covering Laws and the open systems of the real world we inhabit and 182 experience. The Law of Falling Bodies holds true in closed systems, i.e., in a vacuum, but 183 needs to be amended in open systems, the world we experience. 184 One way to take account of the lived experienced world is to draw on the fact that 185 objects have causal powers or tendencies [29]. Using a causal powers explanation [30] we 186 can state that the Earth has a tendency to draw objects towards it such that they accelerate 187 towards its centre regardless of mass. Objects have a tendency to fall towards the center 188 of the Earth. Air currents have a tendency to resist the fall of objects. If we see these objects 189 -the Earth, falling objects, air currents -as having causal powers or tendencies then we 190 can explain the observed behavior in the world of experience in terms of interactions. We 191 do not need to start with a vacuum and demonstrate ideal closed conditions; we can start 192 with the real lived world. 193 To take another example, metallic zinc has the 'power' or potential to reduce solvated 194 hydrogen ions in an acid into hydrogen molecules in the form of hydrogen gas. 195 Zn(s) + 2H + (aq)= Zn ++ (aq)+ H2(g) 196 The term 'power' is used because this potential is only activated when the zinc is 197 immersed in the acid. Similarly, the acid has the potential to strip electrons off zinc when 198 they react together. The reaction is explained by hidden mechanisms, in this case electrode 199 potentials which contribute to redox reactions. The redox chemical reaction -the event -200 takes place when these powers or tendencies are actuated. So, one aspect of a CR 201 pedagogy in science is to start from events or issues which pupils experience -problems 202 which need solving, and thus require taking action -rather than abstract concepts. A central concern of CR is the concept of 'emergence'; that understanding a particular 206 phenomenon goes beyond explaining its constituent parts. An example is water, H2O, a 207 liquid at room temperature. Water is comprised of two elements (hydrogen and oxygen) 208 both of which are flammable gases at room temperature. The compound liquid water is 209 chemically different from its constituent elements; we can deduce this a posteriori. 210 A more complex example is consciousness. Consciousness implies a sentient mind. 211 A necessary condition of consciousness is physico-chemical and biological: a sentient 212 mind relies on a functioning nervous system, itself dependent on the supply of nutrients, 213 in other words a balanced and varied diet. But consciousness reflects a psychological state 214 of mind, a social awareness of others and an understanding of historical and cultural 215 context. A pre-requirement of consciousness is physico-chemical mechanisms, but it can 216 only be more completely understood through psychological, social and political contexts. 217 Any conditions which might prevent that level of reflection and awareness, for example, 218 sustenance, leisure, social contacts, education, impede human autonomy and 219 emancipation. Consequently, a consideration of SSIBL based on the metatheory of CR also 220 necessitates the inclusion of values, social justice and transdisciplinarity as important 221 dimensions of understanding emergent issues and events. 222 Further, events such as the maintenance of multispecies habitation of a pond, the 223 flourishing of a forest, the visit of a robin to a garden feeding spot can be explained by a 224 variety of mechanisms at different disciplinary levels. Only by incorporating these levels 225 into an overarching explanation can the event be understood. Concepts from different 226 fields of study need to be brought together to make sense of experience or an event 227 meaning that transdisciplinarity is a necessary dimension of a CR pedagogy, and a key 228 principle of the SSIBL pedagogy. 229 Within SSIBL, events or issues rather than concepts form the basis of study. Consider 230 a typical SSIBL activity such as pupils inquiring into heat loss in their school and wastage 231 of fuel. Such an inquiry might involve measuring where the heat loss takes place, how it 232 can be reduced through an understanding of heat transfer, what materials might be 233 needed to do this, how resources might be harnessed to enable this to take place, 234 persuading relevant authorities that action needs to be taken. Importantly, reflection on 235 values also becomes part of the learning process (e.g. considering reducing the 236 consumption of fossil fuels). According to Hadjichambis & Reis [4], environmental citizens become agents of 240 change through individual and collective actions aimed at creating a more sustainable and 241 just world, exercising their rights and duties as responsible citizens in the public and 242 private spheres. Environmental citizenship is considered a prerequisite to sustainability 243 [31], as it can enable young people to take action and develop pro-environmental 244 behaviors. At the same time, EC is a complex, multifaceted and multidimensional concept, 245 that requires engagement and action at local, national, and global levels, individually and 246 collectively, privately and publicly [5]. 247 All three instructional phases of the SSIBL pedagogical approach (ASK, FIND OUT, 248 ACT) require students to equip themselves with the knowledge, dispositions and skills 249 they need to act as environmental citizens. When students engage in the exploration of 250 contemporaneous environmental issues or dilemmas through the SSIBL approach, they 251 apply experimental or social inquiry processes utilizing transdisciplinary knowledge to 252 develop an in-depth view and to collect research evidence. They identify multiple 253 perspectives and interest groups while combining scientific knowledge with social, 254 environmental and ethical considerations and they use democratic processes and open 255 deliberation to make informed decisions and take action. Organizing such 256 transdisciplinary inquiries is clearly a pedagogic challenge [32-33]; it requires whole 257 school support, requisite teacher training, and a willingness of both teachers and pupils 258 to work on a transdisciplinary basis amongst others. In the following sections we use four 259 exemplars to illustrate how the SSIBL approach can be implemented to emphasize 260 transdisciplinarity, action and a values-oriented educational approach as a means 261 towards environmental citizenship. 262 263 Four cases have been purposefully selected from different European countries (The 264 Netherlands, Spain, UK and Cyprus) that participated in the PARRISE project and 265 utilized SSIBL within teacher professional development (TPD) courses with pre-service 266 or in-service teachers at the elementary (Cyprus) and secondary (The Netherlands, UK, 267 Spain) education levels. Each case provides insights on the multiple ways in which SSIBL 268 has been implemented in order to address socio-environmental issues placing emphasis 269 on the diversity with which a novel pedagogical approach can be adapted in different 270 educational contexts [34]. The cases presented illustrate the affordances of SSIBL as a 271 means towards environmental citizenship in each context, through a focus on informed 272 and responsible action-taking in relation to environmental and sustainability issues, the 273 ways in which a values orientation to recognizing the complexity of sustainability issues 274 is considered by teachers, and how transdisciplinarity has been used.

277
In the Netherlands, the secondary science curriculum pays explicit attention to 278 reasoning on socio-scientific dilemmas. Students of chemistry, biology, and physics need 279 to be able to distinguish between scientific facts, normative-societal considerations, and 280 personal opinions when evaluating SSIs. Among the SSI contexts included in the 281 curriculum, many relate to sustainability, such as human influence on the Earth system, 282 energy preservation and sustainable production processes. The chemistry curriculum, 283 which was revised in 2016, goes further. It builds upon the principle of 'green chemistry' 284 (Groene Chemie), which includes such skills as recognizing realized, possible, and 285 desirable changes in industry and chemical processes [35] (p.6). 286 Despite this explicit presence of SSI and sustainability-related contexts in the 287 curriculum, many Dutch science teachers experience difficulties in incorporating them 288 into their daily practice [36]. Dealing with personal values and beliefs, and ethical aspects 289 of science, is challenging for many teachers, and other parts of the curriculum are 290 experienced as needing more time or being more important for national exams. Teachers 291 indicate lack of time as one of the main difficulties. 292 To support science teachers in addressing sustainability issues in their daily practice, 293 SSIBL was implemented in pre-service teacher training across 11 cohorts (n=86) at 294 Utrecht University over the last five years. For these training sessions, SSIBL was 295 operationalized in seven stages: i) introduction to the dilemma, ii) initial opinion-forming, 296 iii) creating a need-to-know, iv) inquiry into scientific, social, and personal aspects of the 297 dilemma, v) dialogue, vi) decision making, and vii) reflection [36]. At each stage, 298 examples showing how to introduce SSIBL in classroom practice were discussed and pre-299 service teachers (PST) could practice specific stages in small-group tasks. The SSIBL 300 training consisted of two 1.5-hour face-to-face sessions and a take-home (group) 301 assignment to design a SSIBL lesson, within the context of a 20-week pre-service training 302 course. 303 Lesson design plans made by the student teachers were collected (n=39), 19 of which 304 were based on sustainability-related SSIs by the PSTs own free choice. Additionally, PSTs 305 completed a questionnaire with five evaluative, open-ended questions on the SSIBL 306 approach. These were analysed for common themes in their perceived possibilities of 307 SSIBL as well as their expected struggles with the approach. The 19 lesson designs were 308 analysed based on the occurrence of the ASK, FIND OUT, and ACT instructional phases, 309 and how PSTs addressed these phases in their teaching and learning activities. Overall, the teacher training sessions supported PSTs in designing SSIBL-based 313 lessons, although certain aspects seem underexposed. The analysis of the 19 lesson 314 designs showed that the ASK phase was mainly initiated by media of some form to raise 315 students' questions, including watching video footage (4 designs), reading articles about 316 the SSI (4 designs), and dialogue about statements regarding specific SSIs (2 designs). In 317 the FIND OUT phase, inquiry was more readily applied on social aspects (10 designs, 318 e.g., mapping stakeholders' positions, interviewing parents), and scientific aspects (9 319 designs, e.g., literature research or other types of sources-based research), with personal 320 inquiry being least common (5 designs, e.g., students articulating their personal values 321 and beliefs in a dialogue). Common interpretations of the ACT phase included 322 constructing a poster (5 designs), writing an article or essay (5 designs), forming an 323 opinion on a dilemma (3 designs), and giving advice, by means of letters to stakeholders 324 (2 designs). Four designs lacked a clear ACT phase, and half of the designs were explicitly 325 linked to the national curriculum. 326 To illustrate what these lesson plans look like, we will discuss one design in more 327 detail. In this design, consisting of four lessons, the PST selected an environmental issue 328 from the students' community (local issue). This issue involved a chemical company that 329 dumped their waste into a local river, thereby introducing the potential carcinogen C8 330 into the environment. In doing so, the company stayed within boundaries set by the 331 government, yet inhabitants of the area did not trust the guidelines. They feared the 332 potential carcinogen was responsible for the inexplicable illnesses from which some of 333 the factory workers suffered. 334 The main goal of the PST's design was to foster students' informed opinion-forming 335 about this issue. The first lesson focused on the ASK phase. Students watched a 336 documentary about the C8 issue, while individually answering opinion-forming 337 questions, such as 'Do you think the boundaries set by the government are fair?', 'Do you 338 think residents have a reason to worry?'. Afterwards, students discussed their views in 339 small groups. They had to list stakeholders of the issue as homework. The second lesson 340 made them discuss the views of these stakeholders and consider with which stakeholders 341 they identified most strongly by physically positioning themselves on a line in the 342 classroom. Their position on the line represented with which stakeholder they identified 343 most (controversy line activity). With this activity, content-related and normative student 344 questions were raised. As a next step in the design the PST raised the question 'What do 345 we need to know before we can form a well-informed opinion about this issue?'. 346 The FIND OUT phase started after the first lesson, with a homework assignment. 347 Students had to seek information on the potential toxicology of C8. To facilitate this, the 348 teacher provided some pointers. In the third lesson, they performed scientific inquiry by 349 doing a titration experiment on a water sample of the polluted river. Students titrated 350 several samples, each representing different areas of the river, both upstream and 351 downstream of the factory. In this way they identified the absence or presence of 352 (different) C8 concentrations in the river water. 353 During the final lesson, the ACT phase started with students discussing the issue 354 based on statements reflecting different sides of the dilemma (e.g., banning C8 from 355 industry, the financial value of human lives, conflict of interest when companies 356 determine the toxicity of their own processes, and governments basing policy on 357 scientific research as opposed to the gut feelings of stakeholders). As a homework 358 assignment, students had to write an argument to substantiate their point of view. Finally, 359 students reflected on the lesson series and their own personal growth in understanding 360 the issue by answering a set of reflective questions. The connection of the lesson plan to 361 the seven educational stages through which SSIBL was operationalized is depicted in 362 This SSIBL design of four lessons shows the transdisciplinary nature of SSIBL-lessons, 369 which involve scientific, social, and personal inquiry. Students view a real life, local issue 370 through the eyes of different stakeholders. They perform different kinds of inquiry, for 371 instance, relating to scientific processes and normative considerations about the issue. 372 Exploration of values, from both the students themselves and the different stakeholders 373 involved in the selected issue, is central to this design. This way, they experience how 374 SSIBL can be used to make sense of actual, real life issues in their own community. 375 Based on the analysis of 19 of these lesson designs, we found that the SSIBL guidelines 376 were helpful in structuring SSIBL-based lessons, implementing a diverse range of 377 environmental issues that were linked to the regular curriculum. However, most lesson 378 designs included scientific and social inquiry activities, underexposing personal inquiry. 379 The open-ended questionnaire showed that PSTs felt SSIBL was of added value, e.g.: 380 'SSIBL is very appealing to me. It makes students think about social, moral and complex issues to 381 which there is usually no unequivocal answer. It teaches them to look at issues in a more nuanced 382 way' . PSTs indicated that SSIBL could show how science at school relates to the 383 real world, e.g. 'SSIBL is important because it connects topics with 'the real world'. This answers 384 the 'why should I learn this' question. I like connecting school topics with contexts (teaching 385 doesn't stop outside the classroom)' . Moreover, they indicated that it makes science 386 more interesting to students and stimulates critical thinking, but they perceived it would 387 take much time to effectively implement it into their teaching, e.g. 'The downside is, it takes 388 time; the curriculum is already overloaded' . 389 The educational sequence used in these teacher training sessions will help science 390 teacher educators and teachers to enact SSIBL, thereby fostering students' opinion-391 forming and decision-making skills in complex environmental issues.

394
The main aim of the Spanish case is to describe how the SSIBL approach has been 395 introduced in teacher initial education in Spain at both primary and secondary school 396 levels, and to illustrate how it might be used to design classroom activities that empower 397 students to act on contemporary socio-scientific issues as responsible environmental 398 citizens. 399 The SSIBL approach was first introduced in Spain in 2015 at both primary and 400 secondary school levels. The preliminary work focused on finding connections between 401 SSIBL and the Spanish educational curriculum [37]. Curriculum mapping was 402 considered essential to show teachers how SSIBL might assist students in achieving the 403 intended learning outcomes. Connections between SSIBL and the Spanish curriculum 404 have been identified both in terms of key competences and transdisciplinary learning 405 outcomes such as critical thinking or problem-solving skills, and in relation to content 406 knowledge associated with different school subjects (math, science, citizenship 407 education), as illustrated in the example shown in Table 2. 408 After the curriculum mapping task, a model for SSIBL teacher education was 409 developed through different cycles of implementation, evaluation and improvement. 410 The model was based on the specialized literature about effective teacher professional 411 development [38] and has at its core the three instructional steps of the SSIBL approach: 412 ASK, FIND OUT, ACT. The outer circles in Figure 2 represent the different phases of the 413 Spanish Teacher Professional Development (TPD). The SSIBL model represented by the 414 inner cycle was a referent point in any of the six TPD phases represented by the outer 415 cycles, thus supporting teachers to acquire, experience and implement the SSIBL 416 model: Spanish PSTs were introduced to contemporary issues using news and media, 417 they were immersed in socio-scientific inquiry about them in order to experience the 418 SSIBL approach as learners, they reflected on the educational potential of the process as 419 future practitioners, were invited to co-design new SSIBL activities, and discuss them 420 with other colleagues building a community of learning and practice [39]. Special attention was paid to the process of co-design. PSTs were provided with 426 explicit criteria to design high quality SSIBL activities, well aligned with the SSIBL 427 framework (Figure 1). Quality criteria referred to making good use of media to bring 428 authenticity into the science classroom through the selection of contemporary socio-429 scientific issues unravelling the complexity of the issue through controversy mapping 430 [40], identifying links with the Spanish curriculum, defining consistent learning 431 outcomes and assessment processes, formulating questions for learning, scaffolding and 432 encouraging students' inquiry and action-taking. Quality criteria were discussed with 433 PSTs in advance and were later used for self-evaluation and peer evaluation [41][42]. 434 To illustrate how the SSIBL approach might be used to educate scientifically literate 435 students and responsible environmental citizens, we present in more detail an exemplar 436 SSIBL design developed by Spanish secondary school PSTs. The starting activity 437 designed by PSTs provides students with news about COVID-19 and asks them which 438 type of face masks they would choose and why, to protect themselves and others from 439  To respond to the emergent issue and the initial questions posed, students are asked 441 to inquire about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and how masks protect people from infection. 442 Besides health issues, choosing a particular mask has a wide range of social, economic 443 and environmental implications. To evaluate environmental implications, students 444 should find out, for any type of mask, where raw materials come from, under what 445 conditions they are produced, how long the transport routes take to bring raw materials 446 and final products, how often they are used, and how they are disposed of. 447 The SSIBL approach provides opportunities for conducting both social and 448 experimental science research. Inquiry activities resembling social research are a) making 449 a survey to learn about a local population's mask preferences, as well as a local 450 population's health and environmental awareness; b) researching about the life cycle of 451 different types of masks, and c) collecting key information from reliable information 452 sources (those supported by scientific evidence and widely recognized institutions). 453 Inquiry activities resembling experimental research are d) the analysis of masks' 454 permeability to coloured liquids sprayed from various distances, and e) observation of 455 how contact and distance influence pathogens' infections, by checking, over time, how 456 pieces of fruit located at different distances from mouldy oranges might get infected. 457 Table 2 includes the key elements of the SSIBL lesson plan about masks for protection 458 against COVID-19.  In the following, we discuss how the SSIBL lesson design developed in the Spanish 466 context by secondary PSTs is aligned with the epistemology proposed in this article and 467 exhibits the key features of the SSIBL pedagogy, as an interesting approach to education 468 for environmental citizenship. 469 To address the emergent issue about masks and COVID-19 protection using a SSIBL 470 approach, students should ASK key questions, FIND OUT about them to collect 471 substantial evidence and take consequent ACTIONS based on their findings. The whole 472 process is addressed from a pluralistic perspective aligned with the metatheory of CR 473 and therefore, students are encouraged to explore the implications of wearing different 474 types of COVID masks from the perspective of individual and public health, the 475 economy and the environment, using a wide variety of sources and methods. Therefore, 476 to make an informed decision they should combine both social and experimental 477 research and make meaningful use of relevant knowledge from different disciplines 478 while inquiring about virus infection and a material's properties, or while applying 479 mathematics to estimate economic costs and the life cycle of the masks' components. 480 Assessing the life cycle of a particular product is a challenging but inspiring task, where 481 it is necessary to consider a wide range of different aspects, such as, where and how the 482 raw materials are obtained, the manufacturing process requirements (water, heating, 483 electricity, ventilation), where they are produced and transported and how long is the 484 path between the origin and the destination of the products. Finally, it is important to 485 consider if the products can be reused, for how long or if they can be recycled. The 486 environmental implications of choosing one product over another should be evaluated, 487 not only in terms of resources and energy consumption, but also, in terms of the impact 488 of the processes involved (pollution, greenhouses emissions, altering ecosystems, etc.). 489 Finally, the lesson design encourages students to take informed actions in relation to 490 mask wearing, developing environmental awareness and individual and collective 491 responsibility for both health and sustainability issues, thus exhibiting a values 492 orientation and a commitment to both individual and collective action. Action at the 493 individual level mainly concerns the private sphere where students can make informed 494 choices to reduce the environmental impact of their own actions related to choosing and 495 wearing a particular mask and to exercising their duties and responsibilities as citizens, 496 when creating safe and fair living conditions, protecting themselves and others. The 497 social level is addressed when students engage in collective actions such as distributing 498 information leaflets to disseminate their research results or campaigning to raise public 499 awareness of the different implications of particular behaviours, in this case, taking the 500 social responsibility of wearing a mask for COVID-19 protection and caring about the 501 health, economic and environmental implications of choosing one mask over another. 502 The above considerations illustrate how the SSIBL approach may be enacted in a 503 particular context (the Spanish context), to empower teachers to develop values-504 orientated educational interventions, where students can go through both social and 505 experimental inquiry about relevant emergent issues to construct and use 506 transdisciplinary knowledge, while developing a commitment for informed and 507 responsible action. 508 509

510
As part of the PARRISE project, a SSIBL-focused TPD for PSTs was embedded in a 511 secondary science initial teacher education program in the south of England. Across three 512 years, 103 PSTs took part in SSIBL-based activities engaging them in scenarios as learners 513 (e.g. 'Would you vote against drugs testing on animals?'), as designers and teachers 514 (planning and implementing SSIBL-based lessons), and as reflective practitioners 515 (reflecting on using the SSIBL framework, and on their students' learning during that 516 process). A case study of one male PST in his early 20s, Ryan (a pseudonym), who 517 showed a keen interest in the SSIBL approach at the start of the academic year is 518 presented to illustrate how SSIBL can function as a pedagogical means to environmental 519 citizenship. Data collected from Ryan include his lesson plans, and classroom materials 520 (e.g., PPT presentations, and student worksheets) from teaching 12-16 year olds, a SSIBL 521 lesson observation (Energy Sources, Table 3), and a reflective discussion about the lesson 522 observed. This data set is analysed to illustrate the ways in which transdisciplinary 523 inquiry, action and the value and necessity of sustainability were addressed in Ryan's 524 design and implementation of SSIBL lessons. Ryan designed and implemented three sustainability-focused SSIBL lesson topics 528 (two lessons per topic), with three different year groups. For each of the three topics Ryan 529 designed and taught two lessons following a similar approach across topics. The first 530 lesson of each topic focused on Ryan presenting to students the topic, key questions and 531 socio-scientific context (ASK). The 'Energy Sources' topic was contextualized for the 532 students at a personal and local level, by using the example of an energy power plant in 533 their own town, with implications directly affecting them. The 'Recycling' topic had both 534 a local and global context as it was based on an imaginary scenario of students and 535 residents of a town working together to decide whether they should ban plastic bags 536 from their shops [43]. Students had to consider what they would do at a personal and 537 local level as residents of this imaginary town ('what would YOU do', Table 3), but they 538 were also dealing with a global issue, as the ways in which plastics are sourced and 539 disposed are both socio-environmental issues. Finally, the socio-scientific context for the 540 'Digging for Trouble' topic was at a global level based on mining in different countries 541 (e.g., Brazil, China) but also asked students to consider on a hypothetical level what they 542 would do. 543 Transdisciplinary knowledge within socio-environmental issues was included in 544 Ryan's lesson designs as illustrated through the keywords chosen, which were used 545 when introducing the socio-scientific context of each lesson. For instance, in the 'Digging 546 for Trouble' lessons, the keywords were: 'Environment, Social Issues, Cultural Issues, 547 Finance'. Evidence from students' presentations for the topic, indicates that student 548 groups were able to incorporate environmental knowledge (e.g., pollution of the Amazon) 549 as well as other types of knowledge, such as political (e.g., role of governments), social 550 (influence on people) and financial (economic impact on people's livelihoods). In the 551 Energy Sources lessons the keywords given were 'Environment, Financial issues, Social 552 issues', again emphasizing the environmental dimension of the issue discussed as well 553 as its socio-scientific context, and the presence of controversy, creating the conditions for 554 emergence of issues, that were the starting points for students' socially-responsible 555 transdisciplinary inquiries. Scientific knowledge required was focusing on the types of 556 energy sources that exist (e.g. fossil fuels, biomass, solar power), which students had 557 previously learned about. The FIND OUT instructional phase was based on structured 558 inquiry [23] requiring students to work in groups to collect evidence through the sources 559 provided (printed material, online sources), to analyse this evidence and answer the key 560 questions given to them. The Recycling topic similarly required and included 561 consideration of scientific knowledge ('environmental aspects associated with using 562 polymers', lesson plan) and when considering the benefits and challenges of recycling 563 (e.g. 'melting plastics needs heat. Supplying heat may use up fossil fuels and produce 564 greenhouse gases'; student handout) as well as financial (impact on local shops and 565 shoppers) and social implications. 566 ACT was framed in Ryan's lessons around informed decision-making. During the 567 second lesson of each topic, students were asked to create a group presentation outlining 568 the results of their investigations, suggest actions they could take to address their 569 findings and justify their decision. Ryan's approach to the ACT instructional phase was 570 analysed using a three-level framework emerging from previous analyses of SSIBL lesson 571 designs [44][45] (Figure 3). The three levels of ACT are placed on a continuum from raising students' awareness 577 and knowledge of an SSI (Level 1), to creating the intention to act by providing students 578 with opportunities to consider what actions they would take at a hypothetical level 579 (Level 2) and modelling those in class (e.g. taking a vote on an issue), and finally, enabling 580 and supporting students both to consider actions they would take and most importantly, 581 enact change as a result of their learning (Level 3). Table 3 summarizes the three levels 582 of representation of the ACT phase in Ryan's lessons.  L2 -Intention to Act: students suggest and justify the course of action they would take personally, with emphasis on social wellbeing Science in Society -'Digging for Trouble' Your task is to research the case study you've been given and decide what needs to be done to fix any problems in the area.
Include: -What's being mined, what is it used for? -Who benefits from the mine? -Who is harmed by it? -What would you do to keep everyone happy? Why? (Source: PPT slides) 588 The approach to informed decision-making and taking action that Ryan used when 589 enacting SSIBL was represented at the level of 'intended action' in all three topics. Ryan 590 was able to move beyond simply raising awareness of these socio-environmental issues 591 but at the same time, he did not explicitly enact action within his planning and teaching. 592 For instance, in the Energy Sources topic Ryan initially asked students to summarize their 593 findings in the form of a short presentation; he then focused on the students' intention to 594 act by asking them to consider what they would do and why, before also allowing 595 students to participate in voting for which energy sources they thought should be used 596 by their local council. Level 3 of the action continuum could be represented by students 597 writing to their local council to share the results of this voting and to make their views 598 heard. Ryan's SSIBL lesson designs and implementations were consistent with SSIBL's focus 602 on socially responsible transdisciplinary inquiries, whereby students were asked to 603 investigate a question to enact change [18][19][21][22]. The sustainability-focused lessons 604 analyzed illustrate how the various levels of civic engagement for environmental 605 citizenship (local, global scales) [5] can be addressed in different ways within and beyond 606 classroom settings. Education for environmental citizenship using the SSIBL framework, 607 can challenge the distinction that is often made between these levels as such issues can 608 emerge as objects of investigation at multiple levels and scales. For instance, 609 contextualizing and presenting to the students the Recycling lessons at both public (local, 610 global) and personal levels made the dimension of personal action more evident in the 611 students' learning, and at the same time allowed them to consider this socio-612 environmental issue in relation to society at large; this approach to contextualizing socio-613 environmental issues provides affordances for developing students' environmental 614 citizenship. 615 Further, Ryan's SSIBL lessons illustrate how citizenship and action-taking can be 616 conceptualized in educational settings through a focus on decision-making. Ryan's 617 inclusion of the opportunity to vote at the end of the lesson on what action to take about 618 the socio-environmental issue in hand, offered students opportunities to engage in 619 learning that had elements of democratic participation (i.e. taking a vote on an issue). 620 This in turn created affordances for students to engage in environmental citizenship 621 learning as part of their science lessons, and made stronger the presence of citizenship 622 dimensions (e.g. person action, taking a vote) in students' learning. At the same time, the 623 third level of ACT was not present in Ryan's lessons, indicating that enacting action 624 within classroom settings can be a challenging area, which requires continuous 625 engagement and explicit consideration by teachers as they learn to enact SSIBL. 626 627

628
In Cyprus, several co-design groups were created, each consisting of in-service 629 science teachers and a university researcher who facilitated each co-design group. Over 630 the course of the two iterations of the TPD, 67 Biology, Chemistry, and Elementary School 631 science teachers collaborated in 12 co-design teams, to produce SSIBL curricula that 632 adopted the ASK, FIND OUT, ACT approach, and were built around (a) socio-scientific 633 controversies with local impact, (b) student inquiry, and (c) active citizenship decision-634 making. 635 The TPD's co-design approach situated professional learning in actual practice, 636 established teachers as intellectual partners in design and, thus, augmented the 637 sustainability of an innovation such as the PARRISE SSIBL approach [46]. Each co-design 638 group met both face-to-face and online for a total of 39 (TPD1) and 43.5 contact hours 639 (TPD2). Each group developed and enacted a SSIBL learning module, several of which 640 had a sustainability focus, such as: 641 • Endangered species (lower secondary biology education and elementary science 642 group 1) 643 • Biodiesel or petroleum diesel (lower secondary chemistry education) 644 • Disinfecting drinking water (upper secondary chemistry education) 645 • Which shopping bag should you use (elementary science group 1) 646 In this article, we draw from one of the 12 co-design groups; this co-design team 647 included five in-service elementary school science teachers, who taught 2 nd , 3 rd , and 4 th 648 grade at four different schools. The teachers, with the support of the university 649 researcher, met regularly and co-designed a SSIBL module that was subsequently 650 implemented with 73 students. The SSIBL module was designed for five 80-minute 651 lessons, and the activities centered around the ASK, FIND OUT, ACT dimensions. The 652 driving question for the students was formulated as "Plastic, biodegradable, or fabric bags? 653 Which one would you choose to carry your groceries?" This was an authentic question at the 654 time of the co-design, as the law banning the use of free plastic bags was not instituted 655 in Cyprus until two years after the conclusion of the co-design unit. 656 In the FIND OUT phase, students engaged in different inquiry activities designed to 657 help them understand which of the different types of materials would be more 658 environmentally sustainable. The jigsaw approach [47] was adopted: jigsaw is a 659 collaborative pedagogical approach, in which students work in small expert groups to 660 investigate complementary but different aspects of a problem. In our case, each expert 661 group took on the role of a stakeholder group. Following their investigation, the expert 662 groups break up and form synthesis groups, each one comprised from one representative 663 from each expert group. The synthesis groups discuss and, through dialogue and 664 evidence from the sources they studied, reach a decision on the driving question, which 665 they then propose to the plenary. Through these activities students were expected to 666 understand that terminating the use of plastic bags does not automatically lead to 667 resolving the impact on the environment, as it increases the use of other raw materials, 668 something that may also impact the environment. 669 After their work in the expert and synthesis groups, the students participated in 670 plenary discussions that connected the classroom activity with their local context. 671 Students decided to take action; the following are some of the actions realized by the 73 672 students with the support of their teachers: 673 • Creation of a survey on the use of plastic bags, which was administered to peers, 674 teachers, and parents and was used during the students' decision making.

675
• Creating informational leaflets and sharing them with their peers, their parents and 676 from door to door in their neighbourhood.

677
• Creating fabric bags from reusable materials and explaining their advantages.

ASK
The learning activity begins with the following event, presented to the students via an animation their teachers prepared: A family is at a supermarket cashier, who presents them with three alternatives to carry their groceries: Plastic, biodegradable, or fabric bags? The students' mission is to find out which is the most environmentally sustainable and appropriate choice to carry their groceries.

FIND OUT
Students work in groups following the collaborative inquiry -jigsaw puzzle approach. Each group adopts the perspective of one of the main stakeholder groups: plastic bag factory owners, consumers, and environmental organizations. Students interpret various information sources, collected by their teachers and themselves (i.e., from comics, videos, articles, interviews, posters), which represent the differing viewpoints of the main stakeholders to prepare an evidence-based answer to the driving question.

ACT
Following the work of the expert and synthesis groups (of the jigsaw puzzle approach) students collectively decided to take several actions to raise their community's awareness about the use of plastic bags and the informed decision to use alternative solutions. 690 Data from classroom implementations were collected in the form of videotaped 691 lessons, students' constructed artifacts, researcher field notes and teacher reflections and 692 were analyzed qualitatively. After the classroom implementations, the co-design team, 693 consisting of the in-service teachers and the researcher, met to discuss the effectiveness 694 of the SSIBL materials; during these meetings they constructed a SWOT (Strength-695 Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats) analysis of the learning module and then proceeded 696 with suggestions for the refinement of the activities in the learning module, based on the 697 teachers' reflections. A main question of interest is whether the implementation of the SSIBL approach 701 fostered students' environmental citizenship. Even though the implementation 702 presented challenges, especially due to the teachers' own lack of familiarity with 703 methods such as the jigsaw approach [47], but also due to students needing time to 704 understand how to engage in this new approach, the teachers documented benefits from 705 the implementation of the SSIBL unit, such as an increase in students' participation and 706 active engagement with the learning activities, increased competencies for 707 communication, collaboration and argumentation, self-confidence, scientific, 708 environmental, and social literacy, and improved learning outcomes. When the co-709 design teachers were asked by an independent evaluator to compare the learning that 710 occurred during the SSIBL unit implementation, as compared with other non-SSIBL 711 implementations, they overwhelmingly reported positive outcomes as well. The 712 following excerpt represents the teachers' impressions of how their students approached 713 SSIBL and what they had learned: 714 715 …the only thing I can say is that many times we can ask our students something and they 716 do not remember anything or remember very fragmented information. In contrast, through 717 this program the children learned a lot of things, and they kept them in their memory, because 718 they learned them on their own, we did not teach them. They found out on their own, they 719 discussed them on their own, they supported them on their own, they communicated them 720 to others on their own, so when this knowledge became their experience, they learned it 721 better…this is definitely something they will not forget, as we see unfortunately happening 722 with the lessons we do in our other subjects. The SSIBL module on the most environmentally appropriate choice to grocery 727 shopping bags required students to acquire transdisciplinary knowledge, in that it 728 focused on a social issue that required knowledge about environmental impact and an 729 understanding of the complexity of multiple stakeholders' interests to make an informed 730 decision on which bag is best to use. The students began their quest with an emergent 731 real-life problem they needed to solve; with the support of the jigsaw puzzle pedagogical 732 strategy, they then explored the topic in depth and in breadth, with age-appropriate 733 activities. To be able to decide, students needed to understand the advantages and 734 disadvantages of each type of bag, based on personal criteria but also based on criteria 735 shared by the stakeholder groups. 736 The SSIBL materials and learning activities encouraged respectful dialogue and 737 exchange of ideas between students, supported the development of personal and group-738 based evidence-based answers, promoted argumentation and debate, and created an 739 environment for collective citizenship actions. As evidenced from the teacher reports, 740 classroom observations, and the analysis of students' actions and artifacts, the SSIBL 741 pedagogical framework had an impact on students' interest, motivation to engage with 742 environmental citizenship ideas; most importantly, it also led to the discussion of actions 743 students wished to take to inform others in their community of what it means to act 744 responsibly regarding their everyday choice of grocery bags. As their teachers reported, 745 many of the citizenship actions that were undertaken by the students go far beyond what 746 these students would usually propose in non-SSIBL units. These actions imply an 747 understanding that moves beyond the conceptual and the cognitive, extending to the 748 consideration of personal choices and the development of values and attitudes connected 749 to the controversial socio-scientific topic under investigation.

752
The SSIBL approach, as underpinned by Critical Realist metatheory, is 753 transdisciplinary in addressing sustainability issues as has been illustrated in the four 754 cases presented. Starting with PSTs learning to enact SSIBL is promising because they 755 can bring fresh ideas into a school setting, which are restricted by a subject-based 756 curriculum, the importance of examinations and time, and as the Dutch case demonstrates 757 in particular these are real constraints for teachers. Nonetheless, these limitations can be 758 overcome by forethought in carefully linking subject concepts to the inquiry so that they 759 aid the solution to problems rather than become learning objectives in themselves. The 760 potential link of SSIBL activities to different subjects and content knowledge is clearly 761 signalled in the Spanish case (see Table 2). As several of the cases presented show such an 762 approach has the potential to enhance the learning of subject matter but also fosters 763 motivation to engage in and act upon the ideas. The Spanish case illustrates how a current 764 problem arising in everyday life brings the need for inquiry and empirical evidence to 765 make informed and socially responsible decisions. In the example shown, the 766 transmission of disease and the effectiveness of masks in a pandemic can be gauged by 767 testing the permeability of different types of face masks, inquiring about the life cycle of 768 different products or studying the spread of mould from fruit. Using the SSIBL approach 769 to investigate and act on issues of sustainability can enhance the learning of core concepts. 770 But, importantly, this learning has durability because students realize the value effect of 771 their learning. A transdisciplinary approach towards inquiry, with social justice inquiry 772 at its core, is not therefore a diversion but a means of developing and consolidating 773 learning. 774 Current conceptualizations of EEC and its pedagogical implementation as reported 775 by Hadjichambis and Paraskeva-Hadjichambi [6] focus on using inquiry as one of six 776 stages that teachers and students work through, with the other stages being: planning 777 actions; critical and active engagement and civic participation; networking and sharing at 778 the local, national and/or global scale; sustainable environmental and social change; and, 779 evaluation and reflection. Any of these stages can be the entry point for initiating learning 780 within this EEC framework [6]. However, the SSIBL approach within a pluralistic teaching 781 tradition starts with emergent events that are problematized as socio-scientific, 782 controversial issues that require solutions; thus, it establishes the need for finding a 783 solution through decision-making and action as an inherent dimension of SSIBL, and 784 consequently, as the means towards environmental citizenship. Rather than having a 785 pedagogical approach for EEC that can start from any of the stages mentioned above, the 786 starting point should be identifying events and issues that require a solution and this 787 should be framed within an inquiry-based learning approach, rather than considering 788 inquiry as one part of the learning process. A core aspect of SSIBL is that it expands the 789 conceptualization of inquiry as a scientific process and considers it as socially responsible 790 inquiry; that is, inquiry presupposes skills and attitudes that are a prerequisite to social 791 justice such as personal responsibility, ethical sensitivity and openness and honesty in 792 dialogue. These skills are also core to the promotion of EEC [4], and further support the 793 use of SSIBL a means towards environmental citizenship, since focusing only on 794 promoting subject knowledge within EEC can be counter-productive practice in 795 supporting young people develop pro-environmental behaviours [48]. 796 Achieving sustainability and environmental citizenship requires a pedagogy that can 797 transcend the physical and educational structures, and limits, of schooling since 798 individuals should be able, and willing, to act inboth the private and public sphere, which 799 require an outwards engagement from schools into their communities. At the same time, 800 we need to consider what is achievable within those school boundaries that can establish 801 a basis for considering how actions, values and behaviour can be addressed within and 802 outside of school. Using SSIBL as theorized based on a CR position, and having as a 803 starting point issues or events to initiate a need for learning, can support students and 804 teachers in problematizing knowledge, address these issues and support the development 805 of environmental citizenship in young people. 806 Perhaps the most difficult aspect of SSIBL is what counts as action. A simplistic view 807 of action can negate learning in favour of the need to change. In the UK case study the 808 teacher focused on action by focusing on justified decision-making; this brings to the light 809 the problem that change always involves some kind of trade off and democratic 810 participation is making decisions in full awareness of what is at stake. The UK case also 811 shows how action can be enacted at different levels within classroom settings, which can 812 provide affordances for engaging students with this SSIBL dimension, as also shown by 813 the Cyprus case. At the same time, embedding and enacting taking action within 814 classroom settings can be a challenge for teachers. 815 A note of caution is how the personal, local and global are interlinked; the importance 816 of critical EEC is apprehending the interrelationship between global, social and local 817 aspects of sustainability, a point that needs emphasis in EEC [49]. As encountered in the 818 Dutch study, engagement with the global context of sustainability can overshadow more 819 personal aspects but if the personal and the local or global contexts are presented 820 concurrently through a focus on personal decision-making, as enacted in the UK case 821 study, these different dimensions can become part of EEC. 822 823 5. Conclusions 824 We have drawn on postulates of Critical Realism to underpin the epistemology of 825 SSIBL and its appropriateness as a pedagogical tool in promoting sustainability and a 826 means towards environmental citizenship. Its requirements might seem problematic in 827 terms of school curricula but the illustrated cases of SSIBL indicate real opportunities for 828 promoting EEC within traditional school curricula and PSTs prepared to take risks. We 829 recognize that schools are organized into different disciplines of knowledge, and subjects, 830 which are often compartmentalized. Biology and social science teachers, for example, 831 have different curricula, different expectations, and different aims. Most schools are not 832 organized for a SSIBL-based curriculum as they are often organized for fact-based 833 approaches. Further, EC is not a well-defined concept in the current literature, and 834 teachers are less aware of its multiple dimensions [31]. As research in EEC continues to 835 develop, the role of teachers needs to take a central position within this, in order to address 836 the multidimensional nature of EC within educational practices. To do so, it requires 837 teacher education environments that allow PSTs and novice teachers to engage with the 838 conceptual and pedagogical dimensions argued for here, such as ways in which 839 transdisciplinary knowledge is used to address socio-environmental issues, and the 840 ability and willingness to consider social sciences knowledge, and values. 841 The illustrative cases presented in this article also emphasize the importance of teach-842 ers experiencing SSIBL as learners which is an important aspect of encouraging demo-843 cratic deliberation and of politically responding to diverse views [50] and should be a key 844 component of teacher professional development for EEC. We have illustrated how SSIBL 845 can be used in a tiered manner as teachers learn to engage with it and use it as part of their 846 practices. As a first step it might be best to start at a simple level where an activity is 847 highly scaffolded by the teacher and might be carried out in one day or in one lesson. 848 Teachers can provide students with the overarching questions to investigate as in the four 849 cases presented, rather than expect students to devise their own investigation questions. 850 They can then work with their students to progressively support them in developing skills 851 in asking authentic questions and considering ways of investigating them, taking into ac-852 count societal, scientific and environmental dimensions and implications of the issues ex-853 plored. A more sophisticated activity might involve teachers from different disciplines 854 collaboratively working together across the curriculum designing SSIBL activities so that 855 their students can engage in socially responsible inquiries in an interdisciplinary manner 856 [33,51].