Student Agency as an Enabler in Cultivating Sustainable Competencies for People-Oriented Technical Professions

Abstract

In this article, we provide theoretical and empirical reflections on the agency of secondary school students acting as an enabler in cultivating sustainable competencies, with the aim of providing new insights regarding how to reduce skill gaps in people-oriented technical professions. For this study, we used a complex mixed methods research design consisting of three sequential phases. In addition to a bibliometric analysis, a survey was carried out in a group of students aged 16–19 years (n = 219). The results indicate that the individual constructs of agency are developed unequally, where self-efficacy and locus of control are the most pronounced, while maintained motivation and anticipatory thinking are less present. Next, self-efficacy, persistence, strategic thinking and self-regulation are found to contribute significantly to successful sustainable transformations through fostering resilience, leadership, interdisciplinary thinking and adaptive problem solving. The future orientation of students might be especially critical toward the end of their study, while students in the early years of the study require scaffolding to make better sense of their effort in learning. Student agency acts as a powerful enabler, preparing future professionals to not only master technical skills but also understand and value the human element that is central to their work. Schools should therefore give priority to fostering the development of personal transformative agency in every student, especially during key transition periods.

1. Introduction

In the modern world, with various sectors of the economy, society and the environment being confronted with urgent demands for sustainable solutions, developing competencies for sustainable transformation in young people is one of the most important tasks of the education system (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023; Redman & Wiek, 2021; Oinonen et al., 2023). Special attention should be paid to secondary education, as secondary school students have less opportunity to influence their world, but adults and employers expect that these students will competitively engage as citizens as soon as they enter the labor market (Vare, 2021). After the implementation of national strategic plans for recovery and resilience to overcome the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, although economic activity has increased, a high deficit in several jobs and skills has been detected worldwide (OECD, 2024). In Slovenia, as well as many other European countries, employment services have reported a huge lack of employees in vocational and technical professions that involve working with people (EURES, n.d.). On the other hand, a large number of occupations have been identified as having mismatched priority (Cedefop, 2016). In this context, Guo et al. (2022) detected skill gaps in manual routine and non-routine workers, where digital skills, literacy skills and social skills were found to be the most critical. Thus, all secondary schools that educate adolescents must take these factors into consideration in the design of curricula and people-oriented reflective practices. Technical secondary education, as a bridge between general education and specific vocational skills, plays a very important role in this regard. Therefore, a key question is how to encourage young people in this educational context to develop the awareness, knowledge and skills needed for sustainable action to empower their world, as this is where relevant actions are closely linked (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). Students, when they are well informed, skilled and agency-enriched, can more easily handle the sustainability and workplace challenges that they face (Rap et al., 2022; Vare, 2021).

Agency denotes the ability of an individual to act autonomously, make decisions and take responsibility for the associated consequences (Klemenčič, 2015; OECD, 2019). From the perspective of the social–cognitive tradition, it can also be understood as a trait that can manifest itself in different types of actions due to the interplay between different actors, environments and contexts (Bandura, 2006). In the context of social–cognitive psychology, Bandura (2006) understands agency as an indirect factor between thoughts and actions that is intertwined with the individual’s intentions and personality processes, such as motivation and self-efficacy. Moreover, Bandura (2001) argued that agency may be reflected in human behaviors, which can be intentional, forethought, self-regulated and self-reflective. As Seifert (2004) noted, students who feel self-confident, have a sense of agency and perceive the importance of their academic work are more likely to pursue their learning goals. Despite the emphasis on individual agency in his definition, Bandura (1986) viewed human agency as inherently interactive; that is, individuals form their beliefs about their capabilities through social interactions and experiences in particular contexts.

In the context of sustainable transformations, this means that young people see themselves as active agents of change and not as passive recipients of knowledge (Oinonen et al., 2023; Susman et al., 2024). When a high level of agency is achieved among young people, they are more likely to take the initiative to find solutions to environmental and social challenges—both during their school years and later in their professional lives—rather than just reacting formally or reluctantly (Oinonen et al., 2023; Susman et al., 2024). Through agency, young people are expected to build their own knowledge, engage in authentic tasks that require advanced forms of collaboration (Jääskelä et al., 2020), contribute to their own development and influence their educational path (Klemenčič, 2017). Of particular importance are the transitions from primary school to secondary school and from secondary school to higher education, in which agency plays a key role (Anderson et al., 2019). Research has suggested that students’ self-efficacy decreases and their alienation (disinterest) from schoolwork increases in the transition to secondary school and, later, to higher education. This increased alienation weakens their perceived control, with changes in both control and self-efficacy—two dimensions of personal agency—impacting their academic performance (Anderson et al., 2019). Educational institutions should prioritize the development of each learner’s personal agency in the transition between school levels (Anderson et al., 2019; Klemenčič, 2017), with an appropriate and targeted choice of didactic methods or approaches to develop transformational and action skills (Oinonen et al., 2023). Having multiple competencies for action means (1) knowing and developing comprehensive and adaptive knowledge about options for action; (2) having a sense of self-efficacy and being empowered to act; and (3) being passionate and willing to engage in sustainable transformations at different levels of society (Oinonen et al., 2023). Empowerment theory can generally contribute to the understanding of student agency, as it emphasizes self-confidence, control over one’s decisions, proactivity and the ability to influence the environment (Seibert et al., 2011). Empowered students are more motivated, confident and willing to take on challenges, which directly contribute to their agency in the learning process and in society in general. Psychological empowerment has been defined as “intrinsic motivation for tasks that reflects a sense of self-control in relation to one’s work and an active involvement in one’s work role” (Seibert et al., 2011, p. 981). Similarly, Zimmerman (1995) stated that psychological empowerment “involves a belief that goals can be achieved, an awareness of the resources and factors that hinder or enhance one’s efforts to achieve those goals, and efforts to achieve those goals” (p. 582). Psychological empowerment and agency have been shown to be key factors in optimizing human experiences in a way that leads to desired outcomes (Perkins & Zimmerman, 1995).

In secondary technical programs, students are confronted with technical and technological tasks that interweave science, mathematics, engineering and creativity, and there are several pedagogical approaches that emphasize action and engagement with real-world sustainability challenges. Examples of such approaches include action as one of the key components of agency and location-based learning (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). Although environmental and sustainability education initiatives have shown positive results in terms of increased environmental awareness and changing attitudes (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023), there remains little empirical research on how agency can support young people’s ability to act for a more sustainable future. Youth agency research also means supporting the testing of new ideas, prototypes and approaches to sustainable solutions. Promoting awareness of the fact that they—with their technical skills and knowledge—have the power to find or co-create better solutions encourages both innovation and engagement (Bae et al., 2025).

Skills for sustainable development are not only professional (and, therefore, technical) issues, but also include values and ethical considerations regarding the responsible use of resources, equity and impacts on wider society (Redman & Wiek, 2021). When we explore the agency of young people, we also examine how they incorporate values such as environmental stewardship, intergenerational equity and social responsibility into their professional work. The more students feel that their choices contribute to positive change, the more likely they are to develop strong ethical attitudes and adhere to sustainable practices (T. Koskela & Kärkkäinen, 2021).

The development of agency is closely linked to intrinsic motivation: learners who feel that they have a say during their learning and the ability to solve real-world problems are more engaged in learning (Green, 2024). This leads to the high-quality acquisition of knowledge and skills, a greater willingness to engage and a deeper understanding of the complexity of sustainability-related challenges (Oinonen et al., 2023). Moreover, using project-based and service-learning approaches with real-world applications may enhance the technical skills that students need for work in people-oriented jobs (Diez-Ojeda et al., 2025). Promoting the meaningfulness and relevance of knowledge through concrete (i.e., technical) projects is crucial for young people to see themselves as active participants, both in education and society (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023).

Traditional approaches to the study of student agency in secondary education often focus on the intrinsic motivations and behaviors of individuals (e.g., individual agency), while neglecting the cultural, economic, political and historical forces that influence students’ opportunities to exercise agency in educational settings (Bae et al., 2025). Various authors (Bae et al., 2025; T. Koskela & Kärkkäinen, 2021; Oinonen et al., 2023) have argued for a broader view of young people’s agency which considers the complex dynamics of the classroom or teaching space and the historical exclusion of non-dominant communities in science. Socio-cultural approaches emphasize the role of the community and its participation in the process of knowledge construction, while critical approaches identify agency as a means of resistance to oppressive structures. Bae et al. (2025) have highlighted the main forms of student agency, namely (1) agentic engagement (psychosocial approach), which emphasizes the individual’s active participation in the learning process; (2) epistemological and collective agency (socio-cultural approach), which focuses on the co-construction of knowledge by the group and the dynamics in the classroom; and (3) agency as power (critical approach), which explores how young people use their agency to challenge unequal structures in education. Together, these forms of agency create a learning ecosystem in which students are active co-creators of their educational process. This empowers them, which directly contributes to better learning outcomes and their long-term success, both at school and later in their careers (Bae et al., 2025).

Agency is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that can have diverse and complex effects (Mameli et al., 2023). It can manifest itself in different forms and contexts; countless actions in the lives of individuals and communities at the local, national and global levels can contribute to sustainability (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). As Oinonen et al. (2023) have noted, self-assessed competency for sustainable action predicts behavior in the private sphere, but not sustainable action. Further analysis of the components of this competency shows that high perceived knowledge and low outcome expectations predict low engagement in sustainable behaviors. Knowledge and outcome expectations also influence behaviors indirectly through the willingness to act (Oinonen et al., 2023). From this, it can be inferred that actions and behaviors are based on different factors and that the ability to recognize uncertainty about outcomes influences the way in which young people demonstrate their commitment to sustainability. The diversity of opportunities to engage in sustainability transformations can be better addressed in sustainability education in formal, non-formal and informal learning environments if the goals and indicators of successful sustainability education are broadened and more clearly defined (Bandura, 2006). As a result, sustainability education and the associated engagement in sustainability development can become more inclusive and meaningful for stakeholders from different backgrounds (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). Realizing the core characteristics of agency—namely intentionality, anticipation, responsiveness and self-reflexivity—is a continuous process (Bandura, 2006). Similarly, strengthening agency for sustainability is an iterative process. Learning and acting for sustainability can take place in parallel, with the three types of agency (individual, collective and indirect or vicarious agency) being used flexibly depending on the problem, available competencies and resources (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023).

Different skills, knowledge and attitudes may be required to actively pursue sustainability. Frameworks that capture these competencies for sustainability have developed intensively over the last decade (Bianchi et al., 2022; Brundiers et al., 2021; I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023; UNESCO, 2017; Wiek et al., 2011; Willamo et al., 2018). A particular focus is placed on agency as a competency to act towards sustainability, which is defined as the general will, confidence and knowledge to pursue sustainable change (Sass et al., 2020). However, there is a lack of knowledge about how this agency (and, particularly, its individual manifestations) is linked to and transforms the actual actions and behaviors that promote sustainability. Thus, the emergence of the concept of transformative agency is an area of interest for consideration in future research.

Transformative agency refers to the ability of individuals (or groups) to not only act within existing frameworks and norms, but also to critically question, challenge and change them in order to bring about profound and sustainable change in social, educational or other systems (Kelly & Pelech, 2020). General agency (agentic engagement, including individual agency) primarily relates to the ability to act, make decisions and pursue personal goals within established structures and rules (Bae et al., 2025). An individual who exhibits general agency effectively utilizes their capabilities to achieve goals but does not necessarily engage in systemic or structural change. The key differences between transformative and general agency are as follows: (1) General agency focuses on the effective implementation of actions and the achievement of personal or local goals. Transformative agency, on the other hand, aims to change existing systems, practices and norms in order to bring about broader, often socially significant change (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). (2) General agency does not necessarily require individuals to examine and challenge existing structures. Transformative agency involves being critically aware of how current systems function and actively seeking ways to improve or change them (Kelly & Pelech, 2020). (3) General agency emphasizes an individual’s effectiveness and ability to act within a specific context. Transformative agency, on the other hand, promotes an innovative and proactive role in which the individual not only adapts to but also changes the environment in which they operate, thus contributing to sustainable transformation (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023).

In summary, general agency emphasizes the individual’s ability to act and achieve goals, while transformative agency involves an additional element of critical judgement and active efforts to transform existing structures, which is key to achieving sustainable change (Kelly & Pelech, 2020; Oinonen et al., 2023).

The aim of this study is to examine the agency of students in secondary technical schools that educate and train students for professions whose nature of work requires working with people, in order to determine the level of development, identify key agency-related competencies and identify the main challenges and opportunities for sustainable change in secondary technical education. This research sheds light on whether and how student agency can serve as a starting point for sustainable improvements in the education system, especially in the context of innovative, learner-centered approaches to technical education. Student agency can be seen as a prerequisite for the development of action—without agency, it is difficult for students to develop the ability to act deliberately, responsibly and effectively (OECD, 2019; Oinonen et al., 2023). In this study, the objectives (OBJs) are as follows:

• OBJ 1: To analyze and clarify how student agency is situated within the broader framework of education for sustainable development (ESD), thereby highlighting its role and significance in fostering sustainable competencies.
• OBJ 2: To examine the variations in different constructs of student agency among students from different study years in order to identify patterns and developmental trends that may inform targeted interventions or curriculum design.
• OBJ 3: To identify and analyze the challenges and opportunities associated with fostering student agency in secondary technical education in order to cultivate the sustainability competencies necessary for transforming professions centered on working with people.

To achieve these objectives, the following research questions (RQs) were formulated:

• RQ1: How is student agency embedded in the wider concept of education for sustainable development?
• RQ2: How do different constructs of student agency vary among students across different study years?
• RQ3: In the context of secondary technical education, what challenges and opportunities arise from fostering student agency to cultivate competencies that enable sustainable transformations in professions centered on working with people?

The scientific contribution of this study is primarily reflected in its specific perspective on agency in the context of secondary technical education. The presented research also aims to broaden the theoretical understanding of agency through focusing on students trained in technical fields, with relatively little analysis of this kind having been carried out previously. In this way, it contributes to the development of a model or framework that enables the systematic measurement and assessment of agency while enriching the scholarly debate on the importance of students’ active, responsible and creative roles in the educational process. From a sustainability perspective, the study aims to help in understanding how student agency has a positive impact on the school and the wider community, which is important for the development of strategies focused on sustainable change in education.

The reported findings have numerous implications for practice, and they are expected to benefit teachers, school leaders and education policy makers alike. Teachers will be able to adapt their pedagogical approaches based on the determination of greater or lesser levels of agency, focusing on methods that promote autonomy, collaboration, critical thinking and innovation in students. Moreover, a framework is presented to inform teachers’ choices in promoting student agency to enhance their sustainability competencies. In this way, the school management can be given clearer guidelines for the preparation of environments and activities that further enhance students’ initiative, sense of responsibility and participation in various school and extracurricular projects, especially in the field of sustainable development. It will also help policy makers and curriculum change makers to design strategies based on the research findings, which put awareness of the importance of agency at the center of the processes and serve to promote an active role for every student in achieving sustainability goals, thus reducing qualification or skill mismatches in the future workforce.

2. Materials and Methods

The research design of our three-stage research project includes a complex methodology based on bibliometrics and a survey method. According to Creswell and Creswell’s (2023) framework for advanced mixed methods, a three-stage project like ours—where each phase builds on the previous one—would typically be called a multiple-phase design. It falls under the category of “complex designs” or “advanced mixed methods designs” because it includes more than two distinct phases and combines different forms of data collection/analysis in a sequential way (Creswell & Creswell, 2023).

Our three distinct phases are (I) bibliometric analysis, (II) empirical data collection about student competencies and (III) a further conceptual/bibliometric analysis. Each phase informs or sets up the next step, rather than being a single two-phase model (as in the more common explanatory or exploratory sequential designs) (Creswell & Creswell, 2023).

2.1. Phase I: Bibliometric Analysis of Sources and Literature

The bibliometric analysis focused on the measurement and quantitative evaluation of the scientific literature (articles, journals, citations, authors, etc.) in the field of the research topic. This helped us to (1) identify the most important trends and topics in the chosen research area (e.g., which fields or theories are developing and which concepts are most used) and to (2) identify gaps in the literature where there is an opportunity for further research or the introduction of new concepts (Phoong et al., 2022).

Thus, the bibliometric analysis was performed with the aim of providing a comprehensive and quantitatively sound overview of the field that facilitates understandings of existing knowledge and helps to plan further research.

The Web of Science (WoS) database (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used to identify research articles on the topics of student representation and sustainability skills in the context of secondary technical education. In particular, the Science Citation Index (Expanded) database in the WoS Core Collection was selected. The following search strategy was used in this study: TS = [(student agency OR learner autonomy OR student voice OR student empowerment OR youth empowerment) AND (high school OR secondary school OR secondary education OR secondary student* OR secondary student* OR adolescent*) AND (sustainable curriculum OR education for sustainable development OR sustainability OR environmental education OR sustainable* competencies OR transformative learning OR SDG* OR transformative agency)]. The search was conducted on 29 January 2025. The time frame was set for the last 20 years, such that only articles published between 2005 and 2025 were considered. To ensure the correct interpretation of the results, the language of the publications was also limited to English. Only original, review and early access articles were included in the bibliometric analysis.

The Biblioshiny 3.0 software was used to analyze the data, which allows for the analysis of all the data identified in a literature corpus and the identification of the most important topics (Huber, 2002). The application provides a web interface for the software Bibliometrix version 3.0 (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017) and optionally provides the data in a graphical format to visualize the statistics. In this study, the graphs describe data on the agency of secondary school students over the period selected for the study.

2.2. Phase II: Empirical Study of Students’ Competencies in Technical Secondary Education

The empirical study on student agency in secondary technical education aims to investigate how and to what extent students actively (co-)shape their educational environment and their own learning path. This allowed us to (1) identify the factors that promote or constrain students’ engagement, autonomy and motivation in technical subjects and vocational contexts; (2) understand the decision-making processes through which students co-create the learning process (e.g., choosing projects, participating in practical work, taking responsibility for one’s own learning, etc.); (3) develop guidelines for practice, such that schools and teachers can develop pedagogical approaches that encourage students’ initiative and autonomy while better preparing them for the demands of the labor market and further education; and (4) emphasize the importance of relationships between all stakeholders—including teachers, practical training institutions and the local community—as they all play an important role in developing a sense of agency and responsibility.

2.2.1. Sample

A convenience sample consisting of students from a single Secondary School in Slovenia was used. Schools such as the one considered here emphasize the development of interpersonal, social and communication skills in addition to the teaching of technical skills. These schools prepare students not only for technical tasks, but also for working effectively with people in a variety of professional environments. This means that the associated curricula and education and training programs are designed to foster both technical competencies (vocational competencies) and the people-centered skills needed for future roles that involve meaningful interactions, collaboration and services. In schools where interpersonal and communication skills are developed alongside technical skills, agency is key to strengthening leadership skills and effective teamwork, which are essential for working with people in a variety of professional settings. Modern working conditions require flexibility, innovation and the ability to learn and act quickly. Students with strong leadership skills are better prepared for the changes and challenges of the modern labor market. Furthermore, agency enables students to take an active role in finding solutions to social and environmental challenges, which is key to sustainable change in the service sector, industry and society (Green, 2024). A convenience sample of students from a Slovenian secondary school was used, primarily due to the ease of accessibility of the participants and the alignment of the school’s curriculum with our research objectives. This non-random sampling technique allowed us to obtain a sufficiently large and contextually relevant sample under the practical constraints of the study (e.g., time, resources and ease of obtaining consent). In particular, the school places a strong emphasis on developing interpersonal, social and communication skills alongside technical training. This focus aligns well with the purpose of our research, which examines how agency, leadership skills and effective teamwork emerge in environments that foster both vocational and people-centered competencies. Although convenience sampling can limit the broader generalizability of findings, it was deemed appropriate given the scope and timeframe of the study. Moreover, the school’s size and specialized curriculum ensured a statistically stable sample for investigating the interplay of social, interpersonal and technical skills. The study took place during the 2024/2025 school year in January and February of 2025.

A total of 261 participants took part in the survey, and 221 completed it in full. The analysis of the missing values revealed no anomalies. The identification of possible outliers using the Mahalanobis distance showed that there were two such outliers that could particularly increase the variability of the data, thus reducing the significance of the statistical tests (Byrne, 2016). Thus, we removed these outliers from the database. The final sample, which consisted of 219 students, was predominantly female (174, 79.5%), while males were in the minority (45, 20.5%), which is also typical in the field of education for people-centered professions. Students came from a variety of backgrounds, namely beauty technicians (64, 29.2%), nursing (115, 52.5%), catering and hotel services (10, 4.6%), gastronomy (8, 3.7%) and preschool education (22, 10%). Participants were enrolled in at least the second year of secondary school, with the year groups being represented as follows: 2nd year, 77 (35.2%); 3rd year, 65 (29.6%); and 4th year, 77 (35.2%). The average age of all participants was 17.45 years (SD = 1.18).

2.2.2. Data Collection Method and Instrument

A modified student agency questionnaire, presented by Zeiser et al. (2018), was used for data collection. The closed questions were asked on a six-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). A Likert scale is defined as a psychometric instrument for measuring people’s attitudes, opinions or subjective judgements (Jebb et al., 2021) that allows for the assessment of a single attitude or trait when the ratings of the responses are aggregated (Creswell & Creswell, 2023). It is based on a series of statements to which respondents indicate their level of agreement or disagreement on a defined multilevel scale. The design of our questionnaire included eight constructs with four items each, namely (1) self-efficacy; (2) persistence of interest; (3) persistence of effort; (4) goal orientation of mastery learning; (5) locus of control; (6) future orientation; (7) self-regulation; and (8) metacognitive self-regulation, which emphasizes the cognitive aspect (“how I think, learn, solve problems”).

The questionnaire used in this study began with the definition of student agency as the ability of students to believe in and activate their potential, build relationships, overcome obstacles and exercise their academic, social, emotional and professional abilities (Green, 2024). Respondents were also familiar with the definition proposed by Zeiser et al. (2018), which manifests as the ability to take control of one’s learning.

Each of the eight constructs of student agency contained four sub-questions or items. The first three related to beliefs or behaviors associated with the respective construct. For example, for the persistence of interest construct, participants were asked to agree or disagree with the statement “I often set a goal and stick to it”. The fourth sub-question at the end of each construct was the same and asked participants to reflect on the following: “Development in this area has helped me to be successful in my teaching”. This allowed students to comment on the extent to which they felt that this specific construct had contributed to their readiness for education/training and careers. The instrument is attached in the Supplementary Materials, titled “Secondary Student Agency Survey”.

The questionnaire was published on the 1ka portal (https://www.1ka.si/d/sl, accessed on 5 January 2025). The invitation to participate in the survey was sent to the school’s headmaster, who agreed to conduct the survey and informed the school’s teachers. The parents/guardians were also informed about the survey and allowed their underage children to participate in the survey by giving their informed consent to the survey provider. The participant’s consent to participate in the study also listed all the elements of the study (e.g., the researcher, the purpose, the tasks, the objectives, the risks, the benefits, etc.), including the guarantee of anonymity and voluntary participation. All participants whose data were processed gave informed consent for their participation and contribution to the study. Students completed the online questionnaire electronically in the presence of one of the researchers of this study directly in the classroom. Participants answered the questions based on their experiences and perceptions.

The data were processed and analyzed with the SPSS v. 25 software, using descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, etc.) and inferential statistics for comparisons between groups. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed to determine whether differences in student agency constructs could be attributed to their year of study.

2.3. Phase III: Conceptual Analysis of Student Agency Competencies for Advancing Transformations Towards Sustainability

To address the research question RQ3, we employed a combined method consisting of a sequential conceptual comparative analysis and a bibliometric analysis. Creswell and Creswell (2023) refer to this overall sequence as exploratory sequential because the initial, more “open-ended” phase (comparing conceptual frameworks) feeds into a subsequent, systematically “numeric” phase (bibliometric data analysis). This approach is well suited for clarifying our core concepts first and then leveraging them to structure and interpret quantitative results. Firstly, we compared two sets of competencies—namely the competency framework obtained in the second phase for the representation of secondary technical school students’ agency and the sustainability competencies defined according to Redman and Wiek (2021)—in order to find possible connections and correlations. Our motivation was to determine how one set of competencies contributes to the other and to develop a conceptual framework linking students’ agency to changes in their sustainable transformation competencies. To analyze the relationships between the student agency competencies from the survey data collected in the empirical study and the eight competencies for sustainable transformation identified by Redman and Wiek (2021), we matched them based on conceptual similarities and shared educational goals. This was carried out in two stages as follows: in the first stage, fitting between the competencies for agency and the competencies for sustainable transformation was carried out and, in the second stage, a co-occurrence network analysis was performed on the two competency sets, represented in terms of keywords.

For the second stage, the Science Citation Index (Expanded) database in the WoS Core Collection was selected. The following search strategy was used in this study: TS = ((Systems thinking) OR (Future thinking) OR (values thinking) OR (strateg* thinking) OR (implementation competence) OR (interpersonal competence) OR (intrapersonal competence) OR (integration competence) OR (anticipat* competence) OR (normative thinking) OR (sustainability competence*)) AND ((locus of control) OR (perseverance of interest) OR (perseverance of effort) OR (Mastery Goal Orientation) OR (self-efficacy) OR (future orientation) OR (self-regulated learning) OR (Meta-Cognitive Self-Regulation) OR (ethical awareness) OR (student agency)). Only articles, review articles and early access articles were included in the final analysis, and, after screening, a total of 5195 valid records remained. The time frame was set for the last 20 years, such that only articles published between 2005 and 2025 were considered. To ensure adequate readability, only the 50 most frequent terms were included in the co-occurrence network.

The bibliometric analysis (phase I) provided a context in which students develop agency for sustainable change in the environment, while the empirical validation (phase II) revealed how students deal with the requirements and elements of teaching in technical secondary education and the extent to which they develop agency. A student’s agency is reflected in their efforts to influence their educational path, their future life and their immediate and wider social environment. It can also be assumed that the theory of student agency provides the micro-foundations of their behavior. As such, the analysis can reveal the mechanisms through which students, and later as adults, enact agency in the context of education and beyond (Klemenčič, 2015). In the third phase, we contextualize student agency in terms of its role in promoting and developing competencies for sustainable transformations.

This type of advanced mixed methodology (bibliometric document analysis, quantitative research on a sample of subjects and the creation and analysis of competency maps) allows for triangulation, as it explores the extent to which and how agency is expressed and located in each context at multiple levels, including its integration with the learning and working environment. It is crucial that the approach to sustainable transformation is not viewed in isolation but, instead, as a synergy between modern technology-enhanced and knowledge-based education, innovation and mutual collaboration, which, in turn, will have positive impacts on the service sector, industry and society (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023).

3. Results

The results are presented and interpreted in the order of the research questions, making it easier for the reader to follow the research process and recognize the connections between the research objectives, results and findings.

3.1. Student Agency and Education for Sustainable Development

The retrieved relevant WoS entries were first screened for possible anomalies using HistCite version 12.3 (Garfield et al., 2006). After screening, 1356 valid records remained as the input sample for the bibliometric analysis. The Shiny application Biblioshiny was used to provide a graphical web interface in the RStudio environment, version 4.3.1 (https://posit.co/download/rstudio-desktop/, accessed 29 January 2025).

In scope of phase I, we conducted an analysis of the frequency of co-occurring keywords to identify the main themes, research areas and their relationships (Figure 1). A total of 14,208 unique terms were recorded in the articles. To ensure adequate readability, only the 100 most frequent terms were included in the co-occurrence network, where the size of each circle in the network reflects the number of articles in which the term occurs. The proximity between two related terms represents the relationship between them, in terms of the number of co-occurrences. The thickness of a line connecting two nodes in a co-occurrence network represents the strength or frequency of the co-occurrence of the two terms (Rojas-Sánchez et al., 2023). This means the following:

• Higher number of co-occurrences: A thicker line indicates that the two related terms occur together several times in the text or articles;
• Stronger association: Such a line indicates a stronger statistical association between the concepts, which may indicate a closer thematic or conceptual link between them.

In this way, the thickness of the line allows for a quick visual interpretation of which concepts are more closely related based on their co-occurrence in the analyzed data (Donthu et al., 2021).

In simultaneity diagrams (Figure 1), different colors or contrasts (e.g., size, thickness, color intensity) are often used to represent the relationships between and importance of keywords. These contrasts can represent (1) frequency of occurrence; (2) coherence or centrality in the network; (3) differences between groups or thematic clusters; and (4) theoretical or analytical differentiation (Donthu et al., 2021). In total, five differently sized interconnected clusters were observed, including the main education cluster (brown), followed by the transformative agency cluster (orange), the research cluster (light green), the youth empowerment cluster (blue) and the small education in the COVID-19 period cluster (dark green).

The central and strongest cluster consisted of education and education-related topics, which are reflected in the associated keywords. The links with agency, as the third-strongest node of the cluster, indicate a strong focus on sustainability as well as higher education; however, these links are not particularly strong, with transformation being stronger.

The network is divided into several interconnected clusters, indicating thematic or conceptual links between the concepts. The clusters are interconnected but the strengths of these connections are weak, indicating specific research topics or areas that provide greater insight into the theme of agency in secondary education to promote competencies for sustainable transformations. A very important node is transformative agency competency, which is linked to all other clusters, but the strength of the links are not very strong. The link to dual stimulation is particularly strong, which, in the context of transformative agency, refers to a process in which individuals are exposed to two types of stimuli that together promote transformation in their understanding and action. This is an approach framed by activity theory, in which collective learning occurs (Nussbaumer, 2011) due to interactions of systems. In this context, several tensions and contradictions occur as follows:

• The first stimulus represents a problem, challenge or situation that requires a response or change. This can be, for example, a complex task, a problem or a current reality that the individual experiences and perceives as limiting;
• The second stimulus serves as an aid, support or additional resource that enables the person to deal with the first stimulus in a new way. This additional resource may consist of new information, perspectives, strategies or resources that help the individual to reconstruct and reinterpret the original problem (Bae et al., 2025).

In the context of transformative agency, dual stimulation promotes the development of the ability to radically change one’s agency and perception of the world. Through combining both stimuli, the individual learns the following (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023):

• Identify and redefine the problem—the first stimulus highlights the challenge, while the second stimulus offers alternatives that provide a new perspective on the situation;
• Develop new approaches and strategies—the second stimulus allows individuals to try out and adopt innovative approaches that lead to changes in their behaviors and thinking;
• Change one’s agency—transformative agency is demonstrated by an individual’s ability to not only adapt to given circumstances, but to actively reshape them by adopting new tools and perspectives (Bae et al., 2025).

In this way, dual stimulation enables the individual to move from passively accepting a situation to actively reshaping it, thus strengthening their transformative agency (Kelly & Pelech, 2020). Moreover, new forms of activity, such as expansive learning, can be developed (Toiviainen & Engeström, 2009). Expansive learning is a process in which individuals or groups go beyond their existing knowledge and practices to transform the underlying structure of their activity (Toiviainen & Engeström, 2009). Moreover, it often occurs when students question their current ways of working, identify contradictions or problems in the system and collaboratively develop and test new solutions. Doing so, the students’ understanding and capabilities expand, leading to innovations in both thinking and practice (Vare, 2021).

These keyword co-occurrence network findings are relevant to the study of secondary technical education student agency in the context of careers in people-oriented professions. This illustrates how high school students can exert their influence within the system’s framework, thereby emphasizing how the use of activity theory—as a mainstream theory in student agency and research method—aligns with the overarching aims of the study programs in which they are involved (Vare, 2021).

The network presents five interconnected clusters, with education being the main cluster. This indicates that the educational process is a central factor in the associated research and that several key concepts are closely linked to this area. Of particular interest is the ‘transformative agency’ cluster that—although not the strongest—emerges as an important node in relation to the concept of sustainability and higher education. This suggests that the concept of agency also contains elements of transformation and sustainable development, which are crucial in preparing students for careers in which working with people requires flexibility and innovation.

3.2. Student Agency in Secondary Technical Education for a Career in People-Oriented Professions

Data collected via the 1KA web portal were exported in SPSS SAV format, which is suitable for importing and working with SPSS software.

The reliability of the questionnaire is key to ensuring that the measurement instrument consistently and accurately captures the desired trait or phenomenon. Among the different methods used to assess reliability, one of the most used is McDonald’s ω, which measures the internal consistency of questions or items within the same scale. Its values range between 0 and 1, with higher values indicating better reliability. In general, an α value above 0.7 is considered to indicate acceptable internal consistency, while values above 0.8 and 0.9 indicate high reliability (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013).

For this study, we analyzed the reliability and validity of the constructs of student agency, as well as the entire questionnaire (i.e., with all 32 items). As shown in

Table 1. Reliability coefficient (McDonald’s ω), discrimination coefficient (Ferguson’s δ), composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE).

	McDonalds’ ω	Ferguson’s δ	CR	AVE
Self-efficacy (SE)	0.75	0.96	0.83	0.56
Perseverance of interest (PI)	0.81	0.95	0.87	0.65
Perseverance of effort (PE)	0.82	0.96	0.88	0.66
Mastery learning goal orientation (MLGO)	0.84	0.96	0.89	0.67
Locus of control (LC)	0.81	0.95	0.87	0.65
Future orientation (FO)	0.87	0.98	0.91	0.73
Self-regulation (SR)	0.88	0.97	0.92	0.75
Metacognitive self-regulation (MSR)	0.84	0.95	0.89	0.69

, the reliability of the constructs was moderate to high (0.75 to 0.88), while the reliability of the entire questionnaire was high (0.93) (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). The discriminatory power of the questionnaire was further tested through calculating the Ferguson δ coefficient. The Ferguson δ coefficient varies between 0 and 1, where a higher value indicates higher discriminatory power. The Ferguson δ coefficient for the entire questionnaire was 0.98, indicating the high sensitivity of the questionnaire. The coefficients were also very high for all individual rating scales of student agency, with all Ferguson’s δ coefficient values > 0.90 (Hankins, 2007) (Table 1). From these results, we can conclude that the questionnaire can effectively distinguish between very small differences in the answers given and the scores collected.

McDonald’s ω was above 0.75 in all cases (with a maximum of 0.88 for self-regulation), indicating medium to good internal reliability for each scale used, and Ferguson’s δ (values between 0.95 and 0.98) indicated high discriminatory power; therefore, the scales are capable of differentiating between the students regarding the measured characteristics. High values of Cronbach’s α and Ferguson’s δ confirmed the quality of the measurement scales, such that the results of high or medium aggressiveness could be considered reliable.

Instrument convergent validity was verified through measures of composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE). As shown in Table 1, all CR values were above the threshold of 0.70, as generally recommended (Hair et al., 2019). This indicates that the indicators collectively have good internal consistency in terms of reflecting the construct (Malhotra, 2020). AVE values ≥ 0.50 indicate that the indicators, on average, explained more than half of the variance of the latent construct (Hayes & Coutts, 2020). A higher AVE supports the convergent validity of a scale (Cheung et al., 2023).

In this study, we also verified a discriminant validity using the Fornell and Larcker (1981) criterion and the HeteroTraitMonoTrait (HTMT) criterion (Henseler et al., 2015) (

Table 2. Fornell and Larcker criterion of discriminant validity using the square root of the AVE (in diagonal) and correlations among student agency constructs (off-diagonal) complemented with HTMT values (in parentheses).

Student Agency Constructs	SE	PI	PE	MLGO	LC	FO	SR	MSR
SE	0.75
PI	0.53 (0.66)	0.81
PE	0.31 (0.39)	0.58 (0.65)	0.81
MLGO	0.40 (0.51)	0.45 (0.54)	0.40 (0.47)	0.82
LC	0.51 (0.65)	0.31 (0.38)	0.25 (0.29)	0.36 (0.42)	0.81
FO	0.15 (0.19)	0.11 (0.14)	0.17 (0.19)	0.22 (0.25)	0.25 (0.29)	0.85
SR	0.37 (0.44)	0.53 (0.59)	0.51 (0.58)	0.41 (0.47)	0.21 (0.23)	0.23 (0.25)	0.86
MSR	0.38 (0.48)	0.43 (0.49)	0.48 (0.56)	0.47 (0.56)	0.35 (0.41)	0.25 (0.29)	0.47 (0.53)	0.83

). All HTMT values (in parentheses) were below the threshold of 0.8 (Henseler et al., 2015), while values of the square root of the AVE were above the threshold of 0.50 (and also higher than correlations between student agency constructs). Thus, all constructs of student agency were considered to satisfy the discriminant validity indicators, as argued by Cheung et al. (2023).

Overall, the measurement model is well supported in the present study. Demonstrating that these constructs are empirically distinguishable strengthens our confidence that each construct has practical and theoretical meaning on its own. Once it has been confirmed that the used measurement scales are valid, we can then proceed to report and interpret descriptive and inferential statistics in a more confident and meaningful way.

Table 3. Average self-rated student agency, expressed as mean (M), standard deviation (SD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for all student agency constructs, together with measures of skewness (S) and kurtosis (K) (n = 219).

Student Agency Constructs	M	SD	95% CI	S	K
SE	4.71	0.79	[4.59, 4.80]	−0.53	0.57
PI	3.77	0.91	[3.63, 3.88]	−0.03	−0.37
PE	3.53	1.03	[3.38, 3.66]	0.06	−0.41
MLGO	4.41	0.94	[4.26, 4.52]	−0.51	0.17
LC	4.66	0.93	[4.52, 4.77]	−0.85	0.84
FO	3.66	1.17	[3.50, 3.81]	−0.21	−0.37
SR	3.75	1.13	[3.60, 3.90]	−0.09	−0.52
MSR	4.11	1.08	[3.96, 4.22]	−0.35	−0.15

summarizes the basic characteristics of the data collected from the sample through the survey, where average self-reported scores are expressed in terms of the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD). In addition, measures for skewness and kurtosis are provided in order to check whether our data deviate from the normality, while the 95% confidence interval aims to estimate the range of values within which we expect the “true” value of the mean to lie.

The highest mean values were achieved for self-efficacy (M = 4.71) and control conviction (M = 4.66). This indicates that, on average, students strongly agree that they can achieve their goals and believe that their success (or failure) depends mainly on their own efforts. The mastery learning goal orientation (M = 4.41) was also relatively high, reflecting the importance that students place on understanding or mastering the material.

Relatively low averages were found for persistence of effort (M = 3.53) and future orientation (M = 3.66). This is somewhat closer to the mid-point of the scale, which could indicate that opinions on longer-term or more intensive efforts and future orientation are more divergent or that the students are somewhat less confident in these respects on average. The greatest dispersion of values (SD = 1.17) was found for future orientation, which demonstrates that the students had very different values in this area, with some being very high and others quite low.

Most constructs showed a negative asymmetry (S) (e.g., locus of control: S = −0.85); that is, there were more answers on the higher side of the scale (the distribution is slightly ‘skewed to the right’). This is in line with the higher average values. The values for the kurtosis (K) ranged from slightly negative (e.g., K = −0.52 for self-regulation) to slightly positive (K = 0.84 for locus of control). These values indicate whether the distribution is rather ‘flat’ or ‘narrow’, but the deviations were moderate.

Students generally have high self-confidence (self-efficacy), believe that they can direct and control their own performance (control beliefs) and are highly focused on mastering the subject matter (learning goal orientation).

For persistence and future orientation, the mean scores were slightly lower and the dispersion was higher, suggesting that these dimensions are more diverse and, perhaps, more challenging for certain students.

Table 3 also shows that, at the whole group level, the students had well-developed characteristics in terms of feelings of competency (self-efficacy), internal control (locus of control) and mastery of subject matter (learning goal orientation). Slightly greater diversity was found in the areas of long-term endeavors and future planning, which is potentially important information for guiding teaching or counselling activities.

The normality of the distribution was tested using the Shapiro–Wilk test, both for the questionnaire as a whole and for the individual rating scales. The statistical significance of all scales and the overall result was greater than 0.05 in all cases, again confirming the assertion that the data are normally distributed. As an additional check, we analyzed the measures of skewness (asymmetry) and kurtosis (flatness), which helped us to describe the shape of the data distribution and assess the extent to which the distribution deviates from a normal distribution. The values for skewness and kurtosis ranged from −1 to +1, as shown in Table 3. Values for asymmetry and flatness between −2 and +2 are considered acceptable for the detection of a univariate normal distribution (George & Mallery, 2024). As a result, we could confidently perform parametric tests in the subsequent analysis.

In the following section, we further investigate how the individual constructs of agency are generally pronounced in the sample consisting of all students. We were interested in whether one construct typically deviates from the other constructs. To this end, we conducted a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance.

As the Mauchly test for sphericity demonstrated that the assumption of sphericity was violated, with χ² (27) = 169.40 (p < 0.001), the Greenhouse–Geisser method was used to correct for the degrees of freedom. The results of the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures showed a statistically significant effect of the construct agency [F (5.68, 57.78) = 69.54, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.25], indicating a moderately large effect size (Cohen et al., 2013). This implies that there were statistically significant differences between the constructs of student agency, which warranted further analyses of the post hoc tests to determine which specific constructs present differences. The post hoc analyses of the pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction revealed that the students’ performance in each construct was significantly different (p < 0.05). The most important results are tabulated below (

Table 4. Results of pairwise comparisons between the eight constructs of student agency.

Construct	Significantly Higher (p < 0.05) than	Significantly Lower (p < 0.05) than	No Difference (p > 0.05) with
SE	PI, PE, MLGO, FO SR, MSR	- *	LC
PI	PE	SE, MLGO, LC, MSR	FO, SR
PE	- *	SE, PI, MLGO, LC, MSR	FO, SR
MLGO	PI, PE, FO, SR, MSR	SE	LC
LC	PI, PE, FO, SR, MSR	- *	SE, MLGO
FO	- *	SE, MLGO, LC, MSR	PI, PE, SR
SR	- *	SE, MLGO, LC, MSR	PI, PE, FO
MSR	PI, PE, FO, SR	SE, MLGO, LC	- *

*—no construct satisfied this condition.

), expressed in terms of higher/lower (p < 0.05) and no difference (p > 0.05) relationships.

The most important results derived from the pairwise comparisons are as follows:

• Self-efficacy and locus of control stood out with the highest scores; they were not statistically different from each other (p > 0.05), but both outperformed most other constructs on average.
• Mastery learning goal orientation was also high and comparable to the locus of control. It was only statistically lower than self-efficacy.
• Persistent effort and future orientation tended to perform worse and were below the measured values of the higher constructs in most pairwise comparisons.
• Metacognitive self-regulation occupied an ‘intermediate position’; it was higher than perseverance of effort and interest, future orientation and self-regulation, but lower than self-efficacy, goal orientation and locus of control.

The pairwise comparisons thus confirmed that the constructs of student agency differ, with self-efficacy and locus of control rating the highest and persistence and future orientation rating the lowest.

Next, we were interested in how the constructs differ across the study years. Visual inspection of Figure 2 reveals that there were some differences across the years of study. Overall, it can be seen that the fourth-year students generally presented the highest values, followed by the third- and second-year students, respectively. This indicates that, on average, students achieve higher scores in these competencies as they get older; in other words, older students report being slightly more self-regulated, having more confidence in their abilities and being more persistent in their interests and efforts than younger students. The error bars overlap in some cases, so the difference between two years is not always statistically significant; however, the general pattern is that scores steadily increase with each progressing year of study.

To examine whether the student agency constructs are related to the study year, a MANOVA was conducted, in which the student agency constructs were included as dependent variables. The MANOVA results revealed that the student agency constructs differed significantly across the study years [Wilks’ lambda = 0.86; F (16, 418) = 1.89; p = 0.019; η_p² = 0.09]. Box’s test of equality of covariances matrices indicated that the assumption of homogeneity was met [Box’s M = 71.40, F (72, 123,822.31) = 0.93, p = 0.62 > 0.05]. Levene’s test of equality of variances for each of the constructs was not significant (p > 0.05), indicating that the assumption of homogeneity of variance was met. Regarding the student agency constructs, the findings revealed significant differences only for (1) perseverance of effort [F (2, 216) = 4.84; p = 0.009] between study years 2 and 3 (p = 0.017) and years 2 and 4 (p = 0.036; η_p² = 0.08) and (2) future orientation [F (2, 216) = 4.28, p = 0.015] between study years 2 and 4 (p = 0.041) and study years 3 and 4 (p = 0.035; η_p² = 0.05). Surprisingly, students in the fourth year of the study reported lower scores in the future orientation scale.

Partial eta squared values of 0.08 and 0.05 are generally considered small to moderate effects in the social sciences (Cohen et al., 2013).

3.3. Student Agency in Developing Competencies for Sustainable Change in Professions That Work with People

Skills for sustainable transformations are crucial in enabling individuals and organizations to actively contribute to solving complex sustainability challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss and social injustice. According to Redman and Wiek (2021), these skills are essential to create change and transform society in line with the Sustainable Development Goals. Redman and Wiek (2021) have extended and built upon UNESCO’s concept of sustainability competencies through summarizing existing research and incorporating new competencies into a broader framework of key competencies for sustainability. While UNESCO (2017) identified key competencies for sustainability such as systems thinking, foresight, normative competency, strategic thinking and interpersonal competencies, Redman and Wiek recognized the need to build on and expand this set. They added three new competencies to the existing UNESCO competencies: intrapersonal competency, implementation competency and integration competency. The key point is that these competencies should not function separately but, instead, in harmony with each other. Their upgrading underlines that training programs must not only train individuals in terms of analysis and planning, but also the actual implementation of change in practice. Redman and Wiek (2021) summarized the core competencies in sustainable development into eight categories organized around systemic problem solving as follows:

• Systems thinking—the understanding of complex systems, causal cycles, interactions and unintended consequences;
• Futures thinking—the ability to create scenarios and anticipate the long-term impacts of decisions;
• Values or normative thinking—integrating ethical, moral and sustainable values into decision making;
• Strategic thinking—planning sustainable strategies and action plans;
• Implementation skills—the ability to implement strategies and adapt to change;
• Interpersonal skills—participating in interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral teams and involving stakeholders;
• Intrapersonal competency—taking care of one’s own resilience and well-being when working on sustainable change;
• Integrative competency—using structured approaches to link different competencies to address sustainability challenges.

The framework of eight competencies is universal and applicable across a wide range of professional fields, from science and engineering to social sciences and business (Redman & Wiek, 2021). This expanded competency framework facilitates a more holistic approach to the education of sustainable change agents through the integration of the analytical, value-based, strategic and practical aspects of sustainable action (Oinonen et al., 2023). Without these competencies, individuals and organizations focus only on incremental improvements and not on systemic and transformative change (Redman & Wiek, 2021). All competencies are designed to support action in real-world settings, where sustainability challenges are often complex and involve multiple stakeholders. The focus is on integrating knowledge and skills from different disciplines, which is key to addressing sustainability issues in a holistic manner (Oinonen et al., 2023). Individuals with developed competencies have a greater ability to act as change agents, which is essential for sustainable transformation (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). The connections between student agency competencies and competencies for sustainable transformations are shown in

Table 5. The connections between student agency competencies and competencies for sustainable transformations.

Perspective	Linked Sustainability Competency	Link and Explanation
Self-efficacy (belief in one’s own ability to succeed)	Intrapersonal competency (self-awareness, self-regulation and resilience)	Self-efficacy is key to maintaining motivation and resilience to tackle sustainability challenges.
Persistence of interests (commitment to long-term goals)	Competency in forward thinking (anticipating future scenarios and designing sustainable solutions)	Both competencies emphasize long-term commitment and the ability to visualize future achievements.
Perseverance in effort (working hard despite obstacles)	Implementation competency (implementing sustainable development strategies and overcoming challenges)	Sustainable transformations require persistence in implementing and scaling up solutions, similarly to persistence in learning.
Learning orientation towards mastery (desire for continuous learning and competency development)	Integrative competency (use of collective problem-solving methods)	Both competencies emphasize the importance of continuous improvement and problem solving.
Locus of control (belief in one’s own ability to influence outcomes)	Interpersonal competency (cooperation and stakeholder involvement)	A strong locus of control supports active participation in sustainability initiatives and change leadership.
Future orientation (planning and thinking ahead)	Competency in forward thinking (forecasting and designing sustainable strategies)	Both competencies involve planning for the long term, in terms of results and impacts.
Self-regulated learning (managing your own learning process)	Competency in systems thinking (analysis of complex systems and interconnections)	Self-regulated students develop their own learning pathways, just as systems thinkers analyze and manage complex sustainability challenges.
Metacognitive self-regulation (reflecting on and adapting learning strategies)	Competency in normative thinking (reflection on sustainable values and ethical principles)	Both competencies emphasize reflection and adaptation to align actions with values and long-term goals.

.

The most important findings from the comparison are as follows:

• Both models promote adaptability and resilience—the agency model develops self-efficacy and perseverance, which are crucial for overcoming complex sustainability challenges;
• Long-term goal setting is essential—future orientation is closely linked to the competency to think about the future (sustainability), which emphasizes the importance of strategic planning;
• Collaboration is key to achieving impact—interpersonal competency (sustainability) and the locus of control underline the importance of initiative and teamwork;
• Self-reflection supports sustainable change—metacognitive self-regulation and value-based thinking emphasize the need for ethical reflection and continuous improvement.

This analysis demonstrates that fostering student agency provides a solid foundation for sustainable transformation skills, equipping students with the key competencies to act as change agents in sustainable development.

In the second phase of the competency mapping, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of keywords, where the two sets of competencies were used as an input. In total, four differently sized interconnected clusters were observed, including the main self-efficacy cluster (red), followed by the performance cluster (blue), the healthcare cluster (green) and the future orientation cluster (purple) (Figure 3). The many connections indicate strong relationships and significant co-occurrences among the competencies while, on the other hand, their density indicates complex systemic integration between the competencies (He, 1999). Clusters with densely interconnected nodes highlight critical themes or competencies, around which research or practice is structured or evolving. Moreover, densely connected competencies point to the potential of interdisciplinary integration, suggesting that these competencies function effectively together across different contexts (Börner et al., 2003).

The placement of self-efficacy as the dominant node indicates its strong centrality and high relevance in our data, suggesting that self-efficacy is central in linking student agency and sustainable transformation competencies. The connected keywords closely relate to student agency competencies (particularly self-regulation, metacognitive self-regulation, mastery learning goal orientation and locus of control), signifying the personal development, cognitive skills and intrinsic motivational factors of learners. This cluster emphasizes cognitive, metacognitive and motivational dimensions that are central to student agency competencies. Self-efficacy emerged as the key connector, underlining its crucial role in fostering student agency and impacting learning outcomes and strategies.

Performance and impact, as the dominant keywords in the blue cluster, indicate outcomes and external measures related to the learning processes or transformations. The connected keywords are strongly related to sustainable transformation competencies such as systems thinking, strategic thinking, future thinking and integration competency. This cluster represents competencies linked to planning, implementing and evaluating transformative processes. “Performance” and “impact” suggest a strong result-oriented focus, highlighting the need for clear frameworks and strategic competencies to support sustainable transformations. The blue cluster can also be related to the locus of control through action- and outcome-oriented behaviors, reflecting how the locus of control influences actions that contribute to sustainable outcomes.

The purple cluster is clearly related to sustainable transformations, and this cluster integrates competencies such as future thinking and systems thinking. Terms such as innovation and sustainability indicate the long-term, proactive approaches required for effective transformation and adaptation.

The green cluster might represent contextual or influencing factors that affect student agency in an indirect manner. It emphasizes emotional and psychological states (stress, depression) and the importance of interventions to maintain and foster student agency. An external locus of control could be indirectly connected with concepts in the green cluster (health, stress, intervention and validation), reflecting the external environmental or societal influences shaping individual outcomes.

The keywords from different clusters are interconnected, signifying the role of integration competency. Connections such as self-efficacy–performance–motivation–future–systems thinking reflect how student agency competencies support sustainable transformation competencies, and vice versa.

In particular, self-efficacy acts as a hub linking cognitive and metacognitive competencies (student agency) with systemic, strategic and normative thinking (sustainable transformations) (Karvonen et al., 2023).

We can summarize the findings of this further network analysis as follows:

• Self-efficacy is crucial and serves as a linking competency between agency competencies (motivation, strategies, metacognition and attitudes) and transformation competencies (strategic, systems and future thinking);
• Student agency competencies appear to be strongly related to internal dimensions (beliefs, metacognition and motivation), while sustainable transformation competencies focus more on system-level outcomes, strategy and long-term future orientation;
• Inter- and intrapersonal competencies appear implicitly, connected through attitudes, beliefs and motivation, highlighting their indirect role in supporting integration and systems thinking competencies;
• The locus of control is the key to accountability, sustainable leadership and the successful implementation of sustainable solutions (Oinonen et al., 2023);
• Metacognitive self-regulation through active management of learning strategies, reflective thinking and evaluation of learning enables continuous improvement of sustainability strategies, increased resilience and more informed decision making in the context of sustainable development (Sass et al., 2020);
• The emotional, behavioral and motivational aspects of self-regulation are emphasized, which is essential for directly supporting sustainable transformation competencies while also connecting to strategic thinking (blue cluster) and future thinking, indirectly reinforcing the capacities required for sustainable transformations;
• Self-regulation supports the transfer from student agency competencies (centered around self-efficacy and metacognition) to sustainable transformation competencies (strategic, future-oriented and systemic perspectives).

4. Discussion

With this study, we seek to provide more clarity on how the agency of secondary technical education students can promote sustainable transformations. In doing so, we explained the nature of agency, its effects, linkages and structural features in a step-by-step manner using a complex methodology. In the following, we provide answers to the research questions that guided our investigation.

4.1. Student Agency and the Concept of Education for Sustainable Development

The links between the clusters (e.g., between transformative agency, sustainability, research and youth empowerment) suggest that these themes are related but, at the same time, distinct enough to be identified as specific research areas. This provides more detailed insight into the complexity of factors influencing the development of student agency. The close link between transformative agency and the concept of dual stimulation suggests that there are two types of stimuli involved in the development of agency—one that highlights a problem or challenge and another that provides support and new approaches to solving that problem. This dynamic is critical to developing students’ ability to actively engage with change and challenges in the workplace, particularly when working with people.

Understanding the connections between key concepts helps to design targeted programs and interventions in the educational process; for example, the finding that transformative agency is not the most central node, but has a strong link to the dual stimulus, points to the potential for developing learning approaches that specifically promote transformation and resilience in students through expansive learning. This can lead to methodological approaches that improve students’ skills in solving complex problems and adapting to new work environments, which is crucial for a career in the field of human labor.

The visual representation of the network enabled the identification of dominant themes and connections between concepts, further allowing for the determination of which themes are central (e.g., education) and how agency is related to other important concepts (e.g., transformative agency). This holistic understanding helps to identify potential gaps in the existing literature and guide future research efforts to improve student agency, particularly in the context of sustainable transformations in secondary technical education.

Taken together, these findings allow us to identify how key concepts, such as education, transformative agency and dual stimulation, are related based on quantitative and qualitative analyses. In this way, it is possible to better understand how young people develop agency and how educational processes can be adapted to foster the competencies required for a successful career in people-oriented professions.

Based on the literature review and bibliometric analysis, it can be argued that student agency is a key mechanism that promotes the transition from knowledge to action in education for sustainable development. Through the development of awareness, motivation, skills and courage to actively participate in addressing the challenges of sustainability, students become key agents of change in society, which is a fundamental goal of education for sustainable development. Other authors have come to similar conclusions, for college students (Jääskelä et al., 2020), young people in general (Oinonen et al., 2023; I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023) and also for upper primary school students (Anderson et al., 2019). Furthermore, the clusters associated with the middle education cluster illustrate the breadth of the nature of agency—which is perhaps under-researched but very important (empowerment and transformative agency)—as the current links to the central cluster are not as strong (see, e.g., the articulation in Bandura, 2006). Furthermore, as highlighted by Bandura (2006), metacognitive self-regulation is thought to play a key role in transforming our ideas into actions and, so, agency can be further enhanced (Oinonen et al., 2023; Sass et al., 2020). As stated by Anderson et al., agency needs to develop holistically in different settings, with different people and authentic opportunities (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023). This range of opportunities to engage in sustainable transformations can be better addressed in sustainability education through expanding and more clearly defining the goals and indicators of successful sustainability education. Open-ended tasks, collaborative work, curriculum and teacher facilitation, rather than direction, were found to be enablers of transformative agency (Klemen & Devetak, 2025; Kajamaa & Kumpulainen, 2019; Kumpulainen & Kajamaa, 2020). In this way, sustainability education and the associated participation in promoting sustainability can become more inclusive and meaningful for stakeholders from different backgrounds (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023).

To summarize, student agency is crucial in the concept of education for sustainability, as it promotes the active role of students in shaping a more sustainable society. It is not just about imparting knowledge about climate change, the circular economy or social justice but, instead, about empowering young people to critically engage in these challenges and change practices in their everyday lives. Agency is strongly connected to education for sustainable development through (1) the active participation and co-creation of knowledge; (2) critical thinking and reflection; (3) connection to concrete action (action competency); (4) interdisciplinarity and complex problem solving; and (5) social change and empowerment (Diez-Ojeda et al., 2025). Through developing agency, students feel like active agents in society who can help to shape policies, habits or innovations that lead to a more just and sustainable society. Some other authors have come to similar conclusions (Oinonen et al., 2023; I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023; Green, 2024), which further undermine our findings. Furthermore, as Barth and Michelsen (2013) have also argued, the deliberate and continuous creation of cross-sectoral opportunities that enable people from diverse backgrounds to participate in decision-making and change processes and engage, learn, develop and implement their own agency is essential for progress towards more sustainable societies.

4.2. Development of Technical Secondary School Students’ Agency to Work with People

The study of technical secondary school students’ competencies with respect to careers that involve working with people was based on a quantitative analysis using survey data.

We found that secondary technical students have strong self-confidence and self-control and the ability to master the subject matter, although the constructs of student agency were rather unequally developed, in line with the findings of Green (2024). Second-year students reported lower perseverance than those in their third or fourth year. This might suggest that, as students advance, they become more persistent or resilient in their studies—possibly due to greater familiarity with program demands, stronger commitment or closer proximity to graduation, in agreement with the findings of Vare (2021) and Anderson et al. (2019).

Fourth-year students reported lower future orientation compared to both second- and third-year students. This was somewhat unexpected—one might predict older students to be more focused on their immediate future. However, it may reflect anxiety about transitioning to the workforce, uncertainty about job prospects or “burnout” after several years in the program. Moreover, the unexpected lower future orientation in fourth-year students aligns with the findings of Anderson et al. (2019), who reported that disengagement rises in later years. The study of Anderson et al. (2019) also suggested that students who feel uncertain about their future may reduce their effort and motivation, reinforcing their lower future orientation.

Although overall agency differed by study year, the significant changes were concentrated in the perseverance of effort and future orientation. The surprising dip in future orientation among senior students highlights the need for targeted guidance, stress management and career planning during the final year of a technical program, as has also been stated by Anderson et al. (2019). The results and findings of the study were further validated through comparing models of student agency around the world, with the more recent models proposed by Sullivan (2022) and Green (2024) standing out. These two studies focused on the development of student agency within the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program. The AVID program is based on psychological empowerment theory, which defines agency as a combination (Sullivan, 2022) of (1) meaning—how much the learner feels that their work has value; (2) competency—feeling confident in an academic environment; (3) self-determination—the autonomy to make decisions about one’s own learning; and (4) influence—feeling that one’s actions lead to change.

Green (2024) found that participation in the AVID program strengthens student agency through (1) perseverance in overcoming obstacles; (2) strengthening academic and social skills; and (3) connection to mentors and teachers. The comparison with our research shows both (1) a similarity—namely the high correlation of agency with self-efficacy and perseverance—and (2) a difference—namely, while Green (2024) emphasized the influence of teacher support and mentoring, our research emphasizes the influence of self-regulation and self-monitoring in learning.

Sullivan’s (2022) research also focused on the role of the AVID program in developing agency, but followed an in-depth mixed methods approach. Sullivan (2022) highlighted the following findings on student agency: (1) AVID program participants strongly associate agency with college and career readiness; (2) AVID most strongly promoted self-regulated learning and student motivation; (3) the most-developed aspects of agency were self-confidence, decision making and the ability to persevere; and (4) the least-developed aspects were sense of purpose and influence—students did not always feel that they could make a major difference through their actions.

Both our research and that of Sullivan (2022) indicated that students have confidence in their academic abilities and a sense of control over their own learning. Sullivan (2022) noted a strong relationship between agency and college and career readiness, which was not explicitly examined in our study. In Sullivan’s (2022) study, students reported having less influence over systemic change, which could be a similar finding to our study regarding the lower scores in future orientation observed for fourth-year students. The main similarity between the studies was that all three studies confirmed self-efficacy and internal control to be key factors in the development of student agency. A characteristic difference is that Green (2024) and Sullivan (2022) emphasized the influence of teacher and tutor support, while our research placed more emphasis on individual control over learning and one’s own abilities.

4.3. Challenges and Opportunities of Student Agency as Enabler in Cultivating Competencies for Sustainable Transformations in People-Oriented Professions

Developing competencies for sustainable transformations in people-centered professions (e.g., education, health, social work) presents several challenges and opportunities. An analysis based on the literature and the results of our research provided comprehensive insights into the key dimensions of this area. In summary, all the student agency competencies were found to be significantly linked to the sustainability transformation competencies (Redman & Wiek, 2021). This framework illustrates how student agency competencies, such as self-efficacy, perseverance, strategic thinking and self-regulation, contribute to sustainable transformations through fostering resilience, leadership, interdisciplinary thinking and adaptive problem solving. Together, they enable the development of critical thinking, long-term vision, proactivity, perseverance and collaboration, which are key factors for successful sustainable transformation in secondary education (Inouye et al., 2023; Schoots-Snjider et al., 2025; Tassone et al., 2022; Vare, 2021).

The main challenges in developing sustainable skills are as follows:

• The lack of an integrated approach to education: As Redman and Wiek (2021) pointed out, most educational programs continue to promote incremental change, rather than systemic change. It is crucial that competencies are not treated in isolation, but are integrated and work in harmony with each other;
• The difficulty of integration of theory and practice: Implementation skills and strategic thinking are often under-developed, making it difficult to effectively implement sustainable measures in professional practice. The content of training programs often does not include enough practical experience to develop implementation skills. Theoretical knowledge without concrete experience does not enable individuals to influence sustainable change in the work environment (Mameli et al., 2023; Oinonen et al., 2023);
• Cultural and organizational barriers: Professions that work with people are often embedded in rigid institutional structures in which it is difficult to introduce sustainable innovations. Bandura (2006) pointed out that sustainable transformations require a combination of individual, agentic and collective agency, which means that individuals must be empowered but also supported by the organization. Students and teachers often lack a sufficiently developed capacity to think about the future that enables them to proactively plan sustainable strategies. Without the ability to think ahead, sustainability initiatives remain short-term and fail to achieve systemic change (Redman & Wiek, 2021). Students and teachers often do not feel that they can influence sustainable change, leading to passivity and a lack of initiative (Anderson et al., 2019). Student agency is a key factor that determines how successfully individuals will implement sustainable transformations in their professional environment (I. M. Koskela & Paloniemi, 2023);
• Lack of methods to measure sustainability competencies: At present, there is no standardized assessment system to monitor the development of competencies for sustainable transformations. The challenge lies in quantifying behavioral change; that is, how to measure whether a person is truly contributing to sustainable transformations (Redman et al., 2021).

Opportunities for developing competencies for sustainable transformations can be seen in the following aspects:

• The use of competency models for sustainability: Redman and Wiek (2021) and Oinonen et al. (2023) proposed an extended model consisting of eight competencies, which was also tested in our study. The model was found to relate well to student agency.
• The link between student agency and sustainability competencies: In our study, we found strong links between student agency and competencies for sustainable transformations. This means that strengthening agency directly contributes to the successful implementation of sustainable practices—for example, (1) students with higher self-confidence are more resilient to sustainability challenges, (2) persistent individuals are better able to implement sustainability strategies, and (3) individuals who can plan ahead are better prepared for the challenges of sustainability. These observations confirm the findings of Karvonen et al. (2023).
• Strengthening the agency of students and teachers: According to I. M. Koskela and Paloniemi (2023), the development of agency as the ability to act and influence systemic change is crucial. Oinonen et al. (2023) and Sass et al. (2020) linked agency with capacity to agency—individuals must have the will, confidence, affiliation, passion and knowledge to act as sustainable agents.
• Greater integration of practice into education: Sustainability education models are increasingly focused on the actual implementation of sustainability solutions (e.g., project work, collaboration with local communities, learning enterprises). Oinonen et al. (2023) stated that young people are most actively engaged in sustainable change when they feel involved and see the concrete effects of their actions. Students and teachers should have more opportunities to participate in sustainability projects where they can develop and test their skills in real-life settings. Teaching methods that encourage reflection and self-regulation are needed, as this enables the better adaptation of sustainability strategies.
• Digitalization and ICT as a support for sustainable transformations: Digital tools and artificial intelligence make it possible to better model sustainability scenarios, adapt learning processes and analyze sustainability data. Tools for visualizing complex systems (e.g., simulations of climate change impacts) improve systems thinking and foresight skills (Taub et al., 2020).
• Interdisciplinary approaches and the integration of different sectors: Redman and Wiek (2021) emphasized that sustainable transformations are not the domain of a single discipline, but require the collaboration of different disciplines. The opportunity for professions involving working with people lies in the development of cross-sectoral skills and the integration of different actors (health, social work, education, business, etc.). Professions involving work with people often require collaborations between different disciplines. Therefore, integrative competency, which enables knowledge from different fields to be brought together, is crucial. Furthermore, interpersonal skills enable effective collaboration in interdisciplinary teams;
• Strengthening systems thinking and normative thinking: Systems thinking helps students to understand complex sustainability challenges and recognize how they are interconnected (e.g., in environmental, social and economic aspects). Normative competency promotes reflection on values and ethical dilemmas, which are particularly important for those in professions that involve working with people.

The development of sustainable competencies is not only a question of educational content but also of teaching methodology, the culture of organizations and the systemic changes that make it possible to implement sustainable solutions. Student agency is a key factor in developing competencies for sustainable transformations, as it influences their motivation, perseverance and ability to act in sustainable initiatives. The main challenges include the lack of an integrated approach to learning, difficulties in linking theory and practice and limited institutional support. With the right approach, students can become sustainable agents of change who can contribute to holistic and long-term sustainable change in their professions. While this study offers valuable insights into the agency of secondary technical education students, its findings are limited by the ad-hoc sample, methodological limitations and lack of qualitative data.

4.4. Limitations of the Study and Future Research

Despite the complex methodology used in this study, we can also report some limitations.

The survey was conducted in only one secondary school in Slovenia, which means that the results are not necessarily representative of the entire population of technical secondary school students in Slovenia. The main criterion for the selection of the sample was the accessibility of the participants. This may lead to bias in the sample, as it does not include a wider range of schools and regions in which different levels of agency could occur. Although the considered school represents a statistically stable sample, a larger and more diverse population would be useful to increase the validity and generalizability of the results.

The survey was based on a questionnaire using a six-point Likert scale. This method does not allow the subjective experiences of students to be addressed, which could be better captured through qualitative methods (e.g., interviews or focus groups). Students answered the questions based on their perceptions and experiences, which may lead to (1) cognitive biases (e.g., students may not perceive their agency in the same way as an external researcher would) and (2) socially desirable answers—students may answer as they think the researchers would expect them to and not necessarily in line with their actual beliefs. Self-rated behavioral constructs always have certain limitations, as self-rated behaviors may not fully correspond to actual behaviors (Lange & Dewitte, 2019).

An adapted student agency questionnaire (Zeiser et al., 2018) was used. Although it has been translated and adapted, it may not yet capture the particular nuances of the Slovenian education system. While the survey covers eight constructs of agency, it is not clear whether all aspects of student agency in technical education have been adequately captured.

The survey was only conducted over a two-month period (January–February 2025), which means that long-term changes in student agency could not be captured. The survey focused on students in technical programs, so the results may not be directly applicable to other programs (e.g., general high schools, art high schools). Student agency can be influenced by social and school policies, the quality of teaching and the supportive environment, which were not directly analyzed in the study.

It would be worthwhile for future research to (1) expand the sample to include more technical secondary schools from different regions; (2) use mixed methods (a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches; e.g., interviews and case studies); (3) follow up students for longer periods of time in order to better understand the long-term development of agency; and (4) investigate additional factors such as the roles of teachers, mentors and the school system in promoting agency.

Despite these limitations, the study provides important contributions to the understanding of student agency and its impact on sustainable competencies.

5. Conclusions

This study contributes to the literature on student agency in the context of secondary education through the use of combined methods such as bibliometrics, empirical research and comparative analysis. Furthermore, it continues the debate on the constructs of study agency and offers a sustainability-oriented approach that emphasizes the multi-dimensional nature of agency.

We aimed to describe the process of student agency in a secondary school context using a modified instrument that has been validated in previous studies, robust statistics and a process-oriented architecture. This approach aims to increase students’ engagement in learning through enhancing their sense of agency and improving pedagogical practices, particularly through developing and promoting competencies for sustainable transformation in secondary technical education for occupations involving work with humans. Our conducted survey and multi-faceted analysis of student agency-related data suggested that unique insights into student agency can be gained through the use of a customized questionnaire based on empowerment theory complemented with cultural–historical activity theory and the sustainable transformation competency framework described in the survey. The results demonstrate that the proposed method can provide information about student agency and its relationships with sustainable transformation competencies at the individual technical program level. The observed lower persistence in effort and future orientation scores indicate a need for additional support in developing long-term strategies and goal setting. Most importantly, to the best of our knowledge, this study is one of the few in the literature to systematically analyze student agency using bibliometric, comparativist and grounding theory-based methods. The potential of the applied analytics of student agency in various areas is evident, including student self-regulation, academic advising and pedagogical knowledge.

The results of our research suggest that it would be worthwhile to strengthen mentoring and support systems for the development of long-term persistence and future-oriented aspirations, which could enhance the agency of students in terms of influencing sustainable change in their future careers and lives as responsible and informed citizens.