An Integrated Framework to Motivate Student Engagement in Science Education for Sustainable Development

Abstract

Science teachers continue to face decreased motivation, lower achievement levels, and decreased enrollment in post-secondary science programs. Teachers ask themselves this question: How do I motivate my students to achieve? Student-centered pedagogies, such as an in-depth pedagogy informed by Self-Determination Theory, can improve students’ motivation by addressing students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competency, and relatedness. Problem-based learning presents students with relevant situations and actively engages them in developing plausible solutions to problems. Environmental sustainability encompasses issues concerning our ecological and social environments. Teachers can focus on these issues to develop authentic problem-based learning units that offer a student-relevant pathway to improve motivation and scientific literacy. We propose a pedagogical framework, drawing on Self-Determination Theory, to promote students’ motivation to engage keenly with environmental sustainability education through problem-based learning. This framework is designed for secondary science classrooms to inform science teachers’ pedagogical practice.

1. Introduction

Research has shown that science achievement levels are in decline in North America due to decreased motivation (Firdausih & Aslan, 2024; Larose et al., 2006; Liou et al., 2021; Murdock, 2008; Potvin & Hasni, 2014, 2018; Wang et al., 2017; Ozulku & Kloser, 2024). Fewer high school and college students are motivated to opt for future elective science classes (AlAli, 2024; Aschbacher et al., 2010; Bertels & Bolte, 2015; Glynn et al., 2009; Potvin & Hasni, 2014; Jones et al., 2018; Reider et al., 2021). Fewer students going into senior secondary science classes will result in decreased enrollment in post-secondary science programs and could have a negative impact on STEM fields, scientific literacy, and career opportunities.

Research also suggests that many students feel alienated and excluded from science as they do not see the relevance of science to their lives (Aschbacher et al., 2010; Ayuso et al., 2022; Glynn et al., 2009). Altogether, there is a significant need to improve students’ inclusion, engagement, motivation, and agency in school science education (Larose et al., 2006; Schwartz et al., 2009). Learning science is essential for fostering the development of scientific literacy among citizens to aid their life choices and allow them to “better contribute to informed discourse and decision-making involving science” (Howell & Brossard, 2021). Their informed choices and actions are crucial to addressing the complex issues related to ecological sustainability (Correia et al., 2010; Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002; J. A. Anderson & Makar, 2024). Fostering students’ motivation to actively engage with environmental sustainability challenges thus becomes central to science and sustainability education. Hence, understanding the construct of motivation and how it can inform science teaching and learning to support the development of science-literate citizens is imperative (Annan-Diab & Molinari, 2017; J. Anderson, 2024).

The United Nations’ planned Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer a set of policies for environmental sustainability that includes many elements, including policies on the science-specific topics of conservation, deforestation, energy efficiency, environmental footprints, recycling, greenhouse gases, pollution control, and waste management (Grabau et al., 2021; United Nations, 2024; Wolters, 2022). These SDG concepts and issues can be incorporated into the science curriculum to engage students in local environmental initiatives and make science more relevant and connected to their lives. This paper offers an integrated pedagogical framework to motivate students to engage in science and sustainability education. This framework draws on Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and problem-based learning to enhance students’ in-depth understanding of science issues like environmental sustainability and cultivate environmentally responsible behaviors (Singh et al., 2002; Shongwe, 2024). Explicitly acknowledging the role that SDT plays in understanding and enhancing students’ motivation to learn science is central to this pedagogical framework. More precisely, teachers can adapt this framework to identify their students’ motivational needs and develop effective strategies to address them.

In this paper, we first discuss Science Education for Sustainable Development at the school and community levels. Next, we explain the motivation constructs of Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Subsequently, we illustrate how these concepts can be applied in science classrooms using the problem-based learning (PBL) pedagogy. Finally, we present an integrated framework and its real-time application in science education using selected exemplars.

2. Science Education for Sustainable Development

The UN developed its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on the foundational basis of the Five Ps, “People, Prosperity, Peace, Partnership, and the Planet” (United Nations, 2024; Wolters, 2022, p. 2033). These were conceived to address critical issues facing the Earth and its inhabitants (Dlouhá & Pospíšilová, 2018). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) broadly focus on poverty, health, societal equity, sustainable industries and employment, peace, and the environment. The central tenets of the 17 SDGs, according to Zamora-Polo et al. (2019), are that the goals are international in scope, of equal priority, and transformative for society. Taken together, they form the basis for Science Education for Sustainable Development (SESD). Onwu and Kyle (2011) defined SESD as an education “intended within the school curriculum to maximize the socio-cultural relevance of science education in helping learners to achieve the goals of sustainable development” (Onwu & Kyle, 2011, p. 16).

The general educational goals for sustainable development focus on citizens becoming scientifically literate enough to make informed environmental choices (Vesterinen et al., 2016; Zamora-Polo et al., 2019). A core Sustainable Development Goal is in the field of education. Sustainable Development Goal 4 is centered on the need for quality life-long education for everyone (United Nations, 2015; Dlouhá & Pospíšilová, 2018). Indeed, quality education is essential for driving change needed to meet other SDGs, like those related to health, sustainable communities, and climate change (SDGs 7, 11, 12, and 13). The SDGs cover a variety of environmental topics that include agriculture, biodiversity loss, conservation, energy efficiency, environmental footprints, full-cycle resource usage, greenhouse gases, soil fertility, waste management, and sustainable buildings (Grabau et al., 2021; United Nations, 2024; Wolters, 2022). Equally important is the social action aspect of SDGs in science education. Scholars suggest that a science-literate citizenry can apply their knowledge to local problems related to climate change, social justice, and equity using critical thinking, informed decision-making, and problem-solving skills (Bastien & Holmarsdottir, 2017; Blevins et al., 2022; Vesterinen et al., 2016). Educational units involving ecological sustainability can increase student’s awareness of these concepts and their relevancy to them and change their perceptions and motivations (Ismail et al., 2022). Importantly “the intrinsic motivation to learn science may find support by environmental issues fostering ‘green’ attitudes” (Schönfelder & Bogner, 2020, p. 11).

An example of a community-based educational project that involved scientific literacy and citizen action was ‘Project Shine’ in Tanzania, where youth were engaged as change agents for sustainable development in their local community. As such, Maasai youth helped develop local and relevant sewage sanitation, water hygiene, and health strategies for their neighborhood (Bastien & Holmarsdottir, 2017, p. 1). This project had many social aspects, including the establishment of a public awareness program and the creation of small soap-making enterprises. Another example of a sustainability project is a Malawian sensitization program used to educate village people about the inspection of ponds as possible spawning grounds of insects carrying malaria using drone technology. One of the local community workers explained that her motivation came from the project’s potential to do “something that will impact real people with real problems” (Mkuwu et al., 2022, p. 167, as cited in Solís & Zeballos, 2023). Researchers at a Finnish university assessed 797 university students for their interest in sustainability and their environmental stance. They found that students’ motivation to engage with sustainability education varied according to what the students were studying and that students’ interests and motivations should be taken into account in sustainability education (Hyytinen et al., 2023).

Given the central role of motivation in science and sustainability education, a deeper understanding of motivation on the part of educators is essential to developing meaningful learning experiences that foster students’ engagement in science and sustainability education.

3. Understanding Motivation

Self-Determination Theory is a significant part of educational research. It offers a useful and comprehensive framework for understanding motivation in the context of learning. The definitions and constructs within Self-Determination Theory have been used in many types of studies on motivation. The literature shows that educational achievement depends significantly on motivation, and importantly in science education. In their seminal work on Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Deci and Ryan (1985, 2012) described motivation as the force that pushes one toward perceptions of increased competence, connection, and self-determination.

The name of the theory derives from their proposition that people want to feel that they have the capability to determine their actions. SDT posits that motivation arises out of the need of the individual to satisfy three internal psychological constructs: relatedness—the ability to make and maintain positive relationships with others; competence—the feeling of capability; and autonomy—the ability to be an agent of change in one’s own life. The satisfaction of these psychological needs will lead the individual to develop “an internal, unified structure of self” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 9). To better understand the SDT framework, a more detailed explanation of its constructs is necessary.

As noted above, the three primary internal psychological and motivational needs in SDT are relatedness, competence, and autonomy. SDT focuses on these internal and “inherent” needs, also called intrinsic motivators. People who meet these psychological needs during an educational activity will experience interest, enjoyment, and engagement (Deci & Ryan, 2012). Goyal (2015) argues that people are naturally driven toward their self-development (p. 74). For example, emotional support provided by parents to their children is vital to achieving intrinsic motivation (Lemmer & Schulze, 2017). Deci and Ryan state that “intrinsic motivation is the innate, natural propensity to engage one’s interests and exercise one’s capacities, and in so doing, to seek and conquer optimal challenges” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 43). When a classroom teacher supports students’ basic psychological needs, they are more apt to be engaged in learning (Deci & Ryan in Furrer et al., 2014).

Furthermore, when a classroom teacher uses student-relevant topics, students’ motivation to learn improves (Glynn et al., 2009). “Students should have a proactive and positive attitude toward content that … they find interesting” (Romero-Rodriguez et al., 2020, p. 420). Deci and Ryan define interest—in the context of education—as a “central emotion that accompanies motivation” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 29). Interest serves to regulate an individual’s attention because it can result in an increase in the direction of attention toward a task. The level of a student’s interest directly correlates with the level of the student’s engagement and motivation (Eccles, 2008, in Abraham & Barker, 2015, p. 60). To this end, teachers’ pedagogical actions in the classroom can affect the fulfillment of the basic psychological needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy. As such, these constructs can provide insights into and a better understanding of the role of motivation in teaching and learning (Boiché et al., 2008; Romero-Rodriguez et al., 2020; Reeve, 2012; Shin & Johnson, 2021). A teacher can help or hinder a student’s motivation to learn and achieve by addressing these three psychological needs.

In terms of competence, a teacher having clear and consistent expectations could improve a student’s sense of competence. Significantly, scaffolding students by adjusting the level of difficulty in learning tasks instead of overloading them can also improve students’ sense of capability. Predictable and functional classroom activities create environments where students know that they can rely on other students and the teachers for assistance (Furrer et al., 2014). Regarding relatedness, a teacher may help foster student–student relations or teacher–student relations, encouraging motivation. Providing regular emotional support by establishing safe and supportive learning spaces can improve the connectedness between students, their peers, and their teacher (Furrer et al., 2014, p. 105). School relatedness or connectedness has been defined as “the level of cohesiveness between diverse groups, such as students, families, school staff (teaching and non-teaching), … in the school community” (Rowe et al., 2007, p. 528). A teacher’s recognition and appreciation of students’ presence and contributions in a structured environment with high behavioral expectations can make them feel valued and connected (Furrer et al., 2014). Other ways to improve connectedness are to change school schedules, adapt the group-blocking and break times, and promote peer-tutoring and extra-curricular activities (Rowe et al., 2007). In a quantitative study on teachers’ perceptions of their connectedness with elementary and middle school students, Vidourek and King (2014) determined that teachers did feel marginally capable of establishing connections with students but that this diminished from elementary to middle school; furthermore, school-wide strategies like open-house activities, school meets for new students, and staff visiting feeder schools did improve the teacher–student connectedness, as perceived by the teachers. In addition, rural schools in smaller communities provided more opportunities for students to meet staff, resulting in greater levels of connectedness (Vidourek & King, 2014). Schools which do not put these programs in place to support teacher–student connectedness risk higher levels of students disconnecting and leaving school (Walton & Cohen, 2007).

Finally, regarding autonomy, teachers can improve motivation by supporting students’ ability to think critically and make decisions. If a teacher creates opportunities for students to provide opinions and listens to and respects them, it will create conditions that encourage autonomy (Engler & Westphal, 2024). According to SDT, students need to feel that they have a “sense of agency and control” while acting on matters that are personally or professionally relevant to them or that they find interesting (Hartnett, 2012). Thus, teachers can support the development of their students’ motivation by creating authentic learning situations to foster their autonomy.

The relevant literature has shown that Self-Determination Theory is a significant part of educational motivation and achievement discourse. As such, the influence of SDT is evident in many academic motivation studies (Bolte, 2001; Furrer et al., 2014; Shin & Johnson, 2021; Singh et al., 2002). The definitions and constructs within SDT have meaningfully informed these studies. Of note is that achievement, especially in science education, is significantly shaped by motivation (Boiché et al., 2008; Bolte, 2001; Singh et al., 2002; Vansteenkiste et al., 2009). As Deci and Ryan (1985, 2012) argued in their seminal work on SDT, motivation is the force that pushes one toward perceptions of increased competence, connection, and self-determination. Singh et al. used the SDT constructs of “motivation, attitude, and academic engagement” (Singh et al., 2002, p. 323) in their quantitative study of the motivation of Grade Eight STEM students and its effect on achievement in math and science. This study showed that improved motivation, a positive attitude, engagement, and increased time spent on tasks positively affected achievement in mathematics and science subjects. Furthermore, an improved pedagogy—giving more time on tasks and presenting tasks relevant to students’ lives—positively affected students’ attitudes and motivation regarding science. Alternatively, Shin and Johnson used SDT to examine how peer relationships in the classroom environment influenced the motivation construct of autonomy (Shin & Johnson, 2021). The results showed that students with greater levels of connectedness to other students demonstrated higher levels of competence, intrinsic motivation, and achievement. This study pointed out the need for teachers to implement practices that promote relatedness and competence in their classrooms. Also utilizing elements of SDT, Bolte (2001) studied how teachers’ actions could focus on increasing motivation to improve students’ cooperation to improve achievement. The results demonstrated that students’ experiences in a motivational learning environment can shape positive attitudes toward science-related careers. Similarly, using SDT, Furrer and colleagues developed a model to improve how teachers use the motivational constructs of autonomy, competence, and connectedness to improve students’ resilience, engagement, and achievement (Furrer et al., 2014). Overall, SDT concepts have been successfully used to account for the impact of motivational factors like students’ grades, the classroom environment, and student–teacher interactions in meeting students’ basic psychological needs.

4. Providing Pedagogical Support for Motivation Through Problem-Based Learning

As noted earlier, teachers can support the fulfillment of students’ basic psychological needs, highlighted in SDT, to bolster their motivation to learn science. Problem-based learning (PBL) is a pedagogical approach that, with care, can be employed to support students’ sense of connection, autonomy, and competence. As such, PBL supports students’ sense of competence by recognizing their prior knowledge and challenging them further by engaging them with in-depth learning experiences. The term “in-depth” can be defined by the length of class time spent on a topic, the type of learning goals, and the coverage of the learning material. An in-depth pedagogical approach, as in problem-based learning (PBL), “affords students advantages such as increased motivation” (Gonzalez, 2019, p. 180). A PBL pedagogy encourages detailed and focused engagement on the part of students. It involves tasking students with a target authentic and developmentally appropriate problem to be solved. The students work in teams to comprehend the problem through brainstorming and discussion. The students identify what they need to know to solve the problem and conduct research to increase their knowledge about the problem in teams. They are tasked with solving the problem within a time frame. Then, the students conduct hands-on investigations or construct a technical object in teams (as explained later). Subsequently, they analyze and interpret their findings and present their key results and conclusions about the project. The teacher conducts ongoing assessments—both formal and informal—of students’ work and their class participation (Goodnough & Cashion, 2006; Goodnough, 2003; Gonzalez, 2019; Gordon et al., 2001; Sage, 1996; Pease & Kuhn, 2008; Dodds, 1997).

Problem-based learning promotes curiosity, interest, motivation, and engagement; the acquisition, retention, and application of new ideas; interdisciplinary exploration; active participation; collaborative learning; and critical and creative thinking (Torp & Sage, 2002; Ward & Lee, 2002; Gordon et al., 2001). A primary objective is the development of students’ reasoning and deeper understanding of concepts (Tytler & Prain, 2010). Students collaboratively develop knowledge, test theories, evaluate outcomes, and are guided by the teacher as they solve the problem or create technical devices (e.g., recycling technical objects, building bat houses, or making wind-powered electric generators). Over time, robust knowledge is collectively developed on a specific topic. The students create meaningful conceptual networks of knowledge and learn to apply their knowledge to solve problems (Bertel et al., 2022; Gonzalez, 2019; Hogan, 1999; Margetson, 1998). This experience can also develop their sense of belonging and connectedness while working in teams on problem-based challenges. In addition, improving students’ perceptions of their own competence and connection using a problem-based learning pedagogy increases their motivation to engage and learn in science education (Pearcy & Duplass, 2011; Gonzalez, 2019). At the same time, the problem-solving process requires students to think critically and make decisions together, thus cultivating a sense of autonomy. Studies have shown that the use of relevant PBL units led to an improvement in the self-reported student motivation, student achievement, and desire to take further science courses (MacIntosh, 2013; Firdausih & Aslan, 2024; Pearcy & Duplass, 2011; Gonzalez, 2019; LaForce et al., 2017).

Thus, providing opportunities to study topics of personal interest, especially if the topics are relevant to students’ lives, as ecological sustainability certainly is, makes science meaningful, valuable, and worth learning for students. In the next section, we present a pedagogical framework based on Self-Determination Theory. This framework employs Sustainable Development Goals and problem-based learning to enhance students’ engagement, learning, and agentic actions in their ecological and social environments.

5. A Framework for an SDT-Supported Pedagogy to Promote Science Education for Sustainable Development

We offer a pedagogical framework to conceptualize the development of PBL strategies that promote Science Education for Sustainable Development (SESD), which is informed by Self-Determination Theory. This new approach presents opportunities to create novel learning situations where the teacher can scaffold student activities that center on developing motivation and builds on more general pedagogical approaches to science education (Ali et al., 2021; Bencze et al., 2020; Zamora-Polo et al., 2019). For example, Zamora-Polo et al. (2019) pointed out the crucial role of students’ active contributions to instructional activities and motivation in their academic success. Ali et al. (2021) demonstrated the role of participation in creating sports products in enhancing students’ motivation to engage with STEM learning. Moreover, Bencze et al. (2020) offered a pedagogical approach in which students are encouraged to engage with the socio-political impacts of environmental issues, such as impacts on social justice, to make science learning relevant. Students reflect on key concepts involving societal issues, learn further about them from their teachers to expand their knowledge, and work on small projects on issues of importance to them. While these frameworks underscore the importance of motivation and student engagement in general to enhance students’ learning and success, our framework offers specific and concrete strategies for use in the classroom to develop students’ abilities and promote achievement by supporting their psychological needs. As discussed earlier, in their pedagogical choices, teachers can draw on different SDG concepts to foster students’ motivation as they are relevant to their lives (Gonzalez, 2019; Reider et al., 2021; Ismail et al., 2022; United Nations, 2024).

This integrated approach, pictured below (Figure 1), combines an SDT-supported pedagogical approach, the steps involved in PBL, and sustainable development issues in order to cultivate scientific literacy and environmentally responsible attitudes, behaviors, and actions.

Table 1. Embedding SDT-supported pedagogy in PBL regarding SDGs.

Competence	Relatedness	Autonomy
The teacher presents a problem which focuses on SDGs.	High expectations for students’ behavior during teamwork are established.	Teacher or students assign roles during team creation.
Students first read the problem individually and respectfully share their understandings to comprehend it from multiple team perspectives.	Develop rules for respectful engagement in teamwork. The teacher can work with students to discuss the rules.	The teacher ensures that all the team members develop the requisite knowledge and skills to accomplish the SDG-related task (e.g., scaffolding the use of wood saws, drilling, or the application of math, science, and engineering skills).
The group writes down their collective understanding of the problem on worksheets.	Students learn to recognize, value, and respect each other’s ideas and contributions during brainstorming and subsequent steps.	Students are encouraged to express ideas and possible solutions to the problem.
The teacher presents core concepts and technical skills relevant to the SDG-related problem.	Students learn to debate ideas constructively and critically.	The teacher provides materials to support students’ technical choices to solve the SDG problem.
The teacher shares relevant resources from textbooks and online sources to support students in their research on sustainable development issues.	Everyone is held accountable for their actions when participating in teamwork.	Students are encouraged to defend their choices and decisions.
Students are encouraged to consult the teacher if they are confused or need guidance for their research.	The teacher vocally shows appreciation for students’ actions.	The teacher encourages students to try out their ideas and think of alternative solutions to sustainability problems.
The teacher encourages students to break tasks into manageable components.	Students offer help to each other in their teams and to other teams.	Students know that making mistakes is part of the scientific process.
The teacher actively guides and monitors group work.	Students express appreciation for each other’s ideas and contributions.	Students reflect on their successes and failures.
Student reflection and journaling on their emerging understanding.	The teacher creates a safe environment where students can openly share their ideas, feelings, and problems through individual discussions with the teacher and journals.	Students write journals about their decision-making related to the SDG issues.

below outlines the specific actions a teacher can take to support the fulfillment of the SDT-based psychological needs of students in a problem-based learning unit (Furrer et al., 2014; Reeve et al., 2023). These approaches, used together, can inform teachers’ pedagogical decisions, fostering in-depth learning in students, improving students’ connectedness to their classmates and teachers, and improving students’ confidence in their abilities and sense of agency.

Below, we describe examples of successful PBL units that tie in with many science and SDG concepts and are SDT-supportive in their structure and process. These learning units serve as exemplars to show how the framework aids the creation and implementation

Example 1: Deconstruction, Analysis, and Recycling of Technical Objects

Problem: How can a technical object be repaired or repurposed to minimize the waste going to landfills?

(SDG 12—responsible consumption and production.)

In this activity students, in small groups, discuss this problem to understand it from multiple perspectives. They figure out what they need to know to solve this problem. Respectfully listening to each other in each team, the group records their collective understanding of the problem in their journals. The teacher shares relevant resources from the textbook and online sources to support students in their research, as required. Technical objects include computer hard drives, monitors, keyboards, food blenders, clocks, and fans. In this example, they are given a technical object, like a blender. The students conduct research to learn more about a blender’s different components and functions. They decide how they will disassemble the blender safely and what tools are required for this purpose. The teacher provides the tools and demonstrates how they work. The students take the blender apart and categorize the materials as plastic, metal, ceramic, or a composite. The teacher presents core concepts and helps the students classify the parts by sharing key information about the categories of materials. The students also analyze the blender’s mechanical functions. The students are encouraged to consult the teacher if they need guidance regarding their research or progress. The students open the blender and inspect its parts. At this point, the students decide whether the blender can be repaired or recycled. They then either repair the blender or disassemble it. If they can fix the blender, they do so, and then nothing goes to landfill. If they decide to reuse and recycle it, they must separate and weigh each material according to the categories of materials. Afterwards, they determine which components (screws, wires, gears, jar) can be reused. Based on this, the students write a report explaining how much of their blender will be reused and recycled. They produce a tabletop representation of their analysis of the blender. The students present their solutions to the other groups. The teacher assesses the analysis report. Together, the teacher and the students evaluate their presentations. After the presentations, the students take their components to be recycled at the recycling center and learn more about the recycling process.

Thus, in this activity, the students work in small groups created by the teacher to match their personalities and academic and technical skill levels; this supports connectedness. The students develop a sense of their own competence in the disassembly and analysis part of the project. The students’ autonomy is supported because they determine their progress and choices regarding disassembly and the poster presentation. Often, the students are surprised at what is inside technical objects and how much can be reused. So, there is also an attitudinal shift. The students share responsibility for the tasks and are each responsible for writing an analysis and, overall, for the project presentation. The teacher is seen as an ally (which helps to promote connectedness) as the students tackle the sustainability challenge.

Example 2: Bats and Bat Houses

Problem: How can bat houses using sustainable materials be designed and built to help control the insect population without using insecticides?

(SDG 15—Life on Land.)

In this PBL unit, students construct bat houses in small groups from repurposed wood and other recycled materials (carpets, shingles, screws). First, the students conduct research to learn about the biological role of bats and their importance to the ecosystem and control of insects. In a series of short, teacher-led lessons, the students learn about toxicity, bioaccumulation, bioconcentration, ecological footprints, food and energy pyramids, trophic levels, and the need to support the local bat populations. At this point, the teacher creates groups of students based on their varying skill levels in carpentry and biology, ensuring that each group has students with the requisite skills and experience. The students also learn about safe tool usage. Working in their groups, the students research and determine the type of bat house they need to make for the local bat population. The students record their decisions and reflect on their PBL work in their journals, which the teacher will read and comment on. Then, they source the lumber available, preferably pre-used lumber. To support their choices, the teacher makes lumber available in the school. Having done so, the groups draw out their scaled blueprints for their bat houses. The students may ask the school’s carpentry teacher for their advice regarding construction. They share the tasks of obtaining the wood, determining the coating to be used on the wood, sealing the wood, and determining the materials they should use to make the interior of the bat house. They also decide where to position the bat house (usually the house of one of the participants). The students conduct a technical analysis of their project regarding the materials used, their degradation, and the linkages used to attach the materials. The students summarize their technical analysis in their group report, which the teacher will then assess. The students and the teacher evaluate the completed bat house using the evaluation rubric they created. Finally, the students put their bat house on display and create an advertisement poster for their bat house, indicating its technical aspects and how it helps the local environment. As a bonus, the students can visit a local bat cave and see the bats in their natural environment, if possible.

The group work requiring planning, construction, and communication allows the students to connect as they self-delegate the tasks. The teacher connects to the students as a support figure to aid in the technical aspects of this project. This aspect also helps demonstrate the usefulness of cross-curricular approaches because the students use their communication, carpentry, and science skills. Additionally, the students practice exercising their autonomy through choosing tasks, construction, and analysis. Moreover, they improve their competence in terms of their theoretical knowledge and knowledge of construction techniques.

6. Conclusions

In sum, secondary science education, especially in environmental sustainability, can benefit from an SDT-supported pedagogy. Motivation is the key to developing genuine student curiosity and the motivation to learn science for life and possibly pursue STEM careers. The goals of this framework can be met by creating PBL units that foster students’ engagement with environmental sustainability. The pedagogical strategies we have described to promote competence, relatedness, and autonomy are not exhaustive and serve only as guidelines. Ideally, the strategies presented in Table 1 would be employed by teachers during a year-long science course.

Within the broad scope of SDG topics, the suggested framework could be expanded beyond the confines of science courses and applied to other educational domains. The result will hopefully be a well-rounded education for the next generation of science-literate citizens and presents a hopeful approach for these citizens of the future.