PBL4ESD

What is PBL4ESD?

PBL4ESD (Problem-Based Learning on Education for Sustainable Development) is an instructional approach in which students, both individually and in small groups, engage in the process of solving a real-life problem, usually controversial, such as climate change, banning smoking in public spaces, abortion, animal rights, vaccines, etc. PBL4ESD can be used in any school or academic subject and supports inter/cross-disciplinary teaching, learning, and curriculum. Students’ involvement in real-life problems enables them to become active citizens and bridge the gap between education and society.

The conceptual framework of PBL4ESD

Raising a problem

As the focus of the PBL4ESD process is on a real-life problem, the quality of the problem is critical. Being able to raise good-quality problems becomes a critical skill. Raising a problem whose solution is obvious is not a good problem.

The problem should be firmly embedded in learners’ socio-psychological domain. It must be formulated to motivate and challenge the learner to think, reflect, search, discover, build on their prior knowledge, and act.

For example, there has been an ongoing debate for years about whether or not to ban smoking in public places. Similarly, there is an ongoing debate about whether human activities cause climate change or are natural phenomena. Introducing issues that convey controversial meanings, such as banning smoking, is expected to raise learners’ interest in studying the problem and develop various skills and competencies.

Brainstorming about the problem

The starting core activity of the PBL4ESD application is brainstorming, a creative thinking process best used in groups and led by a teacher who acts as a facilitator to help learners generate ideas, access prior knowledge, construct new knowledge, and take action to tackle the problem studied.

Taking up the smoking ban issue, the teacher, functioning as a facilitator, can ask learners to search Google to find a no-smoking sign picture and start a Cmap session with that picture as a key theme. Concept mapping seems to work particularly well with small-group collaborative activities. Given that some skill is required to work with such a tool, concept mapping as an assessment tool is an effective instructional tool. It is suggested that the teacher spend class time training students to make concept maps using Cmap integrated into the PBL4ESD.

To elicit learners’ known vocabulary associated with the issue conveyed by the picture, the teacher could pose some question prompts, such as: “Is smoking healthy?”, “Does everybody agree with banning smoking from public places?”. Words that may come out could be tobacco, smoke, ash, odor, inhale, breathe, cough, lung cancer, give up/quit, lighter, cigar, butt, etc. This way, learners will use their previous knowledge to develop their first concept map. The concept map should be a visual diagram of the learners’ understanding of the different factors related to banning smoking in public spaces or climate change. Questions such as “What are the ten causes of climate change?” and “What are their impacts?” “How is climate change affecting me?” and “How does climate change affect everyday life?” can be used to motivate learners to develop their preliminary concept maps.

Through the brainstorming process, learners start diagnosing what they know about the main issue or problem they deal with, defining learning objectives, deconstructing previous knowledge through reflection, constructing new knowledge through further inquiry, filling missing gaps, and reaching readiness to formulate claims, link claims with evidence, and develop effective argumentation on proposing solutions.

Developing claims and counterclaims

During this process, problem solvers elaborate on the initial state of the problem and identify debatable claims. A claim or proposition is an expected opinion that conveys the problem solver’s interpretations of or beliefs related to the problem studied. In other words, claims are not facts but conclusions that the problem solver draws from facts.

For example, a student can claim that “Since smoking is associated with significant health problems, it has to be banned from public spaces.”

Another student may claim that “Although smoking is associated with health problems, other measures than smoking ban should be applied.”

In other words, a claim is characterized by its controversiality and challenge. If a claim conveys something generally agreed upon or accepted as fact, then there is no motivation or reason to persuade people. This implies that a claim should be disputable and confront others, often opposing points of view, which can be expressed as a counterclaim. In general, claims typically fall into one of four categories:

factual claims

Example

The overwhelming scientific consensus says human activity is causing global climate change. Meta-analyses show that more than 95% of peer-reviewed articles published that expressed a position on the cause of climate change assume anthropogenic actions cause climate change. Additionally, more than 97% of climate researchers say human activity is primarily responsible for global climate change.

cause and effect claims

Example

Global warming caused by human-produced greenhouse gases is melting the Arctic ice cap at an increasing rate, which in turn affects rising sea levels. This increases coastal erosion and elevates coastal storms like hurricanes and typhoons.

value-laden claims

Example

Climate change threatens our ecosystems, undermines the foundation of our fundamental human rights, deepens inequalities, and creates new forms of injustice, especially for the most vulnerable people. Adapting to climate change and trying to mitigate its impacts is an ethical and justice issue.

policy claims.

Example

To tackle climate change, emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) must be halved by 2050. In addition, the most advanced developing countries with large emissions, mainly due to outdated industrial equipment (e.g., China, India, and Brazil), will have to limit their emission growth.

The type of claim chosen will depend on the nature of the problem and its context, the learner’s knowledge of the problem issue, and his/her standpoint on the various interpretations related to the problem.

However, regardless of the type of claim chosen, it is important to identify the controversy or debate on the problem or issue studied. This can be revealed through the different standpoints or counterclaims. A counterclaim is an opposite statement to the one proposed. The following table provides some examples of claims and counterclaims.

CLAIMS (Climate Deniers)	COUNTERCLAIMS (Climate Activists)
Climate change is natural and normal- it happened at other historical points.	Although fluctuations can be seen throughout time due to high levels of carbon dioxide released in recent decades, the Earth is experiencing climate change today that is far different from any in the past, both in rate and scale…… The argument can continue pointing to climate change occurring more than 20 times faster than in the past.
Scientists can’t even agree that climate change is happening.	Well, based on reviewing scientific research… nearly 100% of scientists agree that climate change is an actual fact and that humans are the primary cause. This has been known since the 1980s and even the 1960s by fossil fuel companies. Unfortunately, leaders in the highest-emitting countries were reluctant to slow climate change, let alone stop it, because they did not want to scarify their economic growth.
It is an extreme weather condition today. It can be doubtful if it is due to global warming.	Do not confuse weather and climate because they are two different things. While weather fluctuates from day to day, it does not necessarily mean that global warming isn’t happening. Climate change can be seen by long-term trends.
Plants and animals will adapt to the changes	Climate change is occurring too rapidly to allow species to adapt. It threatens thousands of species, and dozens of species go extinct every day. It has been found that species are going extinct at 1,000 times the natural rate of extinction.

Evidence should also justify a counterclaim if it can be considered seriously. The opposer should provide the reasons, examples, or proof that the argument one wants to counteract is not valid, weak, unsound, or illogical, and vice versa. By identifying the apparent flaws in a claim or a counterclaim, someone can strengthen his/her point of view on the debatable issue. In cases where the claim and the counterclaim cannot be strongly opposed, the involved can strengthen their positions by providing new evidence that can either weaken or contradict the claim or counterclaim.

Linking claims/counterclaims to evidence

As pointed out earlier, claims challenge the beliefs or opinions of others. Thus, they must be linked to supportive evidence, consisting of objectified facts, beliefs, statements, and socially constructed assumptions. In this process, learners decide about what data and information is needed to support, modify, or even reject claims. Searching the Internet, for example, students can find various sources that contain facts related to climate change or the smoking ban issue.

For example, the student claiming that “Since smoking is associated with significant health problems, it has to be banned from public spaces” could find evidence or facts that support his/her claim. An example could be from NHS in England, which says that 86,500 people die each year as a result of smoking, which is equivalent to the population of a small city such as Bath. A report in 2002 by the British Medical Association found that 800 people in England die each year as a result of passive smoking.

Similarly, the student claiming that “Although smoking is associated with health problems, other measures than smoking ban should be applied” could support his/her counterclaim by saying that a general smoking ban restricts smokers’ freedom. Thus, instead of a smoking ban on all public spaces, smoking and non-smoking places should be established in public areas. As depicted in the PBL4ESD organizer, it is suggested that the supporting evidence be limited to three reasons and that three supporting facts be found for each.

Reason 1: “The burning of heating oil by the burners of every house is the main source of air pollution during the winter months.”

Fact 1: “The very low chimneys used by the houses cannot disperse the pollutants released from the combustion in the wider area, resulting in the creation in many cases of increased aerial, local problems.”

Fact 2: “According to research, the peaks in pollutant prices occur in the early morning and early evening hours and if during these hours of maximum production there are unfavorable meteorological conditions (e.g. apnea and temperature inversion), then an accumulation of the emitted sulfur dioxide is caused and we are led to the formation of smog.”

Fact 3: “According to a survey by ELSTAT, carried out in 2010, the most used fuel (space heating, cooking and hot water production) is oil (60.3%).”

Reason 2: “Citizens should come into contact with alternative ways of meeting their energy needs, such as natural gas, and know the importance of these for life on earth.”

Fact 1: “Despite the adverse effects on the environment of burning heating oil, according to ELSTAT research, the fuel used for the main heating system of every home is: 63.8% heating oil; 12.4% electricity; 12% biomass (firewood, pallets, briquettes, agricultural and forest residues); 8.7% natural gas.”

Fact 2: “Using natural gas instead of heating oil for homes is an alternative, environmentally friendly way of heating.”

Fact 3: “According to research data, the use of natural gas causes less pollution of the atmosphere compared to fossil coals and oil.”

Reason 3: “International Organizations should turn to the broad and coordinated information of the human resources so that they can come into contact with Renewable Energy Sources and adopt daily actions that will lead to sustainable development.”

Fact 1: “According to the KOPE Press Release, we should focus our attention on environmentally friendly technologies, as their utilization is not accompanied at all or is accompanied by a reduced production of pollutants or gases that increase the risk of climate change.”

Fact 2: “Sustainable development will be achieved through environmentally friendly actions, given that fossil fuels are running out.”

Fact 3: “The adoption of daily actions that will lead to sustainable development contribute to the increase of employment in the field of work and, in general, the socio-economic benefit of citizens.”

Argumentation on evidence-based problem solutions

Arguing on evidence-based claims and counterclaims is a process through which many skills can be developed besides the disciplinary and inter/cross/disciplinary knowledge constructed. It is not enough to link claims with facts; it is also essential to develop sound and persuasive argumentation on the claims grounded on evidence and supportive facts or conjectures. This is, in fact, the PBL4ESD process that synthesizes all the previous ones. In particular, it encourages learners to explore further and integrate knowledge and artifacts gathered through the previous problem-solving processes into their cognitive structures.

Producing convincing (i.e., logical and evidence-based) arguments is central to solving problems related to sustainable development’s four pillars (environment, society, economy, and culture). In the PBL4ESD argumentation process, learners can visualize how things should be and think of what actions should be advanced and committed to realizing more sustainable futures. As pointed. there are three major elements to persuasive argumentation:

claims,
evidence, and

A warrant is the logical connection between a claim and a supporting fact. Sometimes, the logical connection, how a fact logically supports a claim, might be obvious. However, more often, there is a need to explain how and why a particular piece of evidence supports a specific claim. In this case, a warrant is needed to provide an underlying assumption that clarifies the evidence supporting the claim.

For example, the evidence that a smoking ban from public spaces will restrict the freedom of a significant proportion of the smoking population in a given society is not enough. Further explanation is needed, arguing, for example, that smoking bans from public places did not lead to the expected results. The problem solver could find evidence saying that research results cannot be generalized and that these measures have not contributed to lowering the average number of smokers.

Teachers functioning as facilitators should be aware that effective and persuasive argumentation emphasizes logic and reason, which provide a rational link between the evidence and the claim. However, there is often a place for emotion as well.

Emotional appeals can use subjective or inter-subjective sources such as interviews and individual stories that could illuminate objectified evidence or provide a more legitimate picture of reality. For example, presenting a video that shows a particular story of a smoker who died from lung cancer because of smoking may make for a more persuasive argument than simply showing the percentage of deaths caused by smoking each year because it would give a human face to the numbers. Such examples could enrich persuasive argumentation and possibly empower people toward direct action.

Acting on viable solutions

Several actions can be proposed to reduce greenhouse gases through argumentation. It is not an exaggeration to say that tackling climate change starts in people’s minds, commuting, eating, and living habits. Thus, everyone can help limit climate change. We can make a difference by raising our voices about how we travel, the electricity we use, the food we eat, and the waste we produce.

Post-critique

PBL4ESD is a powerful pedagogical tool that enhances students’ learning experiences and significantly contributes to education for sustainable development and attaining the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Active Citizenship and Critical Thinking: PBL4ESD fosters critical thinking and active participation, equipping students to become engaged citizens who can address real-world challenges. This aligns with SDG 4 (Quality Education), which emphasizes the importance of inclusive and equitable quality education that promotes lifelong learning opportunities. The text illustrates how students engaging with real-life problems, such as “banning smoking in public spaces” or “debates about climate change,” encourages them to participate actively in society. By researching and discussing these issues, students develop critical thinking skills by evaluating various perspectives and formulating their own claims. This aligns with SDG 4, which promotes education that enables individuals to think critically and take informed actions.
Interdisciplinary Learning: By utilizing PBL4ESD in various subjects, students can explore sustainable development topics interconnectedly, reflecting the cross-disciplinary nature of sustainable development. This approach supports SDG 4.7, ensuring all learners acquire the knowledge and skills to promote sustainable development. PBL4ESD supports inter/cross-disciplinary teaching, as indicated when the text notes that it “can be used in any school or academic subject.” For instance, students using concept mapping while exploring the effects of climate change effectively integrate knowledge from environmental science, social studies, and health education. This interdisciplinary approach fosters a holistic understanding of sustainable development concepts, aligning with SDG 4.7.
Awareness and Advocacy: Engaging with controversial topics such as climate change and health policies allows students to understand the societal implications of these issues. This connects to SDG 13 (Climate Action), as learners are encouraged to advocate for and implement solutions to combat climate change locally and globally. Students discussing the health impacts of smoking illustrate how PBL4ESD raises awareness of public health issues. For instance, when students claim that “smoking is associated with significant health problems, it has to be banned from public spaces,” they engage in advocacy for public health policy, thereby contributing to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) as they analyze the importance of reducing smoking-related harm.
Empowerment through Evidence-Based Decision-Making: PBL4ESD emphasizes the importance of claims and counterclaims supported by evidence, promoting informed decision-making among students. This fosters a sense of responsibility aligned with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), underscoring the necessity of building accountable and transparent institutions. The text describes how students link claims to evidence. For example, a student might cite that “86,500 people die each year as a result of smoking” to support their argument for a smoking ban. Finding, evaluating, and using evidence equips students with decision-making skills essential for responsible citizenship, reflecting SDG 16’s emphasis on peaceful and inclusive societies that promote justice.
Collaboration and Partnership: The framework encourages student collaboration, enhancing their social skills while learning to respect diverse perspectives. This practice aligns with SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), highlighting the importance of partnerships and collaborative approaches in achieving sustainable development.

During the brainstorming phase, students work in small groups to explore issues such as smoking bans or climate change. This collaborative environment fosters teamwork and respect for diverse viewpoints, promoting social skills and an understanding of various perspectives. Such collaborative problem-solving is crucial for achieving SDG 17, which focuses on strengthening partnerships.

In summary, the examples within the text demonstrate that PBL4ESD is not merely an educational methodology but a comprehensive approach that intertwines various aspects of sustainability and the underlying SDG principles. Through real-life problem-solving, students gain valuable skills and a deeper understanding of how they can contribute to a sustainable future.

The 10Cs framework developed by Makrakis (2017) refers to integrating critical skills and attributes essential for 21st-century learning. Here’s how PBL4ESD connects to the 10Cs: collaboration, communication, critical thinking, creativity, critical reflection, critical consciousness, co-constructing knowledge and meaning, co-responsibility, cross-cultural understanding, and connectivity.

Critical Thinking: Developing claims and counterclaims encourages students to analyze and evaluate different perspectives on climate change or public smoking bans. As students reflect on their positions and the evidence they gather, they exercise critical thinking skills essential for making informed decisions. Students think critically by evaluating claims and counterclaims related to controversial topics. Analyzing the health impacts of smoking or the causes of climate change requires them to assess evidence, question assumptions, and develop reasoned conclusions. Students critically evaluate the implications of smoking bans, considering health data (like statistics on smoking-related illnesses) and smokers’ rights. This critical analysis helps them assess the validity of their claims and counterclaims, fostering logical reasoning and sound judgment.

Creativity: The brainstorming phase involves generating innovative solutions to real-life problems. Students are prompted to think creatively about approaches to societal challenges, such as devising alternative measures to address smoking in public spaces instead of outright banning it. This promotes creative problem-solving. The brainstorming session allows students to think creatively and propose innovative solutions to challenges like smoking bans or environmental issues. By developing and refining their ideas, they exercise creativity in tackling these topics. While brainstorming solutions for addressing smoking in public spaces, students might suggest creative alternatives, such as designated smoking areas combined with public health campaigns. This encourages innovative thinking as they explore balancing public health concerns with personal freedoms.

Collaboration: The collaborative nature of PBL4ESD is evident when students work in small groups to brainstorm ideas and create concept maps. This teamwork fosters the collaboration skills for effective group dynamics and collective problem-solving. This collaborative process allows learners to leverage each other’s knowledge and perspectives while developing solutions to real-life problems, such as public health policies or climate change debates. In the PBL4ESD approach, students collaborate in small groups to discuss the issue of banning smoking in public places. They share their perspectives and research findings and build on each other’s ideas to develop collective solutions and arguments, enhancing their teamwork skills.

Communication: Throughout the PBL4ESD process, students must articulate their ideas, present their claims, and defend their viewpoints with supporting evidence. This emphasis on clear communication is critical for engaging in effective communication, which is fundamental in PBL4ESD as students articulate their claims, counterclaims, and supporting evidence. They practice conveying complex ideas in discussions and presentations, facilitating a deeper understanding of the issues. As students express their claims and counterclaims—such as “smoking is associated with significant health problems and needs to be banned” versus “other measures should be taken instead”—they practice effective communication. They must articulate their ideas clearly, listen actively to others, and engage in constructive dialogue about the topic.

Critical Reflection: PBL4ESD encourages students to reflect on their prior knowledge and assumptions about the issues they study. For example, reflecting on the social implications of climate change or public health can lead to a deeper understanding of their own beliefs and the impacts of these issues on society. After engaging in the debate about the smoking ban, students reflect on their beliefs about smoking, health, and individual rights. They examine how their views might have changed during the discussion, promoting self-awareness and personal growth through reflection on their learning process.

Critical Consciousness: As students engage with societal challenges, such as inequality in health outcomes related to smoking, they develop critical consciousness. This awareness drives them to consider the ethical dimensions of their claims and the broader implications of their findings on social justice. As they feel the moral dimensions of smoking bans, such as the impact on different societal groups (e.g., smokers vs. non-smokers), students develop a critical consciousness. They learn to recognize the broader social implications of health policies and question power dynamics related to public health decisions.

Co-constructing Knowledge and Meaning: PBL4ESD’s collaborative nature fosters a learning environment where students co-construct knowledge. They collaboratively build a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the subject by discussing various viewpoints on issues like climate change. Throughout the discussions, students co-construct knowledge by combining their insights and research about smoking and health. For instance, they might explore how public perception of smoking has changed over time and how cultural values towards smoking differ across communities, creating a richer understanding of the topic together.

Co-responsibility: When students address real-life problems, they learn to take responsibility for their role in the learning process and its outcomes. This co-responsibility encourages them to engage actively in group discussions, contribute to solutions, and consider the societal impact of their proposals. Students take co-responsibility for the learning outcomes of their group work. By participating actively in discussions and contributing their research on smoking rates and health impacts, they learn the importance of being accountable to their peers and sharing the workload to achieve collective goals.

Cross-Cultural Understanding: PBL4ESD promotes cross-cultural understanding by exposing students to diverse perspectives on global issues. For example, discussions about climate change can reveal different cultural attitudes toward environmental responsibility, encouraging students to appreciate and respect varying viewpoints. When discussing smoking bans, students may encounter varied cultural perspectives. Some cultures may have more restrictive views on smoking, while others may prioritize personal freedom. This exploration promotes cross-cultural understanding and helps students appreciate diverse values and practices related to public health.

Connectivity: Using digital tools and online resources fosters connectivity as students research and gather information about their topics. This technology integration connects them to a wealth of knowledge and enables collaboration beyond the classroom. Students utilize online resources to collect data about smoking, public health statistics, and the effectiveness of smoking bans. This connectivity to digital information fosters research skills and helps them understand the global context of smoking-related issues, linking local debates to worldwide trends.

By incorporating these 10Cs into the PBL4ESD framework, students develop a comprehensive skill set that prepares them to address complex global challenges and engage meaningfully with their communities. This holistic learning approach promotes individual growth and collective responsibility for a sustainable future.

By engaging with the smoking ban issue through PBL4ESD, students tackle a pressing real-world problem and develop essential competencies that prepare them for thoughtful citizenship and responsible action in their communities.

Here’s how the smoking ban example in the context of PBL4ESD can be linked to specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) while applying the 10Cs.

1. Collaboration

SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

In the PBL4ESD approach, students work in groups to discuss the smoking ban’s implications and solutions. This collaborative effort mirrors the importance of partnerships in achieving the SDGs, where varied stakeholders (e.g., governments, community organizations, and citizens) collaborate to promote public health and reduce smoking rates.

2. Communication

SDG 4 (Quality Education)

Students communicate effectively as they articulate their claims and counterclaims regarding the smoking ban. Clear communication enhances understanding and respect among peers, contributing to quality education by promoting engagement and dialogue on societal issues.

3. Critical Thinking

SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being)

By analyzing the health risks associated with smoking and evaluating the efficacy of a smoking ban, students apply critical thinking skills that directly relate to promoting health and well-being. This process cultivates a deeper understanding of how policies like smoking bans can enhance community health.

4. Creativity

SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure)

Students might propose innovative solutions beyond smoking bans, such as public smoking cessation programs or enhanced community health campaigns. Creative approaches to public health issues encourage innovation in advancing sustainable development.

5. Critical Reflection

SDG 4 (Quality Education)

Through critical reflection on their positions regarding the smoking ban, students develop self-awareness and personal growth, essential components of quality education. Reflecting on their beliefs fosters a deeper connection to the knowledge gained through their activities.

6. Critical Consciousness

SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

Students develop critical consciousness by exploring the ethical implications of smoking bans and recognizing the disparity in health outcomes across different populations. This awareness can drive discussions on how to address inequalities in health and access to resources for smoking cessation.

7. Co-constructing Knowledge and Meaning

SDG 4.7 (Education for Sustainable Development)

The process of co-constructing knowledge through group discussions and shared learning about smoking and public health aligns to ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development.

8. Co-responsibility

SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions)

Taking co-responsibility for the outcomes of their discussions helps students understand the importance of accountability in democratic processes. Engaged citizens are vital for fostering peace, justice, and strong institutions.

9. Cross-Cultural Understanding

SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

Students learn how cultural attitudes affect public health initiatives by exploring diverse perspectives on smoking and health policies. This cross-cultural understanding is integral to forming effective partnerships to address global health challenges.

10. Connectivity

SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure)

Using digital resources and connectivity to access smoking and health statistics data is vital for informed decision-making. Promoting connectivity ensures that communities can develop informed policies and respond innovatively to public health issues.

By integrating these competencies within the framework of PBL4ESD, students can address the smoking ban issue while contributing to the SDGs’ advancement. This multifaceted approach cultivates skills and awareness that empower students to engage effectively with global challenges, promoting a sustainable future

Strengths of PBL4ESD

Engagement with Real-World Problems: PBL4ESD focuses on real-life issues (like climate change, public health, etc.), capturing students’ interest and motivating them to learn. This relevance helps students see the importance of their education and its application to current global challenges.
Development of Critical Thinking Skills: Students enhance their critical thinking by analyzing complex problems and formulating claims and counterclaims. They learn to evaluate evidence, consider multiple perspectives, and reason logically.
Interdisciplinary Learning: PBL4ESD promotes integration across various subjects, encouraging students to apply knowledge from multiple disciplines. This holistic approach reflects the interconnected nature of sustainable development and helps students understand how different fields impact each other.
Collaboration and Communication: The group-based nature of PBL4ESD fosters collaboration, allowing students to develop teamwork and communication skills. Sharing varied perspectives contributes to a richer learning experience and prepares students for collaborative work environments in the future.
Fostering Active Citizenship: PBL4ESD encourages students to become active participants in their communities. By tackling societal problems, they develop a sense of responsibility toward civic engagement and social change, aligning with sustainable development goals.
Critical Consciousness: Engaging with controversial topics helps students develop awareness of social issues and inequities, cultivating critical consciousness. They learn to question existing systems and consider their roles in driving change.

Challenges of PBL4ESD

Resource Intensive: PBL4ESD requires significant resources, including time, materials, and teacher facilitation. Not all educational institutions have the resources or infrastructure to implement this approach effectively.
Assessment Challenges: Evaluating student performance in a PBL4ESD setting can be complicated. Traditional assessment methods may not adequately capture students’ contributions or learning progression, requiring the development of new assessment tools that align with PBL principles.
Variety in Student Readiness: Students may enter PBL4ESD with varying prior knowledge, experience, and skills. This diversity can lead to unequal participation and may cause frustration for some students less familiar with self-directed learning. It is thus essential to familiarize students with self-directing learning before applying PBL4ESD.
Facilitation Skills Required: The success of PBL4ESD heavily depends on the teacher’s role as a facilitator. Not all teachers may have the training or experience required for effective facilitation, especially in guiding students through complex discussions and ensuring balanced participation.
Time Constraints: PBL4ESD often requires more time than traditional teaching methods due to the depth of exploration. This can be challenging within the constraints of a standard curriculum that may prioritize covering a set amount of content.
Risk of Surface-Level Engagement: If not effectively guided, students may skim the surface of the issues without deeply engaging with the complexities of the problems being studied. This superficial engagement can lead to a lack of meaningful learning or awareness.

Conclusion

PBL4ESD is a powerful educational approach that connects learning to real-world issues and promotes essential sustainable development competencies. However, resources, assessment, and facilitation challenges can hinder its successful implementation. Educators considering this model must carefully weigh these strengths and weaknesses to ensure it is applied effectively within their teaching context.