Social reconstructionism in the Education for sustainable development paradigm

Authors

  • K. Glubochenko Херсонський навчально-науковий інститут Національного університету кораблебудування імені адмірала Макарова https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1490-0643
  • T. Shcheredina Донецький національний університет імені Василя Стуса https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8836-0635

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31558/2519-2949.2025.3.16

Keywords:

social reconstructionism, education for sustainable development, critical pedagogy, education philosophy, active learning, agents of change

Abstract

The article aimed to analyze the relevance of the ideas of critical pedagogy and social reconstructionism, taking into account the UN and UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development paradigm. The authors consistently analyzed the ideas of classical critical pedagogy and social reconstructionism regarding the functioning of educational institutions as agents of change. The study reveals a common ideological basis of classical and modern pedagogy of change. Social reconstructionism is a student-centered philosophy of education, where schools and their students are considered as a driving force of important social and economic changes. The paradigm of Education for sustainable development also adds a relevant ecological context to this list. Such an ideological basis brings together social reconstructionism and the concept of Education for sustainable development. In the philosophy of social reconstructionism, schools should help students develop the necessary problem-solving skills to cope with gender and racial inequality, poverty, homelessness, and social injustice. As a result, the reconstructionist philosophy of education provides a personalized curriculum that helps students define their own learning based on their initial background. The approach to learning in social reconstructionism is student-centered, so the role of the teacher is reduced to mediation of the educational process. Therefore, instead of being passive, schools should become agents of progressive social change. Thus, social reconstructionism acts as a future-oriented philosophy of education that is able to initiate the necessary changes in educational practice. Using methods of comparative analysis, a systems approach and analogy, the authors come to conclusions about the continuity of the Education for Sustainable Development paradigm in relation to social reconstructionism as a philosophy of education. According to the authors, the key intersection of ideas of the philosophy of social reconstructionism and Education for sustainable development can be implemented in educational institutions, giving students more freedom in determining the vector of their own learning, taking into account the goals of sustainable development. Discussions, collaborative learning projects, case studies and reflective essays, and other teaching methods should focus on the interconnectedness of the social, economic, and environmental spheres, as well as the global interconnectedness of all countries and economies in the world. Discussions of gender, social, and economic inequality, overconsumption, poverty, and overuse of natural resources will allow students to analyze these problems and find solutions in the future.

References

Джурило А.П. Освіта для сталого розвитку в навчальних програмах європейських шкіл. Дидактика. 2024. С. 191-193.

Ільченко В., Гуз К. Еволюція ідей освіти для сталого розвитку. Витоки педагогічної майстерності. 2022. №. 29. С. 117-122.

Коренева І.М. Феномен «Освіта для сталого розвитку»: сутність та сучасні особливості концепту. Український педагогічний журнал. 2018. №2. С. 113-123.

Підліснюк В. та ін. Сталий розвиток в Україні: роль освіти. Путівник. К., 2005. 88с.

Brameld T. Reconstructionism as radical philosophy of education: A reappraisal. The Educational Forum, 1977. №42(1), 62-67.

Breithorde M.L., Swiniarski L. Constuctivism and Reconstructivism: Educating teachers for world citizenship. Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 1999. № 24(1). С. 1-17.

Counts, G.S. Dare the school build a new social order? Southern Illinois University Press. 1978. 56 с.

Erkilic T.A. Importance of educational philosophy in teacher training for educational sustainable development. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 2008. № 3(1). с. 1-8.

Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Bloomsbury. 2000. 182 с.

Lynch M. Philosophies of education: 3 types of student-centered philosophies. 2016. URL: http://www.theedadvocate.org/philosophies-education-3-types-student-centered-philosophies/

Mansilla V.B., Jackson A. Educating for global competence: Learning redefined for an interconnected world. In H. Jacobs (Ed.), Mastering Global Literacy (5-27). Solution Tree. 2013. URL: http://pz.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Educating%20for%20Global%20Competence%20Short%20HHJ.pdf

McLaren P. Revolutionary Critical Pedagogy. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies. 2010. № 6(2). С 1-11.

Schriewer J. Globalisation in education: Process and discourse. Policy Futures in Education. 2003. № 1(2). С. 271-283.

Shor I. Education is politics: Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy. In Paulo Freire: A critical encounter. 1993. (pp.24-36). Routledge.

UNESCO. Education for sustainable development. 2024. URL: https://www.unesco.org/en/sustainable-development/education

Zuga K.F. Social Reconstruction curriculum and technology education. Journal of Technology Education. 1992. №3(2). С 48-58.

Published

2025-09-22

How to Cite

[1]
Глубоченко , К.О. and Щередіна , Т.О. 2025. Social reconstructionism in the Education for sustainable development paradigm. Political life. (Sep. 2025), 121-126. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31558/2519-2949.2025.3.16.

Issue

Section

Політична культура та ідеологія