35 within ITE, it is reinforcing these topics within the realm of geography teachers more so than science, and much more than other subjects. However, if climate change and sustainability education is to draw on the expertise of a range of subjects (because responses to climate change and sustainability require a range of expertise), the siloing within geography and science at the beginning of a teachers’ career could be reinforcing barriers to cross-curricular approaches in schools. The report insights regarding ITE are limited given that few respondents completed a schoolbased ITE programme, and so further research is needed to better understand broader practice. Nevertheless, the analysis highlights the need for further policy development and support for the implementation of climate change and sustainability education across ITE. Currently, the DfE strategy (DfE, 2022) points to the Initial Teacher Training Core Content Framework (DfE, 2019b) and Early Career Framework (DfE, 2019a) as policy mechanisms which support climate change and sustainability within ITE. However, as Dunlop and Rushton (2022) have highlighted, in contrast with other ITE frameworks in the UK, neither of these documents specifically include climate change or sustainability education. Furthermore, a recent report by the Universities Council for the Education of Teachers (Vare et al., 2022) argues that teachers will not be equipped as they should be to teach in uncertain times, and recommends ‘integrating the development of learners’ awareness of – and their reactions to – sustainability and climate change without creating unnecessary workload be included at the very least’ (ibid., 2022, p. 13). Further research could also investigate why some ITE courses may or may not incorporate climate change or sustainability, whether that be related to structures, capabilities of teacher educators, or of student teachers.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTA4ODM=