Fathimath Azmath*
Meng Yew Tee*†- Department of Curriculum and Instructional Technology, Faculty of Education, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
This study investigates how a science teacher in a Maldivian secondary school enacted the Knowledge Building (KB) approach to facilitate student learning about climate change. A qualitative case study design was used. Data were collected through classroom observations, interviews, and analysis of artefacts generated during lessons, including digital KB platforms such as Padlet. The findings reveal that the teacher initially navigated significant uncertainty and low self-efficacy due to her unfamiliarity with knowledge-building pedagogy, which constrained her ability to facilitate inquiry and support idea improvement. Through sustained reflective practice and self-directed professional learning, she gradually redefined her role, shifting from a knowledge transmitter to a facilitator who valued student ideas, promoted epistemic agency, and encouraged independent learning. The study offers implications for professional development, suggesting that teachers require sustained support, modelling, and scaffolding to integrate knowledge-building approaches when addressing complex, real-world problems such as climate change.
Introduction
Climate change is one of the most significant environmental and social issues we confront today (IPCC, 2021). The complexity, worldwide scale, consequences and need for local action require a dynamic border between environmental, social, cultural, political and economic factors (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2010). Thus, UNESCO endorsed Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in addressing climate change through education. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG), specifically SDG 13.3, calls for enhancing education, raising awareness, and developing individual and institutional competency to mitigate, adapt, and lessen climate change’s effect and initial threat (United Nations, 2022). ESD enables learners to have the right to quality education, encouraging the development of cognitive and non-cognitive skills and empowering them to be responsible citizens (UNESCO, 2021).
With more than 80% of the total land area less than a meter above mean sea level, the Maldives will likely be submerged by the end of the century due to sea level rise (Sakamoto et al., 2022). As mitigation and adaptation are crucial in addressing the climate crisis (Jahanzad et al., 2020), understanding climate issues is essential for effective adaptation and mitigation strategies (Kumar et al., 2023). The Maldives embraces bottom-up approaches to provide scientific knowledge about climate change to the locals which can be used along with the local understandings to work out the best forms of adaptations (Das, 2010), as engaging with climate change is highly impactful when positioned within the context of local effects using a community-based approach (Busch, 2016). However, it is necessary to combine Indigenous knowledge with scientific understanding to create comprehensive and multi-tiered approaches for adaptation at the local or community level (Shammin et al., 2022). It indicates the central role of education in countering the impact of climate change, as climate literacy and understanding are required for innovative adaptation and mitigation actions (Fitzpatrick et al., 2024). Reid et al. (2021) also identified education as a keystone in addressing climate change. The focus on education and climate change has grown in recent years, primarily driven by the leadership initiatives and ongoing advocacy for educational approaches to address climate change by UNESCO (Monroe et al., 2017). Even though education is regarded as essential in tackling climate change, it is barely mentioned in discussions about the main strategies for resolving present climate challenges (Cordero et al., 2020). The complexity of this issue also requires education about climate change that extends beyond just imparting factual knowledge (Perkins et al., 2018). Teaching climate change issues requires collaborative approaches that promote a more profound understanding of the skills required to tackle complex issues like climate change (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020). As new pedagogies are on the rise, these should emphasize student-led investigations and explanations of substantial problems and help students foster abilities to handle unacquainted and uncertain problems (Zhao and Watterston, 2021). Knowledge Building (KB) is a process in which learners collectively identify ‘authentic’ problems or issues, express their ideas regarding those problems, and discuss, develop and improve ideas of value to the community (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2003). To support the students in the complex nature of 21st-century knowledge and to focus on the skills needed in the globalized world, education systems must involve students in the construction of new knowledge with scrappy information and contribute to improving community knowledge (Khanlari et al., 2019; Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2014). The KB pedagogy aims to reshape education at its core, ensuring it becomes a unified attempt to introduce students to a culture that fosters knowledge creation and involves them in seeing themselves and their contributions as essential to the shared effort of expanding the frontiers of knowledge (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2006). In KB, knowledge is considered a “moving body” (p.3) that integrates new concepts and information at its forefront while discarding outdated or unimportant issues and discredited ideas, thereby greatly improving the community’s understanding. Thus, it could aid in addressing the complexities of global issues such as climate change, as a more than one-time discussions or projects are needed to address climate change (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020). Therefore, this research examined a teacher’s implementation of the knowledge-building approach in facilitating learning about climate change.
Research questions
The research questions are:
1. What are the teachers’ experiences using the knowledge-building approach for teaching and learning about climate change issues?
2. What aspects does the teacher do well? What challenges does the teacher face in the process?
Literature review
Climate change is a wicked problem
Climate change is widely recognized as a wicked problem, complex, multifaceted, and resistant to straightforward solutions requiring sustained collective inquiry and interdisciplinary engagement (Lehtonen et al., 2019). Climate change is driven by numerous interacting factors, including greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, industrial activities, land use changes, and socio-economic practices. Cross and Congreve (2021) identified climate change as a widely recognized quintessential wicked problem due to the extensive impact of human-induced CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases on the Earth’s climate, ecosystems, and society, and there is no single, straightforward solution that can fully address these issues. This uneven distribution complicates consensus and coordinated global action. There is no definitive endpoint or universally accepted solution to climate change. Mitigation and adaptation strategies vary in effectiveness and feasibility depending on geographic, political, and economic contexts. Every action taken involves trade-offs and unintended consequences, and often, new problems emerge as others are addressed.
Willamo et al. (2018) considered sustainability challenges as wicked problems due to their complex nature. These challenges have spatial and temporal effects, often impacting various regions and communities and possibly influencing the outcomes of extended historical processes and/or having long-lasting implications. Rittel and Webber (1973) called complex issues wicked problems. They introduced the concept of ‘wickedness’ in their original work, which originated amid ongoing social problems in the US, alongside rising social unrest, turmoil, and movements for change. Identifying problems in natural sciences as ‘tame’ problems, they defined wicked problems as problems that are ill-defined, never solved or may need to be addressed repeatedly. They also identified ten distinguishing characteristics of wicked problems. Subsequent research has tended to simplify wicked problems into three fundamental aspects: high complexity, high uncertainty, and significant stakeholder divergence (Head, 2008; Head, 2022). Newman and Head (2017) consider that climate-related issues share traits of wicked problems, as the problem’s boundaries are ambiguous, even with the large amount of technical and scientific information available. In current literature, climate change is regarded as a ‘super wicked’ problem due to its complex challenges (Lazarus, 2009; Levin et al., 2012). Levin et al. (2012) also identified four main characteristics of super wicked problems: (i) time is limited; (ii) the individuals responsible for the issue are also trying to work out a solution; (iii) the authority required to tackle these problems is either feeble or absent, and (iv) there is a tendency for irrational discounting that delays actions until the future. Cross and Congreve (2021) state that the youth of today will be involved in tackling the issues that affect them and in initiatives to alleviate these challenges for the foreseeable future; therefore, education systems are crucial in equipping the youth with the necessary skills to address the complex societal challenges posed by those problems.
Kagawa and Selby (2012) suggested that climate change education needs an active, collaborative, experiential and participatory approach to bring knowledge to life, apply skills, test attitudes, and analyze values. Likewise, climate change education requires approaches that are drawn from participatory and creative approaches from multiple disciplines (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020). It also requires additional strategies to address the complexities and controversies involved (Monroe et al., 2017). Therefore, this study proposes the knowledge-building pedagogy for climate change education as it can leverage such skills and create opportunities for students to collaborate in expanding their understanding of climate change as a community.
Climate change education
Due to the complexity of the climate crisis, potential effects complicate the teaching and learning of climate change across all educational tiers (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020; Schauss and Sprenger, 2021). Eilam (2022) argues that the elements of climate change are interconnected, making it challenging to teach the topic effectively; their fragmentation could result in ineffective teaching. Despite its complexities, climate change education has long been situated primarily within science (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020), concentrating mainly on the causes of climate change rather than addressing what is most fundamental about it (Kagawa and Selby, 2012). Likewise, Lehtonen et al. (2019) argued that education on climate change typically emphasizes improving scientific comprehension of the topic, providing technical details and solutions, while also encouraging an empathetic awareness of the planet. Therefore, the ethical aspect of climate change is often treated as primarily rhetorical. Furthermore, as climate change is often viewed primarily as a matter of physical science, it is, however, equally a social issue that requires insights from the social sciences to address the challenges posed by climate change (Perkins et al., 2018). In this context, Sharma (2012) also suggests integrating science and social studies in teaching crucial scientific concepts, highlighting the relationship between nature and communities.
Several studies identified the cruciality of integrating scientific and non-scientific disciplines for a meaningful understanding of climate change due to its interdisciplinary nature (Deisenrieder et al., 2020; Eilam, 2022; Lehtonen et al., 2019; Monroe et al., 2017; Perkins et al., 2018; Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020; Stevenson et al., 2017). Lehtonen et al. (2019) argued that a universal approach to reasoning and expanding current educational concepts is essential for unique learning experiences and holistic methods. Education on climate change should focus on critical and creative thinking, enabling students to process information, pose thoughtful questions, understand issues, and take necessary actions in response to climate change (Stevenson et al., 2017). Therefore, teachers should implement strategies that involve inquiry and collaborative learning with students. Inquiry-based instruction enhances students’ conceptions of climate change relating to its causes, consequences and useful actions for mitigation (Akaygun and Adadan, 2020).
Knowledge building
Knowledge Building (KB) emerges as a powerful pedagogical approach, enabling learners to collaboratively generate, refine, and advance ideas within a community of inquiry (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2006). Knowledge building provides collaborative opportunities for students to deliberately enhance their understanding through negotiations, discussions and evaluating information referring to authoritative sources while defending their ideas (Resendes and Dobbie, 2017). Grounded in principles such as epistemic agency, idea improvement, community knowledge and collective responsibility, KB equips students to take an active role in constructing and contributing to knowledge that is authentic and socially relevant—qualities essential for addressing wicked problems like climate change (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2003). Although knowledge building involves problem-solving, it differs from everyday problem-solving or problem-solving in other inquiry-based approaches. Knowledge building is a principle-based approach; hence, it does not depend on pre-defined inquiry tasks or procedures (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2006; Zhang et al., 2011), as a less structured inquiry allows learners with a broader scope to test their ideas concerning real-world issues and is more authentic (Li et al., 2018). However, the twelve KB principles (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2006) allow teachers to work with learners to delineate the process related to those principles. These principles also represent design ideals and challenges for the community to work to advance knowledge (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2003; Resendes and Dobbie, 2017) while providing a basis for improving and advancing the principle-based framework that guides knowledge building (Chen and Hong, 2016) and serves as pedagogical guides and technological design specifications (Fu et al., 2016). In Knowledge Building, problem-solving should be significant to the community or others, not just the individual. Its value should persist beyond the moment, apply to similar circumstances, and exhibit innovativeness (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2010).
In practice, knowledge building allows the learners to discuss ideas deliberately through negotiation and validation, and they think and work like scientists to enhance their understanding by working together to solve problems significant to the community (Tan et al., 2021). In Knowledge Building, problem-solving should hold importance for the community or others rather than solely for the individual. Its significance should endure beyond the immediate situation, be relevant to comparable scenarios, and demonstrate creativity (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2010). The continuous process of knowledge building allows students to engage in scientific activities and have intentional conversations with peers, which can be beneficial in identifying misconceptions about climate change. Nevertheless, the implementation of KB is sometimes challenging. For instance, a study by Chai et al. (2016) investigating the development of students’ epistemic repertoires through the KB approach while they participate in self-directed and collaborative learning in social studies highlighted various issues relating to the teacher, students and parents. Issues included the teacher’s struggles to constantly interpret students’ emerging understanding, the perception that direct instruction is more effective in teaching content, and the myriad of cyber issues related to students’ and parents’ worries about the grading systems. Despite considerable effort, the students in the experimental classes showed increased participation in self-directed and collaborative learning technologies and more significant idea generation and co-creation of knowledge compared to those in the comparison classes. Teachers face challenges in achieving a comprehensive understanding and making responsive decisions to explore opportunities for facilitating knowledge-building within their settings (Zhang et al., 2011). Hence, evidence is needed to effectively teach the design principles and illuminate how learners implement them in knowledge building (Lai, 2019). This study investigates how a teacher new to the KB approach applies it in a science classroom, facilitating student learning about climate change. The research question examined is: What are the teachers’ experiences using the knowledge-building approach for teaching and learning about climate change issues?
Method
This study adopted a qualitative case study method (Merriam, 1998) to examine how the teacher implemented the KB approach to facilitating learning about climate change. The case study method allowed the researchers to focus on the teacher’s experiences facilitating students’ knowledge-building processes. It is also intended to provide readers with a rich description of the participant teacher’s interpretation of her experience as she implemented the knowledge-building approach. A purposive sampling was used to get a depth understanding of information-rich cases (Nyimbili and Nyimbili, 2024; Patton, 2015) as researchers can learn more about problems central to the research from information-rich cases. This study was conducted at a Maldivian school between October 2023 and February 2024, involving a grade seven science teacher and her class of twenty students (thirteen girls and seven boys). Before participation, informed consent was obtained from all individuals. Written informed consent was secured through signed consent forms. In the case of participants under the age of 18, written consent was additionally obtained from their parents or legal guardians.
The Universiti Malaya Research Ethics Committee (non-medical) approved this study under the reference number UM.TNC2/UMREC_2504. The archived data used for this study were accessed for research purposes in October 2023. During data collection and subsequent analysis, the research team did not have access to any information that could directly identify individual participants. All data were anonymized before analysis, and no personal identifiers were retained in the research records. Access to data was restricted to the principal investigator and research team, in compliance with the Universiti Malaya Research Ethics Committee.
Semi-structured interviews allow researchers to have the flexibility to respond to the situation at hand, develop an emerging understanding of the participant, and develop new ideas on the issue (Merriam, 2009; Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). The researcher interviewed the participants (the teacher and six students) twice during the study. Two rounds of interviews aimed to gain a deeper insight into how the teacher understood and facilitated the knowledge-building pedagogy, thus gaining a deeper understanding of their experiences, opinions and challenges faced in using the approach (Merriam, 2009). While the teacher served as the central participant in exploring instructional practices and experiences, the students’ participation was integral to understanding the classroom dynamics, knowledge-building processes, and interactions within the learning environment. Parental consent was obtained for the students, given their status as minors, ensuring the study adhered to ethical research standards.
As a knowledge-building tool, we used a digital application called ‘Padlet’ for student collaborations, and students were encouraged to work in small groups and as a whole class. In the second round, more attention was paid to fostering a KB culture to encourage collaboration, agency and idea improvement. Classroom observations provided information regarding the teacher’s incorporation of the knowledge-building approach. All the KB sessions were observed and video-recorded, and these were used to triangulate data collected from the interviews. The teacher’s reflective journal and documents used by the students and the teacher were also used to triangulate the interview data. Padlet also provided information on the students’ initial ideas and how they built upon them by collaborating on each other’s work to enhance the collective understanding of climate change. Table 1 shows the Research procedures.
Table 1. Research procedures.
Data analysis
Thematic analysis was employed in this study. This method allowed for the systematic identification, analysis, and interpretation of patterns across the qualitative data derived from teacher interviews, classroom observations, student interviews, and teacher reflections (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). The researcher generated open codes, which were later grouped, focusing on the meaning of codes and quotations. Codes were then reduced by identifying repetitive codes or data and combining some. As categories emerged from the data, these were named and revised, focusing on the data and the codes.
Findings
Data analysis revealed three categories related to the teachers’ experiences using the Knowledge-Building approach to facilitate learning about climate change.
Research question
The research question was:
What are the teachers’ experiences using the knowledge-building approach for teaching and learning about climate change issues?
Below is a detailed representation of the findings related to research question 1.
Navigating initial uncertainty and low self-efficacy
The teacher expressed doubt and unfamiliarity with the KB pedagogy, reflecting a sense of insecurity about her role in a student-centred, principle-based classroom. Initially, the teacher had doubts about employing the KB pedagogy in her classroom as she was unfamiliar with creating a KB-focused learning environment, as teachers often are the key information providers. She expressed in her journal that she, ‘questioned myself if my way of explaining the KB method to the students was right or wrong.’ Due to her unfamiliarity and lack of confidence at the beginning, students did the ‘My Ideal Earth’ activity in the initial KB sessions (1–3) without having any idea of the KB approach. She felt she should have explained the KB principles in simple terms so that the students could understand and become familiar with the KB approach:
“at first, I did not discuss (the) vocab(ulary). I could have given the phrases without the big principles, (to help them) understand”. T1 (Teacher Interview 1).
The teacher started acknowledging the difficulties after the eighth KB session, prompting her to learn more about the approach. Even with the limited resources regarding the application of the approach, she read articles and guides on KB to understand how to facilitate students’ KB process. Reading and reflecting on her practice helped her to understand and get connected with KB:
“First, I understood that students make it like others understand something and then be responsible for it. Then, only later did I understand that it means that students work on a problem and get everybody to work on it together. So, I understood those kinds of things after reading.” T1.
Reading about knowledge building and reflecting on the practices also enabled the teacher to change her thinking as it helped her understand the changes she needed to make a better KB classroom. In that regard, she started valuing and accepting students’ ideas without judgment. She penned in her reflection that,
“… to give agency, I first started by letting them know that all their work is valued and important”, paving the way for student autonomy. T1.
She agreed that understanding the KB principles allowed her to facilitate students’ KB process, and she learned to become more approachable to her students as she understood more about her changing role as a KB teacher.
After monitoring and giving guidance, I understood that just telling them what to do for everything wasn't different from everyday classroom learning. So, reluctantly, I understood that if I wanted to make them responsible, I had to give them more freedom on how to do the task. T1.
During the process, the teacher learned that engaging in student discussions helped them to advance their discussions. While she became more confident in implementing KB through such experiences, it took her almost the entire first round of KB. Regardless of her lack of inquiry experience, she slowly changed her role from the sole knowledge source to a facilitator, giving autonomy to students.
“… in KB, you don’t expect a specific, limited answer from students. So, now, since I give them a chance to think freely and openly, they find it easy, and most are grasping the idea of what’s going on.” T1.
Nevertheless, some students embraced the change in their roles more freely as they were allowed to research instead of depending entirely on the teacher. As such, Student D shared.
“…when you get the control, you have the independence to get your own information rather than getting the information from the teacher.” SD.
Students’ lack of independent learning ability impeded the KB process, as the teacher was doubtful of assigning them to work independently. She talked about her uncertainty,
“sincerely saying I wasn’t very sure that they would be able to do the work well, as in a normal class setting, they were given a lot of guidance on approaching a task.” T1.
Stressing the difficulty of getting the students to work independently, she added:
“when I first asked them to start the discussion independently, everyone hesitated.” T1.
Thus, she hesitated to give them more freedom, withholding giving more responsibility to the students. She mentioned in her journal that.
“… did not assign them much agency at the beginning because, they do not take much responsibility…” T1.
Reflective practice as a catalyst for pedagogical shift
The teacher’s growing familiarity with KB principles emerged through sustained reflective practice and self-directed professional learning. Her willingness to read scholarly materials and critically examine her classroom decisions contributed to a meaningful shift in her understanding of knowledge building. Concurrently, she struggled to understand and apply the KB principles more effectively, especially the principles of ‘Community Knowledge, Collective Responsibility’ and ‘Epistemic Agency’. She described the dilemma in her journal regarding Epistemic Agency as,
“… with the epistemic thing, I’ve had some headaches at the beginning, like how much control I should allow them and when I should stop them (or intervene)”. T1.
This reflective engagement gradually enabled her to reframe her pedagogical stance, moving from one of knowledge transmission to one of facilitation and scaffolding. As she recognized the value of student input and adjusted her interactions, she redefined her identity and mindset as a KB teacher. The teacher affirmed that while her doubts about students’ capability hindered the implementation, reflecting on her practice enabled her to change her attitude towards the students. From her observations, she believed that the students, when provided the opportunity, could perform better,
“… after the changes and monitoring for few sessions, I was happy and accepted the fact that students would complete the task well.” T1.
Similarly, the students’ attitudes also changed when they were allowed and encouraged to think and work freely. They became more motivated towards independent learning and better work was done, and the students took responsibility for completing the task…. more students expressed ideas freely rather than being scared that they might be wrong. Students also shared their motivation and feelings with independent learning opportunities. Student A said:
“It was… more fun and different. It was new to find things (information) on our own other than the teacher finding things for us and then probably it was different because this time I was more involved in the learning process because I was the one who was searching for things other than the teacher.” SA.
Yet, there remained some students without taking any responsibility as the teacher shared,
“some students, regardless of which type of class they are in, want to avoid taking responsibility” T1.
Some students also shared that they became more responsible as their roles changed in the knowledge-building classroom. Student E said:
“In my life, this was the time I become most responsible, because I had to get lots of information from home, and I had to read the Padlet, and get some information, to explain to the students what I researched about.” SE.
Limitations of the current educational culture
Several issues related to the school’s existing teaching and learning styles also affected the implementation of KB. As such, the teacher shared about the traditional teaching and learning practices within the school, as the normal teacher’s role is to get specific answers from students.
“It's mainly because even though we do student-centred teaching in the class, we always have this point where we look for specific things we want from them.” T1.
Standard teaching and learning practices hindered students’ voices in the classroom as they were reluctant to share ideas and contribute to discussions. Regarding students being reluctant, The teacher said,
“this (students' being reluctant) might be due to the lecture style method of teaching and spoon-feeding type of teaching done in our schools for years.” T1.
She also felt that it could have made the students reluctant to accept the ideas of their peers as well. She also associated students’ lack of knowledge on areas like climate change, particularly the rise in temperature, with the traditional learning styles within the school. She highlighted the lack of research and reading among the students:
“… the students lack sufficient content or knowledge related to very common topics hence they are unable to come up with new (knowledge) or connect the knowledge they learnt. Most Maldivian students are not avid readers, and those who read, rarely read non-fiction. They do not research topics on their own.” T1.
Lastly, the school’s existing teaching and learning practices did not allow students to be responsible learners as they did not get the opportunities. The teacher penned in her journal:
“In the normal class, I give them to do some things, but then there is a limit… this one (KB) is different. When they get an idea, how to start it… then, they organize and do everything on their own. So, I understood that the students have the capability but have not been given a chance. I think the students don’t think independently because we don’t give them opportunities.” T1.
After the first round of KB, she realised that students’ motivation in learning and their creativity can increase with opportunities:
In the previous round, I learned that the students could think and create ideas if given the opportunity. We usually expect they don't know much, so we give them all the answers. But after the first round, I realise(d) that if they are given the opportunity, they can come up with quite good ideas, and some of them have the capability of improving their ideas also. T2 (Teacher Interview 2).
Challenges: limited familiarity with KB principles and inquiry-based learning
Despite these successes, the teacher struggled with several aspects of KB implementation, particularly the refinement and revision of ideas. Her unfamiliarity with KB principles and lack of prior experience with inquiry-based instruction hindered her ability to guide students through deeper evaluative processes.
Time constraints, the absence of an external expert, and the difficulty of transforming students’ deeply ingrained habits of dependency further compounded the challenge. She acknowledged,
“I doubted whether I could make them do what was expected of me. Ultimately, it’s good because I understood most of it” T2.
“I wasn’t very thorough with idea improvement and was not able to convey it to students that effectively” T1 (Discussion).
Although some negotiations happened during the revising and refining of ideas, the classroom discussions were mainly conducted as presentations. It made the students go through their work and explain it to the class instead of evaluating the ideas for the potential to improve. As a result, the negotiation process or “discourse” in KB was insufficient for the students to evaluate the ideas properly. The teacher also believed that it hindered collaboration among students:
“When they were allowed to present their work, only one or two students from each group could explain the whole group's work. Some of them could only explain the small part they did. I…. was disappointed and was worried about how to change this habit of theirs as some students were not accustomed to doing proper collaborative work. They divided the tasks in…. their group and only do their part. When asked to present, they only presented their part and did not bother about the work the others in the group created. T (discussion).
In addition to the struggles relating to her attitudes and practice, students, and the school culture, the teacher could not involve an expert in the knowledge-building community. Despite several attempts, the climate expert from the Ministry of Climate Change, Environment and Energy was unable to join the session was not only a disappointment but also deprived the students of getting some answers to their questions. At the teacher level, her existing teaching and learning practices, lack of familiarity with the KB approach and lack of experience with inquiry-based approaches constrained the KB implementation process. At the same time, students’ lack of autonomous learning added to the challenges the teacher faced during the implementation. Additionally, the study also revealed that climate change awareness among the students was low at the beginning of KB implementation, as some students were unable to generate initial ideas on the issue from their prior knowledge and experiences.
Discussion
Various aspects related to teaching and learning impacted the teacher’s experience in implementing the KB approach, as the success of the implementation was influenced by her beliefs and attitudes, understanding of the approach, especially the KB principles, her roles, the students, and the existing educational culture in the classroom and school. The teacher’s poor self-confidence and doubts indicated low self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Teachers with high self-efficacy show greater efficiency in teaching (Burić and Kim, 2020; Flint et al., 2024) and greatly impact 21st-century pedagogical practices (Shafiee and Ghani, 2022), while low self-efficacy questions their abilities and focus on shortcomings (Woodcock et al., 2022). Mansor and Jamaludin (2024) suggest that teachers’ ability to carry out 21st-century learning can be improved through internal and external preparation, focusing on knowledge, skills, and roles and fostering positive attitudes. Implementing the KB approach requires teachers to grasp the concept and be open to allowing students to take charge of their learning. Concerning teachers’ experience and understanding of knowledge building, Reda Gavin (2017) emphasized the importance of teachers’ familiarity with knowledge building and recognizing which strategies are effective for their students. Conversely, the teacher in this study expressed her newness about integrating knowledge-building into her teaching, as she and the students were more accustomed to a teacher-centred approach. Research on knowledge building also emphasizes the importance of helping students become acquainted with the KB process through various activities (Yang, 2019). Similarly, teachers support and direct students to adhere to KB principles while allowing them more autonomy (Hong and Lin, 2019). Lack of knowledge of the KB approach made her battle with her existing epistemic stance and practices during the initial round of KB, where she acted as the only source of knowledge, thereby stifling the idea-generation process, resulting in unproductive talks and obstructing epistemic agency (Chai et al., 2016). The teacher often attempted to correct the students because she aimed for them to acquire specific knowledge, suggesting that the objective of learning activities is learning specific content (van Aalst and Cummings, 2006), which hinders students’ epistemic pursuit. Nevertheless, as she understood that teachers act as facilitators and scaffolders in students’ knowledge-building process (Zhu et al., 2019), she needed to become a facilitator, which required her to step back from being the primary source of information and focus on ensuring that her strategies would support the students’ knowledge-building process.
The teacher understood that students should be given choice and autonomy to help them develop a sense of responsibility and ownership in learning. She struggled to find ways that could allow her to provide support while preserving the students’ independence and sustaining the knowledge-building momentum in the classroom. Hence, she employed collaborative approaches (Ong et al., 2020) and inquiry methods (Tao and Zhang, 2018) to gradually guide her students towards engaging in research as a part of their knowledge-building activities. To facilitate this, she utilized Padlet as a platform for communication and sharing among the students, prompting them to contribute information, ask questions, and respond to their peers’ comments. To promote student engagement and autonomy during knowledge building, the teacher, as a facilitator, indicated that the students needed support in collective knowledge building and in improving and revising their ideas. Therefore, she adopted a collaborative strategy to assist them in learning how to negotiate, collaborate, and build upon one another’s ideas, all of which are essential for fostering epistemic agency and encouraging students to become more independent (Zhang et al., 2022), providing guidelines to assist students in enhancing the value of their contributions to group tasks. Alternatively, van Aalst and Cummings (2006) pointed out that the teacher’s role is to empower students to take charge of the learning aspects they can handle while also guiding them on those they cannot so that eventually, students can take control of all facets of their learning, as students can manage more knowledge than typically assumed, even at the elementary level (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1991).
Consistent with Yang et al. (2021) and Ong et al. (2020), the teacher was seen as a community member, often encouraging the students and trying to keep the discussions going. According to Zhang et al. (2009), when teachers are involved in the discussion process, they should take the reflective discussion approach to keep students engaged while monitoring their progress. Nevertheless, in contrast to KB research (Ong et al., 2020) and studies on climate change education that stress the significance of incorporating student perspectives to address the intricacies of climate change (Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020), the teacher predominantly led the conversations most of the time, limiting students’ chances to pose questions and participate in discussions, which suppressed their voices.
About the varying levels of readiness among the students, where not every student showed enthusiasm for active participation, the teacher, in the role of facilitator, should put in additional effort to encourage the more reserved students to engage in discussions or presentations. According to Dehghan-Chaleshtori and Zhang (2020), when dealing with such students, educators should implement direct instruction incorporating repetition, direct and cued elicitation, and reformulation to ensure that students do not feel overlooked or overshadowed. The students participating in this study lack experience with inquiry-based methods; therefore, direct instruction may be employed to address the shortcomings in the students’ inquiry skills (de Jong et al., 2023).
Findings also indicated the importance of cultivating a classroom environment where students can safely contribute to knowledge building, as employing the principle-based approach requires teachers to consider different contextual factors that could hinder the execution of the underlying principles of the approach (van Aalst and Cummings, 2006). Thus, teachers should cultivate a psychologically safe learning environment where students can share, test, critique, and enhance their ideas for further improvement (Scardamalia, 2002). This notion aligns with the teacher’s establishment of a safe and respectful classroom where every idea is appreciated, accepted, and assessed. Hong and Lin (2019) also emphasized the significance of recognizing and trusting students’ abilities to generate ideas and collaborate to refine those ideas, indicating the need to create learning environments that promote collaborative learning.
The teacher acknowledged that applying the KB approach to practice was challenging. However, she made every effort to act as a facilitator, allowing students autonomy and motivating them to become collaborative learners. Although some students were initially hesitant, they eventually became more comfortable with the activities and were able to participate in their groups. Over time, several students developed a sense of ownership over their learning by contributing to and building upon each other’s ideas. This feeling of ownership can enhance their dedication to comprehending and tackling issues like climate change. Moreover, it may not be sufficient to teach only about climate science; students also need opportunities to develop agency and action competence, including the capacity to make informed decisions and to participate in collective responses to climate issues. Within this framing, climate change education is increasingly conceptualised as education for action, rather than solely education about climate change.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated a teacher’s attempt to alter her practice as she began to grasp the KB approach and recognized the significance of offering students opportunities for knowledge building (Parker, 2018) by addressing limitations related to the teacher, students and the educational system in the school. This collaborative approach stands as a crucial foundation for effective climate change education, as it supports students in collaboratively building upon the existing knowledge to seek better ways to address the issue. It also indicates the role of direct instruction in facilitating the knowledge building of learners new to KB. The findings of this study could also benefit teachers’ professional development programs, as the approach can be incorporated into teaching different subjects. Through knowledge building, students can be taught to ask questions, conduct research, collaborate effectively with peers, and enhance their understanding. Simultaneously, it would assist policymakers in introducing and training teachers to integrate the approach into their classrooms. Also, implementing KB and other similar approaches needs support and collaboration from the school and stakeholders, like parents and experts in various fields. This study involved one teacher and her class, so findings are not generalizable across contexts. However, it can inform various stakeholders and support teachers in enacting knowledge-building in classrooms in teaching about climate change. To extend these findings, future research can explore the approach’s effectiveness in teaching and learning complex issues like climate change.
Study implications
The research adds to the area of climate change education by showing how KB pedagogy may be used to encourage student involvement with challenging socio-environmental concerns. The project offers a basis for future research and practice in using collaborative inquiry to tackle global concerns within educational environments. The findings contribute to the pool of knowledge on training teachers to use the knowledge-building approach in teaching different subjects. Students should be taught how to conduct research, work collaboratively with others, prepare for classroom presentations, and build new knowledge on what they have learned previously. The knowledge-building approach should also be included in the in-service teachers’ training schedule as part of their continuous professional development. Policymakers should consider introducing the concept and training teachers to incorporate it effectively in their classrooms. Furthermore, implementing the KB approach and other similar approaches requires support and collaboration within the school as well as other stakeholders such as parents, experts in various fields, local communities, etc., as these approaches require the involvement of communities and people besides the students in the classrooms. Ongoing professional development can be structured to help teachers refine their practices, stay updated with the latest research, and continuously improve their ability to support knowledge building.
Limitations
With a specific focus on the teacher’s role in supporting the knowledge-building process, this paper investigated how one Grade 7 science teacher applied a knowledge-building approach in teaching and learning about climate change concerns. This study, however, has several important limitations. First, it relied on a single case study of one teacher and her class of 20 students in a particular school context. As such, the findings are context-bound and cannot be generalised to all teachers, grade levels, or school settings. Knowledge-building practices are likely to vary depending on curriculum demands, school culture, available resources, and teachers’ prior experience with inquiry-based or collaborative learning, none of which can be fully captured through one case. Moreover, the study concentrated primarily on the teacher’s enactment of knowledge-building and did not systematically measure long-term changes in students’ conceptual understanding, climate change literacy, or sustained engagement with knowledge-building practices beyond the observed lessons. Finally, the focus on climate change as a complex socioscientific issue means that the patterns identified here may not fully transfer to other topics that are less controversial or less emotionally charged.
Data availability statement
The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because access to the raw data is restricted to the research team in order to protect participants’ confidentiality and privacy. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to YXp1dTE5ODFAZ21haWwuY29t.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Faculty of Education Universiti Malaya. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardians/next of kin.
Author contributions
FA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. TY: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Akaygun, S., and Adadan, E. (2020). Fostering senior primary school students’ understanding of climate change in an inquiry-based learning environment. Education 49, 330–343. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2020.1854961,
Bereiter, C., and Scardamalia, M., M. (2003). “Learning to work creatively with knowledge.” In Powerful learning environments: Unraveling basic components and dimensions, E. de Corte and L. Verschaffel, 55–68. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
Bereiter, C., and Scardamalia, M. (2010). Can children really create knowledge? Canad. J. Learn. Technol. 36:1–15. doi: 10.21432/T2ZP43,
Burić, I., and Kim, L. E. (2020). Teacher self-efficacy, instructional quality, and student motivational beliefs: an analysis using multilevel structural equation modelling. Learn. Instr. 66. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101302
Busch, K. (2016). Polar bears or people? Exploring ways in which teachers frame climate change in the classroom. Int. J. Sci. Educ. Part B 6, 137–165. doi: 10.1080/21548455.2015.1027320
Chai, C. S., So, H. J., Tsai, P. S., Rohman, E., and Aw, L. P. I. (2016). “Building epistemic repertoire among primary 3 students for social studies” in Future learning in primary schools. eds. C. S. Chai, C. P. Lim, and C. M. Tan (Berlin: Springer), 109–128.
Chen, B., and Hong, H. Y. (2016). Schools as knowledge-building organizations: thirty years of design research. Educ. Psychol. 51, 266–288. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2016.1175306
Cordero, E. C., Centeno, D., and Todd, A. M. (2020). The role of climate change education on individual lifetime carbon emissions. PLoS One 15:e0206266. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206266,
Cross, I. D., and Congreve, A. (2021). Teaching (super) wicked problems: authentic learning about climate change. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 45, 491–516. doi: 10.1080/03098265.2020.1849066
Das, P. K. (2010). Climate change and education Maldives, UKaid from Department for International Development (DFID). 13–80.
de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Chinn, C. A., Fischer, F., Gobert, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., et al. (2023). Let's talk evidence–the case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction. Educ. Res. Rev. 39:1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100536
Dehghan-Chaleshtori, M., and Zhang, J. (2020). “Dialogic interaction of language learners in a knowledge building community” in The interdisciplinarity of the learning sciences, 14th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) 2020. eds. M. Gresalfi and I. S. Horn (Nashville, Tennessee: International Society of the Learning Sciences), 681–684.
Deisenrieder, V., Kubisch, S., Keller, L., and Stötter, J. (2020). Bridging the action gap by democratizing climate change education—the case of kidZ 21 in the context of fridays for future. Sustainability 12:1748. doi: 10.3390/su12051748
Eilam, E. (2022). Climate change education: the problem with walking away from disciplines. Stud. Sci. Educ. 58:1–34. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2021.2011589
Fitzpatrick, R., Amenya, D., and McAleavy, T. (2024). “Climate change and education. Education development Trust.” Available online at: https://edtlive.b-cdn.net/live/media/opxfsqh0/edt_un-climate-synthesis-digi_0924-2.pdf
Flint, A., Rubie-Davies, C. M., and Peterson, E. (2024). Teacher views of relationships between their teaching practices and beliefs, the school context, and student achievement. N. Z. J. Educ. Stud. 59, 157–173. doi: 10.1007/s40841-024-00321-x
Fu, E., van Aalst, J., and Chan, C. (2016). Toward a classification of discourse patterns in asynchronous online discussions. Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn. 11:441. doi: 10.1007/s11412-016-9245-3
Head, B. W. (2008). Wicked problems in public policy. Public Policy 3, 101–118. doi: 10.1177/0095399713481601
Head, B. W. (2022). “The rise of ‘wicked problems’—uncertainty, complexity and divergence” in Wicked problems in public policy: Understanding and responding to complex challenges (Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature), 21–36.
Hong, H. Y., and Lin, P. Y. (2019). Elementary students enhancing their understanding of energy-saving through idea-centered collaborative knowledge-building scaffolds and activities. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 67, 63–83. doi: 10.1007/s11423-018-9606-x
IPCC (2021) in Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. eds. V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, and S. Berger (Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press), 2391.
Jahanzad, E., Holtz, B. A., Zuber, C. A., Doll, D., Brewer, K. M., Hogan, S., et al. (2020). Orchard recycling improves climate change adaptation and mitigation potential of almond production systems. PLoS One 15:e0229588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229588,
Kagawa, F., and Selby, D. (2012). Ready for the storm: education for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation and mitigation. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 6, 207–217. doi: 10.1177/0973408212475200
Khanlari, A., Zhu, G., and Scardamalia, M. (2019). Knowledge building analytics to explore crossing disciplinary and grade-level boundaries. J. Learn. Anal. 60, 60–75. doi: 10.18608/jla.2019.63.9
Kumar, P., Sahani, J., Rawat, N., Debele, S., Tiwari, A., Emygdio, A. P. M., et al. (2023). Using empirical science education in schools to improve climate change literacy. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 178:113232. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113232
Lai, K. W. (2019). “Literature review: knowledge building research” in NEX—Kōtuitui online teachers network.
Lazarus, R. (2009). “Super wicked problems and climate change: Restraining the present to liberate the future.” Available online at: http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/159/
Lehtonen, A., Salonen, A. O., and Cantell, H. (2019). “Climate change education: A new approach for a world of wicked problems” in Sustainability, human well-being, and the future of education. ed. J. W. Cook, 339–374. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-78580-6_11
Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., and Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy. Sci. 45, 123–152. doi: 10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0
Li, P. J., Hong, H. Y., Chai, C. S., Tsai, C. C., and Lin, P. Y. (2018). Fostering students’ scientific inquiry through computer-supported collaborative knowledge building. Res. Sci. Educ. 50, 2035–2053. doi: 10.1007/s11165-018-9762-3
Mansor, A., and Jamaludin, K. A. (2024). “The level of knowledge and readiness of teachers and their relationship to the implementation of 21st century learning
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., and Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Monroe, M. C., Plate, R. R., Oxarart, A., Bowers, A., and Chaves, W. A. (2017). Identifying effective climate change education strategies: a systematic review of the research. Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 791–812. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2017.1360842
Newman, J., and Head, B. W. (2017). Wicked tendencies in policy problems: rethinking the distinction between social and technical problems. Polic. Soc. 36, 414–429. doi: 10.1080/14494035.2017.1361635
Nyimbili, F., and Nyimbili, L. (2024). Types of purposive sampling techniques with their examples and application in qualitative research studies.
Ong, A., Teo, C. L., Tan, S., and Kim, M. S. (2020). A knowledge building approach to primary science collaborative inquiry supported by learning analytics. Educ. 49:371–386. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2020.1854964
Parker, R. J. (2018). “Designing for knowledge building: An action research study in an elementary classroom [doctoral thesis, University of Calgary], the vault. University of Calgary, Calgary: Electronic theses and dissertations ”.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Perkins, K. M., Munguia, N., Moure-Eraso, R., Delakowitz, B., Giannetti, B. F., Liu, G., et al. (2018). International perspectives on the pedagogy of climate change. J. Clean. Prod. 200, 1043–1052. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.296
Reda Gavin, C. (2017) The Implementation of Knowledge Building in the Elementary Classroom” [Masters Thesis, University of Toronto]. TSpace. Available online at: https://hdl.handle.net/1807/77166
Reid, A., Dillon, J., Ardoin, N., and Ferreira, J. A. (2021). Scientists’ warnings and the need to reimagine, recreate, and restore environmental education. Environ. Educ. Res. 27, 783–795. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2021.1937577
Resendes, M., and Dobbie, K. (2017). “Knowledge building gallery: leading student achievement: networks for learning project” in Web version developed by: MediaFace. eds. D. Maika, E. Hine, E. Heaver, L. Ma, and L. White. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Rittel, H. W. J., and Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy. Sci. 4, 155–169. doi: 10.1007/BF01405730
Rousell, D., and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, A. (2020). A systematic review of climate change education: giving children and young people a ‘voice’and a ‘hand’in redressing climate change. Child. Geogr. 18, 191–208. doi: 10.1080/14733285.2019.1614532
Sakamoto, A., Nishiya, K., Guo, X., Sugimoto, A., Nagasaki, W., and Doi, K. (2022). Mitigating impacts of climate change induced sea level rise by infrastructure development: case of the Maldives. J. Disaster Res. 17, 327–334. doi: 10.20965/jdr.2022.p0327
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal Educ. Knowl. Soc. 97, 67–98.
Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: a challenge for the design of new knowledge media. J. Learn. Sci. 1, 37–68. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0101_3
Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (2006). “Knowledge building: theory, pedagogy, and technology” in Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. ed. R. K. Sawyer (New York: Cambridge University Press), 97–118.
Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (2014). “Knowledge building and knowledge creation: theory, pedagogy, and technology” in Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. ed. R. K. Sawyer (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press), 397–417.
Schauss, M., and Sprenger, S. (2021). Students’ conceptions of uncertainties in the context of climate change. Int. Res. Geogr. Environ. Educ. 30, 332–347. doi: 10.1080/10382046.2020.1852782
Shafiee, N. S., and Ghani, M. A. (2022). The influence of teacher efficacy on 21st century pedagogy. Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ. Res. 21, 217–230. doi: 10.26803/ijlter.21.1.13
Shammin, M. R., Wang, A., and Sosland, M. (2022). “A survey of community-based adaptation in developing countries” in Climate change and community resilience. eds. A. K. Haque, P. Enamul Mukhopadhyay, M. Nepal, and M. R. Shammin. Springer: Singapore.
Sharma, A. (2012). Global climate change: what has science education got to do with it? Sci. Educ. 21, 33–53. doi: 10.1007/s11191-011-9372-1
Stevenson, R. B., Nicholls, J., and Whitehouse, H. (2017). What is climate change education? Curr. Perspect. 37, 67–71. doi: 10.1007/s41297-017-0015-9
Tan, S. C., Chan, C., Bielaczyc, K., Ma, L., Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (2021). Knowledge building: aligning education with needs for knowledge creation in the digital age. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 69, 2243–2266. doi: 10.1007/s11423-020-09914-x
Tao, D., and Zhang, J. (2018). Forming shared inquiry structures to support knowledge building in a grade 5 community. Instr. Sci. 46, 563–592. doi: 10.1007/s11251-018-9462-4
UNESCO. (2021). “Global education monitoring report summary, 2021/2: non-state actors in education: who chooses? who loses?” Available online at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380076_hin?5=null&queryId=N-EXPLORE-b60705c2-4a5c-4c62-aff9-13e9de531b53
United Nations. (2022). “Sustainable development goals.” Available online at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change/
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2010). “UNESCO strategy for the second half of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development.” Available online at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000215466
van Aalst, J., and Cummings, M. (2006). Implementing knowledge building: analysis of a face-to-face discussion by grade-four students. Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ. 6, 351–368. doi: 10.1080/14926150609556710
Willamo, R., Helenius, L., Holmström, C., Haapanen, L., Sandström, V., Huotari, E., et al. (2018). Learning how to understand complexity and deal with sustainability challenges–a framework for a comprehensive approach and its application in university education. Ecol. Model. 370, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.12.011
Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., Subban, P., and Hitches, E. (2022). Teacher self-efficacy and inclusive education practices: rethinking teachers’ engagement with inclusive practices. Teach. Teach. Educ. 117:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2022.103802
Yang, Y. (2019). Reflective assessment for epistemic agency of academically low-achieving students. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 35, 459–475. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12343
Yang, Y., van Aalst, J., and Chan, C. K. K. (2021). Dynamics of reflective assessment and knowledge building for academically low-achieving students. Am. Educ. Res. J. 57, 1241–1289. doi: 10.3102/0002831219872444
Zhang, J., Hong, H. Y., Scardamalia, M., Teo, C. L., and Morley, E. A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at an elementary school. J. Learn. Sci. 20, 262–307. doi: 10.1080/10508406.2011.528317
Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., and Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge building communities. J. Learn. Sci. 18, 7–44. doi: 10.1080/10508400802581676
Zhang, J., Tian, Y., Yuan, G., and Tao, D. (2022). Epistemic agency for costructuring expansive knowledge-building practices. Sci. Educ. 106, 890–923. doi: 10.1002/sce.21717
Zhao, Y., and Watterston, J. (2021). The changes we need: education post COVID-19. J. Educ. Chang. 22, 3–12. doi: 10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3,
Keywords: climate change, climate change education, complex problem, knowledge building, teacher experience
Citation: Azmath F and Tee MY (2026) A teacher’s experience in enacting the knowledge-building approach to teaching about climate change. Front. Educ. 10:1694161. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1694161
Edited by:
Shah Md Atiqul Haq, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, BangladeshReviewed by:
Hilary Whitehouse, James Cook University, AustraliaKayode Babatunde Olawumi, University of Fort Hare, South Africa
Copyright © 2026 Azmath and Tee. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Fathimath Azmath, YXp1dTE5ODFAZ21haWwuY29t; Meng Yew Tee, bXl0ZWVAdW0uZWR1Lm15
†ORCID: Meng Yew Tee, orcid.org/0000-0003-1695-9390