In-service Home Economics Teachers’ Attitudes to the Integration of Sustainable Topics in the Home Economics Subject

  • Martina Erjavšek Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Francka Lovšin Kozina Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Stojan Kostanjevec Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Keywords: sustainable development, education for sustainable development, home economics, home economics teachers


Education for sustainable development is essential for the well-being of present and future generations and is one of the key objectives in the discipline of home economics. The purpose of this research was to ascertain whether in-service teachers of home economics recognise the opportunities to educate students about sustainable development in their courses and if they can identify the topics related to sustainable development that they can integrate into the subject of home economics. To determine this, a study using a questionnaire with a non-random sample of 89 Slovenian in-service home economics teachers was conducted. The results were qualitatively and quantitatively analysed. According to the research results, in-service home economics teachers understand that the topics of the subject promote education for sustainable development. They see the most opportunities for integrating sustainable topics arising in the fields of food and living environments, and less in economics and textiles. This is evident because sustainability topics are predominantly connected to food and the living environment classes in the current education system. Based on the research results, it can be deduced that in-service home economics teachers should be offered ongoing professional development in order to achieve the competences needed to teach sustainable development as part of the home economics subject. The need to update the curriculum of this subject has emerged as it offers numerous opportunities to educate the young in topics related to sustainable living.


Download data is not yet available.


Banič, M., & Koch, V. (2015). Izkušnje učiteljev razrednega pouka s poučevanjem gospodinjstva [Experiences of primary school teachers in Home Economics teaching]. In M. Orel (Ed.), Sodobni pristopi poučevanja prihajajočih generacij (pp. 752–767). EDUvision.

Benn, J. (2008). Some Danish remarks. A response to the IFHE position statement. Home economics in the 21st century. International Journal of Home Economics, 1(1), 8–9.

Borg, C., Gericke, N., Höglund, H. O. & Bergman, E. (2012). The barriers encountered by teachers implementing education for sustainable development: discipline bound differences and teaching traditions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(2), 185–207.

Pavlova, M. (2013). Towards using transformative education as a benchmark for clarifying differences and similarities between Environmental Education and Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 19(5), 656–672.

Burmeister, M., Schmidt-Jacob, S., & Eilks, I. (2013). German chemistry teachers’ understanding of sustainability and education for sustainable development—An interview case study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14, 169–176.

Haapala, I., Biggs, S., Cederberg, R., & Kosonen, A. J. (2012). Home economics teachers' intentions and engagement in teaching sustainable development. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(1), 41–54.

Buza, L. (2010). Environmental education: Teaching in the present, preparing students for the 21st century. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 22, 8–15.

Dale, A., & Newman, L. (2005). Sustainable development, education and literacy. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(4), 351–362.

DeFries, R. S., Ellis, E. C., Chapin, F. S., Matson, P. A., Turner, B. L., Agrawal, A., et al. (2012). Planetary opportunities: A social contract for global change science to contribute to a sustainable future. BioScience, 62(6), 603–606.

Devetak, I., & Krek, J. (2013). EDITORIAL - Sustainable development in education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 3(1), 5–8.

Dewhurst, Y., & Pendergast, D. (2011). Teacher perceptions of the contribution of Home Economics to sustainable development education: A cross-cultural view. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35(5), 569–577.

Dixon, R. (2017). Teachers' hopes for the future of home economics education in New Zealand. International Journal of Home Economics, 10(1), 12–20.

Dresner, S. (2008). The principles of sustainability. Earthcsan.

Elementary School Act. (2016). [Zakon o osnovni šoli /ZOFVI-K/ (2016)]. Uradni list RS, 46 (30. 6. 2016). Retrieved from

Elementary school programme, Home Economics, Curriculum. (2011). [Program osnovna šola. Gospodinjstvo. Učni načrt. (2011). Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport: Zavod RS za šolstvo.

Eurydice. (2019). Slovenia Overview.

Gale Smith, M. (2015). What does "bring back home ec" mean for us: Challenging the discourses of obesity and cooking. In Proceedings of the Canadian Symposium XIII Issues and Directions for Home Economics/Family Studies/Human Ecology Education. Manitoba.

Gisslevik, E., Wernersson, I., & Larsson, C. (2017). Teaching sustainable food consumption in Swedish home economics: A case study. Journal of Home Economics, 10(2), 52–63.

Grayson, J. (2013, December 19). Innovation earth: Make ‘home ecologics’ the new home ec.

Hira, T. K. (2013). Home economics literacy: Investing in our future. Journal of ARAHE, 20(3), 113–118.

Höijer, K., Hjälmeskog, K., & Fjellström, C. (2011). ‘Food with a purpose’ – Home economics teachers' construction of food and home. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35(5), 514–519.

Holden, E., Linnerud, K., & Banister, D. (2014). Sustainable development: Our common future revisited. Global Environmental Change, 26, 130–139.

Information Booklet. First Level University Study Programme. First cycle of elementary school. (2017-18). [Predstavitveni zbornik. Univerzitetni študijski program prve stopnje. Razredni pouk. (2017-18)]. programi/Predstavitveni_zborniki/Zborniki_17-18/Predstavitveni_zbornik_RP_17-18.pdf

International Federation for Home Economics. (2008). IFHE Position Statement – Home Economics in the 21st Century.

Kalin, J., Krek, J., Medveš, Z., Valenčič Zuljan, M., & Vogrinc, J. (2011). Osnovna šola. [Elementary school]. In J. Krek, & M. Metljak (Eds.), Bela knjiga o vzgoji in izobraževanju v Republiki Sloveniji (pp. 107–179). Zavod RS za šolstvo.

Kostanjevec, S., Lovšin Kozina, F., & Erjavšek, M. (2017). Izzivi gospodinjskega opismenjevanja v osnovnošolskem izobraževanju [The challenges of Home Economics literacy in elementary school education]. In M. Sardoč, I. Ž. Žagar, & A. Mlekuž (Eds.), Raziskovanje v vzgoji in izobraževanju danes: zbornik povzetkov: 2nd nacionalna znanstvena konferenca (pp. 72–73). Pedagoški inštitut.

Kostanjevec, S., Lovšin Kozina, F., & Erjavšek. M. (2018). The relationship between teachers’ education and their self-perceived competence for teaching home economics. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76 (2), 175–188.

Līce, I., & Reihmane, S. (2015). Education for sustainable development at Home Economics. In V. Dišlere (Eds.), Rural Environment. Education. Personality. (REEP) (pp. 230–236). The Latvia University of Agriculture, Institute of Education and Home Economics.

Lichtenstein, A. H., & Ludwig, D. S. (2010). Bring back home economics education. JAMA, 303(18), 1857–1858.

Lind, E., Pappel, K., & Paas, K. (2009). Handicraft and home economics as designers of citizen who are able to cope in society. Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 8(1), 54–62.

Lorek, S., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2014). Sustainable consumption within a sustainable economy – beyond green growth and green economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 33–44.

Luppi, E. (2011). Training to education for sustainable development through e-learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3244–3251.

Ma, A., & Pendergast, D. (2011). The past, the present and the preferred future for home economics education in Hong Kong. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35(5), 58 –594.

Meadowcroft, J. (2007). Who is in charge here? Governance for sustainable development in a complex world. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 9(3–4), 299–314.

Olafsdottir, S., Juniusdottir, R., & Olafsadottir, A. S. (2017). Health promotion and home economics belong together-progress towards extended curricula in teacher education. International Journal of Home Economics, 10(2), 180–190.

Pace, E. M., Aiello, P., Sibilio, M., & S. Piscopo. (2015). Applying the theory of simplexity in home economics education for the acquisition of transversal competencies to face complexity. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 11(2), 71–87.

Pendergast, D. (2006). Sustaining the home economics profession in new times – a convergent moment. In A. L. Rauma, S. Pollanen, & P. Seitamma Hakkkarainen (Eds.), Human perspectives on sustainable future (pp. 3–32). University of Joensuu, Faculty of Education.

Pendergast, D. (2012). The intention of home economics education: A powerful enabler for future –proofing the profession. In D. Pendergast, S. L. T. McGregor & K. Turkki (Eds.), Creating home economics futures: The next 100 years (pp. 12–23). Australian Academic Press.

Pendergast, D., & Dewhurst, Y. (2012). Home economics and food literacy: An international investigation. International Journal of Home Economics, 5(2), 245–263.

Renold, U. (2008). The role of education in equipping individuals and families to be resilient and active participants in the global community. International Journal of Home Economics, 1(2), 69–74.

Slater, J., & Hinds, A. (2014). University student perceptions of home economics: food and nutrition education. International Journal of Home Economics, 7(2), 68–80.

Sproles, K. E., & Sproles, B. B. (2000). Careers serving families and consumers. Prentice Hall.

Summers, M., Corney, G., & Childs, A. (2004). Student teachers’ conceptions of sustainable development: the starting-points of geographers and scientists. Educational research, 46(2), 163–182.

Tamm, J., & Palojoki, P. (2012). New Curriculum, new directions? Using socio-cultural perspective to develop home economics education in Estonia.

Torkar, G. (2013). Live what you teach & teach what you live: Student views on the acceptability of teachers’ value-related statements about sustainability and climate change. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 3(1), 45–58.

Torkar, G., & Koch, V. (2012). Factors hindering teachers from integrating natural sciences and mathematics into home economics courses. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 11(3), 216–223.

Tuomisto, M., HaapaniemI, J., & Fooladi, E. (2017). Close neighbours, different interests? Comparing three Nordic home economics curricula. International Journal of Home Economics, 10(2), 121–131.

Unesco. (2014). Roadmap for implementing the Global Action Programme on education for sustainable development. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation.

Vartiainen, L., & Kaipainen, M. (2012). Textile craft students’ perceptions of sustainable crafts. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 43, 131–140.

Wahlen, S., Posti-Ahokas, H., & Collins, E. (2009). Linking the loop: Voicing dimensions of home economics. International Journal of Home Economics, 2(2), 32–47.

WCED. (1987). Our common future: World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press.

Zsóka, A., Szerényi, Z. M., Széchy, A., & Kocsis, T. (2013). Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday pro-environmental activities of Hungarian high school and university students. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 126–138.

UNESCO. (2009). Training guideline on incorporating education for sustainable development (ESD) into the curriculum.