For several decades, efforts to transform the grammar of schooling (Tyack & Tobin, 1994) have proved to be little fruitful, producing at best marginal transformations (Labaree, 2021; Mehta & Datnow, 2020). Today, however, we can observe in many countries that the omnipresent grammar of schooling is at the core of major debates regarding the future of education (Mehta & Datnow, 2020). Two tendencies can explain the rise of attempts to alter the conventional grammar of schooling. First, in the current context characterized by health, economic, ecological and social crises, concerns about our future and future generations have given rise to new educational imaginaries focused on the common good (Mehta, 2021; Taylor, 2017). They disrupt the taken-for-granted grammar of schooling through their particular philosophy, organization, governance structures, curriculum, pedagogy or type of students. Secondly, this tendency is also the result of new institutional pathways at the crossroads of the school institution and social movements, leading to a re-imagining of learning spaces and purposes (Taylor, 2017). As a result, the boundaries of organizations¬—i.e., what should or shouldn’t be incorporated—are increasingly permeable to issues that go beyond them. Normative references and routines are no longer self-evident, and new partnerships are being created between organizations in order to assume the diversification of their missions (Devos, 2020). One of the most pressing contemporary challenges facing humanity is the preservation of the natural environment and the mitigation of anthropogenic impacts on the planet’s ecosystems. Hence, individual actors and organizations are increasingly recognizing the importance of incorporating environmental concerns into their operations and decision-making (Dunlap & Brulle, 2015). As such, a new level of responsibility is required of educators whose job it is to prepare children to meet these profound challenges (Taylor, 2017). In this paper presentation, we ...