Primary teachers shape early environmental understanding, yet their formal preparation in waste management remains poorly documented. This study audited all nine Greek public undergraduate primary-teacher programmes. Official study guides and course descriptions available by 29 August 2026 were screened for explicit content on solid waste, wastewater, sludge, and biosolids. Generic environmental references and undifferentiated mentions of waste were excluded unless a target domain or qualifying management operation was explicit. Five programmes (55.6%) contained at least one relevant course. Solid waste appeared in four programmes (44.4%), wastewater in three (33.3%), and sludge or biosolids in none. Of the five retained courses, one was compulsory and four compulsory-choice; only one programme (11.1%) guaranteed relevant exposure. Four courses provided substantive coverage and one incidental exposure. Independent auditing produced agreement on 40 of 45 programme-level decisions (88.9%; pooled Cohen’s kappa = 0.72), with discrepancies resolved by consensus. These results establish a reproducible national baseline for the intended curriculum and distinguish course availability from guaranteed exposure and explicit pedagogical preparation. They do not measure enacted teaching or learning, but identify where formal provision is absent, optional, or pedagogically unspecified, supporting targeted curriculum review and subsequent interview-, enrolment-, and outcome-based research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karachalios et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: