In Spain, autonomous communities can offer optional subjects. This study focuses on the Landscape and Sustainability (L&S) subject, recently introduced in Galicia, to explore teaching practices in a context with minimal curricular constraints. The subject, offered from 2015-2016 to 12-14-year-olds (one hour per week), promotes an environmental, social, and critical consciousness, differing from traditional decontextualized approaches. The hypothesis was that teachers may lack sufficient training beyond disciplinary knowledge to effectively teach this subject, limiting student learning. The study aims to analyze the observed teaching practices, teachers' conceptions of the subject, and student reflections to better understand the challenges and successes of this new curriculum. The analysis allows for a critical discussion and potential redirection of teaching approaches within a novel and flexible educational setting. This opportunity to study the subject from its inception, free from strict regulatory constraints, is especially valuable for understanding its implementation and impact.

The study draws on existing literature in Place-Based Education and Heritage Education to frame its analysis. It incorporates the work of Augé (2012) on landscape as a common asset, Rubio and Ojeda-Rivera (2018) on the rights of those who inhabit a landscape, and Martínez de Pisón (2010) on empathy as a key to sustainability. Massey (1995) and Augé (2012) provide context for the concept of 'place' as a specific space with strong local identities. The model proposed integrates the emotional connection with local places (Woodhouse and Knapp, 2000; Liceras, 2003, 2016), interdisciplinary approaches (Woodhouse and Knapp, 2000; Liceras, 2003, 2016), and civic engagement (Theobald, 1997; Woodhouse and Knapp, 2000) key to Place-Based Education. Heritage Education is incorporated through reflection on the inclusion of everyday spaces as heritage (Calaf and Fontal, 2006; Domínguez-Almansa and López-Facal, 2016, 2017; Estepa and Martín, 2020), highlighting both visible and invisible heritage. The study also considers 'new localism' (Gruenewald and Smith, 2008) and the ethics of environmental care (Chinnery, 2013), linking globalization, capitalism, and cultural oppression (McInerney et al., 2011). The overall approach emphasizes citizenship (Orr, 1994), research, values clarification, problem-solving (Sobel, 2004; Gruenewald, 2003; Knapp, 1996), and decision-making (Hungerford and Volk, 1990; Knapp, 1996).

The study employed a qualitative methodology, incorporating quantitative analysis. Data collection involved three axes: (a) observation of the teaching-learning process in three schools (n=3); (b) analysis of teachers' conceptions (n=38); and (c) analysis of students' reflections (n=70). **Axis 1: Observation:** Participant observation was conducted in three purposefully selected schools, covering over half of the sessions in each. A validated observation form recorded detailed field notes on various aspects of the sessions: participants, teacher and student roles, content, location, methods, resources, and objectives. These notes were coded and analyzed using Atlas.ti, resulting in 1034 quotes used to describe the experiments. The initiatives were ranked based on their level of development according to the proposed model. **Axis 2: Teachers' Conceptions:** Semi-structured interviews were conducted with three teachers from the observed schools, followed by a closed-ended online questionnaire to gather data from 35 additional teachers. The interviews explored teachers' professional background, views on innovation, teaching practices, and evaluation methods. The questionnaire aimed to broaden the findings of the interviews. Data was analyzed through Atlas.ti, involving identification of recurring themes and categories. **Axis 3: Students' Reflections:** A questionnaire was administered to 70 students after completing the L&S course. The questionnaire used photographs of unsustainable landscapes to encourage reflection on their learning experience and development of civic consciousness. The responses were coded and analyzed using Atlas.ti, identifying recurring themes and codes. The data from all three axes was analyzed holistically and presented in relation to ten dimensions of a proposed teaching model for L&S inspired by Place-Based and Heritage Education.

The findings are presented across six thematic blocks based on the ten dimensions of the proposed teaching model: **TB.1: Use of Places and Local Approach:** All initiatives used local places and landscapes; however, the level of detail varied. Initiative 1 focused on urban transformations and sustainability, Initiative 2 integrated material and immaterial elements, and Initiative 3 focused more on regional than local landscapes. **TB.2: Pupil-Based Active and Participatory Methodologies:** Initiatives 2 and 3 heavily involved students, while Initiative 1 was more teacher-led. Most students positively evaluated collaborative strategies, highlighting harmony and increased learning. **TB.3: Use of History, Culture, and Local Heritage:** Initiatives 1 and 2 successfully integrated history, culture, and heritage, with Initiative 2 showing strong interdisciplinarity. Initiative 3 lacked this integration. **TB.4: Fostering Emotional Connection and Appropriation:** While all initiatives aimed to create emotional connections, Initiative 2 was most effective in fostering student appropriation of local places. **TB.5: Fostering Social, Civic, and Academic Skills:** All initiatives promoted civic skills and environmental awareness. Students demonstrated critical reflection on social inequalities and environmental issues. However, the social aspect of sustainability was less emphasized. **TB.6: Transfers and Impact on the Local Community:** Initiative 2 successfully transferred its results to the local community. Students in other initiatives demonstrated increased environmental awareness, potentially impacting their future actions.

The study highlights the potential of Place-Based and Heritage Education in secondary schools, but underscores the need for teacher training in these approaches. Teachers intuitively incorporated elements of these methodologies, yet their understanding of the theoretical framework hindered a more effective implementation. The flexible curriculum empowers teachers, but the lack of guidelines and training creates challenges in planning and executing activities. The study's findings call for specific training in Place-Based Education, Heritage Education, interdisciplinary project design, and the integration of social and environmental sustainability. Furthermore, addressing the lack of consistent positive student engagement with participatory methods remains crucial.

The study demonstrates that while teachers can effectively utilize Place-Based and Heritage Education approaches intuitively, targeted professional development is crucial for maximizing their potential. Future research could focus on developing specific training programs and evaluating their long-term impact on teaching practices and student outcomes. Further investigation into different pedagogical approaches for diverse contexts and student populations would also be beneficial.

The study's limitations include the relatively small sample size of schools and teachers. The findings might not be fully generalizable to all contexts in Galicia or other regions. Future studies with a larger sample and a broader range of schools could enhance the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, long-term follow-up on student outcomes would provide valuable insights into the lasting impact of the L&S subject.