Pages

Sunday, 30 September 2012

The historical context of Environmental Education and the hurdles it faces


In developing a Philosophy of Environmental Education it is important I understand the historical context of Environmental Education and the hurdles it faces. Understanding this will give me the knowledge of the current priority Environmental Education holds in society and the possible implications this may have for my future as an Environmental Educator.

According the new Australian Curriculum (ACARA n.d.) that will be in action by 2014, Sustainability is a cross curricular priority. At face value this would seem to mean that Environmental or Education for Sustainability (EfS) is becoming a priority to be taught in Australian schools. However, deeper analysis of the integration of Sustainability into the curriculum reveals that it is being treated quite superficially. If one is to consider that there is this push by EfS practitioners to have education systems reorientated towards EfS the apparent ‘add on’ of Sustainability into the curriculum is far from achieving this goal.

If Sustainability has been ‘added’ into the curriculum, it could be assumed that it has become another subject to be taught. Yet if we consider that teachers already feel overburdened with an ever expanding curriculum (Evans, Whitehouse & Hickey 2012), this would seem unwise. Instead, the Australian Curriculum’s interpretation of ‘integration’ of Sustainability into the Curriculum appears to be content based. If there is an outcome in English, Mathematics or Science that could be considered Sustainability then a little symbol is put next to this outcome that shows that if teachers are trying to achieve this outcome they are also trying to achieve Sustainability. This is most evident in the outcomes for Science. If teachers are focusing on the outcome that deals with teaching children about living things then they are also teaching students about Sustainability. According to the Australian Curriculum (ACARA n.d.) they just need to make sure they talk about caring for the Earth when trying to achieve this outcome.

Personally, the Australian Curriculum’s treatment of Sustainability is far from EfS. Where are the principles of values clarification, critical thinking and systemic thinking? Is it assumed that the teachers will pick up the corresponding Sustainability Curriculum Framework( DEWHA 201) and be able to use these principles in their teaching? Or do they really not care about Sustainability? Is it put into the Australian Curriculum as a ‘cross-curriculum priority’ to show that the Education system is ‘doing its bit’ for the environment; but still just going about their business as usual?

The Australian Curriculum is treating Sustainability rather superficially. Yet if we consider the historical context of Environmental Education and Environmentalism itself, it is easy to understand why this treatment is occurring. Saylan and Blumstein (2011) in their book The Failure of Environmental Education (and how we can fix it) discuss the historical context of Environmental Education.  In discussing the historical context of Environmental Education they also present the hurdles that Environmental Education faces. To summarise their argument, the historical context of Environmental Education can be placed into three categories. These categories are the Politicisation of Environmentalism, the Current dominant social paradigm and our current means of interacting with the world.

Politicisation of Environmentalism
Saylan and Blumstein (2011) suggest that environmentalism became politicised following the release of Rachel Carson’s The Silent Spring. According to Saylan and Blumstein (2011) Rachel Carson’s book through scientific evidence, implicated industry in adverse impacts on the environment through the use of chemical pesticides. As a result of this implication Carson was subject to public attacks by chemical industries who felt her findings would discredit and threaten their business. Although it was found that Carson’s findings were solid and resulted in the immediate cessation of DDT usage, the war that was waged over protection for the environment between industry and environmentalists ‘was the beginning of the politicisation of environmentalism’ (Saylan & Blumstein 2011 p. 25).

In the American context, it was at this point that environmentalism became the cry of liberal America (Saylan & Blumsetin 2011). Environmentalism was becoming a threat to economic gain with its call for protection and conservation of potentially economically viable resources taken from the environment (Saylan & Blumstein 2011). This want by environmentalists to protect the environment despite the negative impact it could have on industry caused the environmental movement to be seen as the voices of the extremist few; those with idealistic notions of reality whose views could negatively impact on industry. Environmentalists started to be labelled as ‘tree huggers’, or in today’s context ‘greenies’,  portrayed as a barrier to economic and industrial growth of society (Saylan & Blumstein 2011). According to Saylan & Blumstein (2011) it was this marginalisation of environmentalism as a movement which also marginalised the environment itself.

The Current Dominant Social Paradigm
To understand why the environmental movement was marginalised, the Current Dominant Social Paradigm needs to be understood. According to Fein (1993) the Current Dominant Social paradigm is the current ideal that nature is secondary and submissive to the economic needs of humans. Although this notion of the Current Dominant Social paradigm is described by Fein (1993) in the nineties, in today’s context the paradigm still rules supreme. As stated by Saylan and Blumstein (2011) ‘That society has failed to accept responsibility is a result of placing ourselves at the centre of our universe and believing we are here to dominate our surroundings’ (p.21). It is our value that we place on monetary gain that has created this marginalisation of the environment.

Although this is a personal reflection and is not backed by evidence, if the environment’s needs may override our chance to gain economically then the economy will trump the environment more often than not. This personal observation could be the result of the mention by Saylan and Blumstein (2011) that success in the Current Dominant Social Paradigm is largely measured in monetary terms.
The question that arises through delving into the Current Dominant Social Paradigm is, Is the Current Dominant Social Paradigm working for us? For some whose daily activities result in monetary gain would suggest yes, but surely humanity’s success and worth is beyond measuring economically. 
According to Saylan and Blumstein (2011) in terms of humanity, the Current Dominant Social Paradigm may be doing more harm than good. Unfortunately our education system is designed to produce a workforce, not individuals who hold notions of morals and ethics (Syalan & Blumstein 2011). Saylan and Blumstein (2011) suggest that we have become so wrapped up in standardising learning that it has resulted in a populace that are functionally illiterate. This means that while they may be able to read and write, when it comes to civic concerns and critically analysing the information that is presented to them, they are less able. It is this need for a robotic performing society to create a functioning populace that has resulted in a lack of concern for social and environmental issues (Saylan and Blumstein 2011). Saylan and Blumstein (2011) suggest with this notion that perhaps Aldous Huxley’s A Brave New World is perhaps not too far away from being the truth.

Our current means of interacting with the world
With the rise of new technologies, there has been a change with how we interact with our world. Today we interact through emails, social networking , text messaging and the internet itself (Saylan & Blumstein 2011). This new way of interaction means that we are subject to insurmountable amounts of information which leaves us feeling confused and frustrated with what exactly to believe (Saylan & Blumstein 2011). According to Saylan and Blumstein (2011) the issue of access to too much information is an even greater issue when we consider that most scientific concepts are not accessible to the general public due to scientific language. Thus the populace have access to a large amount of information that may not be backed by scientific findings.
Not only do new technologies give people access to potentially invalid and unreliable information but these technologies can keep us indoors and away from interacting with the environment (Saylan & Blumstein 2011).  This means developing a connection with nature and people is complicated by the fact that people enjoy technology that is used inside.


Assessing the historical context that Environmental Education finds itself in leaves many hurdles that appear to be in the way of achieving change towards action for the environment. These hurdles appear to be the marginalisation of the environment and the environmental movement, the effect the Current Dominant Social Paradigm has on our values and our love for new technology that creates a large amount of information causing confusion and frustration and keeping us indoors.

In terms of a Philosophy for Environmental Education, two questions arise from assessing Saylan and Blumstein’s (2011) stated historical context of Environmental Education. Firstly, are Saylan and Blumstein’s (2011) critique of society’s current treatment of the environment too critical or is it based on merit? And secondly, If Saylan and Blumstein’s (2011) critique is based on merit what do the hurdles it presents mean for Environmental Education?


Saylan C and Blumstein D T 2011 The Failure of Environmental Education The Regents of the University of California, London.
Evans N, Whitehouse H and Hickey R 2012 Pre-service teacher’s conceptions of Education for Sustainability Australian Journal of Teacher Education 37(1):1-12.
DEWHA 2010 Sustainability Curriculum Framework: A guide for curriculum developers and policy makers Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Fein J 1993 Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorising and environmental education Deakin University and Griffith University, Geelong.
ACARA n.d. Sustainability http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/CrossCurriculumPriorities/Sustainability, 20 September 2012.
   

Thursday, 20 September 2012

Homo Empathicus (Jeremy Rifkin)



Recently I gave a seven minute presentation on what it is that makes us care about the environment. This presentation was given to fellow students who were partaking in a training course called Green Steps @ Uni. We were all required to give a presentation on a topic of our choice as long as it was sustainability related. I chose to give my presentation on what it is that makes us care about the environment as since conducting a literature review on the topic I have become quite interested in the subject.
In this presentation I basically summarised my findings of my literature review and came to the conclusion, with the help of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’ s current Love Not Loss campaign, that we care about the environment due to the love we feel for the natural world. This love for the natural world comes about through our human ability to feel empathy.  It is through empathy for nature and fellow creatures that we feel a sense of compassion and therefore love and it is through this love that we want to protect the natural world (Futerra 2010, Reis & Roth 2009).

The below TED talk by Jeremy Rifkin entitled The Empathic Civilisation alludes to this importance of feeling empathy for the natural world. He suggests that humans are hard wired to feel empathy and is a part of our neurology. He refers to humans as Homo Empathicus, and that over time our ability to empathise has evolved and extended to beyond our immediate tribe to that of our nation. Currently, Rifkin suggests, due to technology our empathy now extends to the whole world and with this extension, theoretically we should be able to extend empathy to other creatures and the biosphere. Rifkin believes it is by extending our empathy to other creatures and the biosphere that we may have a chance at protecting our planet.  However, he sends a word of warning that it is our current political context that is threatening Homo Empathicus and causing us to put empathy aside. If we disallow our political context to influence our ability to empathise with that which is beyond us than we potentially have a means of causing movement to protect nature.

Although Jeremy Rifkin’s idea resonates with me and supports the claims I have made in my literature review and recent presentation, I think I need to delve into this idea further and deeper. In doing so I think I may be able to pull out exactly why empathy and compassion cause us to want to protect the environment.  I may be passionate about this idea but if I cannot articulate it well and with a real conviction then it is not strong enough to put into an environmental education philosophy.



Futerra 2010 Branding Biodiversity Futerra Sustainability Communications http://www.futerra.co.uk/downloads/Branding_Biodiversity.pdf, 16 July 2011

Reis G and Roth W 2009 A Feeling for the Environment: Emotion Talk in/for Pedagogy of Public Environmental Education The Journal of Environmental Education 41(2):71-87.

Tuesday, 18 September 2012

Envisioning Exercise- Future Biopic


I have been partaking in a sustainability training course called Green Steps @ Uni. This course focuses on the skills that are needed to create change towards sustainability in organisations. At the conclusion of this course we were required to write a one paragraph future biopic. In this future biopic we were to put in what we envision our career path to be in twenty years time and this biopic is being read out at a conference. This is a version of Envisioning; one of the elements of Education for Sustainable Development.
 I found this highly useful and at the same time caused me to be idealistic. Even though I was aware that perhaps some of the things I had written down in my biopic may never eventuate it gave me permission to be idealistic. I guess through doing this exercise it gives you something to work towards and that feeling that you should never give up on something no matter how idealistic it may seem. It also helped with thinking about who I want to be as an environmental educator and where I want to focus.

This was the two paragraphs that I wrote in the 15 minutes that were given:

Conference: Nature Education Symposium
Job Description: Environmental/Sustainability Educator
Biopic: Rhiannon has been working as an Environmental Educator for twenty years  now helping all types of people engage with their natural environment and build meaningful connections. In that time she has worked as an education officer for National Parks and Wildlife and has written a book on the human need to be connected with the environment. She has been overseas working with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds as an engagement officer in the United Kingdom and spent two years working with the World Society for the Protection of Animals and the Borneo Orangutan Society helping to develop education programs that will help local and orangutans live harmoniously with each other. Now she is in the process of setting up an education centre coupled with an animal rescue program to help people make connections and care for their domestic and wild animals.
She is here to talk to you about never giving up on your dream to protect the environment and how you can make a difference as an environmental educator.

Friday, 7 September 2012

Has there been a reorientation towards Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)?


It is suggested by Hopkins (2012) that Agenda 21, Chapter 36 called for a reorientation of education systems towards sustainable development. This would require a change in world views.  Instead of a focus on economic development, a focus on development across all sectors, environmental, social and economy. However, since Agenda 21’s release in 2002, has anything changed? In reading Hopkins’ (2012) Reflections on 20+ Years of ESD, Capra’s (2007) Sustainable Living, Ecological Literacy, and the Breath of Life and Evans, Whitehouse and Hickey’s (2012) Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions of Education for Sustainability, it would appear that nothing has changed.

In his article, Hopkins (2012) summarises the history of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and then goes on to critically assess the current global treatment of ESD. Although Hopkins (2012) applauds some of the achievements of ESD, he mostly appears to be stating its downfalls. According to Hopkins (2012) while there was a strong sentiment in having ESD become the driver of education systems, getting the global community to feel the same way was blocked by traditional world views and current systems. Instead ESD was and is being viewed as just another subject and largely placed in the domain of Environmental Education (Hopkins 2012). This is suggested by Hopkins (2012) to be the largest downfall of the ESD movement; that it is largely viewed as being an environmentally focused area.  
Although Hopkins (2012) states that ESD has not reached its intended outcome of reorientating current education systems, he does not put the blame of its downfall solely on the global community. Instead he suggests that assumptions and misinterpretations of the driving forces behind ESD are largely to blame (Hopkins 2012). In my interpretation Hopkins (2012) appears to be suggesting that the international bodies and communities such as the various United Nations’ agencies pushing for ESD were too overconfident in their ability and ESD’s ability to change current world views. This overconfidence has led to ESD being largely viewed as just another subject to add to curriculums (Hopkins 2012). 
This sentiment of Hopkins (2012) is supported by Evans, Whitehouse and Hickey (2012).  ESD within schools appears to be treated as just another subject to add to the curriculum, this is evident in the statement ‘teachers….report structural barriers such as overcrowded curricula and a lack of resources such as money and time’ (Evans, Whitehouse & Hickey 2012 p.3). 

In conjunction with the over confidence of the driving forces behind ESD and the world view of schooling systems, another barrier to the reorientation of education to ESD could be the misconceptions of what ESD truly means. Capra (2007) speaks about the different principles of ESD like systems thinking and states ‘Pedagogy orientated toward connecting actions with full appreciation of nature’s processes..is therefore more than just a matter of teaching about biology and chemistry’ (p.17). This statement by Capra (2007) reveals that ESD is not just teaching students about sustainability but instead is a pedagogical process. Through comparing this statement with the suggestion made by Evans, Whitehouse and Hickey (2012) that ESD adds to an already overcrowded curriculum shows that there is a misconception of ESD and could be another reason as to why there has been no reorientation towards ESD.

In reading and reflecting on these articles I realise that the answer to Has there been a reorientation towards ESD? is a definite no. Unfortunately ESD has a long way to go and many barriers to get through before it becomes embedded into pedagogical practice. For me as a future Environmental Educator I need to be aware of these barriers and not let them become an impediment to my goal for a reorientation towards ESD.

Capra F 2007 Sustainable living, ecological literacy and the breath of life Canadian Journal of Environmental Education 12:9-18.
Evans N, Whitehouse H & Hickey R 2012 Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of Education for Sustainability Australian Journal of Teacher Education 37(7):1-12.
Hopkins C 2012 Reflections on 20+ years of ESD Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6(1):21-35

Teaching Philosophy

Below you will find my teaching philosophy that I developed in 2008, my first year as a teacher. It will be interesting to see how my philosophy has changed as a result of the learning I have gained through my Masters program.


July 28th 2008 – Teaching Philosophy
I believe that learning is an integral part in the development of children and therefore the job of a teacher holds great responsibility. This responsibility involves the guiding of learners in developing deep knowledge and understandings about the world in which they live. When learners come to know and understand their world they are able to interact positively with their surroundings and those they share it with. There are two quotes that guide my belief of what teaching is, one being ‘A lack of knowledge is a very dangerous thing’ and ‘In the end we will conserve only what we love and we will love only what we understand.’ Baba Dioum. Both these quotes reveal the effect learning and developing deep knowledge and understandings has not only on an individual’s life but the impact an individual has on their world. As a teacher, I believe that I should look at the impact my teaching has on every facet of a learner’s context, as it is not just what we learn that is important, it is what we do with the knowledge that we gain.
I believe to meet my responsibility as a teacher the following need to be focused on within the learning environment:
  • A physical environment that is welcoming, learner centred and immerses learners in their learning.
  • Individuals should be aware of their rights and responsibilities. The understanding that with rights come responsibilities. We are all responsible for our actions and our actions towards others.
  • Development of a sense of community within the classroom. This creates acceptance, a willingness to help others, sense of belonging and security.
  • The development of skills and strategies. Skills and strategies are the ‘tools’ of the learner. They are apart of the learning process but are not the result.
  • Development of confidence and high self-esteem within learners.
  • Development of empathy, compassion and personal values.
  • Group work to develop social skills, decision making skills and problem solving skills.
  • Fostering the drive for students to delve deep and get their hands dirty in all presented information, truths and knowledge.
  • Development of metacognition and reflection so students are aware of how they learn, how to increase learning and who they are as a learner. This will allow students to develop the skills necessary to be self-sufficient.
  • I want students to develop multiple perspectives within their learning, to look at both sides of every story and question things that they believe are unjust.
  • I want students to find relevance within their learning and apply it to circumstances beyond the classroom and school walls, to show concern for that which is beyond themselves and believe that they have the ability to positively impact their world.

To achieve the above focal areas, the following pedagogical practices will be used:
·         Immersing students in present learning with posters, students’ work, books, games, computer programs, internet sites, newspaper and magazine articles, display centres and learning centres.
·         Involving students in the set up of the classroom e.g. what posters to use, where resources should be placed, involving students in the development of class rules.
·         Using Vygotsky’s Social Cultural Theory and Constructivist theory to guide practices. Inviting parents into the classroom to help, seating students in heterogeneous grouping as well as homogenous depending on task, teaching group work skills, using group work.
·         Group work that allows students to take on different roles and learn from others and have opportunity to use their skills to help others.
·         Using developed pedagogical practices in particular De Bono’s Six Thinking Hats and Bloom’s Taxonomy to encourage higher order thinking skills.
·         Using a variety of learning structures to meet individual learning needs and so students are comfortable and are able to work as a whole class, in groups and individually.
·         Modelling, guiding and allowing for independence when teaching skills and strategies.
·         Provision of learning experiences that relate students’ learning beyond the classroom environment to ensure learners find significance in their learning.
·         Bringing in cultural knowledge to ensure all learners find relevance in their learning, to include all students and to encourage acceptance and understanding of others.
·         Integrating Key Learning Areas in learning experiences to ensure all learning outcomes are being met and create richer learning experiences.
·         Develop units of work that follow the Quality Teaching Model.
·         Adapting learning activities to maximise the learning of students who may have special needs. This may include an idividualised activity that focuses on common outcomes but is designed to meet specific needs of the student.
·         Provision of learning experiences that allow students to question stated ‘truths’, possible injustices and allows for multiple perspectives of a given situation so students learn to look beyond the surface of any given situation, analyse it and develop beliefs that are based on deep thought not what people will have them believe.
·         Use of formative, summative and diagnostic assessment to guide future learning activities, focal outcomes and areas of need for individual students and the class as a whole.
With all this, I hope students will learn the skills, knowledge and understandings that will allow them to live and interact positively with the world beyond the classroom. I hope students will become reflective thinkers who question what is right and that which is wrong. I hope that through learning students will become well adjusted members of their community so their wellbeing is high and above all, are happy.