Should we be impartial?

After reading Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: the importance of teachers’ beliefs by Cotton (2006),I found myself questioning some of Cotton’s summations. In a study of three geography teachers in the United Kingdom and their ability to impart environmental attitudes onto students, it was found that teachers preferred to present their students with holistic views of subjects. Rather than suggesting that they should hold a particular view point or possess particular beliefs about the environment, teachers held a neutral stance and instead presented them with the necessary information and the skills to analyse and critique this information. According to Cotton (2006)this belief in a constructivist approach to education goes against the grain of environmental education. It appears that Cotton (2006) views the role of environmental education as imparting ones beliefs of the environment onto the learner so they will protect and take action for the environment. Cotton (2006) also states that through remaining an impartial educator we are not acknowledging the fact that education is not value free.

Personally, I find Cotton’s (2006) view of environmental education and its role to be in opposition of my belief of the purpose of environmental education. While I believe that as an environmental educator I will be seeking to incite in learners a want to protect the environment, I do not believe it should be done through imparting my beliefs and ideals onto learners. To me this is indoctrination, not education.

In looking back on the Framework of Education for Sustainable Development that I developed last year in this blog in the element of Cognition I have set out three sub-categories. Within these subcategories are the ability to critically think, be a reflective thinker, systemically think and envision the future. Within the element of Values clarification are the sub-categories of metacognition and questioning the dominant world view. If I were to take Cotton’s (2006) view of environmental education, these elements and sub-categories would become redundant. In a learning environment that imposes one’s ideals onto learners there can be no critical, reflective of systemic thinking, envisioning would be impossible and clarifying one’s values by being metacognitive and questioning the dominant world view would not be applicable.

I find the teachers in Cotton’s (2006) study to be quality educators who are pushing their students to question stated truths and thus following the principles of Education for Sustainable Development. I believe this creates a populace who will take action for the environment because through the elements of Cognition and Values clarification they will not accept injustice. As we all rely on ecosystem services to provide us with essentials for survival, the degradation of the environment can only be described as an injustice, therefore through remaining an impartial educator we are in fact creating a populace who will care for their environment.

Quality education and educators who develop within their learners the ability to question, critically assess and clarify develop deep thinkers who will have the skills to create a sustainable world.

Cotton D R E 2006 Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: the importance of teachers' beliefs Journal of Curriculum Studies 38(1): 67-83.