The Ecology of School - Sense Publishers

ADVANCES IN LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS RESEARCH

ADVANCES IN LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS RESEARCH

David Zandvliet (Ed.) Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada

This book describes and documents one school’s experiences in achieving their environmental literacy goals through the development of a place-based learning environment. Through this iniative, a longitudinal, descriptive case study began at the Bowen Island Community School to both support and advocate for ecological literacy, while helping the school realize its broad environmental learning goals. Conceptualised as an intensive case study of a learning environment (with an environmental education focus), the program was part of a larger ecological literacy project conducted in association with preservice and graduate education programs at a nearby university and research centre. Following both (empirical) learning environments and participatory (ethnographic) research methods, the project is described from a variety of perspectives: students, teachers, teacher educators, researchers and administrators. The volume describes a variety of forms of place-based education that teachers devised and implemented at the school while giving evidence of the development of a supportive and positive place-based learning environment. The programs and initiatives described in this volume provide the reader with insights for the development of place-based programming more generally . The final chapter outlines participatory methods and action research efforts used to evaluate the success of the project and recounts the development and validation of a learning environment instrument to assist with this process. The new instrument coupled with qualitative descriptions of the learning environment experienced by many at the school give unique insights into the various ways the study of learning environments (as a methodology) may be explored.

SensePublishers

ALER 4

David Zandvliet (Ed.)

ISBN 978-94-6209-219-8

The Ecology of School


Spine 7.163 mm

The Ecology of School David Zandvliet (Ed.)


ADVANCES IN LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS RESEARCH Volume 4 Series Editors Barry J. Fraser Curtin University of Technology

Jeffrey P. Dorman Australian Catholic University

Editorial Board Perry den Brok, Eindoven University of Technology, the Netherlands Shwu-yong Huang, National Taiwan University, Taiwan Bruce Johnson, University of Arizona, USA Celia Johnson, Bradley University, USA Rosalyn Anstine Templeton, Marshall University, USA Bruce Waldrip, University of Southern Queensland, Australia Scope The historical beginnings of the field of learning environments go back approximately 40 years. A milestone in the development of this field was the establishment in 1984 of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Special Interest Group (SIG) on Learning Environments, which continues to thrive today as one of AERA’s most international and successful SIGs. A second milestone in the learning environments field was the birth in 1998 of Learning Environments Research: An International Journal (LER), which fills an important and unique niche. The next logical step in the evolution of the field of learning environments is the initiation of this book series, Advances in Learning Environments Research, to complement the work of the AERA SIG and LER. This book series provides a forum for the publication of book-length manuscripts that enable topics to be covered at a depth and breadth not permitted within the scope of either a conference paper or a journal article. The Advances in Learning Environments Research series is intended to be broad, covering either authored books or edited volumes, and either original research reports or reviews of bodies of past research. A diversity of theoretical frameworks and research methods, including use of multimethods, is encouraged. In addition to school and university learning environments, the scope of this book series encompasses lifelong learning environments, information technology learning environments, and various out-of-school ‘informal’ learning environments (museums, environmental centres, etc.)

00-FM.indd ii

4/24/2013 2:16:35 PM


Edited by David Zandvliet Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada

A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN: 978-94-6209-219-8 (paperback) ISBN: 978-94-6209-220-4 (hardback) ISBN: 978-94-6209-221-1 (e-book)

Published by: Sense Publishers, P.O. Box 21858, 3001 AW Rotterdam, The Netherlands https://www.sensepublishers.com/

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved © 2013 Sense Publishers No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

vii

1. Environmental Learning David B. Zandvliet

1

2. Place-based Education in Practice Carlos G.A. Ormond

19

3. Development of the Learning Environment Carlos G.A. Ormond, Susan Teed, Laura Piersol & David B. Zandvliet

29

4. How Many Colours of Green? An Unfolding of Place-based Curriculum in an Island Community Susan Teed

43

5. Local Wonders Laura Piersol

63

6. The Moral Purpose of Schooling: An Administrator’s Perspective Scott Slater

73

7. Built Environments: Green Spaces as a Silent Teacher Indira Dutt

85

8. Developing Smiles: Evaluating Place-based Learning David B. Zandvliet

105

Epilogue Marlene Nelson

121

v

PREFACE

The theme for this edited volume: The Ecology of School, highlights the efforts of a group of educators and academics enquiring into the practices of environmental learning as it has been enacted in the school curriculum. In particular, it describes a a case study of the place-based implementation of this curriculum from the perspective of the unique island community of Bowen Island. Environmental Learning and Experience, a framework published by the British Columbia Ministry of Education (2007) aims to assist British Columbia teachers of all subjects and grades to integrate environmental concepts into teaching and learning. An important part of the development work for this framework involved a dedicated team of environmental educators working at the Bowen Island Community School. This framework: designed to guide teachers in their educational planning, supports the implementation of provincially-mandated curriculum for environmental learning in diverse subjects including science, social studies, and language arts. The development and implementation of the framework also guided a community of Bowen Island teachers’ in their interdisciplinary practice: using ‘environment’ as an organizing theme for teaching and learning.’ Environmental Learning’, then, is the conceptual backbone for the developments and reflections shared in this book. In this sense, our work references various perspectives that learners and educators take on their interaction with the natural, social and built environments of Bowen Island. Our collaborative work also describes and extends visionary Rudolf Moos’ original conception of a learning environment to include a consideration of psychosocial, physical and organizational factors as they all may contribute to learning. For many, this book may serve as an introduction to the study of learning environments. Studies conducted by educators on classroom learning environments (otherwise known as classroom climate or classroom ecology) have built on earlier work related to organizational climate and its application to educational settings. Research on learning environments can be described as both descriptive of classroom contexts and predictive of student learning. Today, the study of learning environments has a valuable role to play: in pre-service teacher training; professional development, evaluation of new curricula or innovation and generally as an important field of inquiry in its own right: the description of a valuable psychological and social component of educational experience. This book describes this conception from various perspectives: a synthesis of research that examines innovations in environmental learning and employs a learning environments approach to its development and evaluation. What follows is a brief road map for the reader as they navigate through “the ecology of school”: Chapter one outlines a conception for Environmental Learning summarizing the concepts imbedded in its conceptual framework and defining it as a pedagogy that is centered on interdisciplinary and experiential forms of learning. vii

PREFACE

Chapter two further contextualizes this discussion within the practices of Placebased Education and then describes why this particular conception of curriculum and instruction is important for a place like Bowen Island. Chapter three describes the school’s investigation into how ecological literacy became a core educational standard at the Bowen school – describing place-based programs, events, and activities that contributed to its unique learning environment. Chapter four captures the stories of three teachers who stood out as leaders in our project and, through their innovation, passion, and commitment, provided valuable insight into the power of place-based education on Bowen Island. Chapter five borrows from a philosophical tradition: prescribing a master plan of how place based education should function. The author focuses on Bowen Island as one place filled with many stories of how it can function. Chapter six describes the perspectives of three principals of the Bowen Island Community School. The author examines their beliefs on the moral purposes of schooling and their role in sustaining the learning environment at the school. Chapter seven explores how school design mediates students’ relationships with the natural world, with a view to understand from students’ perspectives how school architecture influences their ideas about the natural world and their learning. Chapter eight relates the development of action research with teachers using a specifically adapted survey that aided teachers in gauging and improving the learning environment in their classrooms and throughout the school. The efforts of educators, graduate students and pre-service teachers working on Bowen Island also involved a critical analysis of various educational frameworks and resources. Focus groups with Bowen teachers helped to inform a collaborative process that involved educators, community members and academics. The resulting volume of research offers both a conceptual view for introducing environmental learning in all settings, while also providing principles of teaching and learning that work to guide teachers in designing integrated activities for a variety of learning contexts. The research also recounts the development and inception of a variety of unique learning environments and richly describes the dynamic interactions between people, places and curriculum. This book outlines this set of rich interactions, which we collectively describe as: the ‘Ecology of School.’

viii

DAVID B. ZANDVLIET

1. ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING

INTRODUCTION

Why do we learn about environmental issues? In part, because there continues to be a concern about the state of the ‘environment’ broadly defined yet we are often confused by the complexities of the various economic, ethical, political, and social issues related to this concept. Daily, there are references in the news media to environmental issues, such as global climate change, ozone depletion, dwindling resources, famine, disease, loss of biodiversity, pollution, and continuing job losses in many communities (see Markey, Halseth & Manson, 2009). This is also true in communities like Bowen Island with its proximity to a large and growing urban centre (Vancouver) and its inherent development and conservation pressures. The environmental issues we all face, both as individuals and within the broader society, are so pervasive and ingrained within our cultural ways of being that we can no longer look to technology alone to solve these problems (Bowers, 1998). As a consequence, environmental learning should include a sustained critique on dominant societal and industrial practices that contribute to widespread and localized environmental problems (Sammel & Zandvliet, 2003). We must also turn to ourselves as individuals and as educators to make changes and develop a new ethic: a responsible attitude toward caring for the Earth (Jickling, 2004). In addition to these thoughts, there have also been many developments in the practical field of environmental education (see Sauve, 2005). These developments have been informed by International agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol (UN, 1997), Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002), and the proclamation of the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2003). This has also been accompanied by research on how people learn and on what constitutes quality in educational experience (Hart, Jickling & Kool, 1999). As a core value, all forms of environmental learning should attempt to integrate concepts into students’ everyday lives and across a broad spectrum of curriculum. Nevertheless in many jurisdictions, environmental topics still receive only a cursory attention in mainstream curriculum (Smith & Williams, 1998). For environmental learning to have any lasting effect, its concepts and approaches need to take a central position in schools. Hutchison (1998) describes three general approaches to conducting environmental learning: first, a supplemental approach in that teachers are provided with curricular materials they may use in addition to regular teaching, second, an infusionist approach in which environmental themes D. Zandvliet (Ed.), The Ecology of School, 1–18. © 2013 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

D. B. ZANDVLIET

are integrated into curricular topics (usually in Science or Social Studies programs), and third, an intensive experience approach in which students participate in short, outdoor immersive trips and experiences. In the supplemental approach, curricular materials are self-contained and require limited knowledge or preparation on the part of the teacher. In the infusionist approach, the environment becomes the organizer for an interdisciplinary curriculum, the premise that potentially all education is environmental education (Orr, 1994). In this work on Bowen Island, the environment is used as an organizing theme in the infusionist sense. This stems from the belief that sustainability education is not subject matter to be treated separately in curriculum but is interconnected with everything we do as humans (BC Ministry of Education, 2007). It is hoped that in adopting an interdisciplinary approach to teaching about the environment, we will support students in understanding how their actions impact the environment at both local and global levels. Working to integrate environmental learning within all subject areas promotes this change in attitude by providing students with opportunities to experience and investigate the relationships linking individuals, societies, and natural surroundings. Education about, in and for the environment can provide students with opportunities to learn about the functioning of natural systems, to identify their beliefs and opinions, consider a range of views, and ultimately to make informed and responsible choices for themselves, their families and communities. EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY

Developments among the broad fields of sustainability, environment and their relationship to educational reform have continued apace and these have impacted efforts at international, national and local levels. Our curriculum review effort also involved referencing and cross-referencing frameworks used in North America (NAAEE, 2004) and internationally (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 1999). These frameworks provided for critical perspectives on our own curriculum work. Education for Sustainable Development Internationally, the term Sustainability and the related term Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) have become important ideas and catch phrases related to human integration and interaction with the environment. Though the terms are also contested in some academic circles (IUCN, UNEP & WWF, 1991; Sitarz, 1993; UN, 2009; WCED, 1987), the idea of making sustainable choices is an important one and should force us to look at issues like the scale of present day economic activity within a connected and increasingly global environment. The proclamation of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005–2014 (UNESCO, 2003) stated unequivocally that there should be no universal model of education for sustainable development (ESD) but instead, 2

ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING

there should be nuanced differences according to local contexts, priorities and approaches in how sustainability will be taken up. It further stated that the values that education for sustainable development of any kind must promote or include the following principles: – – – –

respect for human rights and a commitment to social and economic justice; respect for the rights of future generations and for inter-generational responsibility; respect and care for the greater community of life in all its diversity; and respect for cultural diversity and a commitment to tolerance, non- violence and peace.

As such, the UN (2003) proclamation purported to represent a new vision of education, a vision that emphasized a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to developing the knowledge and skills needed for a sustainable future, as well as the necessary changes in human values, behaviour, and lifestyles. In our earlier work in BC, the idea of ESD was seen to explore relationships between social, economic and environmental factors targeted on the well-being of the human species. Ultimately, thinking about sustainability forces us to examine the ability of the environment to continue to provide for all species, both today and in the future (British Columbia Ministry of Education, 1995; 2007). Environmental Learning Education in the Canadian context remains a provincial jurisdiction however, in 2002 the Canadian federal government developed a broad vision for environmental learning in Canada through the development of the document: A Framework for Environmental Learning and a Sustainable Future in Canada (Government of Canada, 2002). This vision stated that Canadians of all generations and from all sectors of society should be given opportunities to engage in environmental learning within and beyond the classroom walls, where critical questions can be asked and a sustained and meaningful dialogue can take place. The term ‘environmental learning’ a referent for the eventual concept of ESD was retained in the titling of this document for complex socio-political reasons, still, the framework maintains that with increased awareness, knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, and motivation, all Canadians can become more ecologically literate and act competently to build a sustainable future for humans and ecosystems. This framework also indicates that the vast majority of those consulted in the Canadian context felt that environmental learning must be inextricably linked to values and ethical ways of thinking (Government of Canada, 2002). The document re-states the idea that all learning should have value and that citizens, as they are engaged in the life of their communities, should be involved in the discussions, debates, and decisions that will shape their futures. This is especially true in small rural communities such as the Bowen Island context. Educators can, and should, find ways to present environmental and sustainability concepts that will allow learners to 3

D. B. ZANDVLIET

draw their own conclusions about important environmental and societal issues that effect their immediate community. As I stated earlier, environmental education in BC and in Canada aims to integrate concepts and principles of the sciences and social sciences, such as ecology, biogeography, sociology, environmental chemistry, environmental psychology, politics, and economics under a single interdisciplinary framework. It aims to help students learn about how they are connected to the natural environment through their traditional subjects and through direct experience in both natural and human designed systems like their school buildings. In the ecological view, students may come to know and understand that all human environments, societies and cultures are deeply embedded and dependent on natural systems, both for their development and their continued survival. These ‘ecological’ notions of environmental learning are also congruent with the developing discourse around place-based education. Learning in the Context of Place-bound Communities The notion of a place-based education has been described by Sobel (1993; 1999) and related ideas have been expanded on by others including critical pedagogy and rural education (Gruenewald, 2003), community contexts (Hutchinson, 2004), eco-literacy (Orr, 1992; 1994), ecological identity (Thomashow, 1996); and experiential learning (Woodhouse & Knapp, 2000). The idea of place-based learning connects theories of experiential learning, contextual learning, problem-based learning, constructivism, outdoor education, indigenous education and environmental education. As BC is a large, diverse province – our ideas about environmental learning would have to take seriously the notion of communities and their importance for both the consultative process, and for deep knowledge about local ecologies, teaching and learning (Knapp, 2005). RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For the work on Bowen Island, it is also recognized that teaching can be a messy and organic experience and so, ideas about teaching could be described as both art and science. Environmental learning considers at once, multiple models for teaching and learning, as well as teachers’ own pedagogical content knowledge to form a unique blend of interdisciplinary knowledge about specific learning contexts (Palmer, 1999). While guiding principles are helpful, they were only a starting point in our methodology. In this collaborative effort, we attempted to honour the diverse voices and methods that inform environmental learning on Bowen Island (and other B.C. communities), while also tapping into the international and national academic discourses. The model we decided most appropriate for our research purposes here was a type of community-based inquiry that has been termed participatory action research (Carasco, Clair & Kanyike, 2001; Gaventa, 1988; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1994; Selener, 1997). 4


Participatory Action Research Researchers have developed at least five approaches to participatory action research (or PAR), including: (1) action research in organizations, (2) participatory research in community development, (3) action research in schools, (4) farmer participatory research, and (5) participatory evaluation (Selener, 1997). Conceptually, PAR originates from critical and neo-Marxist perspectives and practices that have been raised in the social sciences over the past three decades. Traditional scientific approaches and educational practice can sometimes be seen as maintaining specific hierarchical roles for researchers/subjects and teachers/students. PAR seeks to question unequal power relationships inherent in more traditionally-run institutions (eg education or science) and then, offers an approach to research that recognizes inequalities in our modern society. For the research conducted on Bowen Island, the form of knowledge described here as ‘participatory action research’ enables a form of inquiry that places research capabilities into the hands of the ‘subjects’ of the research, providing these individuals (in this case, educators) with the research tools with which they can generate knowledge for themselves. Knowledge created in this way is empowering, as it can be transformed by the participants into actions that are directly beneficial for their own community. Participants in this type of inquiry are viewed not only are co-creators of the knowledge (along with the researcher and others), but have access to and co-own the knowledge base generated by their research. Another vital element of this type of research approach lies in its attempt to remove the distinction between researcher and subject, with scientists and community members walking up the research path together, encouraging all participants to share in the process of decision making and rewards of research (Gaventa, 1988). However, the idea of PAR as a research paradigm has been contested with issues such as: Is the inquiry defensible as research?; How crucial is participation and how is it expressed?; Is the research about social improvement, or is it only about research efficiency with basic values unquestioned?; finally, what are the appropriate roles for researchers, research, and other social agents in the enhancement of the human condition? (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1994). On Bowen Island, we attempted to address these issues by including a broad range of stakeholders into our community of inquiry – with government bureaucrats, pre-service and inservice teachers, school administrators community members and university academics working alongside each other to develop the ideas described in this work. Consultative Methods The focus and working groups conducted as part of this research occurred on Bowen Island (and in a variety of communities around BC), and included broad representation from various stakeholder groups including the Ministry of Education, schools, informal education organizations, university students and academics. 5

D. B. ZANDVLIET

The structure of these meetings were congruent with the PAR approach in that they were co-lead and co-organized by community members and participants – with researchers acting as resources (alongside senior teachers, administrators and bureaucrats) for the working part of the meetings. Follow-up work and submissions were also encouraged with further input and feedback solicited by email and other forms of communication. These forms of submission continued for a further 10 months after each consultation as island teachers and community members continued on work started in the face-to face consultations. ‘Working’ Meetings and Focus Groups For each working meeting (or consultation), participants were provided with the original government document: Environmental Concepts in the Classroom (British Columbia Ministry of Education, 1995) as well as a variety of readings and frameworks published in other jurisdictions. Participants were then organized into small working groups each tasked with re-visioning or repurposing certain aspects of the original document (acting as quasi-editors for example), while after each working session these groups reported back on their work to the whole community to have their ideas further scrutinized or enhanced. University researchers and graduate students acted as resource persons and record keepers throughout what turned out to be a very engaging community–based process of data collection. As a further enhancement to the process, community members made further presentations to the community about their localized practices in environmental learning and were also encouraged to comment on how our joint project should be communicated to the wider teacher audience and as to what format the final work should take. These communications continued for 6 months after the original face-to-face consultation with educators on Bowen Island. Political Context As an important corollary to this process: our curriculum re-visioning process was not funded or lead by the Ministry of Education but instead was a grassroots effort lead by provincial educator and teacher groups in partnership with local university and teacher-training institutions. As such the joint knowledge-creation process generated in this project had aspects of a research development initiative and a curriculum re-visioning process. This unique political aspect of our meetings probably contributed greatly to the success of our participatory action research approach and results. RESULTS OF THE CONSULTATION

The consultative process described in the previous section had the outcome of producing a revised framework for environmental learning that has been adopted 6


by the BC Ministry of Education and has been guiding curriculum and resource development in the interim period. In short, the revisions to the original framework re-energized practices around environmental learning in the province and these ideas have are accessible to all teachers through a Ministry of Education website (www. bced.gov.bc.ca/greenschools). This section gives a brief overview of the results of our knowledge re-visioning process. Environmental Learning on Bowen Island In the framework, the following principles came together to integrate environmental learning by attempting to connect diverse subject areas for students from kindergarten to post-secondary levels. These principles were intended to assist all teachers both in the design of instructional strategies, and in the critical use of learning resources. At the Bowen Island Community School (BICS), facilitating environmental topics in the learning of all subjects, rather than isolating it, models for students how the environment is connected to their daily lives and relationships within their communities. As a direct result of our consultative efforts, the principles of environmental learning (in the broader provincial framework) were re-organized into two related areas: first, a more richly described principle of: experiential teaching and learning through direct experience, critical reflection and negotiation; and second, a restatement, description and summary of four organizing principles for learning environmental concepts. This organization demonstrates the interdisciplinary nature of environmental learning, while also showing a progression for the development of ideas that can lead students towards a deeper engagement with environmental topics. Teaching and Learning Principles Educators from Bowen Island and across the province acknowledged that direct experience with a concept or problem, followed by opportunities for observation, reflection and negotiation leading to further inquiry, presents the richest form of learning. Direct experience or experiential learning in the environment (see for example Kolb, 1984; Luckman, 1996) individually, or in a group experience, is an important and vital way to learn. These opportunities help provide students with a deeper understanding of natural systems and the impact humans have on those systems. Direct experience also allows students to challenge other cultural perspectives regarding environmental problems and examine them critically. A broad range of communities also acknowledged that for direct experience to be relevant to students, the development of critical and reflective capacities is important. When students are given adequate time to reflect on their learning, they evaluate their own experiences against the experiences of others. Central in this process is allowing students to negotiate among multiple perspectives or ideas about environmental problems. Negotiation involves actively seeking out differences in 7

D. B. ZANDVLIET

opinions and looking for common ideas or themes around specific issues. A view of teaching and learning that incorporates the direct experience, critical reflection and negotiation as a foundation for learning processes is summarized in a model described as the experiential learning cycle. Direct experience

Critical reflection

Negotiation

Conceptualization

Figure 1. The experiential learning cycle.

The model is further supported by experiential and social-constructivist views about teaching. Methodology typical to a learning cycle approach includes: choosing a concept and appropriate experience to be taught, and having students explain their experience and evaluate their ideas against others’ conclusions, as well as with their direct experiences. In this model, environmental knowledge is not to be viewed as stable, and often can be conditional as our developing knowledge grows from exposure and experience. In the learning cycle model, teachers emphasize thinking, understanding and self-managed learning for their students – include accommodation and assimilation (Shapiro, 1994). Principles of Conceptualizing Environment Another important outcome of the consultation was that a restatement, description and summary of organizing principles for conceptualizing environmental learning. These organizing principles essentially give teachers a number of conceptual lenses with which to critically view their existing curriculum. Through a consideration of these principles, teachers, first understand that experiential programs must examine the complexity of natural systems and that human interaction with these systems and that their effect on these systems must also be considered. Consulted teachers also understood that holistic forms of environmental learning also help students to develop a sense of respect and appreciation for the natural world and that an aesthetic appreciation, along with a scientific understanding of nature, encourages students to learn and act to protect and sustain the environment. Consultation also developed the idea that: as educators, we need to facilitate students’ understandings 8


of what constitutes responsible action toward the environment and help students to act responsibly it in their personal lives. Finally, participants understood that these actions can be influenced by belief systems and personal limitations (both physical and cultural) so ultimately, student actions can take many forms. Teachers in principle should encourage students to make decisions based on an understanding of the issues, as well as personal values, and with the sometimes conflicting values of other community members. Working groups eventually synthesized these ideas into four discrete themes. The principles for organizing and conceptualizing environmental education as published in the Ministry of Education framework now include: – – – –

a consideration of COMPLEXITY (or complex systems); AESTHETICS (or aesthetic appreciation); RESPONSIBILITY (responsible action and consequences of action); and the practice of environmental ETHICS.

The mnemonic and metaphor of C.A.R.E. (Complexity, Aesthetics, Responsibility and Ethics) was developed and can be used to describe the various forms environmental knowledge can take. To the working groups, C.A.R.E. demonstrated the interdisciplinary nature of environmental concepts, while also showing a progression of the development of ideas that can lead towards deeper engagement with environmental learning in all of its forms. This chapter now continues with a discussion of the emergent principles and a consideration of how each of these types contribute to the conceptualization of environmental topics in government mandated curriculums.

Figure 2. Mnemonic and metaphor of CARE (Complexity, Aesthetics, Responsibility, Ethics). DISCUSSION – CONCEPTUALIZING ‘ENVIRONMENT’ IN CURRICULUM

Principle One: Complexity (Life on Earth Depends on, and It Part of, Complex Systems) The principle of complexity as an organizing theme for environmental topics was a relatively uncontested idea in our work and is also well supported in the academic 9

D. B. ZANDVLIET

literature (see for example Capra, 1996; Delgrade Diaz, 2002; Gonzalez-Gaudiano, 2001). Participants in the consultations agreed that environmental learning should address the study of complex systems in two ways. First, it examines the complexity and interrelatedness of natural systems, and how humans interact with and affect those systems. Second, it looks at human-created systems, both those that are built and those that are part of our social fabric. For example, when students investigate the water cycle, a food web, or photosynthesis, they are studying a natural system. When they investigate government and politics, economics and the evolution of societies, or highway and sewage systems, they are studying human-created systems. These investigations help students understand the complexity of systems and the links between them. Participants in the consultations on Bowen (and elsewhere) concurred that knowledge from a broad range of scientific disciplines contributes to a well-rounded understanding of environmental issues. However, they also stressed that there must be awareness that knowledge is not static and that theories can change. Knowledge from the sciences, economics, politics, law, and sociology were also viewed as vital to the study of complex systems and human interactions. Through studying cultural systems and global issues, students may begin to see the relationships between the environment and human rights, justice, race and gender equity. Other cultures in the world present diverse perspectives on ways of valuing and relating to natural and human-created environments. In developing a thorough understanding of systems, students can examine the origins and impact of their present worldview and analyze the implications of new information and changing societal values. Focus groups and working groups at the consultations then brainstormed ideas that would capture and describe the thematic notion of complexity. A partial list of these concepts for student consideration and discussion are included here: – an ecosystem, or a social system, is caused by the collective interactions of individual parts that require holistic investigation; – individual components serve unique functions in all complex systems. The loss or degradation of any single component may cause a decline in the viability of the system; – the planet’s resources are finite. Humans are dependent on materials and energy supplied by the global ecosystem; – different cultures observe natural systems through various philosophical, technological, and social points of view. Throughout time, cultures have interacted with the environment in different ways; – the pace of technological change and the distribution of scarce resources can have a profound impact on society and the environment; and – the organization of societies in the past and present, and the laws that govern them, have implications for environmentally and socially sustainable development. 10


Principle Two: Aesthetics (Environmental Awareness Enables Students to Develop an Aesthetic Appreciation) The principle of aesthetics as an organizing theme for environmental topics was also a fairly widely held idea in the consultations on Bowen and many participants believed this to be the most evocative principle with which to capture students interest in environment. Aesthetic appreciation can span a number of areas of practice including: art education (Blandy & Hoffman, 1993; Carpenter & Tavin, 2010); ecological art (Song, 2009); architecture (Upitis, 2007); and music (Turner & Freedman, 2004). In short, aesthetics deals with beauty, artistic expression, and our physiological responses to these. Participants concurred that environmental learning helps students to develop an aesthetic sense of respect and appreciation for the natural world through study, physical challenges, and other experiences in nature. An aesthetic appreciation, along with other understandings of nature, can encourage students to learn and act to protect and sustain the environment, and can also contribute to self-awareness and personal fulfillment. Further, participants acknowledged that outdoor studies and activities in physical or outdoor education can help develop students aesthetic appreciation. Aesthetics also was regarded as having an internalized component strongly related to what we personally value in nature. Participants concurred that aesthetic values may also explore explicit value shifts, such as those found when examining a natural setting for the development of a park or a residential development. The idea that nature has fundamental worth from an aesthetic point of view is one example of a value shift. Different types of value shifts are also possible in environmental aesthetics and environmental criticism in the arts; however, these often concentrate on cultural expressions of our interaction with nature. Finally, aesthetic experiences were seen as providing insight and enrichment to human interactions with the environment by allowing students to: develop an understanding of the aesthetic qualities that exist in the environment; develop skills and sensitivity to the application of aesthetic criteria when considering environmental matters; and develop the ability to formulate, apply, and communicate personal aesthetic criteria for assessing environmental issues. Focus groups and working groups at the consultations brainstormed ideas that would capture and describe the thematic notion of aesthetics. A partial list of these concepts for student consideration and discussion are included here: – direct experiences in natural surroundings provide opportunities to develop respect and appreciation for living and non-living things; – aesthetic appreciation encourages a sense of the uniqueness and beauty of the planet; – appreciation of nature is an impetus for many forms of creative expression; – individuals and cultures vary in the degree to which they value nature for its own sake and for its ability to serve human needs; 11

D. B. ZANDVLIET

– lifestyles, arts, and religions can be indicators of their perception of, and relationship with, their environment; and – respect for the land and all living things can encourage the maintenance of a healthy environment, providing benefits for everyone. Principle Three: Responsibility (Human Decisions and Actions have Environmental Consequences) The notion of responsibility is discussed extensively in environmental education literature (see for example Lewis, Mansfield & Baudains, 2008; Palmberg & Kuru, 2000; Short, 2010). However, the principle of responsibility as an organizing theme for environmental learning was somewhat contested during our consultations as groups explored the relationship between two related principles explored in the original framework: the consequences of action; and second, what constitutes responsible action. A consensus eventually emerged in our work that determined that the two concepts were closely related conceptually, but differed mainly in the temporal dimension. As such the two concepts were eventually combined into the larger principle of responsibility. Participants on Bowen related that studies about environmental responsibility provided opportunities for students to explore the environmental consequences of actions or decisions made at personal, community, societal, and global levels. Studies in geography, history, technology, and other arts and sciences can help students develop awareness of diverse cultural perceptions and interpretations. Further, participants concurred that through the study of human impacts on the environment, students can explore and develop positive approaches to long-range environmental concerns. Exploring and addressing global issues, such as militarism and war, the inequitable distribution of wealth and resources, food production, and transportation are essential to establishing a sustainable society. Also, a focus on decisions or actions in other cultures was seen as contributing to questions about how to live more sustainably in the Bowen Island or wider BC context. In the more immediate temporal sense, responsible action was seen by participants as being integral to, and a consequence of, environmental learning. Participants clarified that in light of what we know about past decisions around environmental issues, it is vital for students to decide what now constitutes responsible action, and then begin to practice it. Focus groups at the consultations brainstormed ideas that would capture and describe the thematic notion of responsibility. The concepts for consideration and discussion include: – the preservation of viable ecosystems is a basic value for every society; – First Nations practice of Traditional Ecological Knowledge can illustrate alternative views on how humans have interacted with their environments; – A consideration of all species for future generations is essential to preserve the integrity of the ecosphere; 12


– the language used by a culture unconsciously reproduces its moral values; – some human actions have significant and cumulative impacts on the environment; and – growth in population and resource consumption is exponential. Most societies produce wastes, consume resources, and add to their population at rates that cannot be sustained. – there are consequences and responsibilities for any action or inaction; – actions are influenced by belief systems and personal limitations, physical and cultural; – responsible action requires an understanding of factors influencing environment and those that regulate or govern our interaction with it. This includes law, government, politics, civics, decision makers, and those who influence them. Principle Four: Ethics (The Study of the Environment Enables Students to Develop an Environmental Ethic) The principle of ethics as an organizing theme for environmental learning was the most widely held idea in the breadth of our consultations on Bowen Island (and elsewhere) and many participants believed this to be the overarching principle for the work of environmental educators (see Bowers, 2009; Jickling, 2004). Participants also saw the principle of environmental ethics as one closely related to that of responsibility. Focus groups concurred that the practice of supporting students to take responsible action would ultimately require an examination of values and that environmental learning should also provide opportunities for students to question the cultural assumptions that lead to social conflict and environmental crises. Participants concurred that this ‘questioning’ process can create new visions and possibilities, but stressed that students need to examine how issues and crises are often the result of our current value systems. Participants also concurred that students should be encouraged to make decisions based on an understanding of the issues, as well as their own values and the values of community members. Knowledge of philosophical and critical thinking tools, such as perspective analysis, argument analysis, and message deconstruction, would also provide a means to assist with the decision-making process and other disciplines. Some issues for an analysis of values could include: economic growth and sustainable development; land ownership; business ethics; consumption patterns and lifestyles; technological change; pollution; violence in society; the role of the media; and population control. Focus groups at the consultations brainstormed ideas that would capture and describe the thematic notion of environmental ethics. The ideas/concepts for consideration include: – actions are generated by belief systems or sets of values; – value systems can change over time; 13

D. B. ZANDVLIET

– the formation of values occurs in stages; – the choice of what action to take is a question of ethics and of cultural, religious, and/or personal values; – human quality of life is influenced by environmental quality; – humans must recognize their responsibility to future generations; – societal attitudes toward environment are influenced by media coverage – and perspectives; and – print and electronic media have commercial implications and contain ideological and value messages that have social and political implications. In our consultations on Bowen Island for example, it became evident that the development of an environmental ethic in students is perhaps the culminating goal for environmental learning in all of its forms and that this would require an understanding of all of the previous forms of environmental concepts described in our work (complexity, aesthetics and responsibility). Understanding the complexity of their daily interactions, while also recognizing the aesthetics of their environment, will help students take active responsibility in moving toward change. When this happens, an environmental ethic can become part of the moral fiber of their identities. CONCLUSIONS

In this first chapter, I have attempted to honor the diverse voices and methods that inform environmental learning across BC communities while also highlighting the views of Bowen Island educators who were themselves a key part of a much broader consultative process. Known as participatory action research (or PAR), this inquiry enabled a study that placed research capabilities into the hands of our “educator-subjects” and provided educators with research tools with which they could generate knowledge for themselves. The focus and working groups conducted on Bowen Island and throughout the province included broad representation from various stakeholder groups including the British Columbia Ministry of Education, schools, informal education organizations, university students and academics. The knowledge we created in this way was empowering for the educators involved and has influenced much of the other work that will be described in other chapters in this book. The study results can, and are being transformed by these participants into actions that directly benefit their communities and the practices of teaching and learning in and around classrooms throughout BC. This curriculum document that resulted from our extensive “working group” consultations describes how environmental education is a way of understanding environments, and how humans participate in and influence these environments. In using the term ‘environmental learning’, the research refers to a range of approaches to environmental issues, including environmental education, ecological education and education for sustainable development. All of these forms aim to integrate concepts and principles of the sciences and social sciences under a single 14


interdisciplinary framework. In the ecological view, students may come to know and understand more deeply that all human environments, societies, or cultures are all deeply dependent on natural systems, both for their development and, ultimately, their survival. In this framework, we present numerous principles for organizing teaching practices related to environmental concepts. Further, the results of our study communicate important principles for environmental learning. These are organized into two areas: first, the widely supported principles for the teaching and learning of direct experience, critical reflection and negotiation are related and described in the form of an experiential learning cycle; second, organizing principles for environmental concepts are summarized and described. These principles demonstrate the interdisciplinary nature of environmental concepts, while showing a progression in the development of ideas that lead towards deeper engagement with learning in all of its forms. Students are assisted by the organizers of complexity, aesthetics, responsibility and ethics (or CARE) to guide their developing ideas about the environment as they appear in mandated government curriculum. The process described in this chapter produced a revised framework for environmental learning adopted by the BC Ministry of Education and has guided curriculum and resource development. This demonstrates clearly how educational research when it is participatory and action oriented in nature, can usefully inform educational policy. Our work has further re-energized teacher practices around environmental learning and these ideas are widely accessible to all educators through the BC Ministry of Education’s website and associated green school initiatives. Most importantly, environmental learning forms a solid foundation for the work undertaken at the Bowen Island Community School. REFERENCES Blandy, D., & Hoffman, E. (1993). Toward an art education of place. Studies in Art Education, 35(1), 22–33. Bowers, C. (1998). Changing the dominant cultural perspective in education. In G.A Smith, & D.R Williams, (Eds.), Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture and the environment (pp. 161–178). Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. Bowers, C. (2009). Educating for a revitalization of the cultural commons Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 14(1), 196–200. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (1995). Environmental concepts in the classroom. Victoria, BC: Queens Printer. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2007). Environmental learning and experience. Retrieved from: http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/environment_ed/ Capra, F. (1996). The web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems. New York, NY: Anchor Books. Carasco, J., Clair, N., & Kanyike, L. (2001). Enhancing dialogue among researchers, policy makers, and community members in Uganda: Complexities, possibilities, and persistent questions. Comparative Education Review, 45(2), 257–279. Carpenter, B.S., & Tavin, K.M. (2010). Drawing (past, present, and future) together: A (graphic) look at the reconceptualization of art education. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education, 51(4), 327–352. 15

D. B. ZANDVLIET Delgado Diaz, C.J. (2002). Complexity and environmental education. Emergence, 4(1/2), 53–62. Gaventa, J. (1988). Participatory research in North America. Convergence, 21(2/3), 19–27. Gonzalez-Gaudiano, E. (2001). Complexity in environmental education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 33(2), 153–166. Government of Canada (2002), A framework for environmental learning and sustainability in Canada. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada. Gruenewald, D. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3–12. Hart, P., Jickling, B., & Kool, R. (1999). Starting points: Questions of quality in environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 4, 104–124. Hutchison, D. (1998). Growing up green: Education for ecological renewal. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Hutchinson, D. (2004). A natural History of Place in Education. New York: Teachers College Press. IUCN, UNEP and WWF (1991). Caring for the earth: A strategy for sustainable living. London: Earthscan. Jickling, B. (2004). Making ethics an everyday activity: How can we reduce the barriers? Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 11–26. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1994). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin (Ed.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 567–605). New York: Sage. Knapp, C. (2005). The “I – Thou” relationship, place-based education, and Aldo Leopold. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(3), 277–285. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Lewis, E., Mansfield, C., & Baudains, C. (2008). Getting down and dirty: Values in education for sustainability. Issues in Educational Research, 18(2), 138–155. Luckman, C. (1996). Defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 19(1), 6–7. Markey, S., Halseth, G., & Manson D. (2009). Contradictions in hinterland development: Challenging the local development ideal in Northern British Columbia. Community Development Journal, 44(2), 209–229. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (1999). Guidelines for environmental education in New Zealand Schools. Retrieved from http://efs.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-resources-and-tools/EnvironmentalEducation-Guidelines NAAEE (2004). Excellence in environmental education: Guidelines for learning (K-12). Rock Spring, GA: North American Association for Environmental Education. Orr, D. (1992). Ecological literacy. Albany: State University of New York Press. Orr. D. (1994). Earth in mind. Washington, DC: Island Press. Palmberg, I.E., & Kuru, J. (2000). Outdoor activities as a basis for environmental responsibility. Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 32–36. Palmer, P.J. (1999). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sammel, A., & Zandvliet, D.B. (2003). Science reform or science conform: Problematic epistemological assumptions with/in Canadian science reform efforts. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(4), 513–520. Sauve, L. (2005). Currents in environmental education: Mapping a complex and evolving pedagogical field. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 10(1), 11–37. Selener, D. (1997). Participatory action research and social change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Shapiro, B. (1994). What children bring to light: A constructivist perspective on children’s learning in science. New York, NY : Teachers’ College Press. Short, P.C. (2010). Responsible environmental action: Its role and status in environmental education and environmental quality. Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 7–21. Sitarz, D., (Ed.) (1993) Agenda 21; The Earth Summit strategy to save our planet Boulder, CO: Earth Press.

16

ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING Smith, G.A., & Williams, D.R. (1998). Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture and the environment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Sobel, D. (1993). Children’s special places. Tuscon, AZ: Zephyr Press. Sobel, D. (1999). Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. Great Barrington, MA: Orion Society. Song, Y.I.K. (2009) Community participatory ecological wrt and education International Journal of Art & Design Education, 28(1), 4–13. Suave, L. (2005). Currents in environmental education: mapping a complex and evolving pedagogical field. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, 11–37. Thomashow, M. (1996). Ecological identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Turner, K., & Freedman, B. (2004) Music and environmental studies. Journal of Environmental Education, 36(1), 45–52. UNESCO. (2003). United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014). framework for a draft international implementation scheme. Retrieved from unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0013/001311/131163e.pdf World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. United Nations. (1997). The Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php United Nations. (2002). Report of the world summit on sustainable development. Retrieved from http://daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/6013275.38490295.html United Nations. (2009). UN millennium development goals. Retrieved from http://www.endpoverty2015. org/goals Upitis, R. (2007). Four strong schools: Developing a sense of place through school architecture. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 8(1), 1–16. Woodhouse, J., & Knapp, C. (2000). Place-based curriculum and instruction. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.

AFFILIATION

David B. Zandvliet Simon Fraser University

17

CARLOS G.A. ORMOND

2. PLACE-BASED EDUCATION IN PRACTICE

“If you don’t know where you are, you don’t know who you are.” –Wendell Berry INTRODUCTION

The term place-based education appears to have been coined in North America in the late 1980s, although elements of its practice have been in existence for quite some time (Smith, 2002; van Eijck, 2010). The basic premise, and one of the most widely quoted definitions, of this educational approach is: The process of using local community and environment as a starting point to teach concepts in language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, and other subjects across the curriculum. Emphasizing hands-on, real-world learning experiences, this approach to education increases academic achievement, helps students develop stronger ties to their community, enhances students’ appreciation for the natural world, and creates a heightened commitment to serving as active contributing citizens. Community vitality and environmental quality are improved through the active engagement of local citizens, community organizations, and environmental resources in the life of the school. (Sobel, 2004, p. 7) Unlike other pedagogies, place-based education does not have its own theoretical tradition. Rather it shares “practices and purposes… to experiential learning, contextual learning, problem-based learning, constructivism, outdoor education, indigenous education, environmental and ecological education, bioregional education, democratic education, multicultural education, community-based education, critical pedagogy… as well as other approaches that are concerned with context and the value of learning from and nurturing specific places, communities, or regions” (Gruenewald, 2003, p. 3). While composed of elements belonging to the traditions noted here, place-based education ‘in practice’ can be traced to the work done in the late 1980s by communitybased projects led by, The Foxfire Fund, The Rural School and Community Trust, the Orion Society and the Education for Sustainability movement (Smith 2002; Powers, 2004). The work by David Sobel and the Orion Society (1990; 1993; 1996; 2004) has done much to develop the concept of place-based education, especially in North America. D. Zandvliet (Ed.), The Ecology of School, 19–28. © 2013 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

C. G. A. ORMOND

The focus of this chapter is on place-based education, and its apparent consolidation of a variety of progressive pedagogies, in particular experiential learning, critical pedagogy and constructivism. I begin by offering an introduction to experiential learning through the work of John Dewey and David Kolb. I then explore the links between experiential learning with critical pedagogy and constructivism. Next, a discussion is had on the concept of sense of place and its argued influence in human development, in addition to the development of stewardship in a community. Following that, how place-based education looks like in practice is presented, ending with an overview of what to expect in the chapters to come and how place-based education takes form in this place. EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

The contemporary theory of experiential learning owes its identity to a number of revered twentieth century social scientists. Of those, the work of two especially has given form to the current understanding of experiential learning, John Dewey and David Kolb (Kraft, 1995). The first was John Dewey (1938/1997) and his theory of experience. While unofficially spearheading the progressive education movement in the early twentieth century, Dewey was also quite critical on the movement itself. One of Dewey’s strongest criticisms of the progressive education movement was that it argued for students to have complete freedom of their learning. While Dewey was in favour of re-visioning the teacher-student roles in the classroom, he believed that “[a] balance needed to be struck, between the freedom of individuals and the educative structure of the learning environment” (Neil, 2008, p. 21). The theory of experience created by Dewey aimed to create this balance between a student needing both freedom and direction. Neil (2008) eloquently writes that “according to Dewey, experiences have the capacity to be educative, but only under certain conditions; otherwise experiences can be mis-educative” (p. 21). Dewey theorized that there are two main sources for a student’s experiences: (a) a student’s accumulated past experiences (continuity); and (b) the interaction between past experiences and the present situation (interaction) (Neil, 2008, p. 21). An individual’s past experiences combine to uniquely affect the individual’s current and future experiences. The other individual who has arguably been one of experiential learning’s most contemporary influences is David Kolb (1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). In his book Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, Kolb (1984) presented his design of the experiential learning cycle. In Kolb’s eye, experiential learning was a combination of Dewey’s philosophical pragmatism, Lewin’s social psychology, and Piaget’s cognitive-developmental genetic epistemology (Kolb, 1984). Within the field of experiential learning Kolb and Kolb (2005, p. 194) state that there exists six common epistemologies: 1. Learning is best conceived as a process, not in terms of outcomes 2. All learning is relearning 20

PLACE-BASED EDUCATION IN PRACTICE

3. Learning requires resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed modes of adaption to the world. 4. Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the world. 5. Learning results from synergetic transactions between the person and the environment. 6. Learning is the process of creating knowledge. Essentially, these six propositions outline what many have termed the learn by doing method. According to this orientation, knowledge becomes practical in a number of ways. Kolb (1984), building upon the ideas of those aforementioned pioneering scholars, created the Experiential Learning Model which is composed of four elements: direct experience, critical reflection, conceptualization and experimentation. Kolb theorized that the learning process starts off with a) an individual performing an action and then witnessing the effects of that action; b) then to understand the effects of that action; c) next to understand the action itself; and d) the last step is to modify the action when confronting a new situation. This model thus defines learning as “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience[;] [k]nowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 41). CRITICAL PEDAGOGY

In his article The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place (2003), Gruenewald argued that besides basing education in the local, it should also be asking questions of it... With justice and equality in mind, critical pedagogy aims to transform society and empower the powerless. While curricula similar to this philosophy have been seen throughout human history, critical educational theory finds its true roots in Europe prior to World War II at the Frankfurt School of critical theory (McLaren, 1998). Critical pedagogy is founded on the the idea that teachers need to understand the role that schools have in addressing the link between knowledge and power, and how that can give rise to an active and critical citizen. It argues that on an ethical level, critical reasoning – and self and social empowerment—should be a priority in our schools. Currently, critical pedagogy aims to confront and challenge what we take for granted in education as well as in our dominant culture. Our subjective views of the environment are not solely constructed from within ourselves but affected by convincing social forces. What this means is that no one individual or group is completely unaffected by outside social influences, and in order to understand and uncover their interests we must critically analyze why they hold this position (Palmer and Birch, 2005). Bowers (2005) strongly suggests that the tool of critical reflection, that which is so highly regarded in critical pedagogy, has enormous wealth to environmental learning. Critical reflection can allow us to recognize which 21

C. G. A. ORMOND

self-sufficient (i.e. sustainable) cultural practices need to remain and highlighted to help us to evolve and adapt the globalized Western-influenced society to a sustainable and self-preserving one. CONSTRUCTIVISM

The instructive method of constructivism is the preferred approach with both place-based education (Gruenewald, 2003) as well as with critical pedagogy (Bowers, 2005). At its core, constructivism is based on the current psychological understanding of the creation of cognitive schema in humans. Although slight differences do exist, constructivism, encourages a learning environment where the learner be allowed to work independently so that they may construct their own worldview. Constructivism, and place-based education approaches insist that the learner must take an “active role in learning and building factual knowledge to improve investigation and critical thinking skills” (Klein & Merritt, 1994, p. 13). and one that agrees with the Piagetian theory that knowledge is not transmitted by the educator but constructed by the learner (Boudourides 2003). It is a belief that the acquisition of knowledge comes from a change in a student’s understanding rather than simply an increase in information taken to be fact (Ballantyne & Packer, 1996). SENSE OF PLACE

Much of Sobel’s (1990; 1993; 1996; 2004) research focused on bringing attention to the important link between human developmental (eg. middle childhood) and a connection to the natural world. Sobel’s work, and that of others (Evernden, 1978; 1992; Chawla, 1986), have referenced Edith Cobb and her book The Ecology of Imagination in Childhood (1959) as an influential text in understanding children’s connection to the natural world. While Cobb’s (1959) research methods have come into question, she is recognized for being one of the first to investigate thoroughly “an elusively intangible but perhaps profoundly formative aspect of childhood: our early sense of the surrounding physical world” (Chawla, 1986, p. 34). What Cobb found was: the study of the child in nature, culture, and society (evolution of social attitudes toward childhood into present realization of its importance in everyone’s life history) reveals that this is a special period, the little-understood, prepubertal, halcyon, middle age of childhood, approximately from five or six to eleven or twelve- between the strivings of animal infancy and the storms of adolescencewhen the natural world is experienced in some highly evocative way, producing in the child a sense of some profound continuity with natural processes and presenting overt evidence of a biological basis of intuition (Cobb, 1959, p. 538) 22


Sobel (1990) credits his roots of ‘place’ to Gussow’s (1972) definition: “a piece of the environment that has been claimed by feelings”. Gussow’s (1972) book, A Sense of Place: The artist and the American land, emphasized and argued his belief in the importance of the environment and nature to art. An artist by training, Gussow in the mid 1960s was a pioneer in bringing together art and conservation: establishing the first ever Artists in Residence Parks Program with the U.S. National Park Service. A few years before his passing, Gussow (1991) shared these comments on place: The physical landscape [i.e. place] is not simply a backdrop to human events, but the stage on which we live. We are not in an audience watching a drama unfold, we are on the stage as players. The events of life take place somewhere, and that somewhere, where ever it is, affects the perception of the event. The visual landscape gives shape to our character, the objects and the forms in the landscape influence our actions, guide our choices, shape our values, restrict or enhance our freedom, determine where and with what quality we will mix with each other. The landscape in a sense molds our dreams. It locates our fantasies. The landscape in my view is never neutral, it is shaping us even as we shape it.(Stewart, 2003, p. 20) Sobel’s (1990;1993) research on adult memories of childhood spaces goes on to support this. Sobel (1990, p. 8) has found that “special childhood spaces hold meaning throughout some adult’s lives[;] special places become places of repose and sure to return to- in actuality and in the mind’s eye.” PLACE-ATTACHMENT AND STEWARDSHIP

The human connection to place that Sobel and others speak of, was investigated by Vaske and Kobrin (2001). Their research argues that environmental education or work programs that take part in local natural settings promote environmental stewardship in that said participant’s community. This comes about through the development of place attachment. Place attachment is the interplay of place dependence and place identity. Place identity is an emotional attachment or psychological investment with a setting that has resulted from numerous visits to that setting; while place dependence is a functional attachment whereby a particular setting, over time, has become an important resource for an individual to provide necessary amenities for specific activities. PLACE-BASED EDUCATION IN PRACTICE

One of the popular appeals of place-based education is the ability it has “to adapt to unique characteristics in particular places” (Smith, 2002, p. 584). This trait of placebased education makes it a strong tool to “overcome the disjuncture between school and children’s lives that is found in many classrooms” (Smith, 2002, p. 585). Smith (2002, p. 586) point out that this disjuncture was also noted in the late nineteenth 23

C. G. A. ORMOND

century by Dewey (1900) in his book The School and Society based upon his work at the University of Chicago Lab School: From the standpoint of the child, the great waste in the school comes from his inability to utilize the experiences he gets outside the school in any complete and free way with the school itself; while, on the other hand, he is unable to apply in daily life what he is learning at school. That is the isolation of the school, its isolation of life. When the child gets into the schoolroom he has to put out his mind a large part of the ideas, interests, and activities that predominate in his home and neighbourhood. So the school, being able to utilize this everyday experience, sets painfully to work, on another tack and by a variety of means, to arouse in the child an interest in school studies. Dewey believed the issue lay in the fact that children are not interested in ideas about phenomena but rather drawn to the actual phenomena. Smith (2002) adds that “valuable knowledge for most children is knowledge that is directly related to their own social reality, knowledge that will allow them to engage in activities that are of service to and valued by those they love and respect” (p. 585). Smith (2002), along with Woodhouse and Knapp (2000) have both written on the diversity found within place-based education. Woodhouse and Knapp (2000, p. 1) claim that place-based education approaches have the following common characteristics: 1. The curriculum content is multidisciplinary; 2. The curriculum goals are broader than just “learn to earn;” and 3. The curriculum integrates self, others, and place and includes ecological, economic, multigenerational, and multicultural dimensions. Smith (2002, p. 593) grouped the variety of place-based education forms into five approaches: 1. Surrounding phenomena are the foundation for curriculum development, 2. An emphasis on students becoming the creators of knowledge rather than only consumers of knowledge created by others, 3. Students’ questions and concerns play central roles in determining what is studied, 4. Teachers act primarily as co-learners and “brokers” of community resources and learning possibilities, 5. The walls between the community and school buildings are crossed frequently, and 6. Student work is assessed based on its contributions to community wellbeing and sustainability. Lastly, Smith (2002), while acknowledging place-education does take different forms in each community, identifies five thematic patterns from his review of the field: 1. Cultural studies: Where students use local cultural or historical phenomena as the guiding focus. Collecting community oral histories and written stories are only 24


2. 3.

4.

5.

two examples of this approach. (These activities also have been labelled cultural journalism, experiential or outdoor education.) Nature studies: Where students observe wildlife, conduct water-quality tests, or restore riparian areas. (These activities also have been labelled nature study, conservation, outdoor, or environmental education.) Real-world problem solving: Where students and teachers identify community issues and problems, study them, and propose possible solutions. Sometimes they even follow up their research by implementing the needed changes. (These activities also have been called conservation or environmental education). Internships and entrepreneurial opportunities: Where students explore local career opportunities and partner with businesses to expand their knowledge of economics and become more involved in community life. (These activities also have been labelled service-learning, experiential or outdoor education.) Induction into community: A more complete immersion into community life in which students were drawn into several decision-making activities. They assumed active roles as participants at town meetings, chambers of commerce, city councils, or environmental protection agencies. They might also conduct community surveys and make public announcements based on those findings. (These activities also have been labelled service learning, environmental, or experiential education.). (Knapp, 2005, p. 280)

Interestingly, Knapp (2005) makes the comment that “all five patterns form a conceptual umbrella commonly called experiential learning, because they are situated in the context of community life and involve active student engagement” (p. 280). PLACE-BASED EDUCATION ON BOWEN ISLAND

The remaining chapters in this book give a variety of different perspectives on the learning environment at the Bowen Island Community School. They include the perspectives of academics, graduate students, teachers and administrators. Together, these complete a more ecological view of the learning environment. The next chapter in this volume (Chapter three) documents and describes the school’s investigation into how ecological literacy can become a core educational standard in schools. The authors begin with a brief description of Bowen Island’s history and community then reviews the place-based programs, events, and activities that contributed to the school’s unique learning environment. They include with a summary of the school’s curriculum developments and acknowledge the importance these have for the development of ecological literacy programming in other places and schools. Chapter four captures the stories of three teachers who stood out as leaders in our place-based, research project and, through their innovation, passion, and 25

C. G. A. ORMOND

commitment, provided valuable insight into the power of place-based education on Bowen Island. The narrative is both phenomenological and ethnographic: by weaving together each teacher’s personal account of the project and combining them with the author’s own recollection of events, the chapter captures the energy and enthusiasm that these individuals shared during the research project. Chapter five borrows from a philosophical tradition: prescribing a master plan of how place based education should function. The author focuses on Bowen Island as one place filled with many stories of how it can function. The author explores how she was invited by several teachers to learn and explore with their classes as they pursued place-based education. She deduces that the concepts used would work well in rural or urban spaces then reflects on two tools that the teachers use to track their students into place and wonder: journaling and questing. Chapter six describes the perspectives of three principals of the Bowen Island Community School during the years 2004–2011. The author examines their beliefs on the moral purposes of schooling and their role in setting and sustaining this purpose, particularly in relation to what has been termed “character education” or social responsibility and their synergy with the goals of environmental education. This examination reveals some common beliefs about the moral purpose of education and the leadership tactics that stem from these that promote environmental learning at Bowen and presumably at other elementary schools. Chapter seven describes another facet of the research project that explored how school design mediates students’ relationships with the natural world, with a view to understand from students’ perspectives how school architecture influences their ideas about the world they live in, especially their ideas about the natural world. The author used an arts-based inquiry to identify aspects of the immediate Bowen Island Community School building and grounds that allowed students to interact with the natural world and then analyzed why these places were (or were not) important to students. The final chapter (eight) relates that another important project outcome was the development of action research with teachers using a specifically adapted survey (code named SMILES) to aid teachers in gauging and improving the learning environment in their classrooms. To access information about students’ perceptions of the learning environment, an instrument for assessing place-based educational settings was adapted and piloted in this study. The objective was first to determine factors important to learning and to influence the unique type of environments fostered in place-based education programs. And second, whether these constructs could be reliably and validly measured in the unique Bowen Island context. REFERENCES Ballantyne R.R., & Packer, J.M. (1996). Teaching and learning in environmental education: Developing environmental conceptions. Journal of Environmental Education, 27(2), 25–33.

26

PLACE-BASED EDUCATION IN PRACTICE Boudourides, M.A. (2003). Constructivism, education, science and technology. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29(3). Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/83 Bowers, C.A. (2005). How Peter McLaren and Donna Houston, and other “Green” Marxists contribute to the globalization of the West’s industrial culture. Educational Studies, 37(2), 185–195. Chawla, L. (1986). The ecology of environmental memory. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 3(4), 34–42. Cobb, E. (1959). The ecology of imagination in childhood. Daedalus, 88, 537–548. Dewey, J. (1900). The School and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and education. New York: Touchstone. Evernden, N. (1978). Beyond ecology: Self, place, & the pathetic fallacy. The North American Review, 263(4), 16–20. Gruenewald, D. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher 32(4), 3–12. Gussow, A. (1972). A sense of place: the artist and the American land. San Francisco: Friends of the Earth. Gussow, A. (1991). A sense of place: The earth as home and habitat. [Lecture (Audio tape)], Fifth Richard Jones Memorial Lecture, University of Tasmania. Hobart: Centre for Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania. Joplin, L. (1981). On defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 4(1), 17–20. Klein, E.S., & Merritt, E. (1994) Environmental Education as a model of constructive teaching. Journal of Environmental Education, 25(3), 14–21. Knapp, C.E. (2005). The “I – thou” relationship, place-based education, and Aldo Leopold. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(3), 277–285. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kolb, A.Y., & Kolb, D.A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(2), 193–212. Kraft, R.J. (1995). A century of experiential learning. In R.J. Kraft & J. Kielsmeier (Eds.), Experiential learning in schools and higher education (3rd ed.) (pp. xi–xiii). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Luckman, C. (1996). Defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 19(1), 6–7. McLaren, P. (1998). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in thefFoundations of education, Third Edition. New York: Longman. Neill, J.T. (2008). Enhancing life effectiveness: The impacts of outdoor education programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Education, University of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia. Palmer, J.A., & Birch, J.C. (2005).Changing academic perspectives in education. In E. Johnson, E. & M. Mappin (Eds.) Environmental education and advocacy: changing perspectives of ecology and education, (pp. 1–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Phillips, D.C, (2000). An opinionated account of the contructivist landscape. In, D.C. Phllips (Ed.) Constructivisn in Education. (pp. 1–16). Chicago, Ill.: The National Society for the Study of Education. Powers, A. (2004). An evaluation of four place-based education programs. Journal of Environmental Education, 35(4), 17–34. Stewart, A. (2003). Reinvigorating our love of our home range: Exploring the connections between sense of place and outdoor education. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 7(2), 17–24. Smith, G. (2002). Place-based education: Learning to be where we are. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(April), 548–594. Smith, G. (2007). Place-based education: Breaking through the constraining regularities of public school. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 189–207. Sobel, D. (1990). A place in the world: Adults’ memories of childhood’s special places. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 7(4), 5–12. Sobel, D. (1993). Children’s special places. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press. Sobel, D. (1996). Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. Nature Literacy Series No. 1. Great Barrington, MA: The Orion Society. Sobel, David (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms & communities. Nature Literacy Series No. 4. Great Barrington, MA: Orion.

27

C. G. A. ORMOND Vaske, J.J., & Kobrin, K.C. (2001). Place attachment and environmentally responsible behaviour. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 16–21. Van Eijck, M. (2010). Place-based (science) education: Something is happening here. In D.J. Tippins, M.P. Mueller, M.V. van Eijck & J.D. Adams (Eds.). Cultural studies and environmentalism: the confluence of ecojustice, place-based (science) education, and indigenous knowledge systems. (pp. 187–192). Dordrecht: Springer.

AFFILIATION

Carlos G. A. Ormond Simon Fraser University

28