The 'Environmentally Educated Teacher': an exploration of the implications of UNESCO-UNEP's ideas

This article was downloaded by: [The University Of Melbourne Libraries]On: 27 April 2013, At: 02:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Education ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceer20

The Environmentally EducatedTeacher: an exploration of theimplications of UNESCOUNEP'sideas for preservice teachereducation programmesChristopher R. Oulton a & William A. H. Scott aa University of Bath, UKVersion of record first published: 28 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Christopher R. Oulton & William A. H. Scott (1995): The EnvironmentallyEducated Teacher: an exploration of the implications of UNESCOUNEP's ideas for preserviceteacher education programmes, Environmental Education Research, 1:2, 213-231

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350462950010207

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. Theaccuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independentlyverified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use ofthis material.

Environmental Education Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1995 213

The 'Environmentally Educated Teacher': anexploration of the implications ofUNESCO-UNEP's ideas for pre-serviceteacher education programmes

CHRISTOPHER R. OULTON & WILLIAM A. H. SCOTT University ofBath, UK

SUMMARY This paper draws on a range of recent curriculum development andresearch initiatives in order to consider what pre-service teacher education programmesmight, most effectively, be able to do to promote environmental education (EE) withinschools and, through them, within the wider community. The paper begins with acritique of UNESCO-UNEP's ideas on what constitutes an environmentally educatedteacher; it then goes on to examine a number of priorities for pre-service teachereducation, drawing in particular on a current work of a European Union initiative inthis field. The paper concludes by putting forward a series of organizational principleswhich are explicated in the form of course aims, programme elements and didacticscharacteristics which might inform the work of pre-service programmes.

Introduction

The School of Education in the University of Bath has been involved inenvironmental education (EE)[1] since the mid 1970s, when a subject didacticsgroup was formed as part of the one year Postgraduate Certificate in Education(PGCE) for intending secondary school teachers of science. The reason for thiswas a mixture of two factors. The first was an intense interest and optimismarising from national and international developments (for example, the 1971Swiss IUCN conference, which highlighted the importance of teacher educationto EE, and the 1975 international Belgrade workshop which went on to urge thatEE should form an obligatory part of pre and inservice teacher education).Tilbury (1992) and Fien (1994) give useful commentaries on this development.The second was hard-headed pragmatism arising from the advent of environ-

1350-4622/95/020213-19 1995 Journals Oxford Ltd

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3

214 C. R. Oulton & W. A. H. Scott

mentally focussed degree courses and the raised interest in secondary schools,where discrete examination courses in environmental science and environmentalstudies were being set up and where there was a shortage of suitably qualifiedteachers. The University saw itself as being able to establish a key role inproviding a means whereby environmentally educated graduates could train asteachers who would then, in their turn, contribute to EE in schools, thusestablishing a virtuous developmental cycle.

Within the School of Education, the past few years have seen three particularapproaches, each of which has had the purpose of broadening the impact of EEwithin the PGCE course outwards from science to other subject areas. The firstof these involved revisions to the course itself, ensuring that all trainees have anattempt to grapple with issues surrounding EE and have a chance to see how itmight affect their subject and how their subject might contribute to EE in schools.The second has been through staff development activities with colleagues in theSchool of Education who work on the PGCE course. This has involved workingwith The Worldwide Fund for Nature and its Thinking Futures programme, thereport of which (Champain and Inman, 1995) includes our analysis of themanagement of change issues which we encountered. The third has beenthrough work on the Environmental Education into Teacher Education inEurope (EEITE) programme sponsored by DG XI of the Commission of theEuropean Union (EU). This programme has involved work with fellow teachereducators in 11 of the 12 then EU countries, with the purpose of exploring theopportunities for collaborative programmes and initiatives. The first publicationof the programme (Brinkman & Scott, 1994) explores EE issues in each country,with a particular emphasis on preservice teacher education and a range ofcommon developmental issues. This programme continues.

The purpose of this paper is not to offer an evaluative commentary on any ofthese initiatives, but to draw on them in order to consider what pre-serviceprogrammes might, most effectively, be able to do to promote EE within schoolsand, through them, within the wider community. In order to effect this, thepaper begins with a critique of UNESCO-UNEP's (1990) ideas on what consti-tutes an environmentally educated teacher, which are a distillation of the ideasexpressed in a number of publications in UNESCO-UNEP's International En-vironmental Education Programme (see Appendix).

Environmentally Educated Teachers: the priority of prioritiesThe UNESCO-UNEP paper (Appendix; UNESCO-UNEP, 1990) begins bydefining the desired result of EE training programmes for teachers as: (i)foundation competences in professional education; (ii) competences in EE con-tent. Each of these will now be examined.

The Foundation Competences

If the EE dimension were to be removed from the text and each competence areataken in isolation, a number of statements would be largely unexceptional, e.g.

... apply a knowledge of educational philosophy to the selection ordevelopment of curricular programmes and strategies....

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3

Pre-service Teacher Education 215

... utilize current theories of moral reasoning in selecting, developingand implementing ... curricula....

utilize current theories of knowledge/attitude/behaviourrelationships in selecting, developing and implementing a balancedcurriculum ....... utilize current theories of learning in selecting, developing andimplementing curricular strategies ....... develop and use effective means of planning for instruction ....... effectively implement the following methodologies ... interdisci-plinarity, ... values clarification, games and simulations, case studyapproaches,....... effectively evaluate the results of ... curricula and methods in bothcognitive and affective domains

Competences such as these are, to varying extents, demonstrated daily (eitherconsciously or as part of an internalised professional thinking and developmentprocess) in schools by the teaching profession and in planning forums wherecurriculum issues are debated and decided. They also, again to varying degrees,are reassuringly familiar to tutors working in pre-service programmes. They do,after all, focus on large parts of the heartland of ideas and practice upon whichmost preservice courses would be built, even though the organization of suchprogrammes might differ considerably between institutions and across coun-tries. There would, for example, be differences in the extent to which particularcompetences were emphasised, but the focus on curriculum development basedaround learning theory and on classroom planning based on moral developmenttheory is likely to be common ground.

The other competences found in this section are much more EE-specific andare not likely to find a generic equivalent within programmes, e.g.

... apply the theory of transfer of learning in selecting, developing andimplementing curricular materials and strategies to ensure that learnedknowledge, attitudes and cognitive skills will be transferred to thelearner's choices and decision making concerning lifestyle and behav-iour....... effectively infuse EE curricular and methods into all disciplines towhich the teacher is assigned ...

unless topics such as 'health education', and to a lesser extent 'citizenship', arethe focus of study, where a broad equivalence to EE issues is found.

A Commentary on the Foundation Competences in Relation to Pre-service Courses

Although many of these competence statements are unexceptional as they stand,there are considerable problems with the list taken together. The problems aretwo-fold; the first relates to the wide-ranging scope of what is already containedwithin the list; the second to important areas which are not included.

Considering the nature of the list itself, problems stem from the length andorganisation of preservice courses which are available to prospective teachers.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


There are three issues here. Firstly, the amount of time which courses have tospend on subject didactics and pedagogical issues tends to be short. Secondly,the focus of such work tends to be on subject-specific issues, especially forsecondary training. Thirdly, EE tends not be part of the mainstream of activitywithin pre-service programmes; the EEITE project (Scott, 1994) has, for example,shown that there is immense diversity of practice and opportunity, even acrossthe small number of countries within the European Union. The problem with thelist is not its lack of desirability, but its lack of feasibility. It is a statement of along-term goal, which is overly ambitious given the present state of curriculumand course development and the low level of awareness within institutions ofthe need for such development.

Thus, the list is not helpful in showing colleagues see how such goals mightbe realized. This is the kernel of the second issue, that of essential elementsmissing from the list. These can be viewed in terms of: (i) an organizationalframework which would make such a list manageable for those who might becharged with its implementation; (ii) additional professional competences whichwould be required; (iii) the need for a rational and practical means whereby suchgoals might be realized. Each of these issues is discussed in detail below.

Organisational framework. Firstly, there is no indication within the UNESCO-UNEP text that the acquisition of such foundation competences might take aconsiderable time and that some aspects might be appropriate for pre-servicecourses and others for later, in-service support during induction programmes orin later continuing professional development. Indeed the use of the wordfoundation suggests, quite misleadingly, that all might be realisable throughpre-service courses; thus, such courses are given no limits for their ambitionlimits which might reduce the rather daunting nature of the competence state-ments and help persuade people that they are indeed manageable and, therefore,worth attempting.

Secondly, there is no discussion of whether and how differentiation might beapplied to ensure that teachers from particular phases of education, e.g. primary,secondary and tertiary, might need different approaches and goals; this applieswith particular force to competences in EE content (see later).

Thirdly, there is no sense in which the case is made for an over-archingrationale for these particular competences, the like of which might begin topersuade colleagues in pre-service programmes that this is worth doing and thatthey should be personally involved.

Additional competences. There is an implicit assumption in the UNESCO-UNEPtext that teachers act alone and have a large degree of influence or control overcurricula; it is far from clear that this is necessarily the case. It does follow,however, that there is a need to develop team-building and team-workingcompetences during pre-service programmes.

The UNESCO-UNEP text also contains the implicit assumption that condi-tions are right in schools for EE to develop and blossom and that all that isneeded is for a teacher to come along with the requisite competences. There isno suggestion that there might be considerable barriers to be overcome and thatserious management of change issues and processes are involved; thus there is

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


a need to introduce teachers and novice (student) teachers to the theory andpractice of the management of change in order to prepare them to take an activerole in the introduction and implementation of EE within schools. This needs, asWilke et al. (1987) note, to be an integral part of work on EE within pre-servicecourses.

Rational and practical issues. The largest question of all which remains unad-dressed, and which underpins the issue of how we get from where we arecurrently to the desired end, is that of who is going to do this? The UNESCO-UNEP paper does rather assume that the skills, resource and inclination re-quired to effect these goals are ready and waiting to be harnessed. In terms ofpre-service courses, this is simply not the case. Universities and schools are not,with a few notable exceptions, repositories of such expertise (For further details,see Williams, 1992, and the studies discussed by Fien, 1994). Tutor competenceneeds to be developed, but before this can happen, tutors need to become awarethat they need to do this; in other words, a vital step is a programme of activitywhereby experts work with teacher educators on exactly this area. Where is thestaff development for this to occur?

The Thinking Futures paper (Champain & Inman, 1995) discussed earlierrepresents one small (national) step in such a process; the EEITE project is anexample of an international one. Without the development of a wide-rangingprogramme of professional development aimed at teacher educators workingwith teachers in schools, experience suggests that no matter how desirable theends, pre-service courses will not become the vehicle whereby an environmen-tally focused approach becomes, as Law (1986) puts it 'the way we do thingsround here'. For a discussion of Law's ideas in the context of pre-service courses,the management of change and EE, see Bullock et al. (1995).

The same argument applies with equal force to those trained and equipped towork with teachers in an in-service capacity. In short, the UNESCO-UNEPpaper wishes some desirable ends, but not the means whereby they mightrealistically be achieved, and the problems with this are deeper than might atfirst appear. So unrealistic is the list that its impossibility and unattainabilityexacerbates the problem and creates resistance within the very groups whom wemight wish to influence. To someone taking a first faltering step, the winningpost of a marathon is not something that it is realistic to strive for. Thesedeficiencies are serious enough to turn what might have been the beginnings ofa strategy into mere wishful thinking. The problem is further compounded bydifficulties with UNESCO-UNEP's list of competences in EE Content. These arediscussed below.

Competences in EE Content

The UNESCO-UNEP paper sets these out at four levels: (1) ecological founda-tions; (2) conceptual awareness; (3) investigation and evaluation; (4) environ-mental action skills. Each of these will briefly be examined.

In respect of ecological foundations, the UNESCO-UNEP paper enjoins teachersto be able to:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


... apply a knowledge of ecological foundations to the analysis ofenvironmental issues and identify key ecological principles involved ...... apply a knowledge of ecological foundations to predict the ecologi-cal consequences of alternative solutions to environmental problems ...... be sufficiently literate in ecology to identify, select and interpretappropriate sources of scientific information in a continuing effort toinvestigate, evaluate and find solutions for environmental problems ...... communicate and apply in an educational context the major con-cepts in ecology ...

It is of course very desirable that all informed citizens should have a workingknowledge, conceptual understanding and appreciation of the significance ofecological concepts and their implications. However, it is far from clear that oureducation systems are so organised as to be able to achieve this, other than forthose who have had some specialised study in ecology during the later,advanced study, years of their formal education. Because of this, most non-biology specialists within the existing profession and such novice teachers intraining will not meet this requirement. Thus, were this injunction to beappropriate, some quite extensive pre and in-service changes would be required.However, three issues arise here.

Firstly, there is the simple point that we shall not be able to meet the goal ofan informed citizenry or capable teaching force without much greater specificityabout what the goals of such a programme might be. For example, what degreeof 'knowledge' is required?, which particular 'foundations'?, how extensive doesthe 'literacy' have to be?, which 'concepts'?, and so on.

The second point is more fundamental. This is to challenge the notion that youcan only contribute to EE if you actually have this (probably quite substantial)background in ecology. This will be somewhat surprising news to those teachersof humanities and languages who seem to be making such a contributionalready and whose contribution will be even more necessary as 'sustainableliving', with its strong emphasis on development education, supersedes EE. Inshort, this unspecific emphasis on ecology, with its attempt at marginalisationand disenfranchisement of the mass of the teaching profession, is unhelpful andcounter-productive. The point here is that teachers from different traditions anddisciplines need to work together in synergistic co-operation.

The third point follows on from this; it is that whilst ecology can provide aframe of reference within which a number of environmental issues can beconceptualised, to attempt to resolve the issues usually involves action in thesocial/political/economic sphere, not the ecological one. A simple example ofthis is the loss of habitat which renders species endangered. Ecology can help usunderstand what is happening, but a very different frame of reference is neededto help us define the actions which are needed.

In respect of conceptual awareness, this is couched in terms of a range of aspectsof professional competence which might have sat comfortably in the foundationcompetences, other than for the emphasis on ecology. Here, however, ecology isusually linked with culture, as in:

The effective environmentally educated teacher should be able to select,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


develop and implement curricular materials which will make learnersaware of:a wide variety of local, regional, national and international environ-mental issues and the ecological and cultural implications of theseissues

which does at least acknowledge the important role of the humanities specialistand reinforces the point made earlier about co-operation between teachers fromdifferent traditions and disciplines being of vital necessity. It also, however,reinforces the impression discussed in the section on foundation competences thatthe UNESCO-UNEP paper has been overly based on the notion that teacherswork alone and act independently. In this sense, it might be argued that theemphasis here ought to be on those professional competences which need to bedeveloped in all teachers, i.e. to

select, develop and implement curricular materialsrather than the current emphasis on the focus of the materials.

There is, however, a further difficulty. UNESCO-UNEP's wording is perhapsimprecise, but it does articulate an unsophisticated model of teaching/learningwhich many would not see as most effective practice when it comes to creatingbest conditions for learning to occur: '... curriculum materials which will makelearners aware of...' (our italics). The model is unsophisticated and inappropriateand we would support Robottom's (1989) critique of such technicist approaches.

In terms of investigation and evaluation and environmental action skills we finallyreach two sections which might be seen as being at the heart of the necessarycompetences of the effective environmentally educated teacher (from whateverdiscipline or background) and to which all other UNESCO-UNEP competences,foundation or ecological, might be seen subservient and very much secondary.

In other words, these two areas represent the ends to which an environmen-tally educated teacher might be aiming, with the other aspects of the UNESCO-UNEP list representing, in some measure, a set of means of getting there.

The effective environmentally educated teacher should be competent toinvestigate environmental issues and evaluate alternative solutions andto develop, select and implement curricular materials and strategieswhich will develop similar competencies in learners, including:the knowledge and skills needed to identify and investigate issues ...;the ability to analyze environmental issues and the associated value

perspectives ...;the ability to identify alternative solutions for discrete issues and the

value perspectives associated with these solutions;the ability to autonomously evaluate alternative solutions and associ-

ated value perspectives for discrete environmental issues ...;the ability to identify and clarify their own value positions related to

discrete environmental issues and their associated solutions;the ability to evaluate, clarify and change their own value positions

in the light of new information.Once again, it would seem that these are essentially professional competences

which can only be practised through co-operation between teachers who bringdifferent skills, approaches, emphases and assumptions to the task. It follows

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


that any professional development associated with the promotion of suchcompetences also ought to be multi-disciplined. This is particularly so given theneed to link all of this with the need for development education.

Thus, this aspect of the UNESCO-UNEP list is useful, but it is still limited inits usefulness. It suffers from the same problems that have been highlightedbefore, i.e. its lack of specificity and no notion of how such desirable andnecessary ends are to be achieved.

Beyond UNESCO-UNEP: other perspectivesIt will be clear from what has been written thus far that we believe theUNESCO-UNEP analysis to be helpful, but not particularly useful in its presentform. Our main objections are that it is: in some important regards, inappropriately conceptualized; not specific enough for progress to be made; too heavily focused on ecology, without acknowledging the vital role of other

disciplines; orientated to ends at the expense of means; lacking in reference to the management of change and the realities of how

innovation occurs; insufficiently differentiated between the needs of:

in-service and pre-service programmes;primary and secondary courses;fundamental and subsidiary priorities;

essentially locked (through no fault of its own) into a pre-UNCED view of theway forward.(United Nations Conference on Environment and Development [UNCED]. Forfurther details, see UNESCO-UNEP, 1992)Whilst any or all of these are in need of attention, we would wish to focus on

what we feel is the important question as far as pre-service programmes areconcerned, i.e. what limits do you realistically need to place on the focus andambitions of such programmes? What should the priorities be for pre-serviceprogrammes in terms of organisation, content and approach, given the limitedstate of EE within such programmes currently? (See Brinkman & Scott, 1994, andWilliams, 1992, for European Union and UK perspectives on this issue.)

Much has been written about the need for such programmes, by UNESCO-UNEP, by national and supranational governments and by a number of writersand researchers. Tilbury (1992), for example, has carefully, though at timesoverly optimistically, charted such calls over a 20 year period. Tilbury suggeststhat '... teacher training institutions in England and Wales will finally need torespond to international calls for the inclusion of ... (EE) ... into preservicetraining.' She bases this claim on the grounds that, because the UK governmenthas made it one minor aspect of the national accreditation process, it will notonly therefore happen, but actually happen in a way which would meet theperceived need. As Fien (1994) has pointed out, if it were that simple, it wouldbe happeningparticularly in highly centralised education systems.

Doubts have also been cast on the efficacy of a number of pre-serviceprogrammes at attaining desired goals; see, for example, Stapp et al. (1980) and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


Wilke et al. (1987), both of whose works are discussed by Tilbury. Less has beensaid, however, about the specifics of what might be provided, although Tilburyalso discusses a number of 'models' which have emerged in the 1980s and findsthem all wanting in some regard: including because they are overly content-fo-cused (UNESCO-UNEP, 1990), too specialized (Marcinkowski et al, 1990),insufficiently contextualized in the realities of the curriculum (Hungerford et ah,1988) or much too limited in their appreciation of the need for a strategicapproach to change within teacher education institutions (Stapp et ah, 1980). Fien(1994) discusses two initiatives in the Asia-Pacific region whose purpose is to'address the imperatives of education for sustainable living within pre-serviceteacher education' and goes into greater detail in an earlier paper (Fien, 1993)about 'the challenges to teacher education' whilst discussing the Environmentaland Development Education Project for Teacher Education.

Tilbury ends her paper by calling for a 'realistic model' which can match upthe complexities of EE with the intricacies of teacher education programmes andinstitutions and which is accompanied by '... sound strategies which will ensureits development ...' within pre-service teacher education.

Priorities for Pre-service Programmesa tentative analysisA Realistic Modelidentifying problemsWhat then might a 'realistic model' be? We have already noted that it will needto be limited in nature and scope, but it is worth stressing here why we feel thisis necessary.

Our experience of our own pre-service programmes and that of colleagueswithin the EEITE initiative suggests that any model needs to acknowledge thatin terms of the implementation of EE innovation, pre-service programmes tendto be characterized by the features set out in Fig. 1.

Such a list appears daunting and conditions for the implementation of EEwithin pre-service programmes are still far from perfect. But Law (1986) hasreminded us in his Critical Mass Theory of Innovation that this need not beproblematic. Law's theory has three propositions:

nothing is perfect and people who wait for perfect conditions to launch a newinitiative will wait forever;

there is always something that can be done; perfection is not necessarywhen enough of the most-needed things have

been done, change will take place.

So, what might be 'the most needed things' with regard to the provision of EEwithin pre-service programmes?

A Realistic Modelproposing some ways forwardThe situational analysis presented earlier suggests that a multi-componentstrategy will be needed if EE goals are to be realised even in a limited way inpre-service programmes. There are two distinct sets of issues here; those relatingto innovation and those relating to aims and outcomes.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


1 * courses are short in duration and, because of this and because they are pre-experience courses, they tend to be

densely packed with content and timetabled activities; it is, therefore, likely to be difficult to find space in the

programme for new initiatives;

2 * the curriculum is already full of 'necessary' and fully 'justified' content which will be defended by special

interest groups whose motivation will be to increase the time allocated to their particular interests rather than

reduce it;

3 * EE is not seen as a real priority by curriculum planners and senior managers, even where they see it as

important; there are also initiatives whose claim to inclusion and preference will be seen by many groups as

being as valid as that of EE; Research does suggest that EE is much better placed in this regard than many other

would-be initiatives. See Bullock & Scott, (1991) p. 7.5;

4 * most tutors are currently not willing to incorporate EE within their specialist subject didactics programmes,

even if they could see some justification for doing so; nor are they able to because they lack the skills,

awareness and motivation to do so;

5 * novice teachers have their own sets of priorities which they bring with them from prior experience of diverse

lands; these tend not to put EE near the top of their own developmental agendas; they, therefore, tend not to

push institutions to provide EE programmes;

6 t novice teachers have not seen EE prioritized by their own educational experiences, and are motivated through

pre-service courses by the need to develop their own competence as a teacher, curriculum foci tend to come a

distant second to this need, particularly in the early stages of a course;

7 * institutional policies might exist, but are unlikely to be fully followed through into practice because the

motivation for and enthusiasm about policies is rarely developed or backed up by implementation strategies;

policies are, by and large, cheaper than practice;

8 courses tend to be reliant on experience in schools to further and nurture the professional development of the

novice teacher, where EE is firmly and positively located within a school curriculum, novices can tap into that

experience and learn through contributing to programmes. Unfortunately, not all schools are in this position

and even where they are, schools need to see such experience as being of formative and seminal experience for

the novice.

FIG. 1. Characteristics of pre-service programmes.

Innovation. In terms of innovation, the following need to be considered: positional, and/or professional, authority; course committees and academic boards; the course team and course management; individual subject didactics tutors; partnership schools; novice teachers.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


Positional and/or professional authority. Kanter (1983) has suggested that:Any new strategy, no matter how brilliant or responsive, no matterhow much agreement the formulators have about it, will stand a goodchance of not being implemented fullyor sometimes at allwithoutsomeone with power pushing it.

This reality calls for a two-fold approach. It argues for a continuation of theexternal pushes aimed at making the intellectual case for EE, with a particularemphasis on pre-service courses; it also argues for tutors within institutions andschools to continue, formally and informally, to press the case internally and toback this need for teaching by carrying out persuasive research studies. Thecritical mass of tutors able and willing to do this needs to be increased.

Course committees and academic boards. Academic boards and committees whichadopt policies and generally validate, monitor and evaluate courses and pro-grammes because of internal and external (statutory) requirements are also opento persuasion. Unlike, an approach to senior management, this is likely to needa formal approach through position papers and the like. Such boards, however,are also susceptible to the push of external persuasion, particularly wheremembership is not wholly confined to the higher education institution. Theirinfluence is due, in large part, to the fact that their approval of an initiative canconfer considerable respectability and status on an initiative.

The course team and course management. These are significant 'gatekeepers' toany innovation and any internal push will need to persuade this group. It is herethat battles are likely to be fought (and lost) over the allocation and prioritisationof curriculum time and where arguments must be won if EE is to be seen as anentitlement for all novices teachers. For success here, there needs to be clarity inthe defining of purposes and practice, precision in the timetabling and organiza-tional requirements and, critically, a shared understanding gained throughco-operative endeavours.

Individual subject didactics tutors. It is here that most flexibility exists. Whereverindividual tutors are both willing and able to deliver EE goals through theirparticular programmes, there are few logistical or other reasons why this is notpossible. Tilbury (1993) has researched and written in some detail about suchissues and in particular about the roles of tutors in innovation relating to EEwithin pre-service programmes.

In terms of innovation, the analysis in Fig. 2 shows the extent of the changeswhich are needed. As most tutors begin in Al (indifferent and unaware), thereis a need to shift to B2 (interested and aware). There is, therefore, a need for adiagonal shift, implying an emphasis on both cognitive and affective issues in anydevelopment strategy. Further movement upwards or rightwards is unnecessaryand potentially wasteful. The imperative, for the use of scarce resources, is toincrease the number of tutors in the B2 position and then to support theirgrowing expertise and interest through appropriate staff development.

The significant question here is, how might this transition most appropriatelybe effected? The research report in Thinking Futures: making space for environmen-tal education in ITEa handbook for educators (Bullock et al, 1995) points one route

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


ATVarenes

specialist

aware

unaware

A3

2

1

B

888888888888888888888888888889888888S88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

c

indifference interest enthusiasm

C o m m i t m e n t >

FIG. 2. An analysis of the innovation limits in terms of tutor awareness and commitment.

forward. Bullock and her co-workers report and comment on a staff develop-ment initiative where a number of subject didactics tutors from varying disci-plines worked together with experts and resource support from the WorldwideFund for Nature in a conscious attempt to make the diagonal shift discussedabove.

The outcomes of this development suggest that resources and conditionsneeded for such a shift are eight-fold and need to be organised in three phases.This is shown in Fig. 3.

Phase 1 itself might usefully occur in more than one stage and could beintegrated with the beginnings of Phase 2, rather than requiring a strict se-quence. This model is very flexible and adaptable. Where an internal expertconsultant is available, it can also be relatively cheap.

Partnership schools. Given that the prime purpose of having environmentallyeducated teachers is to further EE in schools, it seems appropriate to involveschools and teachers in the practice of EE within pre-service courses. Whereparticular expertise resides in a school, that should be drawn upon, and whereEE courses are run in schools, every opportunity should be taken to involvenovice teachers.

Even where none of this is found, every school affords the interested novicethe opportunity of experimenting and trying out approaches in their own subjectareas, subject only to the acquiescence of the school or subject department in thisprocess. However, where such approval is not found, or where the idea isdismissed, very strong negative messages are given to novices. The argumenthere, of course, is for EE developments within pre- and in-service work to beconcerted around IT-INSET work in partnership schools.

Novice teachers. Novice teachers are obviously a key focus of this work, but arealso crucial participants in the innovation. There are two issues here. Firstly, part

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


Phase

1

tutors willing to come together and explore ideas time for working together as a group on EE

itself, and its pedagogical facets

a source of expertise to guide the development,

acting as a consultant to all tutors involved in appropriate resources; some of these will be EE-

the initiative specialist materials; others will be subject- or

phase-specific

Phase

2

time for individual experimentation; ideally this the opportunity to share outcomes and plan for

involves working with novice teachers trying future activity; ideally on a co-operative

out a small number of ideas; guidance from the mutually-supportive basis guided by the

consultant consultant

Phase

3

time to build on developments; ideally by

building an aspect of EE into the subject

didactics programme and reviewing progress

collective review of developments and joint

action-planning for future individual and

collective work; guidance by the consultant

FIG. 3. Resources and conditions necessary for staff development programmes.

of their awareness-raising might usefully involve a sharing of the imperativesbehind this development, both in terms of EE and in respect of the need toencourage their own competenceand that of schools. Secondly, many noviceteachers themselves have both experience and expertise to contribute to thisprocess.

Aims and outcomes. In terms of aims and outcomes, we need to consider what thedesired outcomes of our limited ambitions for EE within pre-service pro-grammes ought to be and to ask what might environmentally educated teachershave done and what skills or awareness might they have by the end of, say, aone year course? The answers to questions such as these will determine whatlimits the pre-service course should realistically set itself.

Finding responses to these questions has been at the heart of the EEITE project(Brinkman & Scott, 1994). Project members have drawn up a series of organisa-tional principles which they feel should underpin the work of pre-servicecourses in this regard. These are set out in the following case study.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


Case Study of Pre-service Course Developmentthe EEITE projectThis case study sets out a number of organisational principles which areexplicated in the form of course aims, programme elements and didactics charac-teristics which might inform the work of pre-service teacher education.

The course aims are:

as a result of pre-service teacher education programmes novice teachersshould be both willing and able to make a contribution to environmentaleducation through their own work with learners;

willing in a sense that they understand the importance of environmentaleducation and have a personal commitment to it which is both practicaland intellectual;

able in a sense that they have a repertoire of management of change andcurriculum innovation strategies upon which they can draw in co-oper-ation with others.

The EEITE project recognises that these are ambitious aims and in order toachieve them, preservice programmes will need to contain two elements. For thesake of clarity these elements are listed here separately. This should not be takento mean that these will necessarily be separate in practice; rather, tutors willhave the responsibility of deciding the inter-relationships between these (andother) elements for themselvesand for determining patterns of organizationand support their development work will have. Rather than stifle innovationhere, it will be necessary to encourage diversity and to monitor practice in orderto gain insights into the transferability of particular approaches and programmedesigns between institutions.

The two programme elements are:(I) aims and practice a consideration of the aims and practice of environmental education, particu-

larly as it relates to compulsory schooling; an examination of curriculum practice and extra-curriculum opportunities and

the desired learning outcomes associated with these; the identification of these characteristics which mark out curriculum activity

as contributing to environmental education; an exploration of particular strategies and approaches which can be employed

in environmental education;

(II) personal experience in environmental education working with teachers and children in schools on suitably small-scale activi-

ties; evaluating this practice and building on the foundations laid through

reflection and systematic planning; in particular, evaluating the effects of this practice on both their own and

children's awareness of the possibilities and priorities of environmental edu-cation.

It is necessary to emphasise the incremental and iterative nature of suchdevelopments and the consequent necessity of taking a small-step approach,coupled with a focus on the management of intervention and change.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


The EEITE project evolved a number of didactics characteristics which eachinstitution's developmental project would try to follow. These are such that theymight themselves describe desired characteristics of pre-service programmes.

The didactics characteristics are:

in part at least, a local focus, drawing from and contributing to expertise andawareness in the local community;

integration in initial teacher education programmes, rather than being anaddition;

a clear set of aims and desired learning outcomes, which are related to thegoals of the preservice programme;

action-oriented, in that novice teachers will be involved in the planning,implementation and evaluation of the work and will be encouraged to have anindividual commitment to reflection, so as to build the experience into theirown professional development;

values and attitude development are key features; processes and outcomes of the work can be shared with other subject didactics

groups; an interdisciplinary approach, involving more than one subject area or cur-

riculum focus; a dual focus, in which tutors and teachers work with novice teachers, who for

their part work with students in school.

It is to develop ideas along these lines and to test out these ideas that theEEITE project is now working.

End Note

It is apparent that the issues which must be considered in the management ofsuch an innovation are various and complex. It could be that the complexity isthe most daunting feature of the developmental process and, invariably, thereare no quick and easy solutions. Interventions which are well thought out andsystematic can help to ensure lasting progress. It would be unrealistic to expectan immediate transformation of course development in EE across anyinstitution, but the small step approach can itself trigger dividends in otherdirections.

A framework for reference in analysing important factors can be helpful tomanagers of change in seeing what is happening and thus being in a betterposition to act decisively and effectively. It is in this sense and spirit that thispaper offers these ideas, tentatively at this stage, to anyone who would wish tocriticise and /or develop them.

Notes on ContributorsBILL SCOTT and CHRIS OULTON are co-directors of the Environmental Edu-cation Research Group in the School of Education at the University of Bath. Billis a Senior Lecturer in Education with responsibility for the school-based PGCEin Partnership programme. Chris is a Lecturer in Education with responsibilityfor the environmental science preservice teacher education programme. Chris is

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


also Chair of the Association for Teacher Education in Europe (ATEE) WorkingGroup on Environmental Education and Initial Teacher Education. Correspon-dence: University of Bath, School of Education, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY,UK.

NOTE[1] This paper uses the term 'environmental education' because its focus is on late 1980s/early

1990s UNESCO-UNEP literature, where the term is consistently found. The authors areaware, however, that were such literature to be generated today, a term such as the IUCN's'education for sustainable living' might well be used in place of environmental education,but have chosen to keep the original terminology to avoid unnecessary confusion. Theissues which the paper addresses remain pertinent, whatever the term used.

REFERENCESBRINKMAN, F.G. & SCOTT, W.A.H. (Eds) (1994) Environmental Education into Initial Teacher

Education in Europe (EEITE) 'The State of the Art', ATEE Cahiers no. 8 (Brussels, Associationof Teacher Education in Europe).

BULLOCK, K.M. & SCOTT, W.A.H. (Eds) (1991) Student Primary Teachers: their economic andindustrial background, understanding and attitudesan investigation (Halifax, EATE).

BULLOCK, K.M., ENGLISH, T., OULTON, C.R. & SCOTT, W.A.H. (1995) Reflections on an environmen-tal education staff development initiative for teacher educators, in: P. CHAMPAIN & S. INMAN(Eds) Thinking Futures: making space for environmental education in ITEa handbook for educa-tors, in press (Godalming, Worldwide Fund for Nature).

CHAMPAIN, P. & INMAN, S. (Eds) (1995) Thinking Futures: making space for environmental educationin ITEa handbook for educators, in press (Godalming, Worldwide Fund for Nature).

FIEN, J. (1993) Sustainable development challenges for teacher education: an Australian casestudy, paper presented to a Unesco-SEAMES Seminar, Penang.

FIEN, J. (1994) Learning to teach for a sustainable world: two Asia-Pacific projects in environ-mental education for teacher education, paper presented to the ATEE Annual Conference,Prague.

HUNGERFORD, H.R., VOLK, T.L., DIXON, B.G., MARCINKOWSKI, T.J. & ARCHIBALD, P.C. (1988) Anenvironmental education approach to the training of elementary teachers: a teacher edu-cation programme, International Environmental Education Programme; environmental educationseries no. 17 (Paris, UNESCO-UNEP).

KANTER, R.M. (1983) The Change Masters (London, Allen & Unwin).LAW, B. (1986) The Pre-vocational Franchise: organizing community linked education for adult and

working life (London, Harper and Row).MARCINKOWSKI, T.J., VOLK, T.L. & HUNGERFORD, H.R. (1990) An environmental education ap-

proach to the training of middle level teachers: a prototype programme, InternationalEnvironmental Education Programme; environmental education series no. 30 (Paris, UNESCO-UNEP).

ROBOTTOM, I. (1989) Social critique or social control: some problems for evaluation in environ-mental education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, pp. 435-443.

SCOTT, W.A.H. (1994) Diversity and opportunityreflections on environmental educationwithin initial teacher education programmes across the European Union, in: F.G. BRINKMAN& W.A.H. SCOTT (Eds) Environmental Education into Initial Teacher Education in Europe (EEITE)'The State of the Art', ATEE Cahiers no. 8 (Brussels, Association of Teacher Education inEurope).

STAPP, W., CADUTO, M., MANN, L. & NOWAK, P. (1980) Analysis of pre-service environmentaleducation of teachers in Europe and an instructional model for furthering this education,Journal of Environmental Education, 12, pp. 3-10.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


TILBURY, D. (1992) Environmental education within pre-service teacher education: the priority ofpriorities, International Journal of Environmental Education and Information, 11, pp. 267-280.

TILBURY, D. (1993) Environmental education: developing a model for initial teacher education,PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.

UNESCO-UNEP (1990) Environmentally educated teachers the priority of priorities? Connect,XV(1), pp. 1-3.

UNESCO-UNEP (1992) UNCED: the Earth summit, Connect, XVII(2), pp. 1-7.WILKE, R.J., PEYTON, R.B. & HUNGERFORD, H.R. (1987) Strategies for the training of teachers in

environmental education, International Environmental Education Programme; environmental edu-cation series no. 15 (Paris, UNESCO-UNEP).

WILLIAMS, R. (1992) Report of a survey of the provision for environmental education in initialteacher training, Environmental Education and Teacher educationpreparing for change andparticipation (Sussex University, Education Network for Environment and Development).

Appendix

Foundational Competencies in Professional EducationThe effective environmentally educated teacher should be able to:

apply a knowledge of educational philosophy to the selection or developmentof curricular programmes and strategies to achieve both general educationand EE goals. (General education materials and methods may sometimes needmerely to be 'environmentalized' to achieve both objectives);

utilize current theories of moral reasoning in selecting, developing andimplementing EE curricula which will effectively achieve EE goals. (Teachersshould be competent to use appropriate strategies to allow learners to recog-nize the role of values in environmental decision making, clarify valuepositions and understand the valuing process);

utilize current theories of knowledge/attitude/behaviour relationships inselecting, developing and implementing a balanced curriculum which maxi-mizes the probability of desired environmentally aware behaviour changes inlearners. (A balanced curriculum takes into account such aspects as ecologicalfactors vs. trade-off costs, etc.);

utilize current theories of learning in selecting, developing and implementingcurricular strategies to effectively achieve EE goals. (The methodology of EEas well as the nature of many EE goals is problem solving. A pragmaticapproach on the part of teachers to theories of learning development, such asPiaget's, can do much to increase EE effectiveness in such methodologies andgoals as environmental problem solving);

apply the theory of transfer of learning in selecting, developing and imple-menting curricular materials and strategies to insure that learned knowledge,attitudes and cognitive skills will be transferred to the learner's choices anddecision making concerning lifestyle and behaviour. (The ultimate goal of EEis to produce environmentally literate citizens who are willing and capable oftaking positive environmental actions in their lifetime);

effectively implement the following methodologies to achieve EE goals: inter-disciplinary, outdoor education, values clarification, games and simulation,case-study approaches, community resource use, autonomous student and/orgroup investigation, evaluation and action in environmental problem solving,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


and appropriate teacher behaviours when handling controversial environmen-tal issues;

develop and use effective means of planning for instruction;effectively infuse appropriate EE curricula and methods into all disciplines to

which the teacher is assigned;effectively evaluate the results of EE curricula and methods in both cognitive

and affective domains.

Competencies in Environmental Education Content

Level 1: ecological foundations. The effective environmentally educated teachershould be able to:

apply a knowledge of ecological foundations to the analysis of environmentalissues and identify key ecological principles involved;

apply a knowledge of ecological foundations to predict the ecological conse-quences of alternative solutions to environmental problems;

be sufficiently literate in ecology to identify, select and interpret appropriatesources of scientific information in a continuing effort to investigate, evaluateand find solutions for environmental problems;

communicate and apply in an educational context the major concepts inecology.

Level 2: conceptual awareness. The effective environmentally educated teachershould be able to select, develop and implement curricular materials which willmake learners aware of:

how people's cultural or vocational activities (economic, religious, industrial,etc.) affect the environment from an ecological perspective;

how individual behaviours impact on the environment from the same per-spective;

a wide variety of local, regional, national and international environmentalissues and the ecological and cultural implications of these issues;

the viable alternative solutions available for remediating discrete environmen-tal issues and the ecological and cultural implications of these alternativesolutions;

the need for environmental issue investigation and evaluation as a prerequi-site to sound decision making;

the roles played by differing human values clarification as an integral part ofenvironmental decision making;

the need for responsible citizenship action (persuasion, consumerism, legalaction, political action ecomanagement, etc.) in the remediation of environ-mental concerns.

Level 3: investigation and evaluation. The effective environmentally educatedteacher should be competent to investigate environmental issues and evaluatealternative solutions and to develop, select and implement curricular materialsand strategies which will develop similar competencies in learners, including:

the knowledge and skills needed to identify and investigate issues (using both

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3


primary and secondary sources of information and to synthesize the datagathered);

the ability to analyze environmental issues and the associated value perspec-tives with respect to their ecological and cultural implications;

the ability to identify alternative solutions for discrete issues and the valueperspectives associated with these solutions;

the ability to autonomously evaluate alternative solutions and associatedvalue perspectives for discrete environmental issues with respect to theircultural and ecological implications;

the ability to identify and clarify their own value positions related to discreteenvironmental issues and their associated solutions;

the ability to evaluate, clarify and change their own value positions in thelight of new information.

Level 4: environmental action skills. The effective environmentally educated teachershould be competent to take positive environmental action for the purpose ofachieving and maintaining a dynamic equilibrium between the quality of lifeand the quality of the environment (if indeed one can be separated from theother) and develop similar competencies in learners to take individual or groupaction when appropriate, such as persuasion, consumerism, political action, legalaction, ecomanagement or combinations of these categories of action.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [T

he U

nivers

ity O

f Melb

ourn

e Libr

aries

] at 0

2:56 2

7 Apr

il 201

3

The 'Environmentally Educated Teacher': an exploration of the implications of UNESCO-UNEP's ideas

Documents

Transcript of The 'Environmentally Educated Teacher': an exploration of the implications of UNESCO-UNEP's ideas