The Heart of Sustainability (continued)


ethics. But, we argue, the environment is the best integrator, not the abstract concept of sustainability.


Big Idea 3: Constancy and changes Our children must also come to understand ideas associ-


ated with constancy, specifically conservation and equilibrium, as well as ideas about change (AAAS, 2007). We must help our children develop adaptability and resilience to the accelerated biological and social changes that are produced by a warming planet (Smith, 2010). We must also help them develop the ability to see the changes taking place in the landscape around them. Their resilience can be supported by the development of a sense of global interdependence based on their study of social deci- sion-making, social conflict and political and economic systems (AAAS, 1994; Wheeler, Wheeler, & Church, 2005). Since much of technology centers on creating and controlling change, it is critical for children to study the designed world including agriculture, communication technologies and computers (AAAS, 2007).


Big Idea 4: Sustainability education is not possible without social cohesion (race, gender, ethnic, religious, political and wealth)


Shared experience creates cohesion and is the foundation for


community. Our educational focus must include issues of access to the natural world and experiences that engender empathy, tol- erance and constructive social interaction. Spending time together in nature is a great equalizer, providing opportunities for teachers to see students, and students to see each other, in a different light. Walls and Jinkling (2002) promote the merits of taking a more participatory, democratic, pluralistic, and emancipatory approach to education and sustainability, particularly in higher education. Access to nature should be a part of these educational efforts.


Big Idea 5: Sustainability is not a destination (but rather an aspiration) based on precedent (we create it)


Without an endless supply of energy to support our cultural


needs we will be forever aspiring toward sustainability. As envi- ronmental education practitioners, we have always believed that the most important thing we can instill in our students is the abil- ity to envision a future that is different from the one that they see laid out before them. Time and time again we have heard students describe the future as overbuilt, crowded and polluted. Our task, then, is to involve them in a personal and ecological healing that opens up the possibility of something other – a future born of love rather than fear. Can a curriculum based solely on the study of the definition and/or principals of sustainability and lacking oppor- tunities to form a relationship with nature engender this love?


Conclusion: It doesn’t matter what you call it, it’s how you do it With the growing anthropogenic pressures on the earth’s


biotic communities and our increasing concern over children’s diminishing affiliation with nature (Louv, 2005), it is now es- sential to embrace a comprehensive educational transformation that is attentive to an ecological and practical wisdom of place. If education for sustainability embraces the best qualities of good environmental education (experiential, place-based, interdisciplin-


Page 10


References AAAS (2007). Atlas of science literacy (Vol. 2). Washington, D.C.:


AAAS and NSTA co-publisher. AAAS (Ed.). (1994). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford


University Press. Bowers, C. (2010). Reflections on teaching the course “Curriculum


Reform in an Era of Global Warming”. The Journal of Sustainability Educa- tion, 1.


Capra, F., & Stone, M. (2010). Smart by Nature: Schooling for Sustain-


ability. The Journal of Sustainability Education, 1(0). Church, W., & Skelton, L. (2010). Sustainability Education in K-12


Classrooms. Journal of Sustainability Education, 1(0). Elder, J. L. (2007). What is environmetnal literacy Retrieved September


14, 2007, from [2]http [2]:// [2]www [2]. [2]fundee [2]. [2]org [2]/ [2]facts [2]/ [2]envlit [2]/ [2]whatisenvlit [2]. [2]htm [2]


Friedman, T. (2008). Hot, flat, and crowded: Why we need a green


revolution — and how it can renew America. New York: Farrar Straus & Giroux.


www.clearingmagazine.org/online CLEARING 2011


ary and nature-centered) and embraces the big ideas that the two disciplines share, then as naturalist educators we are eager to par- ticipate and have much to offer. But if the field continues to dif- ferentiate itself by what it does not include, intentionally exclud- ing the importance of connecting students to nature in deep and meaningful ways, we feel it represents a step backwards. A larger umbrella is needed, not a smaller one, and developing scope and sequence based on a foundation of hope and love is where the real work of education for sustainability lies.


As emissaries of the natural world, we see sustainability


education as heightening environmental literacy with the goal of creating a sustainable relationship between people and the environment. Inherent in this view is the assumption that envi- ronmental education is education for social and environmental change through a process of collective action (Elder, 2007). We assume that environmental education can improve relationships among humans and between humans and their environment (Wals, 1994). We also view environmental education as a potent means for educational reform rather than as a tool to modify chil- dren’s behavior with a predetermined endpoint in mind (Elder, 2007; Orr, 1991; Wals, 1994). Only by giving children the resources (i.e., environmental knowledge, experiences in nature and time to reflect), can they begin to engage in a wider participatory process of societal and environmental change.


Donald J. Burgess is assistant professor in the Secondary Education Department and the Science Education Group at Western Washington University. His research interests are science education, college readiness and children’s perceptions of nature.


Tracie Johannessen has worked in the field of environmental educa- tion for over 20 years. She was education director at North Cascades Institute (www.ncascades.org) for 10 years and currently works as an independent consultant on environmental education program design and evaluation.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62