If the next generation are to be equipped to tackle the environmental legacy left for them, we need to ensure they are getting an environmental education, says Sue Fenoughty
Are we, as adults, taking the steps to protect our planet from further degradation, or are we leaving it to the next generation to try and clear up the environmental anarchy we will surely be passing on to them? The next generation is still at school, so is the national curriculum (in England) equipping these youngsters to take informed action to conserve the planet?
The National Association for Environmental Education (NAEE) thinks not. Despite growing pressures on the environment, 'Environmental Education' as a cross-curricular theme was wiped out of the curriculum just over a decade ago, followed by the government's withdrawal of core funding for NAEE. Despite these two heavy blows, NAEE, founded by teachers 40 years ago, struggled on, knowing that environmental education was needed then (and now) more than ever.
In May this year, we took a petition to Downing Street to ask for environmental education to be restored to the curriculum to fit the needs of the 21st century. Downing Street's response, however, interpreted 'environmental education' as being 'sustainable development', explaining that the sustainable schools strategy has been embedded across the curriculum.
Although NAEE supports the concept of the government's 'Sustainable Schools' strategy, it is not the same thing as 'environmental education'. So, what is 'Environmental Education'? Why does NAEE feel it is still needed in the curriculum? And how does it relate to 'Education for Sustainable Development'?
Environmental Education does three things:
(1) It raises awareness of the existing curriculum opportunities to include the environmental considerations for that particular study area. Key Stage 2 Geography, for example, requires junior school children to carry out enquiry outside the classroom. But due to Health and Safety concerns and the pressures on the curriculum, such as the numeracy and literacy strategy, teachers increasingly lack the confidence to take their pupils off the school site to embark on first-hand investigations in their local environment. If children are denied this opportunity to be involved in their own local community and environment, how can they be expected to understand and care about local environmental issues?
(2) Environmental Education is the vital stepping-stone to understanding why we should all adopt a more sustainable lifestyle. The Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) launched its Sustainable Schools Strategy in November 2006, with its '8 Doorways' for all schools to pass through. If schools follow the guidelines attached to each Doorway, the DCSF says, they will become role models for the Community of how to live sustainably by the year 2020. But the environmental reasons for adopting a more sustainable lifestyle are omitted, and with it the opportunities to link the Doorways to a 'greener' curriculum.
The Sustainable Schools Strategy also misses out the 'environmental' explanation in its 'Energy' Doorway, but emphasises the 'economic' need to save energy, saying that schools can tackle the problem of rising demand by saving energy and at the same time save the school money. As a result, the 'top down' approach adopted in the Sustainable Schools Strategy is more relevant to school management, with the tempting 'carrot' of helping the school to save money - no mention of the environment.
(3) Environmental Education follows a child-centred style of learning based on the beliefs of Comenius, a 17C Czech educator, with his 'Head, Hands, Heart' approach to teaching. Environmental Education is learning about the Environment (the Head, or knowledge, bit), learning in or through the Environment (the Hands or skills bit, gained by going out into the Environment and getting first hand experience); and learning for the Environment (the Heart bit, i.e. the child will develop caring attitudes for the environment through the head and hands approaches).
In order for the Sustainable Schools Strategy to work, it must be acceptable to teachers by relating to the existing curriculum, and not seen as an 'add-on', and it must inspire and motivate the pupils. According to Ofsted's 2008 report 'Teaching Sustainability' this isn't happening. As it stands the Sustainable Schools strategy takes a rather didactic approach, based on economics and more appropriate for business and industry than schools and children's centres.
NAEE's Petition for Environmental Education was signed by a wide range of people across England and Wales, many of whom were shocked to discover that environmental education is no longer included as a cross-curricular theme. Now we need to find another way to convince the government that environmental education is not the same thing as sustainable development.
Sue Fenoughty is hon. secretary of the NAEE (UK) and ex-advisory teacher for environmental education (Birmingham). suefen@blueyonder.co.uk
Green Party City Councillor and Education Spokesperson, Rachel Fryer, writes about the issues surrounding a green education
There has been recent debate about what exactly defines a green education, with the result that the Green Party's education manifesto is being re-written and a Draft Voting Paper will be presented at the next conference in September. At first glance a green education might just seem to be about teaching people to grow trees, recycle, conserve electricity and eat organic food. But education is at the heart of any society, and it is no less important in a green one. We are all learning throughout our lives, so everyone must have the right to a high standard of education which is free at the point of delivery whatever age they are. For Greens, education should also be valued for itself, and not be reduced to jumping through hoops and passing exams.
There are two areas that need to be considered when discussing education. It must be decided what is taught and how, and there needs to be a clear approach to how the educational system is run and by whom.
In terms of delivery, Greens favour a project-based approach to learning with better relationships between the subjects. The current curriculum in secondary schools means that pupils can move from science to sport to history to drama in the space of one morning. It is small wonder that they can become disengaged and disruptive in class. Our approach would encourage more space to explore and create things, to enjoy education for education's sake. Systems such as that in Denmark, where young people choose what subjects to study from a relatively early age, also help to engage young people and these are being considered.
Perhaps the most pernicious aspect of current education is the league tables which are based on SATS, GCSE and A-level results. In this climate even schools who try not to pass this pressure onto students have to deal with children as young as seven suffering from exam-related stress. League tables tell us nothing about the ability of pupils when they enter the school, any learning difficulties they may have, and little of the quality of teaching in the school. League tables have contributed greatly to the admissions crisis we face as supposedly 'successful' schools become more desirable than 'failing' schools. For these reasons the Green Party would abolish League Tables.
In addition to the lack of engagement of young people caused by the approach to the curriculum and the stress of constant assessment, bad behaviour is linked to size, both the size of the class and the size of the school. Some schools have over 2,000 pupils, most secondary schools have over 1,000. Human Scale Education cites evidence that the size both of a school and of a class can have significant impact on pupil behaviour.
Sizes are dependent on admissions and faith schools contribute to the admissions crises Local Authorities face by setting their own admissions criteria. They are not obliged to take pupils who live nearby. The Green Party opposes this. Allowing the state to continue to fund a variety of faith schools will inevitably create divisions in society. But we must understand why people feel faith schools need to exist. Some Muslims do not feel they are able to practice their faith in their school as they need to pray regularly. Many people enjoy the spiritual dimension and positive ethos offered by Catholic schools. We should seek therefore to bring these positive aspects into mainstream schools and embrace spiritualism (including Buddhism and atheism) through a multi-faith approach.
For similar reasons, the Green Party is opposed to City Academies. They are often introduced to deprived areas as the only chance the school has to attract funding. With a City Academy the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) releases approximately £30million for a new building and a private sponsor contributes about £2million. The sponsor has the power to appoint the Board which appoints the Principal and the Governors, decides what the curriculum will be, and what wages individual teachers receive. The sponsor does not have to know anything about education yet has the power to make these crucial decisions.
The Green Party would end this back-door privatisation and allow the school to decide for itself how to spend this money - some may be spent on buildings but the school may choose to spend some of it providing a better education for young people.
