Education for sustainability at home is one thing but is there also EfS subjects being taught at schools?
Education towards what?
I like to see a lot more subjects taught at school which raise awareness of sustainability in children, rather than spending time on teaching subjects, which most children will never again use in their lifetime.
I often wondered why my girls needed to learn - lets say - the Calculus, because neither of them was very much inclined in that direction or has of need of this knowledge now in their current vocational choices. One has got a Degree in Visual Arts and Design (majoring in Graphic Communication) and is currently studying a second Degree in Social Anthropology. My younger daughter is in her 3rd year of a BA in Nursing.
So truly, neither of my daughters had any need to learn the Calculus nor did, as far as I know, any of the other children from their particular classes at school.
If I would look through the school curriculums and cross out subjects which most likely are not useful for basic, needed knowledge (writing, reading, wider world awareness subjects like geography, history, biology or anatomy just to mention a few) or practical skills like woodwork, gardening, cooking or knitting for example, I am sure there would be some time to fit in more about ‘education for sustainability’ to raise awareness in the next generation.
The family environment and its influence on children is one thing, but once children attend school, essentially spending more time there than at home, it becomes an issue of, I guess the government what is listed in the curriculum or not. Saying that, if parents would not agree with the curriculum and keep their children out of school, the government (Ministry of Education) might have to rethink and adjust it.
There still are not many schools, as far as I am aware of, which teach subjects like: ‘grow your own vegetables’ or
‘recycling’, cooking, handwork, woodwork (building) or looking after an animal properly.
Teaching practical life skills in my view is sustainable for the future. Teaching a lot
of un-relatable theory about subjects predominantly irrelevant to basic, essential
life skills, is not.
I am surprised how many young women (and men :-)) have told me that they cant knit, crochet or sew. It still baffles me because to me, that's one of the 'essential, basic skills', handed down through generations (sustainable).
Subjects like communication and conflict resolution skills are also something I would like to see in a school curriculum as part of learning life skills.
I have the feeling that pressure on intellectual achievement is way too emphasized in today's schools and creative skills, like creative thinking (thinking outside the box) don't seem to be given enough value or opportunities in those early years, until one is as far progressed with 'working through the existing educational system' and gets 'to do' a Masters in a subject, then 'one can have and express some of one's own opinions. Before that, let's tick off and stay in the required boxes first.
The link below has some views of what creativity is meant to be and in what area:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity
I personally like this little video clip, uploaded by Bronwyn Hegarty on the Flexible Learning course resources:
Do schools kill creativity? By Sir K. Robinson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
Educating every child in the same way at school doesn't seem very sustainable to me.
There are some nice quotes by Albert Einstein:
I am surprised how many young women (and men :-)) have told me that they cant knit, crochet or sew. It still baffles me because to me, that's one of the 'essential, basic skills', handed down through generations (sustainable).
Subjects like communication and conflict resolution skills are also something I would like to see in a school curriculum as part of learning life skills.
I have the feeling that pressure on intellectual achievement is way too emphasized in today's schools and creative skills, like creative thinking (thinking outside the box) don't seem to be given enough value or opportunities in those early years, until one is as far progressed with 'working through the existing educational system' and gets 'to do' a Masters in a subject, then 'one can have and express some of one's own opinions. Before that, let's tick off and stay in the required boxes first.
The link below has some views of what creativity is meant to be and in what area:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity
I personally like this little video clip, uploaded by Bronwyn Hegarty on the Flexible Learning course resources:
Do schools kill creativity? By Sir K. Robinson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
Educating every child in the same way at school doesn't seem very sustainable to me.
There are some nice quotes by Albert Einstein:
The Ministry of Education www has some positive info about EfS, which is good to see:
http://efs.tki.org.nz/
Sourced from:
Ministry of Education:
A section of:
Taking action
Students taking informed action to
address issues of sustainability and participate in creating a sustainable
future is the core of education for sustainability.
Taking action is a process of
learning that:
uses meaningful contexts for learning
empowers students to do something
with their learning: 'It’s not what you know, it’s what you do with what you
know' (source unknown)
supports participation in the wider
community, such as taking part in decision making processes
develops the key competencies
leading to action competence in education for
sustainability.
Students need to be given multiple
opportunities to plan, implement and carry out actions in response to what they
know and understand about the causes of sustainability issues and possibilities
for change.
Examples of actions include:
a personal response or behavior
change such as taking the bus rather than the car
a project to rehabilitate or
prevent degradation of the environment such as excluding stock from waterways
or planting to increase biodiversity
the development of a system to
reduce use of natural resources such as installing a rain water collection
system to use on gardens or in toilet cisterns
a
project to educate others on an environmental issue, such as a movie
highlighting ways to make a wrapper free lunch and how this reduces waste to
landfills.
And in:
Secondary Section:
Education
for sustainability
Version date: 30 June 2010
Key
changes: Version 2
Subject facilitator email: seniorsecondary@tki.org.nz
What is
education for sustainability about?
Education for sustainability (EfS) is about learning to think
and act in ways that safeguard the well-being of people and the planet.
In EfS, students explore the relationship between people and the
environment. They learn about the environmental, social, cultural, and economic
aspects of sustainability. They learn to show leadership by example and to
contribute to collective decisions that lead to actions for a sustainable
future.
People can have very different views on sustainability. In EfS,
students explore and evaluate different perspectives, rethink long-standing
ideas, and consider alternative practices and directions. With the support of
their teacher, they can take ownership of their learning and create new
knowledge.
EfS is best taught collaboratively in conjunction with other
subjects and supported by school and community policies and practices. Students
then learn that no single area has a monopoly on solutions to complex issues.
They also discover the power of partnerships, of working together.
Mō tātou te Taiao ko te Atawhai
Mō tātou te Taiao ko te Oranga
It is for us to care for the environment to ensure its
well-being
In doing so we ensure our own well-being and that of
future generations
http://efs.tki.org.nz/Toitū-te-Ao-Carving
EfS has its foundations in environmental education. See Guidelines for Environmental Education in New Zealand
Schools (Ministry of Education, 1999).
Some thoughts on modern Technology and
children, who is educating who?
A lot of children in ‘modern society’ have access to TV from an early age (used as a possible ‘babysitting tool’ - so I have been told by many mothers with a smile and a wink).
Then they might progress to computers or X-Boxes – not to mention cell phones.
As a consequence, I believe that children loose touch with nature (e.g. playing outside, using their bodies rather than being 'fixed in one place') hence with themselves as being a part of nature and other children, which also affects their social interactions.
I don't believe technology needs to be introduced to children of a young age as an essential part of their education. There is plenty of time when they are older and have a certain ability to think independently to be able to comprehend to some extend what technology is about or useful for.
When my first daughter was four and she saw a TV the first time in her life, she stopped and stared at this box for some time, then asked me: "Mum - how did the elephant get into that box?"
A thought on the amount of time a child spends in an educational setting away from home:
I know that my mother went to school for about 5 years (in Europe, straight after the war).
I myself went to school for 9 years. This is the 'normal' amount of school time in Switzerland, then most people enter an apprenticeship for 3 years (as I did). Other young adults can choose to study further and progress to Uni.
My children spent 12 years at school (normal amount of time in New Zealand). Add Kindergarten to that and my girls would have been 14 years in an educational environment away from home.
That's an incredible amount of time, hence I believe that education away from home (during those very formative years of a young person's life) needs to researched and chosen with awareness by parents.
I myself chose to have my girls go to a Waldorf School (Rudolf Steiner Education).
Looking back, my children got up every morning and wanted to go to school, which to me as their parent was one good indication of 'did they like where they were going'?
I also liked the Waldorf curriculum, philosophy and approach to education, which included plenty of creativity and practical life skills (and yes both boys and girls had subjects like woodworking, cooking, gardening and knitting :-) just to mention a few).
Question: Is it sustainable to have children in an educational system from such an early age and for so many years teaching them about subjects which they might never use ever again?
I came across this wonderful video clip, again by Sir Ken Robinson:
He talks about how education is based on conformity and how we are so used to linear thinking e.g. 'this is what it is meant to be like'.
I don't believe that the educational system as it is today is sustainable and Sir Ken Robinson's idea of 'personalized teaching and personalized curriculum' is a rather wonderful concept. Seems to me that that would be a much better solution towards sustainable education.
A lot of children in ‘modern society’ have access to TV from an early age (used as a possible ‘babysitting tool’ - so I have been told by many mothers with a smile and a wink).
Then they might progress to computers or X-Boxes – not to mention cell phones.
As a consequence, I believe that children loose touch with nature (e.g. playing outside, using their bodies rather than being 'fixed in one place') hence with themselves as being a part of nature and other children, which also affects their social interactions.
I don't believe technology needs to be introduced to children of a young age as an essential part of their education. There is plenty of time when they are older and have a certain ability to think independently to be able to comprehend to some extend what technology is about or useful for.
When my first daughter was four and she saw a TV the first time in her life, she stopped and stared at this box for some time, then asked me: "Mum - how did the elephant get into that box?"
A thought on the amount of time a child spends in an educational setting away from home:
I know that my mother went to school for about 5 years (in Europe, straight after the war).
I myself went to school for 9 years. This is the 'normal' amount of school time in Switzerland, then most people enter an apprenticeship for 3 years (as I did). Other young adults can choose to study further and progress to Uni.
My children spent 12 years at school (normal amount of time in New Zealand). Add Kindergarten to that and my girls would have been 14 years in an educational environment away from home.
That's an incredible amount of time, hence I believe that education away from home (during those very formative years of a young person's life) needs to researched and chosen with awareness by parents.
I myself chose to have my girls go to a Waldorf School (Rudolf Steiner Education).
Looking back, my children got up every morning and wanted to go to school, which to me as their parent was one good indication of 'did they like where they were going'?
I also liked the Waldorf curriculum, philosophy and approach to education, which included plenty of creativity and practical life skills (and yes both boys and girls had subjects like woodworking, cooking, gardening and knitting :-) just to mention a few).
Question: Is it sustainable to have children in an educational system from such an early age and for so many years teaching them about subjects which they might never use ever again?
I came across this wonderful video clip, again by Sir Ken Robinson:
Bring
on the Learning Revolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9LelXa3U_I
He talks about how education is based on conformity and how we are so used to linear thinking e.g. 'this is what it is meant to be like'.
I don't believe that the educational system as it is today is sustainable and Sir Ken Robinson's idea of 'personalized teaching and personalized curriculum' is a rather wonderful concept. Seems to me that that would be a much better solution towards sustainable education.
J I agree with you that some subjects seem unnecessary to the detriment of children learning about sustainability. However, I believe that sustainability should be integrated in everything that children learn. For example, when using computers children also need to be made aware about where they are produced and how they can be recycled, and the energy impacts etc.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you about not teaching calculus, but it is probably the way in which it is taught that is at fault - not sustainable. Any subject needs to be taught so that students can see the relevance to real life. Calculus is essential in many aspects of society as described on the website: Uses of Calculus in Real Life. For example, understanding how minimum credit card payments are calculated. In any case, how can children decide which direction they want to go in their careers if they are not exposed to these kind of subjects. A child who dislikes calculus is unlikely, for example, to want to study to be an engineer. In that respect, the so-called non-subjects also have a role to play in shaping future citizens.
I agree creative thinking is very important in any discipline, and much of this gets lost in the mire of abstract facts and theories that are taught - so yes the beauty of subjects does need to be brought back to engage people's joy in learning.
And yes, I am a fan of the concept of personalised learning but to help that happen we need to go back to the drivers and funders of education in society. At the moment, in New Zealand the education model is very much driven by economics and not by life long learning principles or even by the stakeholders who make up our society. So when making money is paramount, and students have to be 'churned out' of our educational system (many with huge crushing loans) what chance is there for a more costly model such as personalised learning?
How can this model happen cost-effectively do you think?
Your statement about not exposing children to technology too young has merit, and I believe that there is a balance. However, such children will be disadvantaged in a digital society and will be like the children who have no understanding about where their food comes from. It is a paradox - we have to educate people so that they can engage fully in a society that is becoming disconnected from nature and sustainable practices, but at the same time we want to maintain their integrity as human beings. What is the solution?
Thank you for your comment Bronwyn !
ReplyDeleteI think I'll address the 'computer in education question' in the FL module 'trends'.
I completely agree with your statement: 'Any subject needs to be taught so that students can see the relevance to real life'. That to me is really one of the key points of Education :-)