No Longer a “Little Added Frill”

Paul Hart

155

Teacher Education Quarterly, Fall 2010

No Longer a “Little Added Frill”:The Transformative Potential

of Environmental Educationfor Educational Change

By Paul Hart

Introduction Mydaughter,asaphysician,saysthat,whenapatientvisitsageneralpractitionerwithaspecificconcern,thereisoftenasimplesolutiontobeprescribed.Ininstanceswherethisisnotthecase,well…youreallydon’twanttohearaboutthealternative.Whenenvironmentaleducationmanifestsitselfinschools,itisusuallyasimplematteroftheinsertionofanenvironment-relatedactivityintothescience,orperhapssocialstudies,curriculum.However,ifyoufindateacherwhohas“theethic,”theentireschoolmightbe“green.”Thefactthatthisethicisspreadingthrougharelativelywellorganizedandrapidlyexpandingfieldoftheoryandpractice,groundedinresearchandphilosophicalthought,thatchallengesmanyofthetaken-for-grantedassumptionsofthedominanteducationaldiscourses,maybeacauseforconcerninsomequarters.

Paul Hart is a professor with the Faculty of Education at the University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Thoseteacherswhoarehappyinstandardpracticemaynotwanttohearabout“thealternative,”thecritiquesofbusiness-as-usualinthefieldofeducation,whetherfromenvironmentaleducationorother relatedareassuchassocialjusticeandculturalstudies. Thepurposeofthisarticleistoexploresomeis-suesofworthconcerningwhattakesplaceinschoolsandinteachereducationfromthisvantagepointof

No Longer a “Little Added Frill”

156

environmentaleducation,asafieldthatchallengesthetaken-for-grantedassump-tionsofthedominantdiscoursesofschooling. Inviewofthefocusofthisspecialissueon“environmentinthecurriculum,”withteachereducationinmind,Iarguethatthesociallycriticalcharterofthefieldofenvironmentaleducationhasmeaningfulthingstosaytomainstreameducationthat,iftakenseriously,canprovidethemeanstotransformourthinkingaboutsomethingsthatreallymatterinschooling.Ibeginbyprovidinganumberofbasiccontrastpointsbetweenmainstreameducationalgoals(initiallyusingscienceeducationastheexample)andthephilosophicalpositiontakenupbyenvironmentaleducationlargelyasaresultofUNESCO-basedinternationalconferencesoverseveraldecades.Examinationofthesefoundingdocumentsrevealsanenvironmentaleducationthatdoesnotadvocateinsertionofisolatedactivitiesintothecurriculum.Onthecontrary,itprovidesacomplexphilosophywithparticulartheoreticalgroundingsthat,justasenvironmentalissuesdowithinsociety,positiondominanteducationalconceptsascontestedconceptsforcriticaldebatein(teacher)education.Thesedistinctivequalitiesarefoundinphilosophicalcounter-narrativesgeneratedbyenvironmentaleducationdebatesovermorethan40yearsasfoundationforexplorationofnotionsofstructure-agencyinteaching.Thesenotionsarethenappliedtoeducation,andparticularlytoteachereducation,astheyrelatetoteacherandstudentsubjectifica-tionintheschoolingprocess.

Environmental Education in the School Curriculum:

A Piece for a Different Puzzle? Decisionsabout“whatcounts”inschoolsarealwaysrootedinassumptionsaboutthenatureofeducation.Embeddedwithinthecurriculumandpedagogyofsubjectareassuchassciencearemessages,oftentacitorsubtle,abouthistoricaltheoriesofcultureandsociety,aswellasthenatureofeducationaldiscourse.Suchnon-neutraltheorieshavegeneratedinterestingdebateswithinteachereducationconcerninghowmuchof thishistoryandphilosophy teachersneed toknowinorder tocriticallyparticipate in their translation intocurriculumandpedagogy.Forexample,howmuchmoreshouldteachersknowthanthefactthatthereisarangeofviewsonthesematters,thatdeeperpurposes,interestsandvaluesunderlievariousperspectives?Howmuchshouldtheyknowabouttheconnectionsbetweentheseperspectivesandtheformsofinquirythatsupposedlysustainthem?And,morespecifictoschoolsubjectssuchasscienceandmaths,atwhatdepthsshouldtheybeabletodiscusswaysofknowing(i.e.,epistemologies)andbeing(i.e.,on-tologies)sothattheycanthinkmoredeeplyandcriticallyabouttheirtheoriesofpractice?Andinrespectofteachereducationprograms,shouldweworktocreateconditionsthroughwhichteacherscanbeinitiatedintoformsofcriticalreflectionintohowthey,aspractitioners,havecometoconstructthemselvesaseducatorsofaparticularkind?

Paul Hart

157

Environmentaleducation,byitsverynature,challengestraditionaleducationprovisiontoengageeducationalissuesthat,likeenvironmentalissues,arepolitical,contested,andinvolvedeepphilosophicalstruggleswithpositioningarguments.Suchquestionspushtraditionalboundariesandchallengetraditionalassumptionsaboutwhatreallymattersandaboutwhatcancountaslegitimatewithinschool-ing.Itseemsusefultousethedifferencescreatedbyenvironmentaleducationtomakemorevisiblethoseboundariesandassumptionsthathaveframedestablishedsystemsofeducation.In“SchoolingandEnvironmentalEducation:ContradictionsinPurposeandPractice,”RobertStevenson(1987,republished2007)examinesthe discrepancy between the problem-solving and action-oriented goals of en-vironmentaleducationandthecontent-acquisitionbaseofknowledgeinschoolprograms.Asummaryofthecontrastingpositionsrevealssomeofthe“commonsense”assumptionsofgeneraleducationprovisionthatwarrantattentionfromtheperspectiveofmanyenvironmentaleducatorswhoarguetheneedforstudentstoengageinideologicalandcriticalinquiry. Stevenson (1987) argued, for example, that, although rooted in the liberal-progressive educational philosophy of nature study and conservation education,environmentaleducation’sfundamentalconcernforsocialpatternsofresourceuseinthe1960sand1970sspannedaverydifferentideology.Fien(1993)characterizedthisdifferencefromthedominantsocialparadigmasanenvironmentalethicoranewparadigmaticposition.Althoughthisontologyiscomplexandis,itself,comprisedofseveralideologicalpositioningsrangingfromdeepecologytomoretechnicalap-proaches,theacademicpositiontakenbyenvironmentaleducatorstendstowardthesociallycritical.ThispositioningisevidencedinfoundationalUNESCOdocumentsthatportraytraditionaleducationalmandatesassustainingcertainsocialvaluesbasedinparticularideologies,thatis,inparticular(moral)philosophies. AsRobottom(1987)said,thesestatementsremindusthateducationisalwaysideologicalandthussubjecttotheselfinterestsofthepeoplewhosharepowerinsocietyandmaysharecertainvalues.Inenvironmentaleducation,however,thefocusonenvironmentandenvironmentalissuesrevealsvariouscontestingpositions.Butwhatwemaymiss,saysRobottom(1987),isthepointthattheeducationalprocessesbywhichenvironmentalissuesarestudiedarealsosubjecttotheinfluenceofarangeofselfinterests.Environmentaleducation,byvirtueofitsinvestmentinrealworldissues,helpstobringtheseusuallyimplicitoperatingprinciplesandeducationaldiscoursesintosharprelief.Attheschoollevel,thisrhetoricmaymeanthatenvironmentaleducationposesproblemsforteacherswhodonothaveeitherthecontentorthepedagogicalbackgroundthatisatthesametimeinterdisciplin-ary,outdoors-oriented,community-oriented,problem/inquiry-orientedandaction-oriented,andofteninserviceoflocalenvironment-relatedsocialissuesthatmaybecritically-orientedtolocalpolitics.Attheleveloftheacademy,anincreasingnumberofuniversitieshavecoursesinenvironmentaleducationintendedtoattempttoaddresstheseissuesofbackground.


158

FollowingthelandmarkTbilisiconference,theUNESCOreportstatesthat:

Environmental education…should help the public question its misconceptionsconcerningthevariousproblemsoftheenvironmentandthevaluesystemsofwhichtheseideasareapart…Theeducatedindividualshouldbeinapositiontoasksuchquestionsas:Whotookthisdecision?Accordingtowhatcriteria?Whatare theimmediateendsinmind?Havethelong-termconsequencesbeencalculated?Inshort,he(orshe)mustknowwhatchoiceshavebeenmadeandwhatvaluesystemdeterminedthem.(UNESCO,1978,pp.26-27,quotedinRobottom,1987,p.84)

Messagessuchasthisfromfoundationaldocumentsinenvironmentaleducationproposethat,giventhecomplexityofenvironmentalissues,studentsrequiremorethanbackgroundsciencecontent.Theyalsorequireskillsinissueinvestigationandpublicdecision-makingthataremissingincurrentschoolpracticeand,asaresult,educationalprovisionmustbecomemorecomplex.Peopleneedtobeabletomakedecisionsaboutcomplex(political)issues,aboutresourcessuchaswaterandenergy,population,andpollution;schoolsarenotpreparingstudentsfortheirdemocraticresponsibilityascitizens.Anenvironmentaleducationshouldpreparecitizensforactiveparticipationindealingwithsocial/environmentalissues,notonlywithintheirowncommunitiesbutalsoacrossnationalandinternationalboundaries.Thus,itisargued,environmentaleducationhasaroleineducationalprograms. Thesestatementsandmessagesalsoraisedirectquestionsaboutthenatureofeducationsystemsthatcontinuetoreproducethekindofsocialconditions(i.e.,passiveconsumerism)whichposethreatstotheenvironmentandwhichconserverather thanchallengecriticalconsciousnessofsocial-environmental issues.Ac-cordingtoStevenson(1987,2007),thesocialandcultural purposesofschooling,despite spikes of innovation, continue to promote the transmission of existingcultural knowledge, skills and values so that current social conditions can bemaintained.Schoolshaveassumedacredentializingrolewheremasterymeansindividualachievement,throughacompetitiveprocess.Teachers’workisdefinedlargelybythecurriculumandassessmentsystemwhichdemandsefficient/effec-tivecoverageofcontent-orientedmaterialorganizedindiscretetimeperiodswithprescribedproblem“bits”thatareeasilyevaluatedaseithercorrectorincorrect. Whileenvironmentaleducatorsdonot typicallydisputeeducationalbasicsrequiredbygeneralschoolprograms, theydemandmuchmore thansimplistic,token, environment-relatedactivities addedon toexistingprograms,ornature-basedoutdoorstudiesthatdonotraiselargerquestionsaboutpersonalandsocialgoalswith“environment-in-mind.”Environmentaleducation,organizedacrossthecurriculum,isintendedtobuildtheknowledgeandskillstolookcriticallyatsocial/environmentalproblems,includingtheirrootcauses.Studentsshouldsystemati-callybuildresearchandactionskillsinlearninghowtoparticipatethoughtfullyinworkingtowardsolutions.Theyshouldlearn,withtheirteachers,toworkacrossdisciplinaryboundariesandengageinreal-worldcommunityproblemsolvinganddecisionmakingtowarddemocraticallybasedimprovementsinconditionsaround

Paul Hart

159

qualityoflifeissues.Incontemplatinghowfarschoolsandschoolsystemsmaybewillingtogoinallowingstudentsandteacherstoengageinactivitiesthatgobeyondnormalschoolboundariesthatprivilegeworkconstruedintermsofdis-crete,manageableunits,rightanswersandcertaintythroughmeasuringdevices,environmentaleducationthusposesdeepphilosophicalproblemsfornormalschoolprogramsthatimplicateteachereducation.

Environmental Education:

The Current Crisis of Sustainability Givensomeunderstandingofthethinkingthathasdriventhefieldofenviron-mentaleducation,morerecentdebatesconcernhowthefieldhasbeenco-optedwithinthedominanteducationalparadigm,throughtheevolutionofpartsofthefieldtoeducationforsustainability.Inspiteofpresentinga“morebalanced”ap-proach to social issues,notionsof sustainabilityeducationhavenotyetgainedcredibilitywithinmainstreameducation,includingteachereducationandcurricu-lumdevelopment.Forexample,althoughthePan-CanadianScienceFramework(CMEC,1997)placedconsiderableemphasisonenvironmentaleducationthroughtheScience-Technology-Society-Environment(STSE)setofgoals,theconnectionstoenvironmentalsustainabilityremainunclear.Andinareassuchassocialstudies,wherecompatibilitywithsocialissues,citizenshipresponsibilitiesandcommunityandcooperativelearninghaveprovidedopportunitiesforsomeofthecriticalandcreativethinking,personalandsocialvaluesandskillsandindependentstudentsociallearning,connectionstoenvironmentaleducationremainvague.Thus,thereremains,withintheliteratureofthefield,adeepdiscontentandunderstandableimpatienceamongstenvironmentaleducatorsconcerningalackofprogressinpen-etratingtheideologyofmainstreameducationalsystems.Forexample,AlanReid,editorofEnvironmental Education Research,quotesElizabethAtkinson,“Weallhavereasonsfordoingonethingratherthananother,butweareoftentrappedinthosereasons…wenevertaketimetoquestionthem”(Reid,2009).Environmentaleducators,tiredofremainingontheperipheryofeducationwhenenvironmentalproblemsbecomemorecomplexandglobal,arelookingfornewanddifferentwaysofthinkingabouttheirfutureactionsinspiteoftheconstraintsofthedominantdiscourses.Yettheyareincreasinglyawarethatbyco-optingfoundationalprinciplesinschoolapplicationsofenvironmentaleducation,theymaysimplybestrengthen-ingthediscourseswhichmarginalizediversityanddifference. Insearchofalternatives,GruenewaldandManteaw(2007)havearguedthatenvironmentaleducatorsshouldfocustheirworkinspecificwaystoinfluencebasicconversationsaboutwhateducationneedstobeaccountableforaspartofamorecomprehensive(re)thinkingoftheroleofaccountabilitywithineducation.Theysuggestthatadifferentlanguagethatconnectswidercirclesofinteresttogeneraleducation,inparticular,thepopularcurrentnotionofsustainability,mayprovide


160

newstrategicpathwaysforconnectionsamongstsocial,cultural,anddisadvantagedgroupswhotogetherrepresentamorepowerfulvoiceforchange.Fromtheirperspec-tiveintheUSA,thepublic,whichtheybelieveisunlikelytobeconcernedenoughaboutecologicalliteracytodoanythingaboutit,educationally,ismorelikelytolookatsomethinglikethe‘participationgap’inrespectoftheappropriateroleforschoolsinlocalcommunities.Seekinganewlanguagecommunityamongstplace-basededucators,includingthoseimplementingcommunity-focused(Berg,2005),culturally-responsive(AlaskanNativeKnowledgeNetwork, 1998;Hart,1997)oractioninquiry-orientedapproaches,theysearchforotherapproachesthatfocusoneducationforparticipationandcommunityaction. The sweeping cultural goals in environmental education and sustainabilityeducationdiscourse,expandedbytheUNDecadeofEducationforSustainableDevelopment(DESD),remainastroublingparadoxesnowframedwithinthetidalwaveofglobalizedeconomics(Sauvé,Brunelle,&Berryman,2005).CountriessuchasAustraliathathavetriedtodevelopnationalinitiativessuchasMainstream-ing Sustainability into Pre-Service Teacher Education in Australia, givenwhattheyperceivetobegrowinginterestandsupportwithinschools,reportedchallengesinimplementingthesechangeprocessesassystemictolargeeducationalsystems(Ferreira,Ryan,Davis,Cavanagh,&Thomas,2009).Successescameinincreasingconceptualcapacitiesforchangethroughexpandedopportunitiesfornetworking,action research and systematic approaches to learning and teaching as part ofprofessionaldevelopmentforteachereducators. Resistancestosystemiceducationalchangehavecontinuedtoplagueenviron-mentaleducationastheyhaveotherperspectivalcritiquesofeducationsystems,suchassocial justiceandculturalstudies.Inparticular,areasofconcernabouttheculturalandsocialpurposesofschoolingandthosepromotingsocialchangeorreconstructionhavebeenportrayedasthreatstosocialstability.Theremainderofthispaperattemptstoengageseveraldimensionsofmoregeneralproblemsofeducationalinclusionandchangewithparticularfocusonimplicationsforteachereducation.Iexplorethenewlanguageof(ecological)sustainabilitywithinthecontextofeducationasgroundingfordirectioninconstructingaviewofteachereduca-tionmoredirectlyfocusedonpost-criticalnotionsofsocialidentityinpedagogy.Whereotherapproachesmayhaveprivilegedcurriculum,Iexplorenotionsoftheconstitutionofteachersandstudentsassubjectsandrelatedconceptsofagency,emotionandnarrativeasprerequisitetochangewithincriticalteachereducation.

The New Language of Ecological Sustainability:

Discourse and Educational Change AccordingtoPeterson(2009),significantshiftsarenecessarywithineducation,andbyimplicationteachereducation,asbridgestoeducationalandsocialchange.Toexpandthegoalsofeducationseriously,toincludeecologicalsustainabilitythrough

Paul Hart

161

environmentaleducation,willinvolvetheacademyincritical(re)examinationofitsonto-epistemologicalframes.Forexample,ifweshiftcertainquestionsinteachereducationsothat,ultimately,teachersthemselveslearntoshiftquestionsinschools,wecanperhapsbegintothinkmoredeeplyaboutwhatwethinkwearedoingfor/tostudents.Wecanbegintoquestionthecertaintyofourpreferredwaystowardcertaingoals.Wecanlearntothinkaboutwhowethinkthestudent,assubject,is.Wecantakeupquestionsofhowthesesubjectscometoagency.AsHey(2002)suggests,beginninginteachereducation,weneedtofindwaysofelaboratingonwhatwearedoingtostructureyoungpeople’slivesastheynegotiateentanglementsofissuesofrace,class,gender(andenvironment).Bowers(2008)goesfurther,sug-gestingthatthesestructures,asculturalnarratives,canonlybeaccessedthroughthickdescriptionoflivedexperience,includingearlylifeexperience.Hesaysthatsuchnarrativeworkshouldbecomeintegraltotheeducationalprocess(i.e.,partofteachereducationandprofessionaldevelopment)focuseddirectlyonwhichpartsoftheculturalandenvironmentalcommonstoconserveandwhichtochange. Usingscienceeducationasanexampleoftraditionaleducationpractice,weshould, intheory,beabletoexplorewhat isgoingoninschoolsciencefromanumberofperspectives. Inpractice,however, thishasprovendifficult, givenaparticular ideologicalmindsetconcerningwhatreallycountsasschoolscience.Wecannowbegintoseetheproblemasdiscursiveratherthanonethatblamesthevictim.AccordingtoHey(2006),forexample,wecanengageinsuchaprocessonlyifwehaveconstructedanexplicitplatformofcriticaleducationaltheorythroughwhich theycanquestion ideasalreadyheld, asun(self)consciouslyascommonsenseknowledge,aboutbeliefsthatcurrentlyformpartofeducation’sprofessionallexicon(Hey,2006).Studentsofscienceeducation,itisargued,canlearnhowtoconstructthemselvesaspractitionerswhoarecapableofaddressingissuesofpeda-gogyusingtoolsfromethnography,phenomenology,narrativeinquiryandactionstrategies(fromactionresearch)togatherstoriesoflivedexperienceofteachers’andstudents’livesinsciencecoursesbasedintheirownexperienceswithintest-oriented,industrialmodelsofschooling.Theseinquirymethodologiesprovidethemeansforteacherstoengageincriticallyreflexiveprocessesthatareneededtoturnthefieldofscienceeducationbackonitself,thatis,tomakeexplicitthosewaysinwhichtheinstitutionof schoolingdisciplinesactivitiesinitsname.Onlythencanwebegintoaskquestionsdifferentlyandtoaskdifferentquestions,abouthowschoolsciencehasbeensocially/educationallyconstructedtodocertainkindsofwork(andnotothers).Wecanthenlearntoaskwhatisthinkableinschoolscienceeducationandwhatisnot.Wecanlearntoaskwhatteacherscandoandcan’tasaproductofafieldthatstructuresandlegitimatesacertainorthodoxyordoxa. Whileitispossibletoconsiderchangeinsubjectareassuchasscienceeduca-tionovertime(e.g.,thatfieldengagedindebatesaboutSTSEinthe1980s)andacrossanarrayofpossible forces (i.e.,philosophicalpositions),manyof theseso-called innovations have been over-shadowed by economic-based discourses


162

(i.e.,evidencebasedpractice,measurableoutcomesandachievementgains).Whennewteacherslookatthispicture,theyeitherresolvetoaccepttheenculturationthatinternship/apprenticeshipoffersorpreparethemselvestoarticulatealternativepositionings.Increasinglyexamplesmaybefoundwhereteachersstruggletoworkacrossculturalandinterdisciplinaryboundaries,includingworkin/withFirstNationscommunitiesor‘multicultural’classrooms.Insuchcasesteachersthemselvesareoftenobligedtomakethecaseforconnectionstogroundtheiralternativeswithoutmuchrecoursetonecessarybackgroundtheory. Argumentsarenowbeingmadeforteachereducationtoequipprospectiveteach-erswiththekindsoftheoretical/philosophicalbackgroundneededtointerprettheirpedagogyintermsoftheepistemologicalexpectationsplaceduponitbycomplexteachingsituations.Teachersinsuchprogramssoonlearntobemoresavvyofthepreconceptionsofthefield(s)theyareworkingin.Unlessmoreteachereducationprogramsmovetowardactivelyengaginginbackgroundfoundationsofgoalsandpurposesofeducation,teacherswilllackthecapabilitiesrequiredtocounterthedominantdiscourse.Thus,nomatterhowbrillianttherhetoricoffieldssuchasenvironmentaleducation/educationforsustainabledevelopment(EE/ESD)orcallsfor“Aboriginal”science,thatadvocatechangedtheoryandpraxis,argumentsaboutpracticewillneverberesolvedatthelevelofpractice.Thisisdifficultworkthatimplicateseducationaldiscourseinthetheory-praxisdilemmasraisedovermanyyearsbyenvironmentaleducators.

Moving Ecological Sustainability

into Critical Educational Discourse Thetheory-praxisdilemmaisexposedinSmith’s(2007)workthatattemptstodirectlylinkschoolsandcurriculumtocommunities.Hedescribescommunityandplace-basedprogramsinsocialandenvironmentalissues,centeredonthingssuchasschoolgardens,inwaysthatcanengagestudentsinwhathecallsauthenticformsof learning—akindofecologicaleducation-in-action (seealsoSmith&Williams,1999).Thevalueinthesestories,itseemstome,isthat,likethousandsofsimilarstories inmanycountries(e.g., theENSIprograminEurope[Posch,Kyburz-Graber,Hart,&Robottom,2006]),theyaretheorized. Greunewald (2003) describes teaching practice in terms of decolonizationandre-inhabitationsothatwecanseewhy certainexperienceswerechosenandimplemented.Itisatthelevelofnarrativewithintheseplace-basedstorieswhereteacherscanlearnhowtocriticallytheorizetheirpracticeastheylivetheirexperi-ence.Bycomingtogetherascriticalactionresearchgroups,focusedontheirownsharedstoriesofeducationalpraxis,teacherslearntoarticulatetheirownstoriesinwaysthathelptheirstudentsraisetheirownquestionsaboutlivingsustainably.Atthesametimeteacherslearnhowtoquestiontheirownpracticeintheprocessofwritingstoriesthatformthebasisoftheir criticaldiscussionwithlike-minded

Paul Hart

163

colleagues.Thismethodologyofanewaction-oriented,relationalformofprofessionaldevelopment,envisionedbycriticalenvironmentaleducatorsdecadesago,reappears,strengthenedbynewconceptualwork,focusedinareassuchasdiscursivepsychology(Taylor,2006)andpostcriticalenvironmentaleducation(Hart,2005). Anotherexampleoftheoreticallyinformed,self-consciouspracticeisBarrett’sinquiry that closely examined teacher, student and communitypartner roles inimplementingaction-orientedenvironmental/sustainabilityeducationwithinschoolprograms(seeBarrett,Hart,Nolan,&Sammel,2005).Eachteacher-studentwork-inggroupexperiencedchallengesandresistanceswhentypicalroleschangedasstudentsthemselvesattemptedtoassumemorecontrolandteachersrelinquishedsomeauthority.Wefoundthatwecouldbetterviewthe“programmed”natureoftheseperformedroleswhenthedominantculturalnarrativesof“goodteacher”and“goodstudent”wereintentionallydisrupted.Directingattentiononprocessesof“good”pedagogicalpracticedisruptedtaken-for-grantedassumptionsaboutrolesandresponsibilitiestotheextentthatbothstudentsandteachersbegantocriticallyquestiontheirroleidentities. Theresearchrevealednotonlyaneedtoattendmoretonarrativesthatteachersandstudentsusetoexplainthemselvesandthevarietyofdiscoursespossible,buttomoreeffectivelyaddressidentityasacomponentinteachereducation.Thequestionoftheory-praxis,whenappliedtoteachereducation,thenbecameoneofhowtoen-gagepreserviceteachersinthekindofauto(bio)ethnographicworkthatgivesthempermissiontotracetheireducationalbeliefstofundamentalphilosophicalprinciplesasinternaldriversratherthanexternalbarriersandtotreatthisworkasthesubjectofcriticaldebate.Thisworkalsoraisedissuesoftheviewofknowledgeandsocialorderbeingreproducedintheculturalnarrativesofcurriculumandpedagogy. Beyondtheclassroom,community-orientededucationprojectsarecomplicatedbysocietalissues.Questionsareoftenraisedconcerningthekindofsociety/en-vironmentthatpeoplewanttosustainandtheformofcitizenparticipation(i.e.,hopefullydeepcriticalengagement)thatcurrentcitizensmaybepreparedtoengage.Environmentaleducatorsoftendescribehow,intheirworkoutsideofschools,theyencounter the ratheremptyconceptual spaces thatmanysocieties/communitieshaveavoided.ExceptionsincludecommunitiesinVancouver,Sydney,andperhapsTorontothathavebeguntoengageinpublicdebatesfocusedintheseplaces-spaces(seeEby,2007).Thepointisthatevenatpoliticallevels,wheretheconstructionofrelationshipsbetweenculturalnarrativesandindividualorsocialconsciousnesshaslackedsubstance,educationisnowheretobefound(Zizek,1999). TeachereducationfacultiesatmanyCanadianuniversities,particularlynewfacultymembers,seemtometobeacutelyawareofthisproblemofcommunityengagement,evenwithinuniversitycommunitiesthemselves,andseemcommittedtocreatingconditions(i.e.,apoliticsofspace)forcriticalexaminationofconstruc-tionsofsocial/environmentalsustainability.AsPlumwood(2002)hassaid,whennormativegoalsofsustainabilityare leftundefined,dominanteconomics-based


164

ratherthanthesocial-environmentaldiscoursesshapewidersocio-politicalagendas.Thesamemaybesaidofeducationaldiscourseswhereprospectiveteachershavenotbeenengagedinquestionsoftheory-praxisthatraiseintoviewthosetensionsandcontradictionsoftheinfrastructureofeducationinsociety.Theassumptionremains,ofcourse,thatteachersasprofessionaleducatorshavesomebasicinterestin,andinclinationtopursue,educationascomplex,socialfieldsoftheories(anddreams)thatcanhelpguidetheirpracticeinwaysthatinvolveschoolscriticallyandresponsiblyinwidersocietalissues.

Education Theory—

Moving Slowly Toward Critical (Eco)Pedagogy Fortuitously, for those interested inmovingbeyondschool-society, theory-practiceorrhetoric-realitygapsinthefieldsofeducation,despiterecent“official”responsestomakepracticemoreevidence-basedorresearch-based,anexpandingliteratureinareasoffeminist(e.g.,Weiler,2009),arts-based(e.g.,Atkinson,2007),andearlychildhood(e.g.,Moss,2007),andjournalssuchasDiscourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of EducationandEducational Philosophy and Theory,amongmany others, assume practitioners already have personal practical educationaltheoriesthatcamefromsomewhere.Althoughdiverse,thisliteratureintroduceseducationalpraxisasthought-in-actionwithaviewtowardthekindsofinquirygenerativeofandenactedbythepeoplewhowanttoworkthroughdilemmasofthinking-practiceswithintheirownlocalcontexts.Thesedifferentperspectivesonwhatcountsastheoryandinquiryaregroundedinthebeliefsandassumptionsbywhichteachersmakesenseoftheirindividualschoolexperiences.Thismeansthatprofessionaldevelopmentandinitialteachereducationcanfocusondiscrepanciesbetweenpersonaltheoryanditsoriginsintheprocessesofsubjectification.Hence,wecannowseelinksbetweenthoseeducationaltheoriesandprofessionalpracticesin respectof the social structuresandculturalnarrativeswhich themselvesarealwayscontestedandremainuncertainandthereforeproblematic. Whentheemphasisshiftsfromgrandtheorytosmall,personal,localstoriesinsearchofconscious,criticalself-appraisal,educationaltheorycanbeviewedasarelationaldebateaboutboththeendsandmeansofeducation,thatis,asbothphilosophicalandpractical.Inthisview,theinterestshiftsfromappliedtheory,thatsimplydrawsfromideasinfoundationsandsocialpsychology,tointeractionalelementsofthewhol(istic)enterpriseofcriticallyappraisingtheconcepts,beliefsandvaluesencorporatedwithinprevailingtheoriesofeducationalpractice.Practiceisnotderivedfromtheorybutinter-relationallyusestheideasoftheoryasgenera-tiveanddialecticallyintegratedwithpracticalunderstandingsoflivedexperience.Thegapisnotfromtheorytopracticebutfromignoranceandhabittothoughtful,criticalreflection(Carr,1983). Thisre-interpretationofeducationaltheoryascriticalappraisaloftheory-prac-

Paul Hart

165

ticedialecticseesknowledgeasaninterplayoftheindividual’ssubjectiveviews(i.e.,theirsubjectivity)ontheonehandandthesociocultural,historical,politicalcontextswithinwhichtheyworkandlive.Thiskindofthinkinginfersarelationalepistemology(asopposedtotechnical-expert)whereknowingandlearninginvolvesaninterplayoftheoriesthatguideactionwithinthestructures(institutionsandcul-turalnarratives)thatsurroundsuchrelations.Understandingteachingisabouttherelationalprocessesofsubjectificationwithintheculturalnarrativesofeducation.Criticaldimensionsofenvironmentaleducationarerootedinthisrelationalworkineducation,usingconceptssuchasnatureinrelationtoethicalhumanactivityinrespectofhumanresponsibilityfortheplanetandeducators’responsibilityforaccesstodeepaspectsofsustainabilityasframesofmind(seeBonnett,2003). Ifthequestionofhowtoimproveenvironmentaleducation,orteachereducation,canbeconceivedintermsofrelationalepistemology(methodology),thenquestionsofchangeineducationbecomeonesofimprovingeducationaltheorizingthroughprocessesofprofessionaldevelopmentthatbeginintheteachereducationexperi-ence.Teacherlearning,conceivedasasocialprocess,recognizespastexperienceasasourceofknowledgeandinterpretiveformsofinquiryasalegitimatemeansofengagingsuchprocesses.And,engagingsocial/relationalprocessesasabasisfor educational (i.e., theoretical) debate implicates certain shifts toward social,culturalandenvironmentalissuesasoneofthebasesforeducationalexperiencesandforcriticallyengagingcommunity-basedteachereducation.Criticalanalysisoftheoriesanddiscursivestructuresareseenascrucialtopersonalconstructionofsubjectivities.Ifteachereducationdoesnotincludeelementsofbothcriticalreflection and social critique at several levels of engagement, then educationalchangeisunlikely(Davis,Sumara,&Luce-Kaplan,2000). Environmentaleducatorshavetakenupthesequestionsandchallengesinatleasttwomajorways—throughproposalsforanaction-basedorientationtoedu-cationandteachereducationand,morerecently,throughcritical(eco)pedagogy.Theprinciplesapplytoteachereducationmoregenerallyaspartofthechorusforself-reflexiveinquiryandprocessesofdiscourseanalysis.Andalthoughcertainnotionsofactionresearchhavebeenbadlyabused,certainprinciplesofthisin-teractionalformofinquiryresonatewithsocial,relationallearningandknowingjustdescribed.Theideaofvaluingpersonalpractical(i.e.,teachers’)theoriesasalegitimateformofeducationaltheoryandtheideaofvaluingcriticalengagementofagency-structure(fromcriticaltheorists)setsactionresearchwithinthebroadrealmofideologycritiqueofrelationalknowing(sociallearning),developedbysocioculturalpsychologists,culturalgeographersandlearningtheorists. Historically,criticalpedagogyhasepistemologicalrootsthatgobothtoques-tioninghowcultureconstitutesus(asteachersandlearners)aswellashowwecometoconstructoureducationalidentitieswithinsuchdiscourses.Itgoesbeyondsocialcritique,however,inproposingformsofactivistengagementinthetransformativeaimsofsocioculturalchange.Itfocusesonlearningthatmoreproductivelyaccounts


166

forbothcognitiveandembodiedkindsofintersubjectiveexperience,acknowledgingpoststructuralist(particularlyFoucauldian)conceptionsofthediscursiveformationofidentities.Takingtheseideasseriouslyimpliesaneedtofocusonquestionsofidentity/subjectivitywhetherwelookatenvironment-related,science-related,orteachereducationasweapproachchange.Themostdifficultthingtogetholdofinthisviewishowtocometoaplacewherewecanvaluethoseexperiencesthatformourlives,includingdifficultiesweface,inteachereducation,intryingtoarticulateornarratethemeaningsofthoseexperiencesthathaveformedusasteachers. Environmentaleducation’sinteresthasevolved,itseemstome,asonethatislookingforspacesofpossibilityandresistancebeyondpostmodernconcernsaboutlanguages,asaproductoftheculturalnarrativesweareimmersedin.Criticalpedagogiesinenvironmentaleducationlookforeducationalopportunitiestodesignintersubjective(i.e.,sociallearning/actioninquiry)experiencesasplacesoflearning(i.e.,fieldsofemergence)wheresomeformoftheselfemergesandwherewecanhaveagencywithinourownconstitutedness.Theideais,ofcourse,that,ifwecancreatepedagogicalplaces/spacesthatmayhavedeepermeaning,perhapslearningcanbetransformative.McKenzie(2008),Payne(inpress),Wattchow(2004),andFawcett(2009)inenvironmentaleducationandBoler(1999),PittandBritzman(2003),Bonnett(2009),Gough(2004),andKenwayandBullen(2008)andmanyothersineducationandthesocialsciencesarepointingtowardidentity/subjectivityasasocialexperienceofsubjectificationthatiscrucialtoteachereducation. Similartopost-criticalperspectives,environmentaleducation-orientedtheoryattemptstoshiftthediscourseofresearchandpedagogyfromindividualistconceptionsofbeing/knowing“selves”tosocialrelationalonto-epistemologicalpositionings.Itshiftsthefocusofconcernininquiryfromtextinterpretationtoanalysisofdiscursivepractices.Unliketraditionalsubjectareassuchasscienceeducation,environmentaleducationprovidesconcretealternativegroundingforchangingschoolpractices(andteachereducationpractices)throughidentityworkwithdiscourseinmind.Thesereconstructionsarethefocusofthelastsectionofthisarticle.

Challenges to Understanding

Subjectification as a Process Perhaps because of its socially critical ontological orientation, perhaps itsrelational epistemology and methodology, environmental education has alwaysrepresentedachallengetocomplacencyinthefieldofeducation.Inotherways,ithasprovidedconcretealternativesforteachersandresearcherssearchingforpathstowardparticularends(i.e., thehealthoftheplanet).Manyoftheissuesraisedbythesechallenges,whatevertheirorigin,seemtometocomebacktoadesireformorecomplexnotionsofagencyandsubjectivity.Wewantteachersinteachereducationtowanttotroubletheirteaching.Wecanseethatweneedtogetbeyondrhetoric-realityortheory-practicegaps,beyonddiscretefactorsthatform“driv-

Paul Hart

167

ersandbarriers”(seeHart,2007),orevenbeyondanalysesofpowerofculturalnarrativesthatworktodisrupttransferofbeliefstopractice.Butweseemtohavedifficultyinknowingwheretoturntoaccesssubjectpositionsthatenablecriticalpedagogy.Thisiswherenotionsofidentity/subjectivityanddiscursiveproductionofteachingbecomeuseful. Teachereducationseemsalikelyplacetobegintolearnhowto“becomecriticalandconstructive.”Itispartoftheacademicstructureofsocietythatshouldinspirecreativityandcriticalcapacityforexplorationofpossibilitiesincontactwithyoungpeoplewhohavedevelopedtheirownwaysofconnectingtoeachotherandtheplanet(Berry,1999).Yetteachereducationseemssomehowlimitingorcomplicitinitsinstrumentalistandtechnocentricrole,fulfillingitsresponsibilitytocredentializepeopleforthesystem(Stevenson,1987,2007).Teachereducationlivesakindofschizophrenicexistencebetweenadvocatingradicalchangeandmaintainingthestatusquo,aspacewhichisrapidlybecominganunsustainablefiction(Watson,2009).Theidea,thattheliteratureonteachinghasdiversifiedtoincludethingslikeenvironmentaleducationandmanyotherperspectivesandinsomequarterstodirectattentiontotensionsofprocessesofsubjectification,isencouraging. Weseetheliteratureonteachernarrativesasthekeytoteacherreform.Itisarguedthatteacherscanbecomecriticalagentsoftheirownlearningwhentheyreflectonstoriesoftheiridentitiesandpriorexperiences—talking,reading,“slow”exposureand reflection (seeDrake&Sherin,2006;Samaras&Freese,2006).DavisandPhelps(2006)saythattransformingpracticeishingedtotheexerciseofuncoveringcoreassumptionsandwebsofbeliefaboutwhatknowledgeis,whatlearningisandwhatschools(should)do.Onemustgobeyondreflection,theysay,toconsidertheoriesandphilosophiesthatareembeddedinone’shabitsofthoughtandaction.Onemustalsoassumethatidentityandlearningemergewithinsocial,culturalandhistoricalcontexts(Gutiérrez&Rogoff,2003;Rogoff,2003).BoalerandGreeno(2000)describestudentsandteachersasco-authors,relationalagentswhoaremutuallycommittedandaccountabletoeachotherforconstructingunder-standingsofdiscourse.Theliteraturehasopenedmanynewdebateswhichexposethevulnerabilityofsuchwork.Commentingonthenecessityandimpossibilityofidentitywork,St.Louis(2009)foregroundsthedialecticalnatureofsocialposi-tioningaswellasthedifferencesofperspectivebroughttobearonthepoliticsandethicsofcollectiveidentity.Clearly,educationaldiscoursehaschangedthetheorybaseforteachersasprofessionals. Althoughtheenvironmentaleducationliterature,withexceptions(e.g.,Lunde-gård&Wickman,2009),doesnotrepresentthelargebodyofresearchandscholarlyworkonidentity-agencydiscourse,thiscomplexcriticalliteratureinitsownwayforeshadowedthechangeswenowseeineducationaldiscourse.Itprovidednaturalspacesthatopenupsubjectification1asaprocessthroughwhichonebecomesasubject (Davies,2006).Examinationof thisprocesshasenabledenvironmentaleducatorstointerrogatethedeepermeaningsofthosesignificantlifeexperiences


168

that havehadaformativeinfluenceontheirpersistentsenseofagencyandadvocacyandactivism(seeHart,2003).Itnowseemsquitenaturaltolookattherejuvenatedattentiontoidentityoutsidepsychologicalconnotationsofaunifiedself.Giventhisdiscursiveshift,Probyn(2003)andmanypost-structuraliststendtoavoidusingtheterm“identity”altogether,preferringthenotionofsubjectivitiestoemphasizesubjects’multipleandfluididentitiesandpositionalities(seealsoKreber,2010).Whatevertermisused,thenotionofouridentitiesbeingspokenandwrittenintoexistencebythestorieswetellaboutourselves,orthatotherstellaboutus,becomesanimportantpartoftheautobiographicalnarrativeworkthatisnowcontemplatedandenactedinteachereducationprograms(seeAllard,2006;Wales,2009). JudithButler’s(2006)workwasfoundationalinestablishingtheconceptofsub-jectificationasabasisforthinkingourselvesoutsidetheliberalhumanistperspectiveofstudentsandteachersasautonomousindividualseachwithvaryingdegreesoffreedomtochoosewhatkindofpersontobe.Butler’sinterest,whichseemscrucialtocriticalteachereducation,isinhowsubjectionworksparadoxicallyonandinthepsychiclifeofteachers(whoareatoncedependentuponyetresistanttothepowersthatdominateandsubjectit).FollowingDavies(2006),weseethatButler’ssubjectshaveagencysuchthattheirdiscursiveconstitutiondoesnotcompletelydeterminewhattheycando.Instead,iftheirengagementwitheducationaldiscourseinvolvescriticalreflection,thismayworktoenableresistancesandreworkingsthatcaneclipsethepowersthatactonthem.Forenvironmentaleducators,thekeyelementinthisprocesshasbeenthe“critical”partofthereflexiveprocess,now,inpost-criticaltimes,extendedintermsofanhistoricalautobiographicalexerciseof“insearch.” Whilemuchrecentliteratureonteachereducationhighlightsidentity,theargu-mentsforsuchattentionareframedwithinverydifferentanalyticlensesrangingfromessentialistorindividualisttonomadicandcollectiveorevenpoliticalpositionings(Beauchamp&Thomas,2009).ManyenvironmentaleducatorsthatIworkwithrecognizethenecessityandimpossibilityofidentitywork.Thechallenge,asHall(1996)says,liesinattemptingtoworkwithpeoplewhoseemunableorhavenoap-parentinterestinthestruggletolookathowtheyhavecometoconstructthemselvesas“peoplewhoteach”withinspecifichistoricalandinstitutionalconstructionsofdiscursiveformationsandpracticesofwhatconstitutes“goodteacher.”Assumingawillingness,perhapsevenadesire,toengageinthenarrativeworkof“arrival”attheirpresentviewofteaching/learning,curriculumandpedagogy,identitynar-rativescanprovideaccesstoassumptionsandworldviews—onto-epistemologicalpositionings—thatcanbesituatedwithinarangeofphilosophicalperspectives.Toughwork,nodoubt,butthechallengeofproducingchangeagentsdemandswhatHey(2006)calls“slowcognition”—aformofintellectualengagementnoteasilyachievedin“high-speedhighereducation.” Involvementinsuchworkmeansthatteachershaveanopportunitytolocatethemselvesintheworld,toprobetheirtacitassumptions—theirworldview—thatlocate theirperformance,oftenunconsciously,withinthefield.Withinenviron-

Paul Hart

169

mental education, the importance of identity work, that is, the subjectificationprocess,hasbeenlocated in itsspecificqualityasaphenomenologicalrelationwitheducationandwithsociety/environment.PhillipPayne(inpress)arguesthatecophenomenologicalexperienceismorethanjustcognitiveorintellectualinthatitbecomesembodiedaspartofourlargerconnectionwithourpurposeontheplanet(assentientandimmediateprecognateexperiencesofthenaturalandsocial).Whatcomesoutofgenuinesubjectificationprocessesmaybeakindofpoliticalontol-ogythatempowersteachers,asButler(1995)says,torecognizetheirrelationstoeducation/environmentaspurposiveandsignificant reconfigurationsofculturalandpoliticalrelations(p.46).Thus,becomingconsciousofonto-epistemologicalbeliefs/valueshasthecapacityto(re)shapeand(re)directteachers’livesaswellastheirapproachestocurriculum,pedagogy,andlearningandshouldmoreexplicitlyinformteachereducation(Taylor,2005).Thequestionofwhetherthegrowinglit-eratureononto-epistemologicalidentityinteachereducationcanbeusedtoframethebigquestionsofeducationtheory/praxisremains.

All that Glitters . . . Critical Reflection Therecanbeproblemsinidentityworkasanindividualisticexerciseinselfstudy.Thosewhofocusontheprocessesofsubjectificationnowlookseriouslyatcollectivenarrativeconstructionsofidentity.Particularlyinthoserelationalspacesthatarecreatedinaction-orientedinquiriesofenvironmentaleducation,thinkingoutsidethedominanteducationalnarrativeshastakenagreatdealofcourage.Work-ingagainstthegrainrequirescapabilitiesthattechnician-orientedpractitionersarenottrainedforbutforwhichteachersasprofessionaleducatorsoughttobe.Thismeansreconceptualizingwhatcountsasresearch,whichinturnmeansengagingwithphilosophicalgroundings thatwork topossibility and imagination in cur-riculumandpedagogybeyondthetechnical.Itmeansthatratherthanconsideringteachereducationasproducingteachersasdiscrete“subjects”(throughcompetitionandexclusion),whoworkwithinindividualboundariesandasseparateidentitiesstruggle for recognition,wework to skill up, to engage collective, collaborateresponsibilityforlearningandrelation. Itisnotenough,saysDavies(2006),forteachersandeducatorstosimplyengageinpassiveresistance,toperform“goodteacher”intheprivacyoftheclassroom.Wemustlearnhow(beginningatleastinteachereducation)totakeresponsibilityforcriticallyexaminingthecurriculumandpedagogies,asdiscursivepracticesthataretakenforgrantedinourschoolsanduniversitiesandask:Whatconditionsofpossibilityaretheycreatingandmaintainingforus(p.436)andforourstudents?Ourresponsibility,saysDavis(2006)istounderstand,totheextentpossible,thecomplexconditionsofourmutualformation.Intheircollectivebiographywork,DaviesandGannon(2006)encourageteacherstoworkwiththeirownmemories,toread,toengageincollectivewritingsessionswithcritical,friendlydiscussion


170

ofeachothers’ideas.Teachersareencouragedtogeneratestories,notsomuchaspersonal,autobiographicalaccountsmadeafterengagementingroupwork,butascollectivestories,asempoweringofnewpedagogicalpossibilitiesoriginatingincomingtoknowoneself inrelation—responsiveandemergent—andmovingbeyondthelimitationsofcurrentpedagogicalthought. Theideathatidentity/subjectivityisconceivedasafluidanddynamicrela-tionalprocess,constantly(re)negotiatedthroughexperience(multiple,emotional,narrative/discursive),withinacomplex“architecture”(Day,Kington,Stobart,&Sammons,2006)needsunpackingbeyondwhatcanbeaccomplishedinthispaper.WhileBeauchampandThomas’(2009)attempttoconstructanotionofidentitybasedinexaminationofacombinationofself-knowledge(orknowledgeofself)aswellasthroughthecollectivityoftheprofessioninordertohelpusthinkmoreclearlyaboutteacher“development,”RodgersandScott’s(2008)usefulconnectionbetween“selfandbeing”shouldnotbelostinthedetailofthisarticle. These ideas resonatewithenvironmentaleducatorssuchasFien (1993)andPayne(inpress)whohave,foryears,voicedtheirconcernsabouttheneglectedon-tologicalconnectionincriticaldiscourseanalysisofeducationalprograms(seealsoLotz-Sisitka,2009).Thenotionthattheselfthatisrecognizable(e.g.,ateacherofaparticularkind)asanevolvingyetsomewhatcoherentbeingwhoconsciously(andunconsciously)(re)constructs(andisreconstructed)historically,ininteractionwithcultural(institutional)systems,providesabaseformyconcernaboutthe“barriersanddrivers”approachtomainstreamingenvironmentaleducation(Hart,2007).Whiletheattempttobridgethepersonalandprofessionalorinternal-external(elidedas“oughtself ”and“idealself ”byRodgersandScott,2008)mayseemworthwhile,environmentaleducatorshavearguedformorefocuson“being”—ontheexistentialconnectiontotheembodiedconnectiontothings(Barrett,2007;Payne,inpress). Inadeepersense,BeauchampandThomas(2009)doindeedrepresent“em-bodiment” and “emotion” (see, for example,Alsup, 2006;Zembylas, 2003) asdimensionsoftheselfinthesubjectificationprocess,buttheydososeeminglyas“factors”ofsomewhatdistantexternalities.TheygetclosesttowhatenvironmentaleducatorssuchasBarrett(2007)andPayne(inpress)areattemptingtomakecleartotheeducationalcommunityconcerningthedeepervalueofwhatreallyunderliesenvironmentaleducation’scritiqueofeducationaldiscourse,whentheyconsider“thenarrativeanddiscourseaspectsofidentity.”Thisnew“positional”emphasisinidentityworkalignswithTaylor’s(2005)attempttoclarifythedistortedunder-standingsofdiscursiveandconstructionisttheoriesofidentity.Anditleadstotheidea,fromDaviesandHarré(1990)andBansel,Davies,Laws,andLinnell(2009),thatidentitiesmaybeviewedaspointsofattachmenttosubjectpositionswhichdiscursivepracticesconstructforus. Given these connections, teacher education may begin to attend more to“firstperson”narrationofteachers’storiesofhowtheybelievetheyhavecometoconstructthemselvesasteachers,aswellastheirideasaboutwhatcountsas

Paul Hart

171

knowledgeandpedagogywithin theirsubjectpositions. Inotherwords, justasenvironmentaleducatorshavebeenchallengingthesingularityofdominantedu-cationaldiscoursesasa“site”inteacherprofessionaldevelopmentdiscoursesforover20years,discursive/culturalpsychologistsarenowchallengingcognitiveanddevelopmentalpsychologiststoconsidermoreseriouslythevalueofnarrativeasthe“site”ofidentitywork(see,Edwards,1997;Potter&Wetherall,1987;Taylor,2005;Wetherall,1998,2003). Literatureinresearchonteachingnowlegitimatesconceptuallythevalueofthestoriednatureofidentity(seeConnelly&Clandinin,1999;Søreide,2006;Watson,2006)asadiscursiveactivityofcollectivestorytelling(Sfard&Prusak,2005),orascollectivebiography(Davies&Gannon,2006),inrelationtothelargersocialcontext.Whatneedsmoreemphasis,itseemstome,beyondnarrativeinquiry,isrecognitionofqualitativeinquiryframesofphenomenologyandautoethnography,framedbymanytheoreticalperspectivessuchasfeminist,poststructuralandcultural,asuse-fulinexploringwaysthatidentitycanbenegotiatedcontextuallyanddiscursively(Cohen,2008).Theideathatthediscoursesinwhichteachersengagecanactuallychangetheirtrajectoriesandchallengetraditionalconfigurationsofeducation(seeMillerMarsh,2002)approachesnotionsofborderlanddiscourse(seeAlsup,2006)thatcriticalenvironmentaleducatorsdiscussasactionresearch.Thepointisthat,atleastforenvironmentaleducationresearcherswithaninterestinsociallycriticalap-proachestochangethatgobeyondtheschool(i.e.,community-basedapproaches),thereisaneedtocreateeducationalconditionsforteacherengagementinnewformsofprofessionaldevelopment.Andthereisaneedtobeginthisprocessof“insearch”earlyintheirteachereducationprogramsinwaysthatallowthemtoconfronttheideologicalnatureoftheirformingidentities,thatisthedirectengagementwiththeprocessesof theirsubjectification.Inmyowncriticallyreflexiveencounterswithpreservicepost-interns,theytalkabouttheemotions,feelings,ideas,appearances,actionsandlanguageinvolvedinconstructinglearningenvironmentsfortheirstudents.Theytalkabouthowtheseexperiencesprovokedtransformationintheirthinkingaboutpractice(seethetypologyinLuttenberg&Berger,2008). Environmentaleducatorshavebecomeinterestedinthisemphasisconcerningtherelationshipbetweenidentityandagency,particularlyintraversingtheboundariesofteachers’businessasusual—orasRobottom(1987)said,asakindofdynamicstabilityinthefaceofchange.Barrett’s(2006)deepreflexiveworkwithoneteacherwhowantedtoteachenvironmentaleducationrevealsthegapbetweenidentityandagency.Asshesaid,“hehadtheskills,knewthetheory(hewaspursuingaphenom-enologicallyorientedmastersdegreethatinvolvedfindinghispersonalpracticaltheoryofteachinginanenvironment-relatedprogram),wasinasettingthatremovedsomestructuralboundariesandyethejustcouldn’tseemtogetthere”(Barrett,2006).Al-thoughnarrative-basedformulationsofidentitydescribesuchconstructionsascrucialtoidentityprocessing,theymayrequiremoreworkthatdigsintocultural(Holland,Lachicotte,Skinner,&Cain,1998), feminist (Butler, 2006), disability (Perselli,


172

2005)andmanyotherdiscoursesofdifference.Weseethisinourownworkwithinternteacherstroubledbytheimpactofcontextintheenculturationprocessthatoccursaspreserviceteachersareinductedintotheprofession. Manyquestionsremainabouthowtoaddresstheidentity-agencygapwithinteachereducation(seeBritzman,2003;Hoban,2007;Nias,1987).Itseemsfairto say that along the continuum of views that one finds on the importance ofidentitydevelopmentwithin teachereducation, ranging fromtheviewof thoselikeHammerness,Darling-Hammond,andBransford(2005)whoseedevelopingan identityasa teacherasan importantpartofsecuring teachers’commitmenttoadherencetoprofessionalnorms,tothoselikeBritzman(2003)whoargueforcritical(de)constructionofthereal, thenecessaryandtheimaginaryinteacheridentitywork,infullawarenessofthediscursiveculturaldiscoursesinwhichthey(we)areallembedded,environmentaleducatorsasawholehaveestablishednofixedaddress. BeauchampandThomas(2009)arguethatteachereducationprogramsshouldcreatespacesforteachingcontextsthatprovoketensionsandchallengetaken-for-grantedassumptionsabouttheroleoftheteacherandthedominantdiscoursesofeducation.Itmaybethat,astheysay,alternativeshapesmustbegiventoteachereducationexperience,topathsthatallowfordeepconsiderationoftheselfinrela-tiontotheprofession,tomultipleconceptualframeworksandtopractical,com-munity-basedexperiences thatchallengecomfortableconstructionsof teachingandtraditionaleducationalcontexts. Environmentaleducationdiscoursewillcontinuetotroubleconventionaledu-cationaldiscourseinwaysthatchallengepreserviceteacherstolookcriticallyattheprofessionandtoattendtothetruthsorsacredstoriesthataretooeasilytreatedasgivens.Increasingly,environmentaleducatorsarere-imaginingtheirpracticesthat(re)inscribeparticularstructuresofschoolsinwaysthat(re)shapewhatispossible,exposetheinvisiblestringsthatcontrolwhatcountsasknowledge(i.e.,onto-episte-mology)andlimitthepositionswecan‘see’intheprocessofsubjectification.WhatAlanReid(2009)hassaidofenvironmentaleducationappliestoteachereducation:Educationisaboutengagingthe‘in-betweenspaces’ofourperformanceaseduca-tors.ItseemstomethatthisiswhatButler(1995)referstoasthatparadoxicalspacebetweenmasteryandsubmission,betweenthepowerformingthesubjectandthepossibility itcreates foragencyandchange.Perhapseducatorsarenowready toexplorethesespacesasrichtransitionzonesofchange?

Note1 SeeBritish Journal of Science Education, 27(4), 2006, a special issueon Judith

Butler’sworkonsubjectivity.

Paul Hart

173

References Alaska Native Knowledge Network. (1998). Alaska standards for culturally responsive

schools.Anchorage,AK:NativeKnowledgeNetwork.Allard,A.(2006).‘Abitofachameleonact’:Acasestudyofoneteacher’sunderstandings

ofdiversity.European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3),319-340.Alsup,J.(2006).Teacher identity discourses: Negotiating personal and professional spaces.

Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Atkinson,D. (2007).What isart ineducation?Newnarrativesof learning.Educational

Philosophy and Theory, 39(2),108-117.Bansel,P.,Davies,B.,Laws,C.,&Linnell,S.(2009).Bullies,bullyingandpowerinthe

contextsofschooling.British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(1),59-69.Barrett,M.J.(2006).Educationfortheenvironment:Actioncompetence,becoming,and

story.Environmental Education Research, 12(3/4),503-511.Barrett,M.J.(2007).Homeworkandfieldwork:Investigationsintotherhetoric-realitygap

inenvironmentaleducationresearchandpedagogy.Environmental Education Research, 13(2),209-223.

Barrett,M.J.,Hart,P.,Nolan,K.,&Sammel,A.(2005).Challengesinimplementingac-tion-orientedsustainabilityeducation.InL.Filho(Ed.),Handbook of sustainability research(pp.507-534).Frankfurt,Germany:PeterLang.

Beauchamp,C.,&Thomas,L. (2009).Understanding teacher identity:Anoverviewofissuesintheliteratureandimplicationsforteachereducation.Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2),175-189.

Berg,A.(2005).Learningintherealworld:Engagingstudentsforsuccessandcitizenship.Unpublishedmanuscript.

Berry,T.(1999).The great work. Toronto,Ontario,Canada:RandomHouse.Boaler,J.,&Greeno,J.(2000).Identity,agency,andknowinginmathematicsworlds.InJ.

Boaler(Ed.),Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp.171-200).Westport,CT:Ablex.

Boler,M.(1999).Feeling power: Emotions and education.NewYork:Routledge.Bonnett,M.(2003).Specialissue:Retrievingnature:Educationforapost-humanistage.

Journal of Philosophy of Education, 37(4).Bonnett,M.(2009).Education,sustainability,andthemetaphysicsofnature.InM.McKenzie,

H.Bai,P.Hart,&B.Jickling(Eds.),Fields of green: Restorying culture, environment, and education. Cresskill,NJ:HamptonPress.

Bowers,C.(2008).Whyacriticalpedagogyofplaceisanoxymoron.Environmental Educa-tion Research, 14(3),325-335.

Britzman,D.(2003).Practice make practice: A critical study of learning to teach.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.

Butler,J.(1995).Contingentfoundations:Feminismandthequestionof‘postmodernism.’In S.Benhabib, J.Butler,D.Cornell,&N. Fraser (Eds.), Feminist contentions: A philosophical exchange (pp.127-143).NewYork:Routledge.

Butler,J.(2006).Response.British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(4),529-534.Carr,W.(1983).Educationalresearchasscience.InA.Pitman,etal.,EED302Educational

enquiry: Approaches to research.Victoria,Australia:DeakinUniversity.CMEC(CouncilofMinistersofEducation,Canada).(1997).Commonframeworkofscience

learningoutcomes:Pan-Canadianprotocol for collaborationon school curriculum.


174

Ottawa,Ontario,Canada:Author.Cohen,J.(2008).That’snottreatingyouasaprofessional:Teachersconstructingcomplex

professional identities through talk. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(2),79-93.

Connelly,M.,&Clandinin,J.(1999).Shaping a professional identity: Stories of educational practice.London,Ontario,Canada:Althouse.

Davies,B.(2006).Subjectification:TherelevanceofButler’sanalysisforeducation.British Journal of Sociology of Education,27(4),425-438.

Davies, B., & Gannon, S. (2006). Doing collective biography. Maidenhead, UK: OpenUniversityPress.

Davies,B.,&Harré,R.(1990).Positioning:Thediscursiveproductionofselves.Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20(1),43-63.

Davis,B.,&Phelps,R.(2006).Education,research,andeducationalresearch.Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 1(1),1-7.

Davis,B.,Sumara,D.,&Luce-Kapler,R.(2000).Engaging minds: Learning and teaching in a complex world.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.

Day,C.,Kington,A.,Stobart,G.,&Sammons,P.(2006).Thepersonalandprofessionalselvesofteachers:Stableandunstableidentities.British Educational Research Journal, 32(4),601-616.

Drake,C.,&Sherin,M.(2006).Practicingchange:Curriculumadaptationandteachernar-rativeinthecontextofmathematicseducation.Curriculum Inquiry, 36(2),153-187.

Eby.D.(2007).Stillwaitingatthealtar:Vancouver2010’son-again,off-againrelationshipwithsocialsustainability.PaperpresentedattheCOHREexpertworkshoponprotectingandpromotinghousingrightsinthecontextofmegaevents.Geneva,Switzerland.

Edwards,D.(1997).Discourse and cognition.London,UK:Sage.Fawcett,L.(2009).Feralsocialityand(un)naturalhistories:Onnomadieethicsandembod-

iedlearning.InM.McKenzie,H.Bai,P.Hart,&B.Jickling(Eds.),Fields of green: Restorying culture, environment, and education. Cresskill,NJ:HamptonPress.

Ferreira,J.,Ryan,L.,Davis,J.,Cavanagh,M.,&Thomas.J.(2009).Mainstreaming sustain-ability into pre-service teacher education in Australia.Canberra,Australia:PreparedbytheAustralianResearchInstituteinEducationforSustainabilityfortheAustralianGovernmentDepartmentoftheEnvironment,Water,HeritageandtheArts.

Fien,J.(1993).Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorizing and environ-mental education.Geelong,Victoria,Australia:DeakinUniversityPress.

Gough,N.(2004).RhizomANTicallybecoming-cyborg:Performingposthumanpedagogies.Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(3),253-265.

Gruenewald,D.(2003).Thebestofbothworlds:Acriticalpedagogyofplace.Educational Researcher, 32(4),3-12.

Gruenewald,D.,&Manteaw,B.(2007).Oilandwaterstill:HowNoChildLeftBehindlimitsanddistortsenvironmentaleducationinU.S.schools.Environmental Education Research, 13(2),171-188.

Gutiérrez,K.,&Rogoff,B.(2003).Culturalwaysoflearning:Individualtraitsorrepertoiresofpractice.Educational Researcher, 32(5),19-24.

Hall,S.(1996).Introduction:Whoneeds‘identity’?InS.Hall&P.DuGay(Eds.),Ques-tions of cultural identity. London,UK:Sage.

Hammerness,K.,Darling-Hammond,L.,&Bransford,J.(2005).Howteacherslearnand

Paul Hart

175

develop. InL.Darling-Hammond& J.Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp.358-389).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Hart,P.(2003).Teachers’ thinking In environmental education: Consciousness and respon-sibility.NewYork:PeterLang.

Hart,P.(2005).Transitionsinthoughtandpractice:Links,divergencesandcontradictionsinpost-criticalinquiry.Environmental Education Research, 11(4),391-400.

Hart,P.(2007).Desiresandresistancesasdriversandbarrierstoenvironmentallearningandsustainability:ACanadianperspective.InI.Björneloo&E.Nyberg(Eds.),Drivers and barriers for implementing learning for sustainable development in pre-school through upper secondary and teacher education (p.31-36).Paris,France:UNESCO.

Hart,R.(1997).Children’s participation: The theory and practice of involving young citizens in community development and environmental care.London,UK:Earthscan.

Hey,V.(2002).Horizontalsolidaritiesandmoltencapitalism:Thesubject,intersubjectiv-ity,selfandtheotherinlatemodernity.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 23(2),227-241.

Hey.V. (2006).The politics of performative resignification:Translating Judith Butler’stheoreticaldiscourseanditspotentialforasociologyofeducation.British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(4),439-457.

Hoban,G.(2007).Considerationsfordesigningcoherentteachereducationprograms.InJ.Butcher&L.McDonald(Eds.),Making a difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching and teacher education (pp.173-187).Rotterdam,TheNetherlands:SensePublishers.

Holland,D.,Lachicotte,W.,Skinner,D.,&Cain,C.(1998).Identity and agency in cultural worlds.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Kenway,J.,&Bullen,E.(2008).Theglobalcorporatecurriculumandtheyoungcyberflâneurasglobalcitizen.InN.Dolby&F.Rizvi(Eds.),Youth moves; Identities and education in global perspective.NewYork:Routledge.

Kreber,C. (2010).Academics’ teacher identities, authenticity and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 35(2),171-194.

Lotz-Sisitka,H.(2009).Whyontologymatterstoreviewingenvironmentaleducationresearch.Environmental Education Research, 15(2),165-175.

Lundegård,I.,&Wickman,P.(2009).Identitytransformationineducationforsustainabledevelopment:Aquestionoflocation.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(5),461-479.

Luttenberg, J.,&Bergen,T. (2008).Teacher reflection:Thedevelopmentofa typology.Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(5),311-323.

McKenzie,M.(2008).Theplacesofpedagogy:Or,whatwecandowithculturethroughintersubjectiveexperiences.Environmental Education Research, 14(3),361-373.

MillerMarsh,M.(2002).Examiningthediscoursesthatshapeourteacheridentities.Cur-riculum Inquiry, 32(4),453-469.

Moss,P. (2007).Meetings across the paradigmatic divide.Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(3),229-245.

Nias, J. (1987).Seeing anew: Teachers’ theories of action.Geelong,Victoria,Australia:DeakinUniversityPress.

Payne,P.(inpress).(Un)timelyecophenomenologicalframingsofenvironmentaleducationresearch.InA.Wals,M.Brody,J.Dillon&B.Stevenson(Eds.),International handbook


176

of research in environmental education.NewYork:Routledge.Peterson,T.(2009).Engagedscholarship:Reflectionsandresearchonthepedagogyofsocial

change.Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4),541-552.Pitt,A.,&Britzman,D.(2003).Speculationsonqualitiesofdifficultknowledgeinteach-

ingandlearning:Anexperimentwithpsychoanalyticresearch.Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(6),755-776.

Plumwood,V.(2002).Environmental culture: The ecological crisis of reason.London,UK:Routledge.

Posch,P.,Kyburz-Graber,R.,Hart,P.,&Robottom,I.(Eds.).(2006).Approaching reflective practice in teacher education—Learning from case studies in environmental education.Bern,Switzerland:PeterLang.

Potter,J.,&Wetherell,M.(1987).Discourse and social psychology.London,UK:Sage.Probyn,E.(2003).Thespatialimperativeofsubjectivity.InK.Anderson,M.Domosh,S.

Pile,&N.Thrift(Eds.),Handbook of cultural geography. London,UK:Sage.Reid,A.(2009).Environmentaleducationresearch:Willtheendsoutstripthemeans?En-

vironmental Education Research, 15(2),129-153.Robottom,I.(Ed.).(1987).Environmental education: Practice and possibility.Geelong,

Victoria,Australia:DeakinUniversityPress.Rodgers,C.,&Scott,K.(2008).Thedevelopmentof thepersonalselfandprofessional

identityinlearningtoteach.InM.Cochran-Smith,S.Feiman-Nemser,J.McIntyre&K.Demers(Eds.),Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions and changing contexts (pp.732-755).NewYork:Routledge.

Rogoff,B.(2003).The cultural nature of human development.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Samaras,A.,&FreeseA.(2006).Self-study of teaching practices: Primer.NewYork:PeterLang.

Sauvé,L.,Brunelle,R.,&Berryman,T.(2005).Influenceoftheglobalizedandglobaliz-ingsustainabledevelopmentframeworkonnationalpoliciesrelatedtoenvironmentaleducation.Policy Futures in Education, 3(3),271-283.

Sfard,A.,&Prusak,A.(2005).Tellingidentities:Insearchofananalytictoolforinvestigatinglearningasaculturallyshapedactivity.Educational Researcher, 34(4),14-22.

Smith,G.(2007).Place-basededucation:Breakingthroughtheconstrainingregularitiesofpublicschool.Environmental Education Research, 13(2),189-207.

Smith,G.,&Williams,D.(Eds.).(1999).Ecological education in action: On weaving, educa-tion, culture, and the environment.Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.

Søreide,G.(2006).Narrativeconstructionofteacheridentity:Positioningandnegotiation.Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12(5),527-547.

St.Louis,B.(2009).On“thenecessityandthe‘impossibility’ofidentities”:Thepoliticsandethicsof‘newethnicities.’Cultural Studies, 23(4),559-582.

Stevenson,R.(1987).Schoolingandenvironmentaleducation:Contradictionsinpurposeandpractice.InI.Robottom(Ed.),Environmental education: Practice and possibility(pp.69-82).Geelong,Victoria,Australia:DeakinUniversityPress.

Stevenson,R.(2007).Schoolingandenvironmental/sustainabilityeducation:Fromdiscoursesofpolicyandpracticetodiscoursesofprofessionallearning.Environmental Education Research, 13(2),265-285.

Taylor,S.(2005).Self-narrationasrehearsal:Adiscursiveapproachtothenarrativeforma-

Paul Hart

177

tionofidentity.Narrative Inquiry, 15(1),45-50.Taylor, S. (2006).Narrative as construction and discursive resource. Narrative Inquiry,

16(1),94-102.UNESCO.(1978).Final report: Intergovernmental conference on environmental education,

Tbilisi (USSR), 14-16 October, 1977.Paris,France:UNESCO.Wales,P.(2009).Positioningthedramateacher:Exploringthepowerofidentityinteaching

practices.RiDE: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 14(2),261-278.Watson,C.(2006).Narrativesofpracticeandtheconstructionofidentityinteaching.Teach-

ers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12(5),509-526.Watson,C.(2009).‘Teachersaremeanttobeorthodox’:Narrativeandcounternarrativein

thediscursiveconstructionof‘identity’inteaching.International Journal of Qualita-tive Studies in Education, 22(4),469-483.

Wattchow,B.(2004).Theexperienceofriverplacesinoutdooreducation:Aphenomenologi-calstudy.Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation.MonashUniversity,Australia.

Weiler,K.(2008).Thefeministimaginationandeducationalresearch.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29(4),499-507.

Wetherell,M.(1998).Positioningandinterpretiverepertoires:Conversationanalysisandpost-structuralismindialogue.Discourse & Society, 9,387-412.

Wetherell,M.(2003).Paranoia,ambivalenceanddiscursivepractices:Conceptsofposi-tionandpositioninginpsychoanalysisanddiscursivepsychology.InR.Harré&F.Moghaddam(Eds.),The self and others: Positioning individuals and groups in personal, political, and cultural contexts (pp.99-120).Westport,CT:Praegar.

Zembylas,M.(2003).Caringforteacheremotion:Reflectionsonteacherselfdevelopment.Studies in Philosophy and Education, 22,103-125.

Zizek,S.(1999).The ticklish subject: The absent centre of political ontology.London,UK:Verso.

Documents

No Longer a “Little Added Frill”