Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:30:12.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ontology and the Critical Discourse of Environmental Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

Phillip Payne
Phillip Payne*
Affiliation:
School of Education, La Trobe University, Victoria
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

There has been a major effort in Australian academic circles over the past fifteen years to develop a critical discourse in environmental education curriculum, pedagogy, history, and research (Henry et al 1981, Di Chiro 1987, Gough 1987, 1994, Robottom 1987, Greenall 1987, Fien 1993 a,b, Greenall Gough 1993, Robottom & Hart 1993). This discourse is critical of ‘mainstream’ approaches to environmental education that are alleged to be positivist, behaviourist, masculinist, and instrumentalist. Internationally, environmental educators have also considered various shortcomings of environmental education. There is general concern about unrealised aspirations, unrealistic expectations, definitional problems, values issues, conceptual obfuscation and questionable research endeavours (Brennan 1979, Disinger 1979, 1985, Williams 1979, Baer 1980, 1981, 1985, Knapp 1983, Roth 1988, Iozzi 1989 a,b, Gigliotti 1990, Marcinkowski 1990, Wals, Beringer & Stapp 1990, Ham & Sewing 1992, Leming 1992, Pinar & Bowers 1992, Ramsey, Hungerford & Volk 1992). Consequently, it can be asserted there are practical deficiencies of a moral, social, political, and ecological nature. If so, one conclusion about the development of the field of environmental education is that it is problematic and often contradictory.

Type
Research Article
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 11 , 1995 , pp. 83 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

References

Baer, R. A. 1980, ‘A critique of the use of values clarification in environmental education’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, R. A. 1981, ‘Clarifying my objections to values clarification: A response to Clifford Knapp’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, R. A. 1985, ‘Thank you, Professor Knapp, but … still more objections to the use of values clarification in environmental education’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, S. 1992, Situating the self: Gender, community and postmodernism in contemporary ethics, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
Bookchin, M. 1990, The philosophy of social ecology: Essays on dialectical naturalism, Black Rose Books, Montreal.Google Scholar
Brennan, M. J. 1979, ‘Where are we and what time is it?’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 7–8.Google Scholar
Brown, R. 1992, ‘Max van Manen and pedagogical human science research’, in Pinar, W. & Reynolds, W. R. (Eds.), Understanding curriculum as phenomenological and deconstructed text, Teachers College Press, New York.Google Scholar
Carson, R. 1962, Silent spring, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, UK.Google Scholar
Di Chiro, G. 1987, ‘Environmental education and the question of gender: A feminist critique’, in Robottom, I. (Ed.), Environmental education: Practice and possibility, Deakin University Press, Geelong, pp. 23–48.Google Scholar
Disinger, J. 1979, ‘The literature of environmental education’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
Disinger, J. 1985, ‘Current trends in environmental education’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fay, B. 1975, Social theory and political practice, George Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Fay, B. 1987, Critical social science: Liberation and its limits, Cornell University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Fien, J. 1993a, Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorising and environmental education, Deakin University Press, Geelong, Victoria.Google Scholar
Fien, J. (Ed.) 1993b, Environmental education: A pathway to sustainability, Deakin University Press, Geelong, Victoria.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1979, Central problems in social theory, Macmillan, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984, The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. & Turner, J. (Eds.) 1987, Social theory today, Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1990, The consequences of modernity, Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1991, Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age, Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1994, Beyond left and right: The future of radical politics, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Gigliotti, L. M. 1990, ‘Environmental education: What went wrong? What can be done?’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 9–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gough, N. 1987, ‘Learning with environments: Towards an ecological paradigm for education’, in Robottom, I. (Ed.), Environmental education: Practice and possibility, Deakin University Press, Geelong, pp. 49–68.Google Scholar
Gough, N. 1994, ‘Playing at catastrophe: Ecopolitical education after poststructuralism’, Educational Theory, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 189–210.Google Scholar
Greenall, A. 1987, ‘A political history of environmental education: Snakes and ladders’, in Robottom, I. (Ed.), Environmental education: Practice and possibility, Deakin University Press, Geelong, pp. 3–22.Google Scholar
Greenall Gough, A. 1993, Founders in environmental education, Deakin University Press, Geelong.Google Scholar
Ham, S. H. & Sewing, D. R. 1987, ‘Barriers to environmental education’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 17–24.Google Scholar
Haug, F. and others. 1987, Female sexualization, (Carter, E., Trans.), Verso, London.Google Scholar
Henry, J., Castro, A., Evans, J., Fitzclarence, L., Robottom, I. & Wright, M. 1981, Environmental education: ECT 313 Study Guide 1/2, Deakin University, Geelong.Google Scholar
Iozzi, L. A. 1989a, ‘What research says to the educator. Part one. Environmental education and the affective domain’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 3–9.Google Scholar
Iozzi, L. A. 1989b, ‘What research says to the educator. Part two. Environmental education and the affective domain’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 6–13.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S. with Fitzclarence, L. 1986, Curriculum theorising: Beyond reproduction theory, Deakin University Press, Geelong.Google Scholar
Knapp, C. 1983, ‘A curriculum model for environmental education values’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leming, J. S. 1992, ‘The influence of contemporary issues curricula on school-aged youth’, in Grant, G. (Ed.), Review of research in education 18, American Educational Research Association, Washington, pp. 111–163.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1984, After virtue: A study in moral theory, (2nd ed.) University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN.Google Scholar
Marcinkowski, T. J. 1992, ‘America 2000 and reform in science education: Where does ee fit?’, The Journal of environmental education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 4–9.Google Scholar
Payne, P. 1993, ‘Giddens Critical Ontology and Environmental Education’, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Georgia.Google Scholar
Payne, P. 1994, ‘Restructuring the discursive moral subject’, in Warren, Karen J. (Ed.), Ecological feminism, Routledge, London, pp. 139–157.Google Scholar
Pinar, W. F. & Bowers, C. A. 1992, ‘Politics of curriculum: Origins, controversies, and significance of critical perspectives’, in Grant, G. (Ed.), Review of research in education 18, American Educational Research Association, Washington, pp. 163–190.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J. H., Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. 1992, ‘Environmental education in the K-12 curriculum’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robottom, I. (Ed.) 1987, Environmental education: Practice and possibility, Deakin University Press, Geelong.Google Scholar
Robottom, I. & Hart, P. 1993, Research in environmental education: Engaging the debate, Deakin University Press, Geelong.Google Scholar
Robottom, I. 1994 Editorial, The Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, pp. i–ii.Google Scholar
Roth, C. E. 1988, ‘The endangered phoenix-lessons from the firepit’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 3–9.Google Scholar
Wals, A. E., Beringer, A., & Stapp, W. B. 1990, ‘Education in action: A community problem-solving program for schools’, The Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 10–19.Google Scholar
Warren, K. J. 1990, ‘The power and the promise of ecological feminism’, Environmental Ethics, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 125–146.Google Scholar