Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T23:21:15.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Critical Curriculum Theory and Slow Ecopedagogical Activism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2015

Phillip G. Payne
Phillip G. Payne*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Phillip G. Payne, Faculty of Education, Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia. Email: phillip.payne@monash.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Enacting a critical environmental education curriculum theory with 8- to 9-year-old children in 1978 is now ‘restoried’ in a ‘history of the present/future’ like ‘case study’ for prosecuting five interrelated problems confronting progress in environmental education and its research. They are: the intense heat of the Anthropocene; the accelerating speed of the Dromosphere; the deep cuts of neoliberalism's policing of the cognitive capitalism of the corporate university and public education; the entrepreneurial entry of sustainababble into the discourse of education; and the digital colonisation of its pedagogical practices. The once radical promise of environmental education to serve as a critique of education partially through its ‘language’ (Le Grange, 2013) of empowerment, agency, transformation, contestation, ideology, ethics, action, praxis and change demands revitalisation; hence, this belated restorying of the 1978 case. The time is right; at least in some academic/educational settings where the ‘new materialism’ notions of critical, agency and action remain much more than a fading memory or convenient text. New theory helps restory this old curriculum theory and its slow ecopedagogical activism. In this ‘old’, the critical curriculum theory (re)positioned young children and their teacher as action researchers of their own embodied socio-environmental relations. Through highly inclusive and participatory practices of outdoor and indoor ecopedagogy, children became ethically active ‘citizens’, capable of democratically enacting political and Political change. This ‘active responsibility for the environment’ was, indeed, a key purpose, or promise, of environmental education when the field was formalised in the 1970s. Elements of children's (eco)aesthetics-environmental ethics and ecopolitics are described in this case account of the ‘environmental design’ of a radical curriculum innovation that critically emphasised the ‘humanly-constructive’ educational conditions that enable agency (Payne, 1995, 1999a). Such enablements were only ever assumed in the ‘socially critical’ theorisations of curriculum and pedagogy developed in Australia in the early 1980s. For researchers, this partially autoethnographic narrating of the old case describes the children's (embodied) experiences and locally emplaced agencies in newer theoretical ‘figurations’ of their ‘body~time~space’ relationalities. Children's outdoor ‘expeditions’, interdisciplinary inquiries, literacy development, scientific investigations, and personal and public activisms are described. Revealing these micro figurational relationalities in slow ecopedagogical contexts of the environmental design of education (Payne, 2014) is consistent with Robottom and Hart's (1993) too often forgotten ‘old’ call for researchers and practitioners to clarify the presuppositions they make about the trilogy of ontology-epistemology and methodology in framing, conceptualising, contextualising, representing, and legitimating the research problem and its questions. This restorying and history of the present/future is alert to (but cannot develop) aspects of contemporary ‘high’ theory drawn from the humanities, social sciences and arts that prioritises the politics of ontological deliberation and the ecologies of things, (re)claims a material disposition in empirical inquiry and critique while speculating about non-anthropocentric ‘thought’ responsive to the ‘new’ rallying point of, for example, the Anthropocene. In sum, new theory helps restory the critical, creative, expressive and experimental forms of re-theorising the persistent problematic of human and non-human nature relations and the role of education — well on display in this ‘old.’ This revitalised history of the present/future aims to revive critical optimism and imagination about how agencies of socio-environmental change once promised by critical environmental education and its research can be re‘turned’. The article concludes with some post-critical retheorising of key critical components of the 1978 curriculum theory.

Keywords

curriculum historyenvironmental designexperiential educationpost-critical inquiry
Type
Feature Articles
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , December 2015 , pp. 165 - 193
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abram, D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Apple, M. (2005). Education, markets, and an audit culture. Critical Quarterly, 47, 11–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archer, M. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Education for Sustainability Alliance (AESA). (2014). Education for Sustainability and the Australian Curriculum Project: Final report for research phases 1 to 3. Melbourne, Australia: Author.Google Scholar
Ballantine, R., Fien, J., & Packer, J. (2001). School environmental education programme impacts upon student and family learning: A case study analysis. Environmental Education Research, 7, 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barad, K. (2005). Meeting the universe half way: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Barratt, R. & Barratt Hacking, E. (2008). A clash of worlds: Children talking about their community experience in relation to the school curriculum, in Reid, A., Jensen, B., Nikel, J., & Simovska, V. (Eds.), Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability (pp. 285–298), Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University PressGoogle Scholar
Birth, K. (2012). Objects of time: How things shape temporality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Brown, T., & Payne, P. (2009). Conceptualizing the phenomenology of movement in physical education: Implications for pedagogical inquiry and development, Quest, 61, 418–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, A., Evans, J., Fitzclarence, L., Henry, J., Robottom, I., & Wright, M. (1982a). Environmental Education: Study Guide 1. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Castro, A., Evans, J., Fitzclarence, L., Henry, J., Robottom, I., & Wright, M. (1982b). Environmental Education: Study Guide 2. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Christoff, P., & Eckersley, R. (2013). Globalization & the environment. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Coole, D., & Frost, S. (Eds.). (2010). New materialisms: Ontology, agency and politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, S., Hinkson, J., & Sharp, G. (Eds.) (2002). Scholars and entrepreneurs: The universities in crisis. Melbourne, Australia: Arena Publications.Google Scholar
Connolly, W. (2010). The materialities of experience. In Coole, D. & Frost, S. (Eds.), New materialisms: Ontology, agency and politics (pp. 178–200). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, W. (2013). The fragility of things: Self-organizing processes, neoliberal fantasies, and democratic activism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Counts, G. (1932). Dare the school build a new social order? New York: John Day.Google Scholar
Crutzen, P. (2002). Geology of mankind: The Anthropocene. Nature, 415, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2014). Where are children and young people in environmental education research? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 103–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, J. (1938/1991). Experience and education. In Boydston, J. (Ed.), The later works, 1925–1953, John Dewey (vol. 12). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
Dickinson, J., & Lumsdon, L. (2010). Slow travel and tourism. London: Earthscan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerr, M. (2004). Currere and the environmental autobiography: A phenomenological approach to the teaching of ecology. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Duhn, I. (2014). Making agency matter: rethinking infant and toddler agency in educational discourse. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 35, 1–13.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. (2010). The materialism of historical materialism. In Coole, D. & Frost, S. (Eds.). New materialisms: Ontology, agency and politics. Durham: Duke University Press, 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1993). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103, 962–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, J. (2013). Transformation, empowerment, and the governing of environmental Conduct: Insights to be gained from a ‘history of the present’ approach. In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A.. (Eds.), International handbook of research in environmental education (pp. 63–68). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fien, J. (1993a). Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorizing and environmental education. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Fien, J. (Ed.) (1993b). Environmental education: A pathway to sustainability. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Gough, A. G. (1993). Founders in environmental education. Geelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Green, M. (2013). Transformational design literacies: Children as active place-makers. Children's Geographies, 11, 1–16.Google Scholar
Gros, F. (2014). A philosophy of walking. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Grosz, E. (1999) (Ed.). Becomings: Explorations in time, memory, and futures. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Grosz, E. (2004). The nick of time: Politics, evolution, and the untimely. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Grusin, R. (2015). (Ed.). The nonhuman turn. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Hart, P. (2002). Narrative, knowing, and emerging methodologies in environmental education research: Issues of quality. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 7, 140–164.Google Scholar
Hart, P. (2005). Transitions in thought and practice: Links, divergences and contradictions in post-critical inquiry. Environmental Education Research, 11, 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, P. (2013). Preconceptions and positionings: Can we see ourselves within our own terrain? In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A.. (Eds.), International handbook of research in environmental education (pp. 507–510) London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Huckle, J. (2014). A response to pathways to sustainability. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hursh, D., Henderson, J., & Greenwood, D. (2015). Special issue: Environmental education in a neoliberal climate. Environmental Education Research, 21, 299–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huebner, D. (1967/1987). Curriculum as concern for man's temporality. Theory Into Practice, 26, 324–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. (2011). Being alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jickling, B., & Spork, H. (1998). Education for the environment-a critique. Environmental Education Research, 4, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jickling, B., & Wals, A (2008). Globalization and environmental education: Looking beyond sustainable development. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J. (Ed.) (2013). Dark trajectories: Politics of the outside. Hong Kong: [NAME] Publishing.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, J., Ewing, M., Hyle, A., Montgomery, D., & Self, P. (2001). Women and nature: Using memory work to rethink our relationship to the natural world. Environmental Education Research, 7, 359–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopnina, H. (2014). Future scenarios and environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 45, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2013). An inquiry into modes of existence: An anthropology of the moderns. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2004). After method: mess in social science research. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Grange, L. (2013). Why we need a language of (environmental) education. In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A.. (Eds.), International handbook of research in environmental education (pp. 108–114). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotz-Sisitka, H. (2010). Changing social imaginaries, multiplicities and ‘one sole world’: Reading Scandinavian environmental and sustainability education research papers with Badiou and Talor at hand. Environmental Education Research, 16, 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotz-Sisitka, H., Fien, J., & Kethoilwe, M. (2013). Traditions and new niches: An overview of environmental education curriculum and learning research. In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A.. (Eds.), International handbook of research in environmental education (pp. 194–205). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, T. (2012). The ecological thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Murdoch, J. (2006). Post-structuralist geography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Nakagawa, Y., & Payne, P. (2015). Critical place as a fluid margin in post-critical environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 21, 149–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noys, B. (2014). Malign velocities: Accelerationism and capitalism. Winchester: Zero Books.Google Scholar
Nicholson, G. (2008). The lost art of walking. New York: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
Palmer, J. (1998). Environmental education in the 21st century: Theory, practice, progress and promise. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Payne, P. (1995). Ontology and the critical discourse of environmental education. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 11, 83–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (1997). Embodiment and environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3, 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (1998/2014). Children's conceptions of nature. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 68–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (1999a). Postmodern challenges and modern horizons: Education ‘for being for the environment’. Environmental Education Research, 5, 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (1999b). The significance of experience in SLE research. Environmental Education Research, 5, 365–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2003a). The technics and environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 9, 525–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2003b). Postphenomenological enquiry and living the environmental condition. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8, 169–190.Google Scholar
Payne, P. (2005). Lifeworld and textualism: Reassembling the researcher/ed and ‘others’, Environmental Education Research, 11, 413–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2006). Environmental education and curriculum theory. Journal of Environmental Education, 37, 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2010a). Remarkable-tracking, experiential education of the ecological imagination. Environmental Education Research, 16, 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2010b). Moral spaces, intergenerational influences and the social ecology of families in environmental ethics education, Environmental Education Research, 16, 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2010c). The globally great moral challenge: ecocentric democracy, values, morals and meaning, Environmental Education Research, 16, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2013). (Un)timely ecophenomenological framings of environmental education research. In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A.. (Eds.). International Handbook of Research in Environmental Education (pp. 424–437). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. (2014). Vagabonding slowly: Ecopedagogy, metaphors, figurations, and nomadic ethics. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 47–69.Google Scholar
Payne, P. (in press). An ecophenomenology of children's experience in the Anthropocene: Post-critical theory building and research~er~ed reflexivity. In Fleer, M. & van Oers, B. (Eds.), International handbook on early childhood education. Rotterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Payne, P., & Wattchow, B. (2009). Phenomenological deconstruction, slow pedagogy and the corporeal turn in wild environmental/outdoor education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 15–32.Google Scholar
Petrini, C. (2001). Slow food: Collected thoughts on taste, tradition, and the honest pleasures of food. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Petrini, C. (2003). Slow food: The case for taste. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinar, W. (2004). What is curriculum theory? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pink, S. (2009). Doing sensory ethnography. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potts, R. (2003). Vagabonding. New York: Villard.Google Scholar
Reid, A., Jensen, B., Nikel, J., & Simovska, V. (Eds.). (2008). Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickinson, M., Lundholm, C. & Hopwood, N. (2009). Environmental learning: Insights from research into the student experience. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Robottom, I. (1984/2014). Why not education for the environment? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 5–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robottom, I. (Ed.). (1987). Environmental education: Practice and possibility. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Robottom, I., & Hart, P. (1993). Research in environmental education: Engaging the debate. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Sanders, J. (1999). Affordances: An ecological approach to first philosophy. In Weiss, G. & Faber, H. (Eds.), Perspectives on embodiment: The intersections of nature and culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and social science. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2009). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shaviro, S. (2014). The university of things: On speculative realism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shusterman, R. (2008). Body consciousness: A philosophy of mindfulness and somaesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simms, E. (2008). The child in the world: Embodiment, time, and language in early childhood. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Sparrow, T. (2014). The end of phenomenology: Metaphysics and the new realism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffen, W., Grinevald, J., Crutzen, P., & McNeill, J. (2011). The Anthropocene: Conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions A, 369, 842–867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevenson, R.E. (1987/2007). Revisiting schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and practice. Special issue. Environmental Education Research, 13, 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R. (2011). Sense of place in Australian environmental education research: Distinctive, missing or displaced? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 27, 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R., & Dillon, J. (2010). Engaging environmental education: Learning, culture and agency. Rotterdam: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R., & Evans, N. (2011). The distinctive characteristics of environmental education research in Australia: An historical and comparative analysis. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 27, 24–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoller, P. (1989). The taste of ethnographic things: The senses in anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Tanner, T. (1980). Significant life experiences: A new research area in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 11, 20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thrift, N. (2008). Non-representational theory: SpaceIpoliticsIaffect. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toadvine, T. (2009). Merleau-Ponty's philosophy of nature. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troutner, L. (1974). Time and education. In Denton, D. (Ed.), Existentialism and phenomenology in education: Collected essays (pp. 159–181). New York: Teachers College Press,.Google Scholar
Trigg, D. (2012). The memory of place: A phenomenology of the uncanny. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar
Virilio, P. (1977/2006). Speed and politics. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e).Google Scholar
Virilio, P. (2010). The university of disaster. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Walker, K. (1997). Challenging critical theory in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3, 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wals, A.E.J. (Ed.) (2007). Social learning towards a sustainable world. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wals, A., Stevenson, R., Brody, M., & Dillon, J. (2013). Tentative directions for environmental education research in uncertain times. In Brody, M., Dillon, J., Stevenson, R., & Wals, A. (Eds.), International handbook of research in environmental education (pp. 542–548). Routledge: London,.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, R. (1990). A critical theory of education: Habermas and our children's future. New York: Teacher's College Press.Google Scholar