{"id":6841,"date":"2016-12-05T07:18:56","date_gmt":"2016-12-05T07:18:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/?p=6841"},"modified":"2016-12-05T07:28:15","modified_gmt":"2016-12-05T07:28:15","slug":"the-uks-25-year-plan-for-nature","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/2016\/12\/05\/the-uks-25-year-plan-for-nature\/","title":{"rendered":"The UK's 25-year environment plan"},"content":{"rendered":"

There was a meeting last week at Defra about the UK's 25-year environment\u00a0plan<\/a>. \u00a0This was not actually about the plan, or about the environment; rather, it was about that most muddled of ideas, outdoor learning<\/em>.<\/p>\n

If we get the \"outdoor learning offer\" right (the argument seems to be), and everyone gets enough outdoor learning of the right sort, people will then \"make better decisions\" about the environment. \u00a0That is, they will acquire the right knowledge, attitudes and values and therefore make not just\u00a0better decisions, but the right ones,\u00a0about how to live. \u00a0This sort of outdoor learning prescription seems rather like\u00a0a course of vitamins, and indeed some Americans do now talk glibly about Vitamin N [see Note 1]. \u00a0I remember that this exposure to action<\/em> logic\u00a0was used to justify\u00a0environmental education in the 1970s. \u00a0But have we learned nothing since then? \u00a0Do we really still think that learning can be mandated like this? \u00a0That people will learn what they're supposed to, and then do as others want?<\/p>\n

The main problem with the idea of\u00a0outdoor learning is, of course, not so much the word \"outdoor\" itself, but the prominence given to it here in the qualification of learning<\/em>. \u00a0The Defra staff\u00a0at the meeting presented a neat (if confused) model of what they see as the significance of the outdoors, and in what follows you'll have to imagine three boxes at each corner of a triangle, each connected to the others with double arrows. \u00a0The text in the boxes says:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. spend time in nature<\/em><\/li>\n
  2. awareness of and engagement with environmental issues<\/em><\/li>\n
  3. actions to protect and enhance the environment<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Box [1] is the outdoor learning bit [see Note 2].<\/p>\n

    Box [2] is what\u00a0result from [1], and Box [3] is\u00a0the outcomes of [2] \u2013 and perhaps [1] as well. \u00a0Neat, as I said. \u00a0And the good thing about the model is\u00a0the double arrows as [3] can (and do) give rise to [2], as well as [2] resulting in [3].<\/p>\n

    The fly in the ointment here is what box [1] says because you don't have to spend time in nature to achieve either [2] or [3], although it can happen: as Wordsworth<\/a> said in The Tables Turned<\/em>:<\/p>\n

    \"Come forth into the light of things, Let Nature be your teacher<\/em>.\"<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    The light<\/em> is outside. \u00a0Alarmingly no doubt for some, it would makes more sense if Box [1] were to say \"environmental education\". \u00a0This is because there\u00a0is then a stronger logical link between [1] and [2] and [3]. \u00a0It's a pedagogical link too as, if you're at school, it is purposeful educative experiences, and unplanned\u00a0experiences within a broad\u00a0educative framework, that give rise to awareness, involvement, actions and engagement. \u00a0Without these, although \"spending time in nature\" might possibly do all that if your mind is open to it (in the Wordsworth sense), it might also give rise to tedium, boredom, frustration, estrangement and alienation, as was well argued\u00a0in the discussion group I was in during the meeting.<\/p>\n

    What good teachers do (whether in schools, NGOs, universities, etc) is to provide such a framework which guides and maximises the opportunities for\u00a0the learning that then takes place outdoors. \u00a0In doing so, they link this to what has preceded it and to\u00a0what will likely follow, most usually in what we might term the indoor classroom<\/em>, if it weren't already adequately called, the classroom.<\/p>\n

    Thus, to place so much focus on the \"outdoor\" is to risk forgetting that, educationally speaking, it is not the spending of time (being<\/em>)\u00a0in the outdoor that really matters, it is what goes on there that's of importance. \u00a0Even those who valorise being outside, and say they\u00a0do so just for the intrinsic good it brings, do\u00a0understand this \u2013 especially if they are educators.<\/p>\n

    And so, were I (heaven forfend) in charge of the plan at\u00a0Defra, I might want to suggest that the 3 boxes say this:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. have outdoor educative experiences<\/em><\/li>\n
    2. gain awareness of, and think about,\u00a0environmental issues<\/em><\/li>\n
    3. take appropriate actions to protect and enhance the environment<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Some will surely recognise this as \"in\", \"about\"<\/em> and \"for\" the environment<\/em>. \u00a0Happy Days!<\/p>\n

      But this won't do either because it still seems to privilege the outdoor over the indoor for no apparent reason other than the fact that most of the natural world (nature) is outdoors. \u00a0That might be fine if you're Wordsworth where the \"light of things\" is obviously outside, but it won't do for us, particularly if we're thinking about more formal aspects of educating the young. \u00a0We need clear reasons if going outdoors is to be justified. \u00a0There might be a number of these, for example:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. the ineffable and the infinite \u2013 to appreciate the awe, wonder and scale of the world cannot be done inside four walls. \u00a0Thus all environmental education needs to somehow embrace the 'out'; the issues to grapple with are for what reason, how, where, when, how often, etc rather than whether.<\/li>\n
      2. authenticity \u2013 it's only by being 'out' that you can really experience the real thing. \u00a0Thus, investigating rocky shore ecology\u00a0is best done\u00a0by going to the coast;\u00a0much fieldwork relies on this sort of justification.<\/li>\n
      3. practicability \u2013 you can't do something unless you go 'out'. \u00a0Thus, to develop and master\u00a0the art of\u00a0pruning apple trees can only be done where there are such things; the development of many practical skills\u00a0relies on this justification.<\/li>\n
      4. pedagogy \u2013 sometimes a particular 'out' pedagogy is needed to get something across in an effective way because the learning is in the pedagogy and not (just) in what the pedagogy is used for. \u00a0This seems to be a justification for those who promote the idea that all learning (or as much as practicable) should be 'out'.<\/li>\n
      5. added value \u2013 although you can do something just as well either 'in' or 'out', being 'out' brings additional benefits. \u00a0Thus, there may be social skills to be developed alongside practical ones which are best accomplished in the 'out'.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        You will have your own examples to fit in here. \u00a0I have not attempted to be comprehensive in any of the above. \u00a0Nor am I trying to assert the 'out' over the 'in', or vice versa, as I see them as fully complementary. \u00a0For me, the issue is to start with the educational (learning) objective and then to ask how<\/em> and where<\/em> (or where<\/em> and how<\/em> if you prefer) is this to be realised? \u00a0More often than not it will be found in some combination of 'in' and 'out'.<\/p>\n

        There are constraints on all this and such choice is never free. \u00a0There are always opportunity costs, and often\u00a0financial ones as well. \u00a0Thus, there is always a balance to be struck between\u00a0effectiveness and\u00a0efficiency which is why, in the real world, it will be some\u00a0combination of being outdoors and indoors, guided by clear educational objectives, that will be necessary.<\/p>\n

        Because of all this,\u00a0we ought really to be having serious conversations about\u00a0curriculum, instead of marginal\u00a0ones about the outdoors. \u00a0The UK Department of Education easily dismisses outdoor learning because it understands all\u00a0the problems with the idea. \u00a0It would find curriculum less easy to ignore, especially if Defra's three boxes were something [see Note 3] \u00a0like this:<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. a curriculum focus on the importance of\u00a0nature<\/em><\/li>\n
        2. awareness and understanding of, and concern about, environmental issues<\/em><\/li>\n
        3. appropriate individual and social actions to protect and enhance the environment<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          As the text in these boxes has evolved in my writing, boxes [2] and [3] have not changed all that much. \u00a0The major shift has been in Box [1] where the emphasis has moved from being<\/em> outside, to having educative experiences<\/em> outside, to a curriculum focus<\/em> on nature (both 'in' and 'out'). \u00a0This is a better fit with the 25-year plan which, after all is \"for nature\", and also with the fact that, when thinking about learning, a necessary prior focus has to be, one way or another, on curriculum.<\/p>\n

          ..........................................................................<\/p>\n

          Note 1<\/strong><\/em>. \u00a0This is what Richard Louv's website<\/a> says:<\/p>\n

          \"From the author of the\u00a0New York Times\u00a0bestseller that launched the international children-and-nature movement,\u00a0Vitamin N\u00a0(for \u201cnature\u201d) is a complete prescription for connecting with the power and joy of the natural world right now, with:\u00a0five hundred activities,\u00a0scores of informational websites,\u00a0an abundance of down-to-earth advice,\u00a0and dozens of thought-provoking essays\"<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

          Note 2<\/strong><\/em>.\u00a0Although I really ought to\u00a0point out that \"outdoor\" is not the same as \"nature\" or \"the environment\", everybody knows that, don't they ...<\/p>\n

          Note 3.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0In what follows, I've shifted the language to reflect the global concern for sustainability which\u00a0outdoor learning<\/em> can miss because of the focus on being \"in nature\". \u00a0If this were a\u00a0Defra 25 year plan this focus on nature might be ok, but it's not, it's a UK government plan and so should reflect the government's wider commitments and obligations to sustainability; for example, to the United Nations sustainable development goals. \u00a0In this sense, the three boxes might be something like:<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. a curriculum focus on the importance of nature\u00a0to the human future<\/em><\/li>\n
          2. awareness and understanding of, and concern about, environmental and associated social issues<\/em><\/li>\n
          3. appropriate individual and social actions to protect and enhance the environment and people<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

            There was a meeting last week at Defra about the UK's 25-year environment\u00a0plan. \u00a0This was not actually about the plan, or about the environment; rather, it was about that most muddled of ideas, outdoor learning. If we get the \"outdoor...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":237,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6841","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-comment","category-news-and-updates"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6841","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/237"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6841"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6841\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}