Abstract
This chapter explores the concept of worldviews in tertiary outdoor environmental education (OEE) programs. We discuss how worldviews are constructed based on our understandings of the world and our place within it, drawing on the role of social and cultural norms and assumptions influencing the ethical frameworks we might adopt. The chapter offers a critique of commonly employed approaches to the concept of worldviews, such as anthropocentrism, biocentrism and ecocentrism. Although our discussion is reflective of our positions and experiences, located in south eastern Australia, we suggest possibilities for considering broader perspectives and assemblages that might otherwise be overlooked. We suggest the provocations of posthumanist orientations and offer some introductory suggestions for deploying them constructively in OEE.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
02 March 2022
The original version of this book was published with an error in Chapter 3 wherein the line should read, "We are mindful that the artefacts that comprise our views of reality and nature are socially constructed and do not exist independently of human agency and activity" instead of “… do exist independently of human agency and activity”.
Notes
- 1.
Returning to Haraway (1991), we are ‘somewhere in particular’. Our homes are in south eastern Australia - Noel in Melbourne, the second largest state capital, and Kathleen in Bendigo, close to the geographical centre of Victoria. Our particular positions and experiences are reflected in our writing in this chapter.
- 2.
We adopt the position that our connection to the more-than-human world is artificially severed in modern Western culture by mind/body, nature/culture, subject/object dualisms. Hence, we choose the term ‘more-than-human’ to draw attention to our ethical accountability to the world.
- 3.
Gough (2016) argues that challenging hierarchical anthropocentrism (i.e. challenging the assumption of human superiority) does not prevent us from acknowledging an ‘irreducible anthropocentrism,’ that is, accepting that we necessarily experience the world with species-specific biophysical limitations and possibilities. However, we must also consider how an understanding of irreducible anthropocentrism might be changed by accepting that we increasingly experience the world as posthumans, with perhaps (eventually) fewer species-specific biophysical limitations and with further possibilities provided by biophysical extensions and enhancements.
- 4.
Karen Barad’s (2007) notion of ethico-onto-epistemology points to the inseparability of ethics, ontology and epistemology in knowledge production. See https://newmaterialism.eu/almanac/e/ethico-onto-epistem-ology.html for fuller discussion
- 5.
- 6.
Describing worldviews thus, does not rule out the potential worldviews of more-than-human entities
- 7.
The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues estimates there are more than 370 million Indigenous peoples spread across 70 countries worldwide, each practicing unique traditions, retaining social, cultural, economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant societies in which they live (https://aiatsis.gov.au/)
- 8.
Several tools are available for this exercise. Some employ CO2 measures (eg: https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx), while others calculate how many planets are required to maintain a particular lifestyle (eg: https://www.footprintcalculator.org/)
References
Affifi, R. (2020). Anthropocentrism’s fluid binary. Environmental Education Research, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1707484
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
Blades, G. (2015). Walking the ground: (Re)storying footprints. In M. Robertson, R. Lawrence, & G. Heath (Eds.), Experiencing the outdoors: Enhancing strategies for wellbeing (pp. 13–24). Sense.
Bowers, C. (1993). Education, cultural myths, and the ecological crisis: Toward deep changes. State University of New York Press.
Brookes, A. (1989). Outdoor education: Environmental education reinvented, or environmental education reconceived? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 5, 15–23.
Brookes, A. (2002). Lost in the Australian bush: Outdoor education as curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(4), 405–425.
Brookes, A. (2006). Outdoor activity safety guidelines and unfamiliar environments: A hidden curriculum? Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE), 11(1), 195–206.
Brookes, A. (2015). Foundation myths and the roots of adventure education in the Anglosphere. In B. Humberstone, H. Prince, & K. Kenderson (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of outdoor studies (pp. 11–19). Routledge.
Gough, N. (2009). How do places become ‘pedagogical’? In M. Somerville, J. K. Power, & P. deCarteret (Eds.), Landscapes and learning: Place studies for a global world (pp. 155–173). Sense Publishers.
Gough, N. (2016). Postparadigmatic materialisms: A ‘new movement of thought’ for outdoor environmental education research? Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 19(2), 51–65.
Gough, N., & Adsit-Morris, C. (2020). Troubling the anthropocene: Donna Haraway, science fiction, and arts of un/naming. Cultural Studies↔ Critical Methodologies, 20(3), 213–224.
Haraway, D. J. (1989). Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science. Routledge.
Haraway, D. (1991). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (pp. 183–201). Routledge.
Hay, P. (2002). Main currents in western environmental thought. UNSW Press.
Jukes, S., Stewart, A., & Morse, M. (2019). Acknowledging the agency of a more-than-human world: Material relations on a Snowy River journey. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 22(2), 93–111.
Lynch, J., & Mannion, G. (2016). Enacting a place-responsive research methodology: Walking interviews with educators. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16(4), 330–345.
McPhie, J., & Clarke, D. (2018). Nature matters: Diffracting a keystone concept of environmental education research – Just for kicks. Environmental Education Research, 26(9–10), 1509–1526. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1531387
Mikaels, J., & Asfeldt, M. (2017). Becoming-crocus, becoming-river, becoming-bear: A relational materialist exploration of place(s). Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 20(2), 2–13.
Mochelle, R. (1986). Future choice: An environment design approach. Curriculum Perspectives, 6(2), 52.
Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: A summary. Inquiry, 16(1), 95–100.
Snaza, N., & Weaver, J. A. (Eds.). (2015). Posthumanism and educational research. Routledge.
Sonu, D., & Snaza, N. (2015). The fragility of ecological pedagogy: Elementary social studies standards and possibilities of new materialism. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 12(3), 258–277.
Stewart, A. (2020). Developing place-responsive pedagogy in outdoor environmental education: A rhizomatic curriculum autobiography. Springer.
White, L. (1967). The historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science, 155(3767), 1203–1207.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pleasants, K., Gough, N. (2021). Worldviews, Environments and Education. In: Thomas, G., Dyment, J., Prince, H. (eds) Outdoor Environmental Education in Higher Education. International Explorations in Outdoor and Environmental Education, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75980-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75980-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-75979-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-75980-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)