ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND PROJECT WORK

Project work can support the ideas of good environmental education
What does it mean to do project work in environmental education?
Problem orientated
Product orientated
Mutual control
Cross curriculum
Exemplary content choice
The teacher role
How many periods are spent on a project course?
Demands must be made on the students’ project work
Evaluation themes
 


 

Project work can support the ideas of good environmental education

In many cases environmental education organised as project work can create the basis for good student learning processes. However, this does not mean that environmental education should always be organised as project work. A great deal of teaching can take place in a more traditional way, such as class teaching with adjoining practical activities and sessions with group work.

When project work is nevertheless emphasised in environmental education it is because as a teaching and work method it has qualities which particularly support many of the ideas which are the basis of environmental education with the long term objective of creating action competence.

Project work is a way of teaching and working that has been adjusted to fit various conditions for both younger and older students so that today it would be difficult to say precisely what genuine project work is. However, it seems reasonable to keep to the broad conception of project work as Hans Jørgen Kristensen has described it (Information/24, 1995):

’Project work is a teaching and work pattern in which the students actively and purposefully examine the world around them, form concepts and ideas about it, try to understand it, have an opinion on it and act accordingly. Contentwise the selected problems are treated from several different points of view so they appear in a historic and present day perspective with the purpose of providing the students with insight which can make their everyday lives and society understandable and transparent.’
 

What does it mean to do project work in environmental education?

According to Hans Jørgen Kristensen project work generally contains as many as possible of the following teaching principles in the same course:


If these principles of project work are seen in relation to some of the courses in environmental education in MUVIN a great deal of experience can be gained which can serve as a source of inspiration to continue the development of project work and environmental education.
 

Problem orientated

For obvious reasons when the pivot of the teaching is environmental questions work is problem orientated. This is so because environmental education is to do with opposing interests that turn out to be problems or conflicts.

Nevertheless, quite a lot of experience points to the difficulty in making or at least maintaining a problem-orientated course. This may be due to the difficulty in pinpointing what is decided to work on in class.

It is obviously difficult for the students to be problem orientated if it has been decided to work, for instance, on ’Waste’. The pivot of the teaching for this is not problem orientated but the topic ’waste’. This means the students have been working, for instance, on different types of waste, sorting waste, waste from the consumer to the waste dump etc.

This may well be good teaching but ideally it is not environmental education organised as project work nor in line with the MUVIN ideals. In order to be problem orientated what the class is doing must be directed towards a problem, and preferably a local and definite problem. This means that the class, as in a Green City project, for instance, worked on ’Have we got a sensible choice or use of packaging?’ where the main idea is not just at the descriptive level of waste from the consumer to the waste dump etc. On the contrary, it is directed towards an investigation of our use of packaging. And this entails considerations, assessments and taking a stand as to whether all packaging is necessary, when there are good reasons for packaging, and when not, and whether there may be some people who benefit from extra packaging etc.

Some teachers may well say that it is of no importance what the course is called. But there are many examples that signify a great gap between what teachers and students understand by ’Waste’ or ’ Why is there so much waste?’ A group of teachers from MUVIN say (Hedegaard, 1996):

’We teachers have become aware of what are called environmental topics. We had not only ’Hens,’ but ’How do we keep hens?’ so that the conflict approach was in the title.’
 

Product orientated

In project work it is common for students to end their project by producing a product that in various ways can illustrate what they have been working on. Typically, they make a wall chart or give a lecture using transparencies on the overhead projector. But it is a challenge to introduce other forms than the usual.

Examples from the development projects show that the product may be a student prepared role play, for which they may have made the costumes, the scene, or a toy theatre made from a cardboard box, if the role play is made as a puppet theatre.

Or that they arrange a panel debate on which there are different people from outside school: parents, local politicians or just a neighbouring class of students.

Generally, it has a positive effect if the product is to be shown to others e.g. in the school assembly hall, in the library, the town hall, or another public place. In this way the students feel that their work is being taken more seriously than if their work is merely put on wall sheets in the classroom. They feel their work can be useful to others.
 

Mutual control

Frequently, it can be a productive learning process for both teachers and students if they carry out a project in which the students have a high degree of responsibility for the content and the process. In other contexts it can also be expedient for the teachers to make decisions for the students. After all, the teacher has the final responsibility for the teaching and learning. Responsibility and influence are things that have to be learned - within a framework that can be managed and accepted by all parties.

Furthermore, it has to be made clear to the students under what conditions they have influence, and (of course) live up to them as a teacher. Experience from the development projects clearly shows how difficult it can be to tighten up if the students were not aware of the conditions, and things were initially very loose.

Finally, one must realise that mutual control does not necessarily mean that the students can pick and choose. Mutual control means precisely both teachers and students.

Experience from the development projects shows that when several teachers participate in an environmental course one should be aware of the number of teachers (Breiting et al, 1994) The higher the number of teachers seems to be inversely proportional to student influence i.e. the more teachers means less student influence because the structure, agreements between teachers, teacher attitudes towards ’my subject must be included’ etc make it difficult for students to have shared responsibility.

But like many other things in the teaching world a balance must be reached and must be taken into consideration and decided. Though determination to maintain and consciously work for student influence can counteract the above mentioned tendencies.
 

Cross curriculum

Class work on an environmental problem contains many concepts. Conflicting interests, ecological cycle, environmental impact, threshold values, history, consumption, advertising, traditions, habits, and action possibilities. All concepts that together make the work cross the curriculum. Many school subjects are in the offing with these concepts, and it becomes a question of selecting and involving the subjects whose content and methods are necessary to achieve the goals, also those of the subjects, which have been formulated beforehand.

Vagn Oluf Nielsen (Breiting et al, 1993) has suggested that 4 types of question ought to be posed when considering the particular subject participation in the theme to be worked on problem across the curriculum:

These questions can be derived when directed at the problem issue, and are particularly useful if one is working on environmental problems. Questions on the data and explanatory level will pin down important aspects of the conditions mentioned in connection with the understanding of the environmental problem (causes, conflicts of interest, action patterns, effect), whereas questions on the assessment and action levels will give rise to discussions among the students and contribute towards allowing them have an opinion, ideas of alternatives, visions and action possibilities.
 

Exemplary content choice

It may often be difficult to choose the environmental problem to be worked on. An important criterion for the choice of environmental problem ought to be the transfer value of the problem, so the ’environmental content’ of the problem reaches beyond the problem itself and thereby expresses a general and principle problem.

Conflict of interests is in itself a universal concept and therefore exemplary. What becomes decisive is selecting an environmental problem, which can be made relatively concrete for the students so they become aware of and understand the generalisation.

It is a good idea to choose an environmental problem which is possible to describe with the help of the students’ own investigations, because experience seems to prove that in this way the abstract becomes more easily accessible to the students. Such an environmental problem would often be in the local area (e.g. a polluted lake, plans for erecting windmills etc) or a more general problem which can be investigated at a local level (e.g. sub soil water pollution, waste problems etc.)
 

The teacher role

There are many examples of the value of teachers acting as advisers and consultants when the students are working individually or in groups – and are able to administer the freedom. Many teachers say that the opportunity to have a different teacher role is an advantage in project work (Mogensen, 1997).

Many students also say the teachers ’aren’t as they usually are’ when the class is doing project work. All the interviewed students in a survey of project work (Mogensen, 1997) indicated that the teacher role was different. One big hefty lad when interviewed frankly stated that he ’wasn’t an angel’ and that he had a clear feeling the learning environment was different in a positive way when the teacher was a project adviser and not a class teacher. And he felt better about it:

’ they are completely different…they are not themselves….they are more relaxed like…I’m no angel, like …and many times a day get to feel it – but when we’re doing projects it’s like: ”Well, how far have you got – that’s good, just carry on”… with a big smile all over his face. The teacher does not decide, but comes up with suggestions with how it can be done better – and that’s a help to you…. I think the teacher emphasises more what you have done instead of what you haven’t done’.
 

How many periods are spent on a project course?

The number of periods spent on a project on environmental questions, and where it is placed in a school year varies a great deal. Some choose to concentrate most lessons within a limited period of time, while others spread project work over a number of weeks spending, for instance, 2 or 3 days a week on the project. There are advantages in both types of organisation.

It has often turned out that if the course is structured to be carried out within a short period of time it is a good idea to have a time gap between the initial phase and the phase in which information is gathered and processed. This leaves room for anything unforeseen. It is not possible to be able to sure that the people and institutions etc that are to be visited have the time straight away, or that the materials at the library are accessible.

If the course is planned to last over a longer period of time with fewer lessons a week, it is an advantage to have at least 5 hours a week to maintain the continuity. One experience from the development programmes has been that it is a good idea in the divided course to provide the opportunity for an occasional outing or excursion lasting at least 4 hours.
One thing seems clear from experience that if the course is planned so there are only 2 or 3 hours a week it becomes difficult to maintain the continuity as well as the keen interest of both teachers and students.
Also as regards placing the course in the year’s plan plenty of time should be allowed for the final phase, perhaps more than originally decided. Things take more time than planned. In any case it would be a pity to rush through the final phase because the winter holidays are near.
 

Demands must be made on the students’ project work

Project work form’s emphasis on student co-responsibility and the students’ independent work can lead to student production on a superficial level if the teacher does not get involved by maintaining subject concepts, theories and points of view. The teaching and learning lose height and the gains do not live up to the expectations – neither those of the students nor of the teachers.

The cause can often be that agreements were not reached before the project began. As a starting point of a project orientated environmental course agreement should be reached, in co-orporation with the students, on what is to be emphasised i.e. what is expected of their work on the environmental problem. It may be to do with the work process, the content in their problem, responsibility or, the co-orporation in the group.

There have been many cases, in which the students cannot themselves find or reveal the conflict of interests. So it is up to the teacher to create the framework which makes the students realise that there are different conceptions, interests and opinions of the environmental problem. It is not a question of giving the answer in beforehand, but for instance by saying they have to interview at least two resource persons with different points of view, so they are directed onto the way of thinking.

What is important here is that the agreement with the students about the expectations being of such a level in form and content that students have understood the demands being made on them. Of course it is unreasonable to expect too much either because of their immaturity, lack of ability or skills, or because the demands were not known or understood beforehand. There must be consistency between what is emphasised and student capability i.e. their qualifications. The specific demands made on the students will vary. And some age groups will need more guidelines and assistance, whereas others have less need of help. The demands should not be understood as precontrol, but as a framework or long term planning of the course which may be of help to the students and thereby support the quality of the work.

The expectations and demands that could be required of the student work on environmental problems could be connected with a number of the following points:
 

Evaluation themes

The students work on environmental issues, organised as project work, can be evaluated on the basis of the following themes which the development projects MUVIN and Green City regard as being particularly important to be aware of. For the sake of an overview the themes are placed in a structure as it could appear in a project:
 

1. Introduction and inspirational phase


2. Problem choice phase


3. Planning phase


4. Investigation phase

  • were methods from both the humanities and natural sciences used in the practical gathering of information?
  • were the students prepared when visiting the resource persons so the visit and the information received could be used in the work afterwards – for instance, the preparation of relevant questions, instruction and training in introducing oneself and asking questions, agreeing who takes notes or holds the microphone?
  • were the resource persons who were invited into the classroom informed beforehand (by the teacher or the students) so that they knew what was expected of them - and had the teacher made sure that the resource persons were suitable, for instance, talked so that they were understood by the students etc.?


    • 5a. Processing phase - of the investigations

  • did the students get the opportunity to see the problem from several points of view i.e. did they experience the environmental problem as a conflict of interests?
  • did the students ask critical questions to the answers from the resource persons/ the reading material/investigations etc – generally speaking, did the students get behind the face values?
  • did the students develop subject and general concepts from the investigations and their experiences?
  • did the students get the opportunity to objectivise and make visuals of the results in a concrete way e.g. models, drawings, graphs, tables?


    • 5b. Processing phase - of the results

  • did the students get an opportunity to discuss which solutions of the problem and future visions the investigations gave occasion to point to – on an individual level as well as a structural level?
  • did the students get an opportunity to discuss collective and individual action possibilities – including the barriers to actions?


    • 6. Presentation phase

  • did the students get an opportunity to present the results of the course for each other and discuss them, or for others, in an interesting and untraditional way – for instance, as proposals for action possibilities in the form of letters to the editor, panel debates with invited guests/politicians, an exhibition at the town hall etc.?


    • 7. Evaluation phase

    Go to next schapter

    Go to start

    This is chapter 4 of 5 chapters of:

    Environmental Education - development and evaluation
    by
    Finn Mogensen, Ph.D
    Research Centre for Environmental and Health Education
    The Royal Danish School of Educational Studies
     fm@esbjerg.dlh.dk